Alien body recovered shows DNA not Human

Sorry, I'm not prepared to believe that was once a 6-8 year old kid. Amongst other things, it's six inches long for Christ's sake. No way that survived 6-8 years.

So, since Greer is involved, I'll have to go with an elaborate hoax.

So what's everyone take on this vs the starchild skull? Obviously the shape of the skull is the major obvious factor that put these things on radar.

Assuming it's fully human, I think the oddness could result from deliberate actions to make it that way.

Could this be the result of some kind of "shrunken head" processing on a dead body?

Or perhaps it could have been a sort of "bonsai" person? Other cultures in history have played around with human growth, like with foot binding or neck stretching or skull elongating.

I remember reading a very disturbing account of how long ago a child might be placed in pottery and its bones broke and conformed to its shape as it grew, just for the amusement of cruel people.

Could this be someone whose growth was stunted?

(I'm also very curious about what might be left of the organs, especially the brain...)

reply to post by AlienDeathSpider

Originally posted by AlienDeathSpider
reply to post by eletheia

 

Truth is stranger than fiction -- whether the being is an ET or ET/ Human Hybrid or a new race of hominid heretofore undiscovered on planet Earth.

how about human with unknown genetic disorders?

Originally posted by mcrom901
i can agree with most of that except for the certainty that it definitely lived between 6 to 8 years; that bit still needs further research & has to be independently verified.... dr. lachman has based that on the 'knee epiphyseal' analysis and also did mention....

While there remains a possibility this latter result is due to some form of unknown progeria (accelerated aging syndrome), in my opinion this is a low probability.

siriusdisclosure.com...

that needs to be put to the test & should pass peer review... mere expert speculation doesn't automatically translate to hard fact i'm afraid...

for instance...

Our results demonstrate that during the normal development of the cartilaginous distal femoral epiphysis, signal intensity decreases within the weight-bearing region and becomes progressively more heterogeneous within the posterior condyles. We believe that the signal intensity changes can be explained (a) by cartilage response to pressure incurred with weight bearing and (b) by advancing ossification within the cartilaginous epiphysis as a child develops.

radiology.rsna.org...

have all the possible genetic mutations re ossification been addressed?

came across fop... www.scientificamerican.com... has it been ruled out? other possible interrelated variables?

reply to post by AlienDeathSpider





Hmmmm...


"Truth is stranger than fiction"


That was a phrase much bandied around on the very thread I mentioned all 250 pages of it

before it was finally HOAXED

reply to post by AlienDeathSpider




I have looked him up

Richard Dolan ... American Historian, author and television personality, whose areas of

expertise are in history and ufology?? not a mention of anything SCIENCITIFIC

He has a BA degree in History and English literature!!... very scientific


The best legitimate claim is the one made by Dr. Francisco Exteberra Gabilondo a professor

of legal and forensic medicine who said 'it can be estimated that it is a fetus in an

approximate gestation period close to 15 weeks,' but that information has taken a back seat as

it doesn't fit in with 'part alien and 6 years of age' He has more claim to accuracy with his

qualifications than some one with a degree in History and English literature wouldn't you

say??

Originally posted by eletheia
reply to post by AlienDeathSpider

 

I have looked him up

Richard Dolan ... American Historian, author and television personality, whose areas of

expertise are in history and ufology??

not a mention of anything SCIENCITIFIC

He has a BA degree in History and English literature!!... very scientific

The best legitimate claim is the one made by Dr. Francisco Exteberra Gabilondo a professor

of legal and forensic medicine who said 'it can be estimated that it is a fetus in an

approximate gestation period close to 15 weeks,' but that information has taken a back seat as

it doesn't fit in with 'part alien and 6 years of age' He has more claim to accuracy with his

qualifications than some one with a degree in History and English literature wouldn't you

say??

Not Richard Dolan. Richard Dolan has nothing to do with this.

Garry Nolan, PdD at Stanford University. And the person doing the age assessment was Dr. Richard Lachman, MD. His assessment is here: Link

The bios of the docs & links for them are here: Link to Post With Bios/Outside Links...

This article has an interview with Dr. Nolan from Stanford who mentions the previous information given by Dr. Etxeberria. Link to article

peace,

AB

Originally posted by bananasam
So what's everyone take on this vs the starchild skull?

My take is that the proponents of both employ the same special pleading tactics when their own tests fail to support their beliefs.

reply to post by eletheia


The report that's posted and linked in this thread is by Dr Garry Nolan. It was Dr Lachman who said it was 6 to 8 years old. They need to do more tests.
What tests did Dr. Francisco Exteberra Gabilondo do?

reply to post by AboveBoard




That is like any other medical consensus...goes round and round ticks a lot of boxes

but doesn't reach any definite conclusions! However it reminded me of something I

had heard about some time ago


A seven year old boy in Kasakhstan was scanned by consultants for a mystery lump. The

scan showed clearly a baby inside him. It was the first time the doctors had seen such a

case ...For almost seven years it had lived, a parasite inside the boys body - the embryo

lay in such a position that it got nourishment from its brother (host) ... the baby was

technically alive, yet not sustainable when separated from its brother. The medical team

removed a 4 pound baby boy from the stomach of its twin brother. The boy Alamajan was

born with a freak foetus growing inside him!!


A seven year old foetus? If Greer had managed to obtain this IMO a much more

logical explanation for his 'Alien'? and what mileage could he get out of that?


source www.rense.com...

reply to post by eletheia

I've heard this idea proposed by people, and have not heard a direct refutation of it, though I do believe the answer lies in the long bone growth and density, which means that the little guy had to interact with gravity to create that kind of bone density (i.e. support his weight)? I have questions about this myself, and am not an expert, so I'm hoping that actual experts jump in to supply these answers. I do know that Dr. Ralph Lachman would be very familiar with the concept of parasitic twins or fetal parasites, as this his part of his field of expertise. I don't think either Dr. Lachman or Dr. Nolan is jumping to the conclusion that this is an alien, only that it is very complex and a mystery. The DNA so far is showing a 91% match to human with markers for having a human mother in the mitochondria (an indigenous indian woman from Chile). Right now it is a one-of-a-kind specimen.

So... I'm cool with it being a medical mystery and very impressed with the scientists brought in to do the research. Dr. Greer is leaning toward the mysterious, of course, as is his bias, but he is not currently saying that it is an alien. He is hoping for more data. Dr. Nolan or Dr. Lachman, whom I understand are currently calling it human with a need for more data and new methods of determining age, refining the 2 million base pairs of unmatched DNA to see what it can tell them, etc., to either back up or refute their initial findings.

peace,
AB

reply to post by LEL01



Taken from Whitley's journal www.unknowncountry.com/journal



The Atacunna child remains something of a mystery in a study completed a few years

ago by Dr Francisco Etxeberria Gabliondo a professor of legal and forensic medicine

concluded that the body was "a completely normal mummified foetus" However

Dr Ralph Lochman has concluded that the body is not a foetus but that of a child. The

remains reveal what appears to be a unique abnormality, but the remains are human

and not a creature from another planet!

For my part I stand ready to offer whatever insight and support I can. And unlike the

Sirius document 'I don't cost 10 dollars my help comes free



If you read from the article the 'body' has been around for some time and sold on a few times

reply to post by eletheia


I only asked what tests he did, I went to Whitley's journal and all it said was that he did a study. There was no information about the study.
I have seen Dr Garry Nolan's report and I do know the little guy has been around for years.

reply to post by LEL01


The little guy has been around for at least 100 years. It has 10 ribs, never or almost never seen in a human being.

Think of this: the difference between different hominid species on earth is as little as 0.04 % as in the diff between neanderthal and modern humans. 9% of the little guys DNA is unmatched. That's a lot of unknowns.

Originally posted by AlienDeathSpider
reply to post by LEL01

 

The little guy has been around for at least 100 years. It has 10 ribs, never or almost never seen in a human being.

Think of this: the difference between different hominid species on earth is as little as 0.04 % as in the diff between neanderthal and modern humans. 9% of the little guys DNA is unmatched. That's a lot of unknowns.

Sorry that's 0.004%

reply to post by AlienDeathSpider


I did see 100 years somewhere but I can't remember where it was, so much has been said about this. I think it's strange that they didn't find the father in the known DNA, we know the mother was human but we don't know how big she was, she might have been small.

I was told years ago that tiny bones had been found, I don't think they were talking about this little guy because they said bones not a body.

I don't know what they can do with the unknown data, where do they start looking?
I wouldn't have known you made a mistake if you hadn't pointed it out, we all make mistakes, I do it all the time.

reply to post by AlienDeathSpider

Originally posted by AlienDeathSpider
reply to post by LEL01

 

Think of this: the difference between different hominid species on earth is as little as 0.04 % as in the diff between neanderthal and modern humans. 9% of the little guys DNA is unmatched. That's a lot of unknowns.

The presence of ~9% “unmatched” DNA should not be interpreted to represent anything unusual about the specimen itself. Reasons for the lack of match can include artifacts generated during library preparation, low quality reads from the instrument, or insufficient data to allow computational alignment against the human reference standard.

siriusdisclosure.com...