> It's a humanoid skull, whose mtDNA has far more differences
> than a chimp's, is half the normal thickness but 2-3 times as
> tough bone(all over the skull)as humans, incorporates ALUMINUM
> in its bony makeup, in which fibers are grown through and
> through the bony matrix, (unlike any earth species with bone),
> has a cranial capacity exceeding a human by 400cc, has no
> sinuses, has its nasal passages right in between its eyes, has
> no inion, no cerebellar sulcus(indicating NO cerebellum), inner
> ear twice the size of normal humans, has a totally flat bony
> palate( no arch to accomodate a tongue capable of
> speech.......but then, they don't need to speak......according
> to contactees, they never do), five undescended adult teeth in
> the maxilla fragment, above the most laterad tooth remaining,
> which has marks on the enamel of adult-style wear(it's not even
> a child!)........just what do you think it is? Given all the
> knowledge we have now of ALL lifeforms native to the earth,
> where would you say its terrestrial niche exists? According to
> mainstream science, if it is from earth, it evolved on earth.
> What are its progenitors........any candidates?
> There are over twenty MAJOR differences between the SC and ANY
> human or hominoid that is or was on earth, and the research
> that remains shows every sign of uncovering many more. How many
> do you need to call it alien? Cheers, Rick
1) It has almost half the mtDNA difference of a chimp. How do you figure it has more? It says right on the Starchild website that the Starchild has 800--1000 mtDNA difference while a chimp has 1500.
2) There are several abnormalities that could cause high levels of aluminum. Also, soil in the area where the child was found has a very high aluminum content. Aluminum is the third most abundant element on the planet, after all, and we ingest it all the time. High aluminum levels in bones can be a side effect of renal disease as well.
3) Dr. Ted Robinson, who is on Pye's website as an expert, says:
Dr David Hodges, a radiologist, stated that the suture lines were open and growing at the time of death. Dr. David Sweet was of the opinion that the skull was that of a 5-6 year old, based upon the dentition in the right maxillary fragment. Though some specialists who looked at the skull disagreed, I have always supported Dr. Sweet in his belief that this was the skull of a 5-6 year old child.
4) It states in the DNA analysis:
Single amplifications for fragments containing the diagnostic mutations for Native American haplogroups A, B, C and D did not reveal a known Native American haplogroup, however, the extraction did not amplify consistently. A single amplification of a fragment of the mtDNA first hypervariable segment (HVSI) between np 16210 and np 16328 was sequenced using a cycle sequencing procedure with ABI Big-Dye 3.1 chemistry and analyzed on an ABI automated genetic analyzer. The sequence obtained revealed a transition relative to the Cambridge reference sequence at np16273. This sequence did not match either any personnel with access to the ancient DNA facilities or a sequence obtained from Mr. Pye. Subsequent amplifications of this fragment were not successful and the sequence could not be confirmed. Attempts to amplify fragments of the amelogenin gene located on the X and Y chromosome were uniformly not successful.
Sorry, but "subsequent amplifications were not successful" and "the sequence could not be confirmed" does not equal alien.
Can Pye explain how an alien from another planet had the same number of chromosomes as humans in order to breed with them? Current thinking holds that if life on another planet evolved completely separately from life on Earth, then their DNA would be so different as to make it impossible for cross-breeding.
Post Edited (22-Jun-11 14:39)