Archaeologica.org

or perhaps shell shocked. Either way I got a chuckle out of it

http://youtu.be/zI8Mon6EFKg

at about the 4 minute mark of this video there is a mention of some DNA results (1999 and 2003) . The video is worth watching from the beginning. Not for any information but......well see for your self.

I just finished watching this video as well..the anti ancient aliens perspective. http://ancientaliensdebunked.com/

that was given to me by an abductee."

Abductee, huh? Guy is a fucking lunatic.

And still you skirt the evidence and attack the messenger.

Somebody please explain to me the absence of the parietal seam! I really want to know without having to read page after page of medical jargon written by a man who refers to Africans and other "savage" races. If you've read it and found that information please explain it to me. My eyes are about to start bleeding from reading so much stuff that is in a language that eludes me. My eyes are not that good and my brain isn't either...apparently.

Perhaps I should call it the parietal suture instead of seam. Like I said I'm no doctor. Please explain it to me in layman's terms.

Frank Harrist wrote:Somebody please explain to me the absence of the parietal seam!

Careful camera angle ? Which suture is missing?

Yeah, I meant the sagittal suture. I'm also pretty sure the starchild skull is just a freak of nature. The elongated skull that Foerster showed in the video didn't have a sagittal suture. It wasn't the camera angle either, because he showed it clearly, from all angles. Also the extra large eye sockets were odd. Thanks for the clarification, Ernie. I'm still not convinced either way, though. I like to keep an open mind. Seems most of the people who use to agree with me about being open minded have since closed their minds to anything out of the ordinary. We were the ones who argued against the Clovis first theory. Now they seem to be stuck on the status quo. I'm looking for something new and earth shattering. This probably isn't it, but as I said I like to be open minded.

I wish they hadn't lumped the starchild skull in with these elongated ones. It's apples and oranges. Starchild skull will never be proven either way as no one seems to have possession of it since Pye died. I know some of the elongated ones are artificially induced. But the theory is that they were copying traits that they had seen on ...possibly alien. Yeah I know that's kinda "out there", but I can't dismiss it entirely until it is conclusively proven to be bullshit. I'll accept conclusive proof for or against it. I will not simply dismiss it because of the perceived lack of credibility of some of the people who support the alien theory. Even nuts can be right occasionally. Innovators are often considered to be insane until they prove their concepts. They though Galileo was nuts..and Newton, and .....

Frank Harrist wrote:I wish they hadn't lumped the starchild skull in with these elongated ones. It's apples and oranges. Starchild skull will never be proven either way as no one seems to have possession of it since Pye died. I know some of the elongated ones are artificially induced. But the theory is that they were copying traits that they had seen on ...possibly alien. Yeah I know that's kinda "out there", but I can't dismiss it entirely until it is conclusively proven to be bullshit. I'll accept conclusive proof for or against it. I will not simply dismiss it because of the perceived lack of credibility of some of the people who support the alien theory. Even nuts can be right occasionally. Innovators are often considered to be insane until they prove their concepts. They though Galileo was nuts..and Newton, and .....

I understand you, and I am not rejecting the idea based on it's proponents or what I may think of their credentials, motives, etc. I do disagree with your approach, perhaps. I don't take the approach that it's possible until proven to be bullshit. I take the approach that it's likely bullshit until proven non-human. And I am not a close minded individual. I've just seen this notion batted around for several years now without any proof whatsoever forthcoming to prove non-human DNA. I am not a doctor, just as you are not, and I can't possibly address the bone/suture issue, but that does not mean therefore the answer to that issue must be deeply mysterious or never before seen. I just don't know. We need a medical professional here, and I don't think we have one. I cannot find anywhere on the net an update later then April 2012 for DNA samples submitted in April 2011. We also need medical professionals to deal with the skull volumne issue. I don't take the researcher's word for it for a minute, I don't know if he is accurate in his claims, it seems to me if you squeeze something enough, you do increase the interior volumne, but what do I know.

Frank Harrist wrote:I wish they hadn't lumped the starchild skull in with these elongated ones. It's apples and oranges. Starchild skull will never be proven either way as no one seems to have possession of it since Pye died. I know some of the elongated ones are artificially induced. But the theory is that they were copying traits that they had seen on ...possibly alien. Yeah I know that's kinda "out there", but I can't dismiss it entirely until it is conclusively proven to be bullshit. I'll accept conclusive proof for or against it. I will not simply dismiss it because of the perceived lack of credibility of some of the people who support the alien theory. Even nuts can be right occasionally. Innovators are often considered to be insane until they prove their concepts. They though Galileo was nuts..and Newton, and .....

I watched a half dozen or so You tube videos made by "the aliens were here" proponents.
I believe it was one of the elongated skulls that was missing a normally present sagittal suture and not the star child.
I cannot at the moment put my hands on that exact video though so I will have to rely on my memory for the moment. At this site http://thegreaterpicture.com/skulls.html about half way down there are some still pictures of what appears to be two elongated skulls that are missing the sagittal suture. I am not so sure. Better and more photos would be nice.

I must say that even if one of the elongated skulls was missing a suture line that it may mean nothing about alien influence. It is possible for babies to have skulls where some of the sutures are missing or prematurely fused (craniosynostosis.) shrug...as for the "star child"..My lay guess ...an unfortunate child born with a condition known as Pfeiffer syndrome. Google for pictures. I cannot/will not post pictures of the poor things.

and just to muddy the water some more. how about an skull with a suture not normally seen in an adult.

stolen from http://www.riouetlescalanquesdudralbert ... Today.html

Foerster just posted this on his Facebook page:
"Brien Foerster
IMPORTANT DNA UPDATE (not of this skull, but another Paracas): NOT HUMAN?
it had mtDNA with mutations unknown in any human, primate or animal known so far. But a few fragments I was able to sequence from this sample indicate that if these mutations will hold we are dealing with a new human-like creature, very distant from Homo sapiens, Neanderthals and Denisovans.. I am not sure it will even fit into the known evolutionary tree. The question is if they were so different, they could not interbreed with humans."

I don't know for sure what it means, but take it as you like. Oh and the video link you're looking for, Ernie is in the original post of this thread. It's the first video on the page.

Frank Harrist wrote:Foerster just posted this on his Facebook page:
"Brien Foerster
IMPORTANT DNA UPDATE (not of this skull, but another Paracas): NOT HUMAN?
it had mtDNA with mutations unknown in any human, primate or animal known so far. But a few fragments I was able to sequence from this sample indicate that if these mutations will hold we are dealing with a new human-like creature, very distant from Homo sapiens, Neanderthals and Denisovans.. I am not sure it will even fit into the known evolutionary tree. The question is if they were so different, they could not interbreed with humans."

I don't know for sure what it means, but take it as you like. Oh and the video link you're looking for, Ernie is in the original post of this thread. It's the first video on the page.

I read that, and he's quoting someone. As the first comment says "sources, sources, sources". I guess we'll know eventually if it's a new Hominid. There have been surprises in recent years, speaking of Denisovans.

Frank Harrist wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... nERUZNqwbc

Well there it is ..right in front of my nose..ha ha..thanks Frank.....the elongated skull does appear to be missing a suture line..This topic has me reading about skull pathologies. It would seem the lack of or early closing of suture lines in childhood can cause problems for brain/skull growth. The skull may take on an abnormal shape as the other suture lines expand to accommodate the growth.
It's interesting to note that the elongated skull in the video that is missing a normal suture line has evidence of trepanning. Perhaps to alleviate pressure caused by the missing suture line ?

Ernie L wrote:

Frank Harrist wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... nERUZNqwbc

Well there it is ..right in front of my nose..ha ha..thanks Frank.....the elongated skull does appear to be missing a suture line..This topic has me reading about skull pathologies. It would seem the lack of or early closing of suture lines in childhood can cause problems for brain/skull growth. The skull may take on an abnormal shape as the other suture lines expand to accommodate the growth.

That could explain why it is elongated. Strike one! But this person did live into adulthood. I wonder if he or she was extra intelligent or intuitive or stupid or....alien? I know it's crazy, but it is interesting regardless of the reason for it. (This could also explain the so called starchild skull.)

It's interesting to note that the elongated skull in the video that is missing a normal suture line has evidence of trepanning. Perhaps to alleviate pressure caused by the missing suture line

I wouldn't expect an alien to have had trepanation like that if it was natural for their skull to be elongated. Strike two! Looking less and less alien.

Been seeing Foerster's Facebook posts recently and he's a pretty radical dude. Even so I do like using science to debunk his BS instead of just dismissing him out of hand. Scientists should keep an open mind and use their science to disprove radical theories, not just attack a person's character.

Thanks for your patience, Ernie.