Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Cosmic Ray

Paracas elongated skull dna

108 posts in this topic

It has to be true! It's on the internet and I have confirmation from a french model! :tu:

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the first order of business here to see if Mr. Foerster's character can be attacked?

I mean, if that can be done, there's no need to even look at the research, right?

Heck, the article even invoked the name of Lloyd Pye (rip)...surely that's enough to discredit the entire study...

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I almost hate to do this, but I saw this

http://www.ancient-o...h.56udAAQg.gbpl

It appears Brien Foerster has released "preliminary information" about those DNA tests he promised us.

Thoughts?

Would prefer to see the actual genetic testing results instead of Foerster and others claim as to what they say/mean.

cormac

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would prefer to see the actual genetic testing results instead of Foerster and others claim as to what they say/mean.

cormac

Cosigned, and Foester is several yrs late in obtaining and releasing these results. Being the author of 10 books doesn't make him an expert in DNA analysis. (Unless you are part of the Ancient Alien Theorists fan club. )

At least he now admits they are human. :rolleyes:

I also question the article's stating that these skulls are too thick to be elongated using traditional methods.

"...The Paracas skulls, however, are different. The cranial volume is up to 25 percent larger and 60 percent heavier than conventional human skulls, meaning they could not have been intentionally deformed through head binding/flattening. They also contain only one parietal plate, rather than two. The fact that the skulls’ features are not the result of cranial deformation means that the cause of the elongation is a mystery, and has been for decades....."

Edited by scorpiosonic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also question the article's stating that these skulls are too thick to be elongated using traditional methods.

Am most interested in this new theory which claims cradleboarding actually increases skull capacity and weight on the order of 20% and 60%, respectively.

Those numbers, if accurate (and photos do appear to back them up), are nothing to sneeze at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have a source for that lilthor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My apologies. I can only assume that folks who believe that "traditional" methods for cranial deformation produced these skulls from Paracas must have a working theory to back them up. Perhaps they don't...but if they do, I am most interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My theory is that they did use traditional methods. It was more difficult to accomplish on a thicker skull. (The article states, "The cranial volume is UP TO 25 percent larger and 60 percent heavier than conventional human skulls meaning they could not have been intentionally deformed through head binding/flattening.") The second part of this statement is opinion, not fact!!!

Foerster has attempted to pass these skulls off as being of Alien origin many times in the past, hence the DNA tests. He had accepted $$$ for these tests yrs. ago, but didn't follow thru until now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cosigned, and Foester is several yrs late in obtaining and releasing these results. Being the author of 10 books doesn't make him an expert in DNA analysis. (Unless you are part of the Ancient Alien Theorists fan club. )

At least he now admits they are human. :rolleyes:

I also question the article's stating that these skulls are too thick to be elongated using traditional methods.

"...The Paracas skulls, however, are different. The cranial volume is up to 25 percent larger and 60 percent heavier than conventional human skulls, meaning they could not have been intentionally deformed through head binding/flattening. They also contain only one parietal plate, rather than two. The fact that the skulls’ features are not the result of cranial deformation means that the cause of the elongation is a mystery, and has been for decades....."

Article says they could not have been deformed since their cranial volume and weight is much more than a human. Don't see anywhere where it states that they were too thick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, I assumed the bone was thicker due to the skull being heavier.

Edited by scorpiosonic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not uncommon for human DNA to contain traces of DNA from Homo sapiens neanderthalensis or Homo heidelbergensis ("Denisovan man").

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very sceptical that this represents a true discovery and is not a hoax.

This part of the article...

They also contain only one parietal plate, rather than two.

...is especially concerning regarding the factuality of the reporting. That human skulls have two parietal bones is necessitated by the circumstances of our birth - in which the new-born's head is larger than the cervical canal through which it must pass and so multiple plates in the skull are necessary to allow a deformation of it so as to pass through that canal.

While it may be difficult to see the parietal seams in some of the Paracas skulls, in others they are clearly visible - indicating the presence of multiple parietal plates.

There is a possibility that this statement refers, however, to the parietal bone of the adult - where the two infant parietal bones are fused into one. This would suggest the statement is either woefully ignorant (comparing adult to infant skull structures) or deliberately misleading.

So, while I do not immediately discount the reports of 'cryptic DNA' (which could simply mean the DNA was too degraded to be properly sequenced), I do think that what has been reported is not entirely true.

Edited by Leonardo
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears to me to simply be Foerster stringing along his loyal acolytes without actually providing any evidence in order to encourage more sales of his books, or to increase tourism as per his remit from the Peruvian tourist board.

Call me cynical...

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's bad science to say the least as written in the article, since Foerster says of the person who performed the test:

Basically what I can say is that he speculates that there are segments of the DNA of the Paracas which do not match anything in GenBank, which is the genetic database located in the United States that contains all known genetic DNA information.

The presumed geneticist involved either knows that the Paracas DNA segments match GenBank, by direct comparison, or that they don't. No speculation is involved nor necessary. Which suggests that the person involved with the genetics test didn't actually compare the results with GenBank. One would have to ask why?

cormac

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's bad science to say the least as written in the article, since Foerster says of the person who performed the test:

The presumed geneticist involved either knows that the Paracas DNA segments match GenBank, by direct comparison, or that they don't. No speculation is involved nor necessary. Which suggests that the person involved with the genetics test didn't actually compare the results with GenBank. One would have to ask why?

cormac

I agree! Also one could swap the word 'speculates' to 'guesses' to make it clearer.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree! Also one could swap the word 'speculates' to 'guesses' to make it clearer.

I don't believe "speculates" or "guesses" is the real reason. I'd say if the person involved was a reputable geneticist then to not have made an actual comparison suggests that he already knew that the genetic segments were not what Foerster claimed they were. Particularly since GenBank is easily enough accessed here:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/

cormac

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The presumed geneticist involved either knows that the Paracas DNA segments match GenBank, by direct comparison, or that they don't. No speculation is involved nor necessary. Which suggests that the person involved with the genetics test didn't actually compare the results with GenBank. One would have to ask why?

Here is what I found with a little Google-kung-fu,,,, The geneticist in question is Dr Melba Ketchum of Bigfoot DNA analysis fame.

http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/02/foerster-pye-and-ketchum-collaborate-paracas-elongated-skull-exposed-its/

Or at least the evidence seems to be pointing that way.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...The Paracas skulls, however, are different. The cranial volume is up to 25 percent larger and 60 percent heavier than conventional human skulls,

Does anyone have a Scientific source (Or just a source that is not Lloyd Pyle) that verifys these numbers are true? Could it be speculated that 95% of the 300+ skulls are normal in volume and weight and that there are only a handful of outlyers and one true mutant giant? This seems to me to be taking one exceptional specimen and trying to limit the theorys of the entire set of data using it as the standard.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have to weigh in my skepticism. I am no expert on the particular group of ancient people Foerster is discussing, but the skull in the photo closely resembles innumerable examples of other ancient Peruvians and Chileans on whom cranial deformation was performed. And it was a common procedure in these ancient populations. I doubt I'm the only one here who's examined actual examples in a museum.

Foerster's "conclusions" are of limited value and need not be accepted if access to the scientific methodology and results are not provided to the wider scientific community. This has been an ongoing problem with the Egyptians' extensive genetic testing of Amarna mummies performed in 2007-2010. The methodology looks sound on the TV screen and the results if reliable are highly interesting, but no access has been provided to scientists and other specialists outside Egypt. Consequently, the wider scientific community is very hesitant to accept the Egyptians' results at face value.

Cormac is the resident genetics expert here and he can correct me if I'm wrong, but Foerster's "conclusions" seem of further limited value if only one skull was sampled. If Foerster is trying to prove a new race of Homo, which seems his intent, a wider population of individuals needs to be sampled.

Most important, however, is that independent experts be given access to the work conducted. Otherwise, it's one man's fantasy. And to be perfectly honest, this seems to me to be less like science and more like trying to sell a book or bring readership to a website. I don't think I'm the only one who sees it this way.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full interview with Foerster.

All sounds very questionable to me.

If he really wants results I'm sure his book sales could fund the relatively small price.

http://www.ancient-o...8oUGXQ.facebook

Yes, very questionable, I read entire interview, and BF was vague thru-out....saying, "possibly"....."seems to be", etc. Only one skull has DNA been tested so far. (In the past, BF has stated that some of these skulls WERE IN FACT of Alien origin.)

It appears that they did find one exceptionally large skull, and then went w/ the statement,..."up to 25% larger, and 60% heavier..." Also, according to BF, 'possibly, only 5-10% of the skulls didn't show obvious signs of cradle boarding,....."

Also, BF did mention using the "Bigfoot" geneticist, Dr Melba Ketchum.

"Speculation" could also mean sheer fabrication and/or misrepresentation of the facts. BF has delayed implementation of these DNA tests for for yrs, (after receiving the funds to do them) to try to promote his Ancient Alien theories.

It's well past time to bring in the real experts to examine and DNA test a majority of these skulls, and then conduct quality studies of the results.

Edited by scorpiosonic
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't aware Foerster belongs to the befuddled camp of ancient alien "theorists." That alone should shake any faith in his work. Does this character appear on the Ancient Aliens show?

I also wasn't familiar with the work of this Dr. Melba Ketchum so I had to look into it a bit. Anytime you see something like "Bigfoot geneticist," your critical-thinking alarm just can't help but to clang loudly. I found a good article here which handily lambasts Ketchum's credibility. Interesting is the fact that the "academic" source which published her work seems to have been set up at the same moment the work was ready to publish, and evidently it is really the only thing which exists on the site. Bit of a conflict of interest, perhaps? When a "researcher" needs to build a website to post her work, her work must not be regarded as valid.

Why do these people waste our time? There are oodles of legitimate scientific and historical projects taking place out there, so tossing crap into the mix is likely only to muddy the waters. And then it smells.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cosmic ray, cant believe youd bring this one up, but hey ho! On the 600 page old AA thread we discussed all the issues of the elongated skulls for some time, and much info was posted then that I can barely bring myself to get involved in this discussion again!

It should be understood, that BF first and foremost is a tour-guide, whose job description naturally includes getting people to tour the sites, and thus make money for the business. As an aside he also makes money from his websites/vids/books/T-shirts and ahem, lectures. he's the type who in the old days would be on a fairground with a stall promising to show people things that theyd never seen before, like the bearded lady, the Siamese twins etc..."Roll Up Roll Up only 50 cents to see"

The facts are, elongated skulls are found throughout parts of the world, but he has simply jumped on the woo woo bandwagon to make it into a better sideshow than it really is. Since at least 2011, Foerester has promised results 'soon' but never quite actually doing that as he needs more donations!!

Lloyd Pye, RIP, made similar claims for many years too, until at such a time it was 'overtime' with the results, and so results were released, and it was a human skull, no matter how bizarre it looked.

Now Melba Ketchum, along with a Dr Robert Swenson, tested alleged bigfoot DNA, and became convinced they had PROOF it was Bigfoot indeed. Until others looked at their findings and guess what? It was Opossum DNA :tu: So dont be holding your breath for first class reliable results from that crew.

Now DieChecker already posted a link above that I too would have posted had I joined the thread earlier and let me quote a paragraph: -

"Samples of these skulls (hair, including roots, tooth, bone and skin) housed at the Paracas History Museum were taken. Here’s the kicker… they were sent, not to a reputable scientist or geneticist, but to Lloyd Pye (now deceased), founder of the Starchild Project who believed in alien hybrids.

Guess who he gave them to for testing? (This is rich.) Our favorite Nobel-wishing genetic tester, friend of the forest people, Dr. Melba Ketchum. Ketchum has made our feature posts as the orchestrator of the Bigfoot DNA testing boondoggle. In February of 2013, she self-published a paper (after it was rejected by mainstream journals) that her collection of supposed Bigfoot genetic samples showed the North American Sasquatch was a hybrid of an unknown ape and a human mother. The findings were roundly rejected".

So with that in mind, dont be keeping awake at night with anticipation of 'what if they are aliens or hybrids', because they are not. and just for info purposes, heres how skulls can be deformed without head binding. Im not saying they are naturally deformed or mechanically, that bit doesn't really interest me.

[media=]

[/media]

gretabirth0002-480x360.jpg

Mangbetu-Tribe-Baby-Lipombo-2-432x670.jpg

BTW many babies are born with pointed/misshapen heads, my own son was but his naturally went round after a short time, but deformation by birth as shown above, is so common you will find new mums discussing it in many forums TODAY...their are even special caps made to reshape a babies head if it is misshapen/pointed, elongated etc

http://www.babycentr...-should-i-worry

eta fixed link

Edited by seeder
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quoting KMT, 'I wasn't aware Foerster belongs to the befuddled camp of ancient alien "theorists." That alone should shake any faith in his work. Does this character appear on the Ancient Aliens show?'

Yes his is, and he's on their program w/ Mr. Childress examining those 'machined or laser-cut' stones @ Puma Punku, and some other scenes, etc. :rolleyes: ..maybe a topic for that AA Thread.

Quoting Seeder, "Guess who he gave them to for testing? (This is rich.) Our favorite Nobel-wishing genetic tester, friend of the forest people, Dr. Melba Ketchum. Ketchum...." :D

And a friend of the Foerster ppl too! :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.