zoser Posted December 23, 2012 #2826 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Here is the video clip again put together by the anthropologist who is convinced that there is a difference between deformed and natural elongated skulls: The really interesting bit begins at 6:52 Here is how deformation is classically done: Like squeezing a balloon pressure has to be applied at a certain area Creating a constriction at one point (think of the balloon again) This is what we see with skulls deformed Yet the coneheads (from Paracas etc) look more like this: An example of which is this: Notice the top of her head where the constriction is clear to see. The evidence was there all along it's just that nobody was really looking for it. The coneheads are different to the elongated skulls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted December 23, 2012 #2827 Share Posted December 23, 2012 You have to see my remark in its context. It was a response to one of LRW's posts. Yes, this one: A common argument of skeptics when they are getting thoroughly and utterly destroyed in a debate is to bring out the "modern man builds better" card. I just do not think he has a point at all, it sounds like some philosophical BS to be honest. I was just saying I would say that, and I do not think there is anything wrong with it. No offence intended, I am just the one who does think this is indeed the case, and such is a natural progression. It seems a pretty silly thing to say to be perfectly honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted December 23, 2012 #2828 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Here's perhaps a better example showing the constriction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted December 23, 2012 #2829 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) Here is the video clip again put together by the anthropologist who is convinced that there is a difference between deformed and natural elongated skulls: The really interesting bit begins at 6:52 Here is how deformation is classically done: Like squeezing a balloon pressure has to be applied at a certain area Creating a constriction at one point (think of the balloon again) This is what we see with skulls deformed Yet the coneheads (from Paracas etc) look more like this: An example of which is this: Notice the top of her head where the constriction is clear to see. The evidence was there all along it's just that nobody was really looking for it. The coneheads are different to the elongated skulls. Yeah, they are modelled on these aliens, some have already returned. Satisfied now? Maybe you can email Giorgio all about it. Edited December 23, 2012 by psyche101 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted December 23, 2012 #2830 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) No, that shape was considered beautiful. Have you ever seen what Japanese women do to their feet? There's another sign of beauty, on both sides of the South Atlantic: the Lip Disk http://itsfine-levin...2/lip-disk.html Of course we all know the aliens loved to listen to music, and so they carried their CD players with them everywhere they went. Edited December 23, 2012 by Abramelin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted December 23, 2012 #2831 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Deformed, "alien" skulls, and health effects The above skull shows how gross deformation of the skull can affect the venous drainage system. There are many different types of normal and pathological variations in the design of the skull, as well as different types of strains and deformation of the skull and spine. Some problems we inherit, others are acquired through disease, aging and injuries. Some are clearly visible, others are not so easily seen or recognized. One thing is becoming readily clear with modern MR angiograms, venograms and cine MR however; that is, strains and deformation of the upper cervical spine and base of the skull can cause chronic venous back pressure (edema), decreased arterial blood flow (ischemia) and decreased CSF flow, which has been linked to NPH, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease. http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?app=blog&module=display§ion=blog&blogid=2684&showentry=25938 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Wearer of Hats Posted December 23, 2012 #2832 Share Posted December 23, 2012 It's called choosing what one believes. The skeptics do it all the time. They even ignore specialist witnesses if they are batting for the wrong team. umm Zoser ... that's ever so hypocritical coming from you. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted December 23, 2012 #2833 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) hehehe.... "Malekula String Band and the Longheads"... The living longheads, and as some will just watch the vid and not read the text UNDER the vid... then heres a few snips: "They are the real life coneheads. In 2004, on a remote island in the South Pacific, exclusive footage was shot of 'headbinding' or skull elongation which the Lonely Planet said had.... "long since died out". On what became an impromptu, largely unplanned adventure-filled 'expedition' the filmmakers found that not only were these 'longfala hed' Small Nambas tribe members alive and well, but contrary to Lonely Planet's assertion they were binding the heads of new-born babies - in time-honoured fashion. Led by their 'progressive' chief, they had moved out of the dense jungle to the shoreline just weeks earlier. In this clip "longfala heds' listen to an island string band ... Huffman, an anthropologist, has studied the practice for more than 20 years on Malakula, Vanuatu's second largest island, which boasts a proud tradition of binding babies' skulls to produce a cone-shaped head. "Some cultures are into pyramids; these cultures are into cones," says Huffman. Huffman says head binding does not mean squashed brains. "If it's done properly, there are no side effects," he says. Head elongation has been practised in many places. One South American culture specialised in "bi-lobal modification", tying a string around the head so that it would grow into two bulbs. (now they may look weird enough to get zoser in a serious flap) "There's an Indian tribe in Columbia who are nicknamed plate-heads because up until 1947 they were binding the skull in a way that flattens but makes it round," says Huffman. Europe has also embraced head modification. One 17th century French text recommended midwives bind the skulls of babies to increase memory storage space. Huffman says it continued into the 19th century in parts of France, Germany and Eastern Europe. The last known instance was recorded by a doctor in a French mountain village in 1925. For Huffman, head binding has to be put into a cultural context. "It's considered beautiful and why not? Humans throughout the world have done all sorts of things to their bodies. Look at white women today - they wear high heels and get Botox ... (not to mention piercings, tattoo's, nose jobs, boob jobs, hair coloring etc etc -seeder) Now the vid...watch carefully.. (aliens my rse) [media=] [/media] Edited December 23, 2012 by seeder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted December 23, 2012 #2834 Share Posted December 23, 2012 . [media=] [/media] .....? Have a Merry Christmas everyone ....ho ho ho . 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderOTD Posted December 23, 2012 #2835 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Everyone had an elongated skull...rather intriguing. Besides the point, they had a close knit community, and everyone shared the same skull configuration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted December 23, 2012 #2836 Share Posted December 23, 2012 . [media=] [/media] .....? Have a Merry Christmas everyone ....ho ho ho . Brilliant, hilarious find!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted December 23, 2012 #2837 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Brilliant, hilarious find!! . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted December 23, 2012 #2838 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) Here is the video clip again put together by the anthropologist who is convinced that there is a difference between deformed and natural elongated skulls: The really interesting bit begins at 6:52 Ok first bolded text, .... Now which anthropologist exactly is making the claims? The opening frames of the powerpoint vid or whatever states.... "I have a degree in anthropology"... Who does? Many folk have degrees, even odd balls... so why not present some names, qualifications, experience etc, of the author? Oh I forgot - you dont need the finer details do you, you just watch the vid - then proclaim its genuine...Id have thought youd have learned your lesson from your Roger and Chris fail... 'The really interesting bit begins at 6:52' In whose opinion? I couldn't stop yawning waiting for a mind blowing revelation - that only zoser can source from youtube can you get a few more anthropology experts with names and checkable history, who are also so convinced as the author of the vid? Or is the vid the only one of its kind where an an 'anthropologist is convinced' . Edited December 23, 2012 by seeder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted December 23, 2012 #2839 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Ok first bolded text, .... Now which anthropologist exactly is making the claims? The opening frames of the powerpoint vid or whatever states.... "I have a degree in anthropology"... That's just condemnation of the evidence without offering reason because it doesn't suit. You've offered nothing. You never have, It's very basic. Squeeze a balloon to try and create a bulge and you have to create a constriction. It was here all along but no archaeologist spotted it. That just says how delinquent their methods are. Now unless you can come up with a solid argument that defies this then the anthropologists argument stands. No amount of your derision and sarcasm will succeed. (If you hadn't noticed. I'm actually immune to it anyway). So the balls in your court again. We have a thesis and evidence that supports that thesis. Ideally we need to be in a museum to see a range of skulls from across the world at different times and do the comparison according to the hypothesis. Alas we cannot do this so we will have to do the best we can from here. If you pour derision over it with no accompanying reason I will judge you accordingly. On the other hand if you show honesty and genuineness that's different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted December 23, 2012 #2840 Share Posted December 23, 2012 If the latest Mexico skull is real, has anyone thought to comment on the eyes? Or indeed the ridge that appears to go up the cranium? Is this really the skull of a homa sapien? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted December 23, 2012 #2841 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Ok first bolded text, .... Now which anthropologist exactly is making the claims? The opening frames of the powerpoint vid or whatever states.... "I have a degree in anthropology"... Who does? Many folk have degrees, even odd balls... so why not present some names, qualifications, experience etc, of the author? Oh I forgot - you dont need the finer details do you, you just watch the vid - then proclaim its genuine...Id have thought youd have learned your lesson from your Roger and Chris fail... 'The really interesting bit begins at 6:52' In whose opinion? I couldn't stop yawning waiting for a mind blowing revelation - that only zoser can source from youtube can you get a few more anthropology experts with names and checkable history, who are also so convinced as the author of the vid? Or is the vid the only one of its kind where an an 'anthropologist is convinced' . I noticed a couple of errors or what should I call them. According to this guy with his anthropology degree Neanderthals had cities. I'd like to see where he got that from. He mentions Cro Magnon. Isn't hat an outdated name, already for decades now? According to the guy the elongated skulls have a larger volume than normal. This is not true at all. They only have a diferent shape. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted December 23, 2012 #2842 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) That's just condemnation of the evidence without offering reason because it doesn't suit. My replies inline, cant get the multiple quote thingy working, my bad... That's just condemnation of the evidence without offering reason because it doesn't suit. W-T heck are you on about? Evidence? Its a bloody PP vid with no-one offering their credentials. For all anyone knows a school kid could have sat down and made that, thats why I ask you to confirm its authenticity and the authors details... come on "Oh Warrior of Truth"...surely you too, want the truth behind the vids author? If not lose your avatar blurb.. You've offered nothing. You never have, In the way of what? Support? Didnt I give you a living longhead video? But....Its not up to me to offer anything, Im not the one making any claims, YOU ARE!! didnt I offer evidence for your previous claims re pyramids and puma punku and oh...so much more? It's very basic. Squeeze a balloon to try and create a bulge and you have to create a constriction. It was here all along but no archaeologist spotted it. That just says how delinquent their methods are. No archaeologist spotted it? None? Wonder why they missed it? Why isnt this breaking world news? Good Lord - youve stumbled on the truth at last zoser. Youre gonna be famous!! I just can just imagine the headlines.. "Zoser, an avid follower of the odd side of youtube, stumbled across an un-named - unverified video on one of his excursions into video gobbeldygook, and has found the smoking gun that NO OTHER seasoned and experienced anthropologist, scientist or archeologist has so far noticed". Now unless you can come up with a solid argument that defies this then the anthropologists argument stands. No amount of your derision and sarcasm will succeed. (If you hadn't noticed. I'm actually immune to it anyway). "The anthropologists argument stand".... Oh yeh? Which anthropologist? You cant even name him? Be a good lad and compile your evidence and get in touch with some REAL leading anthropologists pls, discuss your finds, then come back here and post your/their reports. The video is hardly a professional source of info now is it? Come on zoser even you have to admit that. So the balls in your court again. We have a thesis and evidence that supports that thesis. Ideally we need to be in a museum to see a range of skulls from across the world at different times and do the comparison according to the hypothesis. Alas we cannot do this so we will have to do the best we can from here. errmm, what did I say about hypothesis? remember? Its an idea, a proposal, not a fact If you pour derision over it with no accompanying reason I will judge you accordingly. On the other hand if you show honesty and genuineness that's different. Judge me how you like, water of a ducks back and all that jazz...Ive been nothing but honest with you and all the info Ive shovelled your way, and honestly, the vid sucks, find me some real anthropologists with verifiable qualifications and work background, who 'also' agree with your premise, and I will listen to you and pay great attention, for as you know, I like facts, real people Not bogus vids on youtube. You want to believe the alien malarkey sooo much matey dont you? And so do I! But I need hard dependable well researched evidence, from experts with verified qualifications and backgrounds..to even wet my appetite. COME ON zoser, its not up to me to prove anything, Im not the one making claims of ET coneheads. if 'you' have no further proof, if all your eggs are in the one basket, with a single vid by a nameless - and alleged anthropologist' then how can you expect anyone, not just me, but ANYONE to not view you with derision? You make a rod for your own back every time Edited December 23, 2012 by seeder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted December 23, 2012 #2843 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) A candidate for skull deformation from the practise of binding. Two points: Very different from the 'Conehead' examples. Also the constriction point is very defined. This is what I would expect to see from binding. http://www.dosgatos....ay-7_8-lima.htm Edited December 23, 2012 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted December 23, 2012 #2844 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) My replies inline, cant get the multiple quote thingy working, my bad... Avoidance of the issue. Edited December 23, 2012 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted December 23, 2012 #2845 Share Posted December 23, 2012 I noticed a couple of errors or what should I call them. According to this guy with his anthropology degree Neanderthals had cities. I'd like to see where he got that from. He mentions Cro Magnon. Isn't hat an outdated name, already for decades now? According to the guy the elongated skulls have a larger volume than normal. This is not true at all. They only have a diferent shape. Avoidance of the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted December 23, 2012 #2846 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) If the latest Mexico skull is real, has anyone thought to comment on the eyes? Or indeed the ridge that appears to go up the cranium? Is this really the skull of a homa sapien? If you had added the link to the site you got that pic from, we could have told you directly it's nothing alien at all: http://www.messageto...hp#.UNcB0KwhZag Edited December 23, 2012 by Abramelin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted December 23, 2012 #2847 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) If you had added the link to the site you got that pic from, we could have told you directly it's nothing alien at all: http://www.messageto...hp#.UNcB0KwhZag Sorry to post this again Abe but your avoiding the issue again. Please account for the eyes and the ridges. I'm not going to let you get away with this! The link does not mention either. Edited December 23, 2012 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted December 23, 2012 #2848 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Sorry to post this again Abe but your avoiding the issue again. Please account for the eyes and the ridges. I'm not going to let you get away with this! The link does not mention either. I even posted another photo of the same site !! I am not going anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted December 23, 2012 #2849 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) Quote from the article: According to the researchers death was not caused by any diseases but rather by excessive force while squeezing the skull. Edited December 23, 2012 by Abramelin 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted December 23, 2012 #2850 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) No evidence of binding on this one. Instead evidence of natural skull. Edited December 23, 2012 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts