seeder Posted February 19, 2014 #76 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Well, I actually did. Or tried to. I posted an invitation on his Facebook page for him to come here and discuss his 'research', but it seems to have disappeared. In fact, any posts to his page just disappear. I may try again via email, but I suspect he will remain a stranger to these parts! maybe he's not so stupid after all then. Its one thing touting your nonsense to blind believers, But its a whole other donkey ride touting it to skeptics, and many well read skeptics that is 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Ray Posted February 19, 2014 Author #77 Share Posted February 19, 2014 So I messaged Foerster on Facebook. "Hi. We've been discussing your research into the Paracas skulls here http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=262007&st=0 and would like you to come and join in. Maybe you could take up some of the issues raised here http://badarchaeology.wordpress.com/2014/02/15/the-paracas-skulls-aliens-an-unknown-hominid-species-or-cranial-deformation/ What do you say?" His reply... "I think first you should read my book: http://www.amazon.com/Enigma-Cranial-Deformation-Elongated-Ancients/dp/1935487760/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1392851328&sr=1-3&keywords=brien+foerster And then we can discuss issues." 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpiosonic Posted February 19, 2014 #78 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Good work, CR! Not surprising, he wants you to buy his book. Tell him, no need......or you've already read it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmt_sesh Posted February 20, 2014 #79 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Perhaps you can email Brien Foerester the links too, and then invite him here for a right royal ass kicking er, a discussion on his views? Seeder, I thought I should correct your post. You were right the first time. One can understand why Foerester would avoid our thread. He's probably not interested so much in a scientific analysis of his ideas—he just wants to make money on his books. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpiosonic Posted February 20, 2014 #80 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) And our forum! A friend I worked with would always say, "I HAVE issues". ...it became the comical catch-phrase for the crew. (Jm,thanks for the links.) Edited February 20, 2014 by scorpiosonic 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted February 20, 2014 #81 Share Posted February 20, 2014 So I messaged Foerster on Facebook. "Hi. We've been discussing your research into the Paracas skulls here http://www.unexplain...pic=262007&st=0 and would like you to come and join in. Maybe you could take up some of the issues raised here http://badarchaeolog...al-deformation/ What do you say?" His reply... "I think first you should read my book: http://www.amazon.co...=brien foerster And then we can discuss issues." I bet he couldn't resist coming and reading anonymously. Its a conceit thing, people feel compelled to check what others say about them!! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted February 20, 2014 #82 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Seeder, I thought I should correct your post. You were right the first time. One can understand why Foerester would avoid our thread. He's probably not interested so much in a scientific analysis of his ideas—he just wants to make money on his books. Plus id have a sneaking suspicion he knows, to an extent, he cant milk this forever... same as it was for Lloyd Pye 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpiosonic Posted February 23, 2014 #83 Share Posted February 23, 2014 (edited) Here are 2 comments, (made on Bad Arch site) by a woman who had purchased Childress' and BF's book on Amazon. (link to this book above).She then left a a negative review there, and the fringe imm. attacked her. MY comments: Typical BF nonsense thru out vid of him purchasing 2 skulls. BF insists these skulls are a mother and baby, (age approx. 2 months old) when he only has the seller's word for this, and he states that they are from a royal burial...also, he says her hair is red, when in fact it's brown. The small skull, (assuming it is one) was never unwrapped, and I could only see what looks like a jaw bone w/ fairly well-developed teeth.....I could go on and on, see for yourself. FIRST COMMENT: The Paracas Museum is a small private museum – something not uncommon in Peru – located in a town that doesn’t get a huge amount of tourism. Given that, I suspect Brien Foerster managed to persuade the owner that giving him a title in the museum would bring in more visitors thanks to his Ancient Aliens fame. The museum does contain skulls from Tello’s excavations, but the collection has increased greatly in recent years thanks to the work of looters. SECOND COMMENT :One wonders how the skull samples made their way from Peru to the US for testing. As you may imagine it’s tremendously difficult to get official permission to remove archaeological materials or samples from the country. Permits from INC – the Peruvian Ministry of Culture – are needed, and are only granted to archaeologists for good reason. It seems highly unlikely that they’d issue one to a tour guide. Here’s a video from 2011 showing Brien purchasing a skull: [media=] [/media] Edited February 23, 2014 by scorpiosonic 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 20, 2014 #84 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Hi All I had a lurk here the other day, brilliant read this thread, it is probably one of the better sources on the entire net to find all information in one place. I think you should all be very proud of yourselves. Helen of Annoy just posted an excellent thread in the Palaeontology, Archaeology & History section, it seems elongated skulls have now also shown up in Croatia, I had no idea that there was head binding in the region. It's also more evidence I feel that further trounces Foerster's ramblings. When you follow the link in the thread though, I would just ignore the last paragraph, it seems that there is even less information out there on this practise than I had imagined. LINK - UM Thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Spartan Posted March 20, 2014 #85 Share Posted March 20, 2014 I had a similar experience with a fringie - Mr. Doug Yurechy. He made a claim that the pennyhead Indian was part of the corny powergrid or atlantis power grid, connecting major locations blah blah. I emailed him and asked him a few questions. He went on defensive and stated I am not qualified to question him and that he was on coast to coast AM. I mailed back that being on coast to coast AM is no certification that he can post anything he wishes. I requested him politely to provide evidence to prove that the pennyhead indian was indeed an artificial construct. lol..after that he went abusive. Below is an image from his website. Typical fringie attempt to make some moolah!! sheesh!! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted March 20, 2014 #86 Share Posted March 20, 2014 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. Really?? tell me how, through conjecture, that the weight of the human skull increases 60% through binding. confused Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted March 20, 2014 #87 Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) 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 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] 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 Seeder said: "Since at least 2011, Foerester has promised results 'soon' but never quite actually doing that as he needs more donations!!" Maybe he learned that tact from his genetisist, Melba Ketchum Edited March 20, 2014 by Earl.Of.Trumps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted March 21, 2014 #88 Share Posted March 21, 2014 Really?? tell me how, through conjecture, that the weight of the human skull increases 60% through binding. confused Yes it can be confusing, have you seen this giant skull? http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=263897&st=15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpiosonic Posted March 21, 2014 #89 Share Posted March 21, 2014 Really?? tell me how, through conjecture, that the weight of the human skull increases 60% through binding. confused I was quoting the info given in that article, and they were talking about the skulls in their possession, trying to support their theories of these skulls belonging to a 'missing link' in the Humanoid evo. tree........and my point was "UP TO" as in maybe only the very largest one they had really was this size..and we were also questioning the figures/amounts as well. The binding is a separate issue, but does increase overall skull size to a sm degree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbero Posted April 11, 2014 #90 Share Posted April 11, 2014 those are not aliens or human hybrids, its just some ancient tecnique used to produce longer and bigger skulls the Paracas culture also practised skull surgeries to heal wounds, though many did fail, and even lobotomies were used to be common 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaric Posted April 11, 2014 #91 Share Posted April 11, 2014 I'm not jumping on the "It's aliens brah" bandwagon, but I feel I must correct the mistaken assertion that Intentional Cranial Deformation increases skull volume. Here are two studies which bear that out: Shape and volume of craniofacial cavities in intentional skull deformations. Khonsari RH1, Friess M, Nysjö J, Odri G, Malmberg F, Nyström I, Messo E, Hirsch JM, Cabanis EA, Kunzelmann KH, Salagnac JM, Corre P, Ohazama A, Sharpe PT, Charlier P, Olszewski R. "We conclude that ICDs can modify the shape of the cranial cavities and the thickness of their walls but conserve their volumes." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23553676 Exploring artificial cranial deformation using elliptic Fourier analysis of Procrustes aligned outlines. Friess M1, Baylac M. “There is no statistically significant difference in cranial capacity between artificially deformed skulls and normal skulls in Peruvian samples.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12923900 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReddHeadsRantings Posted May 14, 2014 #92 Share Posted May 14, 2014 I got the book for free-but its no longer free on amazon. What about the prego mummies who's babys heads are elongated ? Those were found between 1820-1930 there's 1-3 of them If you do read it-you can see many appear to be natural while most appear to be shaped-28 differents between the 2 & 3 bones skulls (top of the head bones) and they are consonant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpiosonic Posted May 18, 2014 #93 Share Posted May 18, 2014 "What about the prego mummies who's babys heads are elongated ? Those were found between 1820-1930 there's 1-3 of them..." Sometimes the baby's head is naturally deformed while in the womb. Do you have a link to these? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted May 22, 2014 #94 Share Posted May 22, 2014 I got the book for free-but its no longer free on amazon. What about the prego mummies who's babys heads are elongated ? Those were found between 1820-1930 there's 1-3 of them If you do read it-you can see many appear to be natural while most appear to be shaped-28 differents between the 2 & 3 bones skulls (top of the head bones) and they are consonant It seems that conditions like Craniosynostosis and inbreeding gave a few individuals large heads, which some people equated with greater intelligence and possibly tried to emulate, eventually the practice becoming associated with beauty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted May 24, 2014 #95 Share Posted May 24, 2014 Helen of Annoy just posted an excellent thread in the Palaeontology, Archaeology & History section, it seems elongated skulls have now also shown up in Croatia, I had no idea that there was head binding in the region. It wasn't found by Semir Osmanagic hopefully? Below is an image from his website. Typical fringie attempt to make some moolah!! sheesh!! Seeking the Truth... The truth that it takes money to live in today's world. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted May 24, 2014 #96 Share Posted May 24, 2014 I'm not jumping on the "It's aliens brah" bandwagon, but I feel I must correct the mistaken assertion that Intentional Cranial Deformation increases skull volume. Here are two studies which bear that out: One slight disagreement there. They are hybrids not aliens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted May 27, 2014 #97 Share Posted May 27, 2014 One slight disagreement there. They are hybrids not aliens. Nope, you mean only one person here who stands by the inane ranting of Foerster which has been soundly refuted. These skulls are not hybrids, absolutely nothing stand behind that inane assumption. You have been unable to prove so, only being able to point at the failed Foerster. Not the same thing you see. Go back and read the thread and the information that soundly refutes this childish notion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted May 27, 2014 #98 Share Posted May 27, 2014 It wasn't found by Semir Osmanagic hopefully? Thank goodness not!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted May 27, 2014 #99 Share Posted May 27, 2014 "What about the prego mummies who's babys heads are elongated ? Those were found between 1820-1930 there's 1-3 of them..." Sometimes the baby's head is naturally deformed while in the womb. Do you have a link to these? There is no link - no such mummies have been found Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpiosonic Posted May 30, 2014 #100 Share Posted May 30, 2014 There is no link - no such mummies have been found Not surprised. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now