23.5 Degrees: Mission Starchild Part Deux Comments - Mania.com



COMMENTS AND RESPONSES

Showing items 31 - 40 of 50
<<  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  >>  
serpentsminion 9/18/2009 11:57:52 PM

Not believing in the whole supernatural divine creator and his talking snake tempting people with apples theory, and also having problems with human evolution theory (as it is taught by mainstream) I choose to be one of the ones who seeks elsewhere and I always will. With the things I've learned about Astronomy, Cosmology, Anthropology and Archeology just from reading books and digging on the internet for 11 years I refuse to believe that its as simple as "We came from myocene apes". No way. Maybe NEANDERTHAL is the final product on this planet of primate evolution but not us. Homo-Sapien does not fit naturally anywhere in the picture.

Anyhow, I could go on and on, but Lloyd- I hope you at least get the tests done and part of me hopes that it IS non-human. Think of the paradigm shifts that would occur and all the new doors that could be opened!

LloydPye 9/19/2009 8:33:19 AM

Everyone:

Thanks for keeping this thread alive. To catch up a bit, let's start with the idea of creating a toy that looks like the Starchild. We looked at this early on, as we did T-shirts, bumper stickers, posters, etc., to pay the bills. It would have been soooooo easy to capitalize on that and create a tidy little side business. In 2007 we more or less had to create some T-shirts to sell at the 60th anniversay of Roswell (they were requested by the promoters of the event), but in that case the owners of the skulls, Ray and Melanie Young of El Paso, Texas, handled that because they were putting the originals on display for the first time since late 1999. Ray and Melanie still run the T-shirt business, such as it is. Nobody promotes it, they just sell one if someone asks them to do so.

This "vow of poverty" policy I've insisted upon is based on a simple reality, which is that all hardcore "defenders of the mainstream faith," like Wyldstaar and Squid, but literally millions of others like them, delight in seeing someone like me trying to make even a subsistence wage while doing this kind of work. Why? Because it allows them to dismiss us and our work with a simple line: "You can't believe a word that person says because he/she is 'just in it for the money'." That single phrase has been used to dismiss as many of us as has, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." It's all a part of the litany of attacks that mainstreamers use to keep alternative researchers marginalized.

I understand how their game is played, I live as much as I can within those boundaries, and I keep plugging away at it because I KNOW, and I have known since the end of 1999, that the Starchild is not entirely human. I was SURE of that after the primer-based DNA test in 2003, and since then it's just been a matter of waiting for the 454 technology to come online, as it did in 2006, and then to fall within a reasonable price range, as it did this year (2009). Now it's just a waiting game until we secure the investment money we need for the final DNA test and filming it, and then we'll make history.

I know 10.5 years is a long time to wait, but when it's something the size of the Starchild's ultimate impact, I think almost anyone would judge it was worth it. If you still have doubts about my confidence regarding the Starchild, simply check out a FREE sample of the eBook at the link below and see if you want to explore more of it. Thanks!     Lloyd

www.starchildproject.com/starchild_ebook.htm

 

 

 

 

 

bottleslingguy 9/19/2009 3:06:42 PM

But I want to look at it up close darn it!!!  :)

Getting back to deformaties and deliberate malformations from waterboarding (that was a joke). Those things would not cause the structure of the bone to be any different from a human or would it? Maybe one or two of the "debunkers" would like to chime in on that. Do genetic or intentional deformities cause the actual structure of the bone change? Does the bone grow completely differently from a normal human's? Does it uniformly harden to the point that it is more like dentin than bone? Not to mention, I think it is even lighter than normal bone.

How about the fibers INSIDE the bone? Has this ever been seen before in humans or even Neanderthal bone?

Squid 9/20/2009 3:23:04 AM

Wow.. name calling. Putting words in my mouth. I must have hit a nerve.


Stranger, regarding your points:


1. No, Stranger, I'm not a biologist, anthropoligist, or other type of scientist. So I don't represent science in that sense. Nor am I president of a $200 technology firm. (Why $200? Is that a typo?) And I don't have "the most intelligent people in the world" working for me. So what? Does that mean I can't ask questions when things don't make sense or say, "Hey, wait, it looks like you're changing your story?" (Btw, Stranger, you don't represent science, either... regardless of your credentials or what you control. Science is a collective process, not led by one voice.)  And for that matter, the only idea we have that are a president of a tech firm with the smartest people in the world working for you is your word. Care to back that up with proof?


2. Good for you... I want to hear the process out as well, although I don't know what I'm supposed to be pretending about.


3. My only one liner was in my 1st post, and that had the link. As for logic, the statements above "Which is more likely to have occured?" are basically Occam's Razor as it applies to this case, which is a classic piece of logic. And I'm not being logical for pointing this out?


4. Good for him. I never said he shouldn't do this, and I agree the skull is worthy of testing. Why are you saying I said these things? Show me where I said them, please. And for doing things with his heart... passion for what you believe is good. However, you should not let passion override reason.


5. I'm not sure what "a construct" is, but I thought the whole point of this was to produce evidence that the skull was a human/alien hybrid.


6. Again, I agree the testing should be done.


As for the rest of your statement... I'm glad to hear many scientists are watching this. Good for them. But they're not married to a conclusion, but they reject the conclusion that it's a deformed human being. What other conclusions are left, besides alien or fake, then?


Can someone please point out in my posts exactly where I said the skull shouldn't be tested? I'd like to know, because I didn't make such a statement. Nor did I say that Mr. Pye should live in poverty, nor did I say that he was in it for the money. In fact, I haven't insulted him in any way. Yet he has insulted me... "Squiddy Boy", "ignorant pomposities like you", "brainwashed belief", "people like you would never do", "profound ignorance", "Squid had to change his shorts after that!"

Mr. Pye, I'm not insulting you. Why are you insulting me? Is this your idea of debate... shout down any dissenting opinions?

Now Mr. Pye, I’m directly quoting you here… “I came into this in early 1999 as convinced as you that it had to be some kind of deformity. I mean, I'm a reasonable person and I had a life apart from the Starchild skull. I figured the odds on it being an actual real alien, or human-alien hybrid, were like 90%-10% against.” And then, later in the thread… “I keep plugging away at it because I KNOW, and I have known since the end of 1999, that the Starchild is not entirely human.” So, I take it you’re saying you went from being a skeptic to being a believer. Is this correct?


Mr. Pye, if it is an alien/human hybrid skull, and you can prove it to the scientific community at large, and it is then generally accepted as being such a hybrid by the vast majority of scientists worldwide, I will be glad to apologize to you and shake your hand, for you will have done what most people only dream about… radically change the world. Until then, I will remain a respectful skeptic.


Squid
 

Wyldstaar 9/20/2009 7:49:24 AM

I've been described as many things over the years, but never as a 'hardcore defender of the mainstream faith.'  I believe in life on other planets.  I believe that any alien life out there would avoid contact with the Earth to avoid cultural contamination.  Historically, when a powerful culture encounters a less powerful one, very bad things happen.  Don't take my word for it, ask a historian.  Any historian.  Humans being highly aggressive is just icing on the cake of reasons to avoid contact for the time being.  If these sorts of notions are mainstream, it's news to me.  I suppose I must be mainstream because I have serious doubts about the Starchild's origins as put forth by Lloyd Pye. 

All great leaps forward have required someone to step up and challenge mainstream beliefs.  Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Darwin and many more all chose to do so.  These people put themselves out there for the scrutiny of their peers.  They took a chance that their colleages would see the truth of their studies, and they changed the world.  These men of science had confidence in their work and in themselves, and were ready to face anyone who challenged their conclusions with hard science.  The flip side of this of course, is that nobody remembers the names of all those who stuck their necks out on the line when their ideas were a load of dingo's kidneys.  Until an actual scientist is willing to stand by this skull and publish a difinitive work on the subject, you are not going to be able to change the world. 

The internet is a powerful tool for raising funds, and I'm sure that sometime in the next few years Lloyd will find the money to run his tests.  I look forward to this day.  No matter the outcome, it will make for interesting reading.

bottleslingguy 9/20/2009 1:18:02 PM

Actual scientists have presented some pretty convincing evidence so far, who do you think is doing all the dna work and bone analysis?

Wyldstaar 9/20/2009 4:03:33 PM

Yes, there are indeed actual scientists who are noted on the site, bottleslingguy. None of them however, has been willing to do anything like publishing a book or paper regarding the skull.

The head researcher Dr. Ted Robinson is, according to the nixed Daily Mail article, a Canadian craniofacial surgeon. I have been unable to find any information regarding Dr. Robinson to determine his specialties and qualifications. There don't seem to be any websites dedicated to monitoring doctors in Canada the way we do here in the US. Since I can't find any info one way for the other, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt for the time being. While craniofacial surgery is a worthy field that gives him significant insight into the intricasies of the human skull, his job is to treat living human beings and not nine-hundred year-old skulls. What is called for to study an artifact such as this skull is a forensic anthropologist.

The article is written by Dr. Danny Penman, Ph D. What it fails to mention is that Dr. Penman got his Ph D in biochemestry studying fungus in cocoa, as opposed to anything remotely medically related. The good Dr. is also a staff writer on the Daily Mail, and not a practicing scientist or physician. He did however co-author a best selling weight-loss book called, "The No Diet Diet."

I must admit that what I've been able to find on the web about Dr Jason Eshleman does indicate that he is a well qualified genetic researcher. If he could not identify any paternal section of the DNA sequence, there are certainly questions that are unanswered. Lloyd's assertion that, “Only one stark conclusion can be drawn. Dad was not a human.” is jumping the gun. There are other possibilities which are much more down to Earth. Parthenogenesis and gynogenesis would explain the lack of a detectable father. Neither one of these possibilities has ever been recorded in a human being, but they are no more absurd an explanation than "Dad was not a human."
 

LloydPye 9/21/2009 11:54:14 AM

Squid....Wyldstaar....you're still around? Why am I not surprised? Because my ten years at this has shown time and again that it's you, yes, "defenders of the mainstream faith" that can't let a bone go once you get it in your jaws. And if you're not a defender of the faith, Wyldstaar, and you too, Squid, then who on earth would qualify as such? I really can't imagine how you don't see yourself as what you are.

Anyway, it's illustrative of you to search out and comment disparagingly on the credentials of those scientists who have helped me with the Starchild case and who have allowed me to use their names. There are many more who were not willing to allow it for precisely the reason you exhibit here: they knew they'd be picked apart and roasted by their peers and defenders of the faith for daring to involve themselves with such strictly forbidden intellectual fruit as UFOs and/or aliens. Every time I tangle with people like you, you prove all over again why it is so incredibly difficult to get credentialed scientists to take a serious look at anything outside the mainstream canon. It's not because they're not interested, or can't see enormous potential, but because they're terrified of the fallout that will rain down on them from skeptics and, again, overly zealous defenders of the faith.

To answer one of your many comments, in February of 1999 I first saw the skull and, while I could see it was incredibly bizarre, I had to accept that logically it was almost certainly a deformity of some kind. At that point I was going on exactly as much information as Wyldstaar and Squid have about it, which is very damn little. But by the end of 1999 I had learned that no physical corollaries could be found between the Starchild and a normal human. Dr. Ted Robinson had also spent six weeks researching mainstream literature that dealt with human deformities. He was convinced it couldn't be the result of deformity, either individually or as a collection of various kinds, and I was convinced, too. Then in 2003 when we got the primer-based DNA results, I knew for sure that the Starchild was a human-alien hybrid. I also knew I couldn't prove it then (primers wouldn't allow that), but I was informed that in development was new technology that would be able to prove it conclusively. All I had to do, I was told, was wait 3-5 years, which I did.

Sure enough, in 2006 the new genome recovery technology from 454 Life Sciences was announced, but at that time the price was millions of dollars, ridiculously out of reach. Now, at $200,000 it is well within reach, so now that's all we want, all anyone on my side of the fence wants, and what Squid and Wyldstaar say they want--a final test to prove it, up or down, yea or nay. I've been ready for years to shove a decade's worth of personal chips out on the table and let it all roll on Rudyard Kipling's "one turn of pitch and toss." Let's just do it and see how it goes. Let's see who has to eat crow--me and my much-maligned supporters, or the entirety of mainstream science and their myriad  defenders. Somebody has to win this one and somebody has to lose, and the stakes are, without exaggeration, humongously enormous. As Squid pointed out, and which anyone can see, this result can change history in a way that is difficult to imagine at this point. I'm ready for it and have been ready for it for years. I have a strong feeling, though, that the other side is not nearly as ready as I am.

Here's the bottom line: (1) An absolutely conclusive DNA test is available; (2) a ready supply of topnotch DNA is available. Setting aside parthenogenesis and gynogenesis, and all the other outlandish possibilities mainstreamers suggest to keep from having to confront the Starchild's obvious potential to change their lives and careers forever, why don't we all just shove our collective piles of chips out to the middle of the table and spin the wheel of Fate?

Crow, anyone?

 

bottleslingguy 9/21/2009 4:53:13 PM

I agree with Lloyd regarding the gun shy scientists. Talk about Stockholm Syndrome? These people are so afraid of not only their bosses but, probably moreso, their peers. It'll happen though and once it does theire will be a gold rush to put their faces on this.

My initial reaction when I first heard of this on (I hate to say) UFOHunters was that it was a deformity but looked cool. Then hearing about the sinuses and shallow eye sockets I got more interested which lead to my now cultish following. I hate to even mention that word because it has the potential to cause all kinds of dogmatic nonsense.

All in all with such high stakes at hand I don't mind the potential chance of eating crow and prefer to get more used to the fact the SC is a direct link to EBEs. Let's say the SC was a freak of nature, a one in a trillion mistake or a genetic transformation from the human species to the "grey". It could be the Adamu of the grey species 900 yrs ago. Wouldn't that be something too? I'll put my money on the hybrid theory.

Anybody check out that black and white photo of the military guy shaking the alien's hand? I don't give many of those kinds of things much credibility but the shape of the skull is pretty darn close. And the hand could be described as "deformed".

LloydPye 9/21/2009 5:28:00 PM

Bottle: You need to give us the direct link to that photo. I never did see it, I just saw a photo of Bush shaking hands with a reptilian....yeah, riiiiiggghhht!

<<  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  >>  

ADD A COMMENT

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Please click here to login.