Post by Brad-LaSpirits on Oct 1, 2007 14:23:24 GMT -5
Sixty to seventy years ago the parents of a young American girl of Mexican heritage took her to visit relatives in a small rural village in the mountains southwest of Chihuahua, Mexico. While there, the girl disobeyed a local taboo and went exploring in caves and mineshafts dotting the area. In one mineshaft she made a startling discovery: lying on the ground at the rear of the tunnel was a complete human skeleton. Coming up out of the dirt beside it was a misshapen hand, entwined in one of the human skeleton's arm bones. Gathering her courage, the young girl began to dig away the dirt the hand was rising up out of. She uncovered a shallow grave containing a being smaller than the human, with a body and skull as misshapen as the hand.
This discovery occurred in an area (northern Mexico) rife with variations of a legend that pervades all of South and Central America, as well as parts of the American southwest. These are known as "The Star Being Legends," which state that for many centuries Star Beings have come to Earth from the heavens to impregnate women in isolated rural villages. Because Star Beings do not nurture their young as humans do, and because the hybrids produced have so much human in them, the chosen women are allowed to raise them until they are five to eight years old (receiving much help along the way from other villagers, who consider Starchildren a great blessing). At that point the Star Beings return to take the hybrids to wherever they are ultimately destined to live.
With that in mind, it is easy to imagine a scenario in which the mother of a young hybrid finds out her child will soon be taken from her. Rather than give it up, she takes it into a mineshaft and kills it, then buries it in a shallow grave with one hand sticking out for her to hold onto. Then she takes a fatal dose of poison and lies down beside her child to permanently escape their mutual fate. Now, to many that might seem an overly drastic solution to what was surely an excruciating torment, but it is always difficult to second guess a mother's motives in circumstances like that. Maybe she had acquired knowledge that led her to believe what awaited her child in space was a fate worse than death.
Needless to say, the young American girl knew nothing of those Amerindian legends, so she removed both skulls from the mineshaft and brought them back into the U.S., where she kept them until her death in old age. They were then passed to an American man who held them for five years, not knowing what to do with them. He passed the skulls to a younger couple with UFO affiliations, and they contacted me because of my research into human origins (Everything You Know Is Wrong--Book One: Human Origins, Adamu Press, 1998, available now). My expertise is in comparing human bones with prehuman bones and showing they have very little in common, so I am not a UFO expert. However, I am aware of the basics of ufology, so at my first glimpse of the "deformed" skull my only thought was that it had to be from an alien because it looked so much like a "Gray."
The eyes are what did it for me, as they do for most people. Hauntingly different from the human norm, they are two stark windows into forbidden knowledge, strongly hinting that we are not at all what we think we are, and that in life the owner of those eyes knew secrets of the universe that we Earthlings can barely begin to imagine. Gazing into those eyes (eye sockets, actually), I felt the way people in the early 1600's must have felt when first gazing into a telescope, seeing spread out before them the infinite depth of their ignorance about physical reality. Like them, I felt myself staring at a similar depth of personal ignorance regarding biological reality.
Soon after that first glimpse into my possible past and future, I was offered the job of caretaker for what has come to be called the Starchild skull. Soon after that I began consulting experts in various aspects of cranial anatomy, all of whom assured me that the astonishing degree of "deformity" evident in the skull was the result of cranial binding (practiced throughout South America) combined with a highly unlikely but not impossible combination of physical pathologies. This did considerable damage to my initial conviction that the skull might prove to be the greatest relic in the annals of human history. Then I went to my local library and spent many hours researching human deformities, which taught me I had been misinformed by the experts I consulted.
I do not choose to believe my misinforming was deliberate. I choose to believe it was what often results when personal ego and professional reputation are mixed with the hubris that can come from being considered an "expert." Having achieved that lofty status, there can be an overpowering temptation to pound all square pegs into the round hole of conventional thinking, whatever that happens to be at any moment in time. So I choose to believe the experts I consulted were acting in good faith, victimized by their own extensive educations which, past a certain point, tends to become indoctrination, which leads to collective peer-reviewed agreements that ultimately ossify into dogma.
In the library, using their own texts, I discovered the truth, which was that the Starchild possessed "deformities" like no others ever seen before. Individually, each was absolutely unique, which negated all the assurances I had heard that "this isn't so very different from any number of others I have seen in my career as a (fill in the blank)." Those were all lies, whether to themselves or to me. None of them had ever seen anything like it before because I was looking through their own texts and nothing like the Starchild was there. Nothing even close. Not even a whisper of it. So my lost conviction rapidly returned.
What came out of my research is this: When it comes to deformity of the human cranium, a little is generally too much. Because newborns are so fragile, and because the head is the center of so many of life's essential processes (eating and breathing, to name two), anything seriously wrong in that area is frequently a death sentence. Certainly in any remote village like the one where the skull was supposedly found, there was no social stigma attached to doing away with malformed newborns that would be a long-term drain on a mother's meager physical resources. So there is no way the Starchild should have made it past Day One, yet it survived in apparent good health until the age of about five.
We know this because a detached piece of maxilla (upper jaw and palate) was found with the skull, and in that piece of maxilla were two baby teeth that show clear signs of wear from chewing. Also, its cranial bones, though highly aberrant, are well knit in all their sutures, indicating an age of more than three. Since the baby teeth would probably be missing in the sixth year, the age of five has been chosen as the likeliest time of death. [Note: this is no longer a solid assumption. The teeth still indicate an early death, but the skull suturing and durability of the bone indicate either an adult, or something other than a normal human child.]
During life [however brief or long] this skull exhibited an astonishing array of traits that cannot be considered human either in isolation or collectively. The eyes are not human; the temples are not; the forehead is not; the parietal bones (upper rear of the head) are not; the occipital bone (rear of the head) is not; the foramen magnum (hole where the spine enters the cranium) is not; its weight is not; its cranial volume (brain capacity) is not; its sinuses (which it completely lacks) are not; and its neck is not. In short, it is not human. Experts insist it is human only because their knowledge base simply does not allow the possibility that it is not human. But, experts or not, these facts cannot be denied.
Let's examine a few closely. First, as highlighted earlier, the eyes. Human eye sockets are cone shaped to hold an eyeball and the muscles surrounding it that allow it to move in all quadrants: up, down, left, right. That cone extends about 5 centimeters into the skull, and at its back are openings for the optic nerve and various blood vessels. The Starchild's skull has no cone, but rather a shallow scoop in the bone of the face, 3 centimeters at its greatest depth. The optic nerve canals and the fissures are skewed down and away, at the bottom of the scoop and on the inside, thereby housing an eye so different in shape and probable function that to attempt any comparison is an exercise in straw grabbing.
The temples. In humans, thick bands of muscle pass beneath the zygomatic arch (cheekbone) to spread out in a fan shape and connect with the entire side of the skull. Hold your fingers to the side of your head and grimace to see how they attach from forehead to upper hairline to behind the ear. In the Starchild the zygomatic arch has been greatly reduced and dropped from horizontal to a 45-degree angle. Instead of two fingers worth of muscle passing through, two spaghetti strands pass through. And, in a true miracle of deformity, those greatly reduced muscles have been neatly detached from the anchor points of humans, spread out in a reconfigured fan shape, and reattached across an area about 1/3 that of a human.
The parietals. In humans the parietal bones form the upper rear of the cranium. While there can be quite a range of difference in this part of the head, the parietals of the Starchild are far beyond any such variation. In fact, they are so large relative to human parietals, it is conceivable they might contain individual parts of a trilateral brain (all humans and primates have bilateral brains). If this should prove to be true (a planned endocranial cast should be definitive), there would be little doubt the child was a pure alien or an alien-human hybrid. [Note: an endocranial cast has yet to be created. At first, the thinness of the bone intimidated us away from casting it for fear of damaging one or more of the cranial sutures. Now we know the bone is durable, so a cranial cast seems possible, but it remains something for us to do. Also, we no longer consider the trillateral brain as a possibility. All indications are that the brain was bilateral.]
The occipital and neck. The occipital is a large curved bone covering the lower rear of a human head. Near its center is a noticeable bump (feel your own) called the "inion," the starting point for the neck. Above the inion is skull, below it is neck. Neck attachments fan out in an arc that carries from the inion to behind and below the mastoid bones that protect the ear canals. It is an extensive area, in its own way as extensive as the attachment area of the temple muscles. And in all cases of head binding, none can go below the inion without damaging muscle. Yet in the Starchild's skull the entire occipital is flat, as if designed that way, with a gently convoluted surface that belies any chance of binding--ever. Furthermore, the inion has become subtly concave relative to the bone around it. And, as with the temple muscles, the neck muscles have somehow been detached from where they would normally be on a human skull, greatly reduced in size, then reattached in a semicircle roughly 1/3 the area of a human neck.
The foramen magnum. In humans the foramen is positioned rear of center to balance a heavy rear cranium against an essentially empty face area. The front of a human face has numerous sinus cavities, two deep eye sockets, a mostly empty nasal passage, and a rather large mouth. This means the weight of the brain is dominantly rearward, under which is the human foramen. The Starchild's foramen is centered under the head, balancing it like a misshapen golf ball on a vertical tee. This shift in its center of gravity is necessary because the child's cranium is essentially wall-to-wall brain. It has no sinus cavities and greatly reduced eye sockets above an apparently small nasal passage and mouth.
Weight and brain volume. An adult human skull weighs about 2.2 pounds. A typical five-year-old might weigh a pound less, about 20 ounces. The Starchild's skull weighs 13 ounces without its teeth or jaws, so with them it might have weighed 15 to 16 ounces. Its bone is definitely lighter than human bone and roughly half as thick. Perhaps its most startling difference is in brain volume. A normal adult's brain capacity is around 1400 cubic centimeters (c.c.). Whatever the Starchild’s age, its brain capacity is an astonishing1600 c.c.!
In anthropological circles a jump of 200 c.c. in brain volume heralds a new species. Homo Erectus is 200 c.c. more than Homo Habilis. Homo Archaic is 200 c.c. more than Homo Erectus. Homo Neanderthalensis is 200 c.c. more than Homo Erectus. But with the Starchild skull, thus far it is officially considered a mere freak of nature, and so it will remain until DNA testing and other testing now underway definitively proves its lineage to be either a butt-ugly human, a pure alien, or an alien-human hybrid. I'm betting on one of the latter two.
[Note: DNA testing has confirmed it is not a pure alien. Its mother was definitely human, as proved by its mitochondrial DNA. However, we are yet to determine anything substantive about its father, so the alien-human hybrid option remains.]
