If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Examiner)   Tiny 'alien' skeleton debunked by DNA: But wait a minute what is that?   (examiner.com) divider line 236
    More: Interesting, DNA  
•       •       •

25272 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 May 2013 at 12:35 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



236 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-01 02:35:41 PM  

internut scholar: swahnhennessy: Did you not get the bit about the guy's own website? You're really going to give that to me as a source? You can't be serious Sirius.

Right, now read it, and follow the links in the report, from the scientists that did the testing. I am telling you that it is legit. I personally conversed with one of the scientists.

I am not saying that this is an alien. What I am saying is that they don't know what it is.


What I found interesting about this was that Greer wanted this to be an alien, so he took it to actual scientists, who studied it and concluded it was a 6 inch human(oid) that was probably 6 years old. The scientific opinion seems just as unbelievable as the alien theory, but these are reputable people from Stanford that studied it.

I would be hesitant about calling this BS, even if there is a pretty large chasm of WTF between what we will accept at face value and what the Stanford guys are saying.
 
2013-05-01 02:37:01 PM  

my_cats_breath_smells_like_cat_food: Why are people arguing that this thing isn't an alien?  The whole article is saying nothing but "this isn't an alien" and everyone in the thread is saying "this isn't an alien" and yet I still see a bunch of posts saying (paraphrased) "DURRRR, nutjobs thinks this is an alien, dumbasses" when the one thing I see everyone agreeing on...IS THAT IT ISN'T AN ALIEN.

Jesus...just INCLUDING the word alien in teh headline is apparently all it takes.

I read about the tiny skeleton on Yahoo earlier today, but I imagine every internet article is using the same sources.  In the end it looks like all they know is:

DNA is human, no (known) markers for dwarfism, has the wrong number of ribs, not a fetus.

/And since we are all internet-armchair-scientizing about it, my guess is weird random mutation that we don't see because it is not conducive to survival, therefore the mutation is not reinforced and is not increasingly present in the gene pool.
//Or, ya know, it's aliens...



Or, it's neither, as a farker who is an actual archeologist has already pointed out - it is most likely a carving/composite someone put together. Considering the nuttery of the source of this "skeleton", and the successful way he's exploiting the credulous to make money off of it, I'm going with hoax.
 
2013-05-01 02:37:22 PM  

mongbiohazard: Some more background on Dr. Greer, the guy behind this latest alien hoax. He literally claims that an alien ambassador from the Andromeda Galaxy named "Bijou" follows him around. So everyone who seems to have lost all critical reasoning capabilities and are blathering on about how people who are skeptical aren't being open-minded enough should really keep that in mind.

He's a known loon, and this is yet another hoax. It's not that skeptics aren't open-minded enough.... it's just that you're so "open-minded" that you're too willing to believe any silly garbage which conforms to your desires.


This is true, but just because he is picking this up and running with it, does not mean the science behind the testing is flawed.

The scientists are being very cautious, and are not saying this is an alien. For the most part, Greer isn't even saying this is an alien. He is implying that it could be, but frankly it really could be. More likely not, but there is that chance. Being that it doesn't fit ANYTHING we have ever observed before.
 
2013-05-01 02:37:39 PM  

internut scholar: GungFu: I don't think your mind can process the idea that the figurine is neither human nor alien. It's a shiatty model attached to a story spun for the idiots who have the capability of thinking that it can be some ET from another planet. Throughout history there has been extremely similiar attempts at deception.

Throughout history, there has not been an alien lifeform (of the popular culture kind) found on earth. I rest my case.


Except for the parts where you are totally wrong I agree with you.

The part where you are wrong is that this "figurine" is a biological humanoid and that it is not a hoax.

http://siriusdisclosure.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/signed-Lachma n- report.pdf

http://siriusdisclosure.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Chile-Specime n_ GPN-Summary.pdf


As was pointed out upthread somewhere, it seems to be a mashup of different bones. In all probability, the rib ends that were supposedly dissected did come from a human, they were just carved to be that small. Why the hell do people always believe such ridiculous bullshiat? It's NOT a new species of human, it's a farking model.
 
2013-05-01 02:38:39 PM  

DeathCipris: GungFu: internut scholar: GungFu: Oh fark off!

Seems to me you're the one who believes in any bullshiat these kooks dish out, including the 'Starchild' alien skull bollocks, or whatever 'proof' they've used in the past.

Well since you have it all figured out, why don't you tell me what it is.


I don't think your mind can process the idea that the figurine is neither human nor alien. It's a shiatty model attached to a story spun for the idiots who have the capability of thinking that it can be some ET from another planet. Throughout history there has been extremely similiar attempts at deception.

Throughout history, there has not been an alien lifeform (of the popular culture kind) found on earth. I rest my case.

So you are implying the scientists Dr. Nolan and Dr. Greer are staking their professional careers and totally making this shiat up about it testing positive for human DNA when in reality it is just a doll?

Again not saying it isn't possible, but just like that thing ACTUALLY being an alien, it is a long shot.


If you read to the end of that "paper" by those "scientists", you see that they end with the suggestion of an ET, and the half baked theory of panspermia, with no citations.

/you are all being trolled.
 
2013-05-01 02:38:48 PM  
If it was a hoax, I'm pretty sure the Stanford guys would have outed it as such.
 
2013-05-01 02:39:06 PM  
Also, I should have added that the fact that this guy really thinks that aliens follow him around everywhere and that he sees alien craft every time he looks at the night sky should be an obvious hint that this is utter crapola.
 
2013-05-01 02:40:37 PM  

mongbiohazard: my_cats_breath_smells_like_cat_food: Why are people arguing that this thing isn't an alien?  The whole article is saying nothing but "this isn't an alien" and everyone in the thread is saying "this isn't an alien" and yet I still see a bunch of posts saying (paraphrased) "DURRRR, nutjobs thinks this is an alien, dumbasses" when the one thing I see everyone agreeing on...IS THAT IT ISN'T AN ALIEN.

Jesus...just INCLUDING the word alien in teh headline is apparently all it takes.

I read about the tiny skeleton on Yahoo earlier today, but I imagine every internet article is using the same sources.  In the end it looks like all they know is:

DNA is human, no (known) markers for dwarfism, has the wrong number of ribs, not a fetus.

/And since we are all internet-armchair-scientizing about it, my guess is weird random mutation that we don't see because it is not conducive to survival, therefore the mutation is not reinforced and is not increasingly present in the gene pool.
//Or, ya know, it's aliens...


Or, it's neither, as a farker who is an actual archeologist has already pointed out - it is most likely a carving/composite someone put together. Considering the nuttery of the source of this "skeleton", and the successful way he's exploiting the credulous to make money off of it, I'm going with hoax.


It's also interesting to note that the scientist that studied the skeletal structure only did so from images.  And the scientist that studied the chemical makeup made no analysis of the specimen as a whole.
 
2013-05-01 02:41:30 PM  
It's probably a new species of primate, hell we recently discovered a few.
 
2013-05-01 02:42:23 PM  

MacWizard: internut scholar: swahnhennessy: Did you not get the bit about the guy's own website? You're really going to give that to me as a source? You can't be serious Sirius.

Right, now read it, and follow the links in the report, from the scientists that did the testing. I am telling you that it is legit. I personally conversed with one of the scientists.

I am not saying that this is an alien. What I am saying is that they don't know what it is.

What I found interesting about this was that Greer wanted this to be an alien, so he took it to actual scientists, who studied it and concluded it was a 6 inch human(oid) that was probably 6 years old. The scientific opinion seems just as unbelievable as the alien theory, but these are reputable people from Stanford that studied it.

I would be hesitant about calling this BS, even if there is a pretty large chasm of WTF between what we will accept at face value and what the Stanford guys are saying.


I agree.

I also find it interesting that no one, besides these obscure websites are reporting this news.

I think this is pretty wild just thinking it could be human. But further testing definitely needs to, and will be (is) happening.
 
2013-05-01 02:46:08 PM  

internut scholar: One thing I find fascinating is that how so many people are ready to call BS on this but really have no idea the circumstances behind this story. It's almost as if people only believe what is spoon feed to them. They don't have to do any further thinking because the guys on the evening news, or the NYT didn't say so.

Anyway, to those that want to know more:

This is a real creature.

http://siriusdisclosure.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/SMG-report-4- 22 -2013-FINAL-COMPLETE.pdf

It is not a non-human primate (i.e. monkey)

It has very similar DNA to a human.

It is 6-8 years in age. (not a human fetus)

It has 10 ribs.

It is 6" in length.

It's cause of death is considered to blunt force trauma.

There are no known human conditions that would account for the abnormalities

There were no genetic markers that would indicate dwarfism or other deformation.

It was tested by two leading scientists in their respective fields. Dr. Nolan and Dr. Lachman of Stanford.

This is really exciting news, even if the thing is not a alien. Again, there is no known human to ever of had this condition. That alone is news worthy. Alien stuff is just icing on the cake.


.

Dr. Nolan is continuing to work on the DNA analysis, and when he concludes his work, he is writing a paper for peer review.


THIS. I thought it was a hoax when I first saw the pics a long time ago...Watched Sirius last week and the analysis of this lil guy was the only exciting bit.
 
2013-05-01 02:47:40 PM  
Yeah, the Dr. Greer dude is a nutbag. If he's the "credible" one in this, I'm calling hoax.
 
2013-05-01 02:48:00 PM  

mongbiohazard: my_cats_breath_smells_like_cat_food: Why are people arguing that this thing isn't an alien?  The whole article is saying nothing but "this isn't an alien" and everyone in the thread is saying "this isn't an alien" and yet I still see a bunch of posts saying (paraphrased) "DURRRR, nutjobs thinks this is an alien, dumbasses" when the one thing I see everyone agreeing on...IS THAT IT ISN'T AN ALIEN.

Jesus...just INCLUDING the word alien in teh headline is apparently all it takes.

I read about the tiny skeleton on Yahoo earlier today, but I imagine every internet article is using the same sources.  In the end it looks like all they know is:

DNA is human, no (known) markers for dwarfism, has the wrong number of ribs, not a fetus.

/And since we are all internet-armchair-scientizing about it, my guess is weird random mutation that we don't see because it is not conducive to survival, therefore the mutation is not reinforced and is not increasingly present in the gene pool.
//Or, ya know, it's aliens...


Or, it's neither, as a farker who is an actual archeologist has already pointed out - it is most likely a carving/composite someone put together. Considering the nuttery of the source of this "skeleton", and the successful way he's exploiting the credulous to make money off of it, I'm going with hoax.


I mean, I guess I find it questionable that someone could pass a figurine off as an actual skeleton for so long.  I mean, that is probably just about the simplest most basic testing you would do if someone handed this over to a lab.  Unless you are assuming that this whole thing from top to bottom is 100% bullshiat fiction (which it might be, I have drawn no conclusions but enjoy speculation), why bother going to the trouble/expense of complicated DNA analysis when any old MRI would likely give you everything you would need to rule out figurine.
 
2013-05-01 02:48:42 PM  

Xploder: As was pointed out upthread somewhere, it seems to be a mashup of different bones. In all probability, the rib ends that were supposedly dissected did come from a human, they were just carved to be that small. Why the hell do people always believe such ridiculous bullshiat? It's NOT a new species of human, it's a farking model.


Why do I believe this ridiculous BS? Because one of the leading scientists in the world on skeletal abnormalities concluded that it was a being. Not some mix and match hoax.

Don't believe me. Go straight to the source.  Dr. Ralph Lachman.

So either you and the farkers up thread are smarter than him or you all are wrong. It's really that simple now.
 
2013-05-01 02:50:32 PM  

chuggernaught: What makes you think an advanced alien race would think humans are the smartest creature on the planet?


Don't know about your first question (what makes us think we're the smartest). But as to your second, any alien race capable of traveling here would do so by manipulating its physical environment to its advantage in some hugely impressive way to achieve interstellar travel. And it would have arrived at the ability to do so by manipulating its physical environment starting in far less impressive ways and working its way up. On arriving at our planet it would ask itself "which species has, like us, manipulated its physical environment to its own advantage?". It might be amused by how crude and limited our efforts are, not even reaching the planetary scale of control, but nonetheless it would recognize that fundamental ability we hold in common.

In exactly the same way, when we look at archaeological evidence for our distant ancestors, we accept the emergence of stone tools as a key divergence from other early apes, and the appearance of polished stone tools as a dramatic step forward. Even across millions of years we attribute the greatest intelligence to those creatures who showed signs of becoming like us.

Of course, it's quite possible we're not the smartest and that the dolphins are smarter. But the point is that long after we've departed this planet (one way or another), dolphins will still be in the oceans doing dolphiny things, and so will their space-dolphin equivalents on other worlds. Any alien likely to actually get here is going to be a lot like use in the manipulating the environment department, and like us is likely to regard manipulating the environment as the hallmark of intelligence.
 
2013-05-01 02:51:12 PM  

Pauly Math: SirEattonHogg: I would guess one problem with this "thing" being an alien species is if it got here, then that denotes intelligence and its head size seems too small to have the brain power. Obvious intelligence that could create an interstellar spacecraft capable of large distances.

I've read that there is no direct correlation between body size and brain power in a species.  For instance, humans don't possess the biggest brain, but obviously we're the smartest on the planet.  OTOH, isn't there a minimum brain size needed for developing self-awareness, critical thought, imagination, etc?

There is a strong correlation between brain size relative to body size and intelligence though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encephalization_quotient


There's a lot more than quantity in determining intelligence. Number of glial cells for one is something that seperates the most of us from Einstein. There's still a hell of a lot we do not know about neuroscience and I just wish there was more funding...
 
2013-05-01 02:52:03 PM  

swahnhennessy: Does anyone have a link that isn't the Examiner or the guy's own website? I find it impossible to believe that that thing is real, let alone that it was a human that survived 6-8 years.


http://www.livescience.com/29176-alien-looking-skeleton-poses-medica l- mystery.html?cmpid=514645

there are more pictures of it there. Basically reports the same thing, though, with a little more detail on the DNA.
 
2013-05-01 02:53:56 PM  
d.gr-assets.com
 
2013-05-01 02:54:34 PM  

Xploder: internut scholar: GungFu: I don't think your mind can process the idea that the figurine is neither human nor alien. It's a shiatty model attached to a story spun for the idiots who have the capability of thinking that it can be some ET from another planet. Throughout history there has been extremely similiar attempts at deception.

Throughout history, there has not been an alien lifeform (of the popular culture kind) found on earth. I rest my case.


Except for the parts where you are totally wrong I agree with you.

The part where you are wrong is that this "figurine" is a biological humanoid and that it is not a hoax.

http://siriusdisclosure.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/signed-Lachma n- report.pdf

http://siriusdisclosure.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Chile-Specime n_ GPN-Summary.pdf

As was pointed out upthread somewhere, it seems to be a mashup of different bones. In all probability, the rib ends that were supposedly dissected did come from a human, they were just carved to be that small. Why the hell do people always believe such ridiculous bullshiat? It's NOT a new species of human, it's a farking model.


25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-05-01 02:56:57 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Yeah, the Dr. Greer dude is a nutbag. If he's the "credible" one in this, I'm calling hoax.


No, he's the one that tried to say it was an alien. The credible ones are:

Garry Nolan, professor of microbiology and immunology at Stanford School of Medicine, and
Dr. Ralph Lachman, professor emeritus, UCLA School of Medicine, and clinical professor at Stanford University
 
2013-05-01 02:57:01 PM  

MacWizard: If it was a hoax, I'm pretty sure the Stanford guys would have outed it as such.


You would think, but then again....Uri Gellar.
 
2013-05-01 02:57:49 PM  

FloydA: ArkAngel: Probably carved

Yeah.  The skull is a composite; the maxilae of one animal are glued on to the frontal of another; you can see the join at a horizontal crack on the frontal that should not be there on any mammal.  The back of the skull looks like it might be a coati, with the zygomatic arches broken off, and the face is probably a small monkey, or that might be carved as well.

The body looks like it is carved out of a single piece.  It looks a lot like what people imagine skeletal material looks like, when they haven't actually seen any.


Some have actually bothered using Xray on the thing, others are quick to dismiss anything out of the ordinary from a single picture and/or are simply too lazy to delve deeper. I admit I was like you when I first heard of the case.
 
2013-05-01 03:02:50 PM  

chuggernaught: SirEattonHogg: I would guess one problem with this "thing" being an alien species is if it got here, then that denotes intelligence and its head size seems too small to have the brain power. Obvious intelligence that could create an interstellar spacecraft capable of large distances.

I've read that there is no direct correlation between body size and brain power in a species.  For instance, humans don't possess the biggest brain, but obviously we're the smartest on the planet.  OTOH, isn't there a minimum brain size needed for developing self-awareness, critical thought, imagination, etc?

What makes you think humans are the smartest on the planet?
What makes you think an advanced alien race would think humans are the smartest creature on the planet?


So long, and thanks for all the fish.
 
2013-05-01 03:04:28 PM  

deadsanta: DeathCipris: GungFu: internut scholar: GungFu: Oh fark off!

Seems to me you're the one who believes in any bullshiat these kooks dish out, including the 'Starchild' alien skull bollocks, or whatever 'proof' they've used in the past.

Well since you have it all figured out, why don't you tell me what it is.


I don't think your mind can process the idea that the figurine is neither human nor alien. It's a shiatty model attached to a story spun for the idiots who have the capability of thinking that it can be some ET from another planet. Throughout history there has been extremely similiar attempts at deception.

Throughout history, there has not been an alien lifeform (of the popular culture kind) found on earth. I rest my case.

So you are implying the scientists Dr. Nolan and Dr. Greer are staking their professional careers and totally making this shiat up about it testing positive for human DNA when in reality it is just a doll?

Again not saying it isn't possible, but just like that thing ACTUALLY being an alien, it is a long shot.

If you read to the end of that "paper" by those "scientists", you see that they end with the suggestion of an ET, and the half baked theory of panspermia, with no citations.

/you are all being trolled


The report I read had some explanation at the end that they didn't know what it was and a very brief mention of ET.
Yes, it is possible it is a fake or a hoax. Yes, that Greer guy is a nut.

But outright lie and fake test results? Then send them off for peer review after the analysis finishes? That's a new low and one I don't think he is willing to take.
 
2013-05-01 03:09:08 PM  

DeathCipris: Old news is so exciting...
It has already been determined this was human. It is a HUMAN (or at least something that tested positive for human DNA) that is 6 inches tall and lived for 6 to 8 years WITHOUT modern medicine. That is interesting on its own and warrants further research.


No, that is bullshiat.
 
2013-05-01 03:10:03 PM  

DeathCipris: deadsanta: DeathCipris: GungFu: internut scholar: GungFu: Oh fark off!

Seems to me you're the one who believes in any bullshiat these kooks dish out, including the 'Starchild' alien skull bollocks, or whatever 'proof' they've used in the past.

Well since you have it all figured out, why don't you tell me what it is.


I don't think your mind can process the idea that the figurine is neither human nor alien. It's a shiatty model attached to a story spun for the idiots who have the capability of thinking that it can be some ET from another planet. Throughout history there has been extremely similiar attempts at deception.

Throughout history, there has not been an alien lifeform (of the popular culture kind) found on earth. I rest my case.

So you are implying the scientists Dr. Nolan and Dr. Greer are staking their professional careers and totally making this shiat up about it testing positive for human DNA when in reality it is just a doll?

Again not saying it isn't possible, but just like that thing ACTUALLY being an alien, it is a long shot.

If you read to the end of that "paper" by those "scientists", you see that they end with the suggestion of an ET, and the half baked theory of panspermia, with no citations.

/you are all being trolled

The report I read had some explanation at the end that they didn't know what it was and a very brief mention of ET.
Yes, it is possible it is a fake or a hoax. Yes, that Greer guy is a nut.

But outright lie and fake test results? Then send them off for peer review after the analysis finishes? That's a new low and one I don't think he is willing to take.


Never go full Greer?
 
2013-05-01 03:12:24 PM  

DeathCipris: Old news is so exciting...
It has already been determined this was human. It is a HUMAN (or at least something that tested positive for human DNA) that is 6 inches tall and lived for 6 to 8 years WITHOUT modern medicine. That is interesting on its own and warrants further research.


OK, I'll choose this one to say what I just posted to FB on this topic:

Hmm, while there are 2 "Garry Nolan"s on the faculty of Stanford, one is a Cancer researcher, and one is a Genetecist, both are professors, not the "director of stem cell biology". That would be Irving L. Weissman, whose proper title is Director of Stanford Medicine's Institute of Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine. See:

http://stemcell.stanford.edu/about/annual_reports/2011%20annual%20re po rt%20small%20copy.pdf

Here's the Professors Nolan, who seem like very accomplished men, but whose lists of publications do not mention stem cells, not once:

http://www.stanford.edu/group/nolan/members/members.html#nolan

http://med.stanford.edu/profiles/cancer/faculty/Garry_Nolan/

So, I'd say any claim about the composition of the "DNA" made by "Garry Nolan" in the "documentary" are pretty suspect, since that person doesn't appear to exist.
 
2013-05-01 03:14:16 PM  
I'm not vested in this debate one way or the other, but, someone is going to someone else an apology.
/welcome to fark, I know
 
2013-05-01 03:16:26 PM  
I am astounded that so many people with adequate brain power to operate a computer in order to post on Fark actually believe that this is a skeleton of a 6-8 year old human being. I would think that anyone who couldn't recognize that this story is complete and utter bullshiat would have difficulty controlling their own bowels, much less operate a computer.
 
2013-05-01 03:16:44 PM  
DNA data is available to anyone who actually knows what to do with it, as the spirit of collaboration and peer review  is well alive in Science. Scientist do not immediately dismiss things because they are challenging or ground-breaking, but most of you guys do.
Coming straight out of the Conspiracy Theorist and scientific reasoning discussion, I find these comments very interesting. Are the people calling this story bullshiat saying that world reknown scientific academia and the world famous UFO "researcher" are in on a conspiracy to bring the "reality" of the UFO phenomena to the public or did your brains just go pop?
Little human or not, it seems very real. To deny this all by saying it's a carving is lazy at best.
 
2013-05-01 03:20:35 PM  
Anyone surprised that the article just barely touches on how this item was found? Found by one of the documentary producers maybe?

/Call me when the NYT picks this up.
 
2013-05-01 03:20:56 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: Looks like alien mummy jerky to me.


bbsimg.ngfiles.com

Did you say jerky mummy?

/Emperor Nimbala
//Hot and smokey.
 
2013-05-01 03:21:06 PM  
When googling "smallest known human ever recorded," the second and third entries are about micro penises.

Oh internet, you are a dark and soulless place...
 
2013-05-01 03:21:42 PM  

Deucednuisance: DeathCipris: Old news is so exciting...
It has already been determined this was human. It is a HUMAN (or at least something that tested positive for human DNA) that is 6 inches tall and lived for 6 to 8 years WITHOUT modern medicine. That is interesting on its own and warrants further research.

OK, I'll choose this one to say what I just posted to FB on this topic:

Hmm, while there are 2 "Garry Nolan"s on the faculty of Stanford, one is a Cancer researcher, and one is a Genetecist, both are professors, not the "director of stem cell biology". That would be Irving L. Weissman, whose proper title is Director of Stanford Medicine's Institute of Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine. See:

http://stemcell.stanford.edu/about/annual_reports/2011%20annual%20re po rt%20small%20copy.pdf

Here's the Professors Nolan, who seem like very accomplished men, but whose lists of publications do not mention stem cells, not once:

http://www.stanford.edu/group/nolan/members/members.html#nolan

http://med.stanford.edu/profiles/cancer/faculty/Garry_Nolan/

So, I'd say any claim about the composition of the "DNA" made by "Garry Nolan" in the "documentary" are pretty suspect, since that person doesn't appear to exist.


http://www.stanford.edu/group/nolan/members/members.html#nolan

It says he is geneticist and in the paper he tested the DNA, which makes perfect sense. Where are you getting the Stem Cell thing from?
 
2013-05-01 03:26:17 PM  
chuggernaught
What makes you think humans are the smartest on the planet?
What makes you think an advanced alien race would think humans are the smartest creature on the planet?


Well, aside from the amusing books of Douglas Adams and our violent and self-destructive propensities, I would think any alien race that travels space and comes to this planet would probably measure intelligence and level of civilization by something that has some remote similarity to its own. Namely, the use of tools, understanding of mathematics and by extension level of technology/science.

Since as far as we can tell, chimps, dolphins, whales and dogs don't really use tools or understand math (beyond simple counting) or science...  And we're the only ones who travel off this planet - albeit very short voyages and distances.  Yeah, I don't think its a stretch at all to say we're "top dog" on this planet and would be perceived as such by alien races.
 
2013-05-01 03:26:30 PM  

stevetherobot: I am astounded that so many people with adequate brain power to operate a computer in order to post on Fark actually believe that this is a skeleton of a 6-8 year old human being. I would think that anyone who couldn't recognize that this story is complete and utter bullshiat would have difficulty controlling their own bowels, much less operate a computer.


When I point out and prove how you are wrong, will you come back and admit it, or will you disappear like everyone else does?
 
2013-05-01 03:26:59 PM  
I don't get the people crying "fake" and "bullshiat." The article seems to imply that this thing is real, but it's really a deformed human. Are the people crying BS saying that the doctors are in on the hoax, or that the doctors can't recognize a real skeleton from a figurine carved from human bone no matter what test they run on it?

The first time I saw it, I too assumed it was a fake. Then I saw the x-rays and heard the medical reports. Every followup seems to indicate that it's real, and not a carved figurine or a mashup of different bones.

I dunno. I have a hard time believing it's an alien, but I have an equally hard time believing that it's a human that lived to the age of six in a poor country hundreds of years ago. If it's human, it appears that it's about a quarter of the size of the shortest human ever documented, and at the age of six (or older) was about half the size of the shortest baby ever. That alone makes it a historic find, regardless of whether or not it's an alien. The chance a human that tiny would live a week, much less six years or more, would seem to be very small.

It seems clear that it's not a fetus or baby due to the bone density, it wasn't a dwarf due to the long limbs, and the skull sure doesn't look like a monkey skull to me.
 
2013-05-01 03:32:01 PM  

stevetherobot: I am astounded that so many people with adequate brain power to operate a computer in order to post on Fark actually believe that this is a skeleton of a 6-8 year old human being. I would think that anyone who couldn't recognize that this story is complete and utter bullshiat would have difficulty controlling their own bowels, much less operate a computer.


What I don't believe is that well-respected scientists AND the University of Stanford would stake their reputations and falsify test results for some PR campaign of a silly movie. You sound like the Catholic church when Galileo told the Pope that the Earth revolves around the Sun. It is why they are running more tests on it.
 
2013-05-01 03:32:09 PM  

dittybopper: Deoxyribonucleic acid.  It's the genetic 'code' that describes all living things, but that's not what's important right now.


Ha Ha!! Awesome.
 
2013-05-01 03:37:59 PM  

DeathCipris: It says he is geneticist and in the paper he tested the DNA, which makes perfect sense. Where are you getting the Stem Cell thing from?


Right here, which was the article under discussion on FB:

http://www.examiner.com/article/tiny-alien-skeleton-debunked-by-dna- al ien-shown-to-be-human-after-all

internut scholar: When I point out and prove how you are wrong, will you come back and admit it, or will you disappear like everyone else does?


I do so look forward to quoting this back to you.
 
2013-05-01 03:40:36 PM  

DeathCipris: What I don't believe is that well-respected scientists AND the University of Stanford would stake their reputations and falsify test results for some PR campaign of a silly movie.


Read carefully.  They didn't examine the specimen, they were provided a DNA sample (which would never be admissible in a court of law for the complete lack of a chain of custody) and the Xray films.

They're dupes, not co-conspirators.
 
2013-05-01 03:43:58 PM  

Deucednuisance: DeathCipris: It says he is geneticist and in the paper he tested the DNA, which makes perfect sense. Where are you getting the Stem Cell thing from?

Right here, which was the article under discussion on FB:

http://www.examiner.com/article/tiny-alien-skeleton-debunked-by-dna- al ien-shown-to-be-human-after-all

internut scholar: When I point out and prove how you are wrong, will you come back and admit it, or will you disappear like everyone else does?

I do so look forward to quoting this back to you.


Ohh, FTA. Yea, you got me where Jay Petrillo got that info from, but in the write up released by the people that did the research it was not mentioned. Dr. Garry Nolan of Stanford University was only mentioned in the paper as the person that ran the DNA tests to conclude this tested positive for human DNA. He also stated he would continue research into the mummy.
 
2013-05-01 03:49:11 PM  

Deucednuisance: So, I'd say any claim about the composition of the "DNA" made by "Garry Nolan" in the "documentary" are pretty suspect, since that person doesn't appear to exist.


Haven't seen the documentary. However, the Garry Nolan in the LiveScience article...

http://www.livescience.com/29176-alien-looking-skeleton-poses-medica l- mystery.html?cmpid=514645

...(identified as a professor of microbiology and immunology) seems to be this guy...

http://med.stanford.edu/profiles/Garry_Nolan/
 
2013-05-01 03:55:18 PM  

Deucednuisance: DeathCipris: What I don't believe is that well-respected scientists AND the University of Stanford would stake their reputations and falsify test results for some PR campaign of a silly movie.

Read carefully.  They didn't examine the specimen, they were provided a DNA sample (which would never be admissible in a court of law for the complete lack of a chain of custody) and the Xray films.

They're dupes, not co-conspirators.


Dr. Nolan took the DNA Sample himself. Forensic documentation procedures were followed and he was hand delivered the distal end of the two right anterior ribs still containing bone marrow.
Short of actually being there, I think that is the best we have.
 
2013-05-01 03:58:29 PM  

Draskuul: My guess: parasitic twin. They say it seems to have survived for several years after birth, so my guess would be a parasitic twin that was more like a conjoined twin, something that in those days could have reasonably been removed by what passed for a surgeon at the time.


This is what I came here to speculate.

There have been similar cases.
 
2013-05-01 04:01:40 PM  

thatguyoverthere70: I don't get the people crying "fake" and "bullshiat." The article seems to imply that this thing is real, but it's really a deformed human. Are the people crying BS saying that the doctors are in on the hoax, or that the doctors can't recognize a real skeleton from a figurine carved from human bone no matter what test they run on it?

The first time I saw it, I too assumed it was a fake. Then I saw the x-rays and heard the medical reports. Every followup seems to indicate that it's real, and not a carved figurine or a mashup of different bones.

I dunno. I have a hard time believing it's an alien, but I have an equally hard time believing that it's a human that lived to the age of six in a poor country hundreds of years ago. If it's human, it appears that it's about a quarter of the size of the shortest human ever documented, and at the age of six (or older) was about half the size of the shortest baby ever. That alone makes it a historic find, regardless of whether or not it's an alien. The chance a human that tiny would live a week, much less six years or more, would seem to be very small.

It seems clear that it's not a fetus or baby due to the bone density, it wasn't a dwarf due to the long limbs, and the skull sure doesn't look like a monkey skull to me.


And as someone mentioned earlier, check out the leg bones. They seem pretty large. Relatively speaking, of course. If this thing was real, I'm betting it could jump like a mo'fo. Maybe it was like a flying human lemur mutant thing. I dunno. I think it's pretty neat though.
 
2013-05-01 04:02:21 PM  

studs up: I'm not vested in this debate one way or the other, but, someone is going to someone else an apology.
/welcome to fark, I know


At a nickel apiece, the value of all apologies owed by Farkers exceeds our national debt.
 
2013-05-01 04:11:44 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: studs up: I'm not vested in this debate one way or the other, but, someone is going to someone else an apology.
/welcome to fark, I know

At a nickel apiece, the value of all apologies owed by Farkers exceeds our national debt.


I'm sorry, I only understand comparisons expressed in unicorns per rainbow.

/Which can be reduced to Rhode Islands
 
2013-05-01 04:15:02 PM  

Calmamity: That whole article reeked of bullsh*t.


This. A "mixture" human male that tiny who despite his size still lived 6 to 8 years? How could you guess age? He's as small as a very at-risk premie birth. How did they keep him alive to live that long outside of modern medical intervention? Mix of what? The entire article makes not the slightest bit of sense.
 
2013-05-01 04:19:21 PM  
I'm a pixie.  Look at my profile pic ;)  I also have claws for toenails.  I never grew wisdom teeth.

/CSS (not Cascading Style Sheets...Cool Story, Sister)
 
Displayed 50 of 236 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report