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  
•       •       •

25223 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 04:19:36 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?


Conspiracy theory believers more likely to reject science and behave irrationally.
 
2013-05-01 04:21:56 PM

internut scholar: 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?


If it was proved to my satisfaction, I'd be happy to admit I'm wrong. I seriously doubt that I will ever have to. If you find better evidence that a sketchy article like TFA, feel free to bring it to my attention.

/EIP
//Though I don't check it often, so I might not respond promptly.
 
2013-05-01 04:22:51 PM

vudukungfu: FARK rebel soldier: Reminds me of this place which has apparently closed since I was there 20 years ago.

The most asked-for exhibit at the Dime Museum is Abraham Lincoln's last bowel movement -- supposedly taken from a chamber pot at Ford's Theater -- mounted in a dusty frame along with a faded, handwritten note attesting to its authenticity. Horne had taken the turd down -- he changes his exhibits frequently -- but people kept asking for it, so he put it back up. The crusty, blackened poop was exposed as a fraud, Horne says, when an analysis revealed that it contained Necco wafers, which weren't sold until 1912. Of course, even Horne's explanation may be a fraud -- who can say?

I could swear that NECCO wafers were sent to Union troops in the Civil War.


Uh...how would they know the poop contained Necco wafers? They are pretty much sugar and would dislove into their constituent molecules in the body during the process of digestion. I don't think you could make poop out of Necco wafers, there wouldn't be any of them left. It's not like they are corn kernels.
 
2013-05-01 04:26:48 PM

DeathCipris: 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.


I too find it difficult that well-respected scientists and the U. of Standford would do that, which is why I'm extremely skeptical that they have done so. TFA is very sketchy and it will take more than that to convince me.
 
2013-05-01 04:27:35 PM
Hey, I was gonna eat that mummy.
 
2013-05-01 04:28:20 PM

stevetherobot: internut scholar: 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?

If it was proved to my satisfaction, I'd be happy to admit I'm wrong. I seriously doubt that I will ever have to. If you find better evidence that a sketchy article like TFA, feel free to bring it to my attention.

/EIP
//Though I don't check it often, so I might not respond promptly.


Im just messing around with you.

Forget the alien angle thing to this. That is Greer's thing, and it is irrelevant, scientifically speaking.

This being is a biological creature and not a hoax it was tested be two leading Stanford scientists. One a specialist in skeletal abnormalities and one that is a specialist in genetics.

They performed DNA testing, CT scans and Xrays. The being has a visible heart and lungs.

They said, not Greer, that it is real, it is unlike anything that is known to medical science and that it is not a fetus.

I can't link from phone so read my previous comments and links.
 
2013-05-01 04:35:08 PM
Of course it's granted they have some piece of alien DNA to compare this too, otherwise they would definitely have the integrity not to say it's most comparable to human.
 
2013-05-01 04:35:46 PM
Seeing it walking around and waving would blow my mind. Clone it...it'd probably make really a cool bipedal pet.
 
2013-05-01 04:40:52 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.


That's the most logical explanation thus far, since it's bones were supposed to have been developmentally 6-8 years...
 
2013-05-01 04:41:57 PM

Deucednuisance: 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.


Oh, FFS. There is only one Garry Nolan at Stanford. He has appointments in 2 departments, which is quite common. (Hint: look at the Education in the 2 links. "Both" Garry Nolans got undergrad degrees at Cornell, Ph.D.'s at Stanford, and did postdocs with David Baltimore. Wow, what are the odds?)

I actually know Garry- he's the real deal.

/scientist
 
2013-05-01 04:45:52 PM

Born to Die: Deucednuisance: 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.

Oh, FFS. There is only one Garry Nolan at Stanford. He has appointments in 2 departments, which is quite common. (Hint: look at the Education in the 2 links. "Both" Garry Nolans got undergrad degrees at Cornell, Ph.D.'s at Stanford, and did postdocs with David Baltimore. Wow, what are the odds?)

I actually know Garry- he's the real deal.

/scientist



Sirius question: Was he paid to be in that documentary? Amd can you ask him if he thinks he's lost crediblilty for being associated with Steven Greer, who even the UFO and alien community think is a twat?

/why so sirius?
 
2013-05-01 04:50:29 PM
cdn1.screenrant.com
 
2013-05-01 04:50:36 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.


Yeah, this is what's bugging me. Across all these sources I can't figure out whether Nolan took the DNA specimen himself directly from the body, or if it was provided to him with assurances that it was honestly, truly, really from the mummy -- or equally troublesome, he was provided with a clipping of bone that he was told was from the mummy. (Academics can be very trusting because they are used to assuming that the people they are dealing with are acting in good faith. Remember how Hugh Trevor-Roper was duped into "authenticating" the Hitler Diaries?)

There's a similar chain of custody issue with the body itself. Where was it found, and in what context? Was it buried or just laying on the surface? How did it come to be mummified, rather than simply decaying?

I also can't figure out who is allegedly testifying to the age at death, and if so how they are determining it. What is reliable, especially for a supposed child this deformed? I'm not sure that tooth eruption would even be reliable.

So there's really only two logical possibilities (and one illogical one) here:

1) The body is an outright fake, like the "alien autopsy" body from a few years ago. Nolan (and others) have been exploited by the fakers who have supplied them with selective evidence. For example, perhaps the DNA actually comes from a woman from that region but has been deliberately damaged (or "distressed" as antiques fakers like to say) to make it seem more "interesting". Note that Nolan has only found two kinds of thing: definitely human genetic material, and material not identifiable as anything at all. What he hasn't found, despite the misconceptions of several of the commentators on TFA, is anything that looks like DNA, but not human DNA. This is very telling: unless this creature is 100% human, it would be astonishing that only the human DNA has survived, and all of the telltale non-human DNA has not.

2) The body really is human, and truly highly anomalous, perhaps due to a combination of genetic defects and other illness. As others have pointed out, there are a lot of problems with this theory, including the fact that the body is not merely unlike any other corpse ever seen, it is different by an enormous degree. I suppose this is possible -- recall the degree of skepticism about Homo floresiensis being anything other than a diseased individual when it was first discovered -- but it's asking a lot.

If I were a betting man, my money would be on (1) as the explanation requiring the fewest assumptions.

The illogical one is

3) It's an ALIEN!!! that somehow has exactly the same DNA as a human. And no, the idea that it has the same DNA because its ancestors seeded Earth with life would somehow have to account for 7 million years of genetic divergence since then... I leave it as an exercise for the Believer to determine how many extraordinary assumptions would need to be true for that theory to work...
 
2013-05-01 04:56:53 PM

GungFu: Sirius question: Was he paid to be in that documentary? Amd can you ask him if he thinks he's lost crediblilty for being associated with Steven Greer, who even the UFO and alien community think is a twat?


No clue. It's not like we're best buds; we've met at meetings and have published papers in the same field. I honestly don't know what to think of this story, but I'm willing to forgo judgment until I see a peer-reviewed paper, as opposed to some BS "documentary" or sloppy reporting.

/but my money is on primordial dwarfism:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_dwarfism
 
2013-05-01 04:57:07 PM
The UFO ommunity think he's a bit of twat for not making his videos free, for organizing camps out for a fee, and maybe his encounters to big shots a la Rockefeller...paranoia is pervasive in such communities. His discluse project is still considered a must see.
The sirius documentary is more personal than most docs since it almost has an autobiographical tone, but it is worth seeing in my opinion.
 
2013-05-01 05:04:37 PM
I'm going with aliens. Aliens seeded the earth with DNA, evolution is the basic fundamental that created us as who we are, life is present throughtout the universe and is mostly similar with respect to using DNA under the same basic conditions. This thing is some kind of freak off-shoot.

Yeah, I know it all seems like BS, but that's where I'm dropping my money. I want to believe.

I also found this quote freaky from the article on Buzz Aldrin on why we aren't really searching Mars where we should be (something I harp on in every Curiosity thread);
"Because the foundations of every fundamentalist orthodox belief system on earth would be up-ended".
 
2013-05-01 05:11:31 PM

Born to Die: Oh, FFS. There is only one Garry Nolan at Stanford.


Huh, sorry about that.  I thought I saw two different undergrad institutions.  The pictures on the two bios don't look anything alike, and list two different specialties, so I figured it was a very odd coincidence.  My apologies to him and Fark for botching that.
 
2013-05-01 05:12:19 PM

czetie: So there's really only two logical possibilities (and one illogical one) here:

1) The body is an outright fake, like the "alien autopsy" body from a few years ago. Nolan (and others) have been exploited by the fakers who have supplied them with selective evidence. For example, perhaps the DNA actually comes from a woman from that region but has been deliberately damaged (or "distressed" as antiques fakers like to say) to make it seem more "interesting". Note that Nolan has only found two kinds of thing: definitely human genetic material, and material not identifiable as anything at all. What he hasn't found, despite the misconceptions of several of the commentators on TFA, is anything that looks like DNA, but not human DNA. This is very telling: unless this creature is 100% human, it would be astonishing that only the human DNA has survived, and all of the telltale non-human DNA has not.

2) The body really is human, and truly highly anomalous, perhaps due to a combination of genetic defects and other illness. As others have pointed out, there are a lot of problems with this theory, including the fact that the body is not merely unlike any other corpse ever seen, it is different by an enormous degree. I suppose this is possible -- recall the degree of skepticism about Homo floresiensis being anything other than a diseased individual when it was first discovered -- but it's asking a lot.

If I were a betting man, my money would be on (1) as the explanation requiring the fewest assumptions.

The illogical one is

3) It's an ALIEN!!! that somehow has exactly the same DNA as a human. And no, the idea that it has the same DNA because its ancestors seeded Earth with life would somehow have to account for 7 million years of genetic divergence since then... I leave it as an exercise for the Believer to determine how many extraordinary assumptions would need to be true for that theory to work...


Jeez, forget the alien thing.

"While the jury is out regarding the mutations that cause the deformity, and there is a real discrepancy in how we account for the apparent age of the bones ... every nucleotide I've been able to look at is human," researcher Garry Nolan, professor of microbiology and immunology at Stanford School of Medicine, told LiveScience. "I've only scratched the surface in the analysis. But there is nothing that jumps out so far as to scream 'nonhuman.'"
 
2013-05-01 05:17:34 PM
It's a scout for the first bugger invasion. The scorching of China isn't too long from now.

/obscure?
 
2013-05-01 05:18:30 PM
I'm going with aliens. Aliens seeded the earth with DNA, evolution is the basic fundamental that created us as who we are, life is present throughtout the universe and is mostly similar with respect to using DNA under the same basic conditions. This thing is some kind of freak off-shoot.

Yeah, I know it all seems like BS, but that's where I'm dropping my money. I want to believe.

I also found this quote freaky from the article on Buzz Aldrin on why we aren't really searching Mars where we should be (something I harp on in every Curiosity thread);
"Because the foundations of every fundamentalist orthodox belief system on earth would be up-ended".


Buzz makes a great point. Greer made the disclosure project, and despite what anyone may take issue with of his personal beliefs, it was a great project. He has on-tape testimony from dozens of credible sources from astronauts to airline pilots and military personal all speaking about their ufo experiences. Believe them or not, it's a great set of speeches. You can find it on Youtube.
 
2013-05-01 05:24:08 PM

internut scholar: stevetherobot: internut scholar: 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?

If it was proved to my satisfaction, I'd be happy to admit I'm wrong. I seriously doubt that I will ever have to. If you find better evidence that a sketchy article like TFA, feel free to bring it to my attention.

/EIP
//Though I don't check it often, so I might not respond promptly.

Im just messing around with you.

Forget the alien angle thing to this. That is Greer's thing, and it is irrelevant, scientifically speaking.

This being is a biological creature and not a hoax it was tested be two leading Stanford scientists. One a specialist in skeletal abnormalities and one that is a specialist in genetics.

They performed DNA testing, CT scans and Xrays. The being has a visible heart and lungs.

They said, not Greer, that it is real, it is unlike anything that is known to medical science and that it is not a fetus.

I can't link from phone so read my previous comments and links.


If i'm in possession of something that of a biological 'creature' that seems to have never been known before, I'd pretty much give it to as many scientists as possible to get definitive results. And not just two bods from Stanford, regardless of what their qualifications are. This is potential humanity changing and yet, that's it? Inconclusive results? Most likely human. Nolan even states that he will publish a final paper on it when he's finished with it but has already said that DNA doesn't provide all the answers. But it's likely human.

So, despite all the early Greer PR for the documentary, we have something that's not an alien. And based on the miniscule bits of the figurine being tested (ie not every part of it) there's suggestion that it's human. However, bear in mind that if you scrape a few bits of a dildo for DNA testing, I bet you can conclude the dildo is human too.

What needs to be done and stop with the wishy washy bullshiat these stories engender, is to have full scientific testing of everything. Personally, if there's evidence of hearts of lungs and shiat in the figurine, test those bits too, and so on and so forth.

As a project in PR and media interest for the documentary, the story has done remarkably well. I've grown to hate UFO and alien assholes as the evidence is so flimsy, improbably and unbelievable, that I can't watch documentaries anymore with these subject matters. It give s me a headache. However, I was interested in this one as Greer was such a polarizing figure on the Joe Rogan Podcast. Of course, I didn't buy into his bullshiat but I was surprised that others did, initially. As such, when the documentary came out, I skipped all the UFO Disclosure bollocks and went to the little 'alien' tests at the end. Disappointed. But not unexpected.

Greer is a hack, even the UFO community thinks he's a hack. BUt nice try with the documentary and the little alien gimmick. It suckered even me for a few minutes in making me watch his documentary. For further evidence of his bollock, I suggest listening to him on Joe's podcast and the shiat he spews. It's unbelievable - at least for most.
 
2013-05-01 05:27:43 PM

Deucednuisance: Born to Die: Oh, FFS. There is only one Garry Nolan at Stanford.

Huh, sorry about that.  I thought I saw two different undergrad institutions.  The pictures on the two bios don't look anything alike, and list two different specialties, so I figured it was a very odd coincidence.  My apologies to him and Fark for botching that.


Our first nickel!
 
2013-05-01 05:45:54 PM
I'm guessing parasitic twin.  Is that the right term for conjoined-twin where one is completely internal to the other?
 
2013-05-01 05:52:44 PM

MacWizard: czetie: So there's really only two logical possibilities (and one illogical one) here:


Jeez, forget the alien thing.
"While the jury is out regarding the mutations that cause the deformity, and there is a real discrepancy in how we account for the apparent age of the bones ... every nucleotide I've been able to look at is human," researcher Garry Nolan, professor of microbiology and immunology at Stanford School of Medicine, told LiveScience. "I've only scratched the surface in the analysis. But there is nothing that jumps out so far as to scream 'nonhuman.'"


DNA analysis is complicated especially without markers. It's still too early in the analysis to determinie anything conclusive, except saying that it's more human than chimp. As someone else has pointed out in this thread, the markers for the usual suspects leading to such difformities have been ruled out. The rest is going to be pain-staking and will need the collaboration of many other scientists interested in the case. This is how you work out the details of large DNA data : through sharing.
 
2013-05-01 05:57:57 PM

GungFu: internut scholar: stevetherobot: internut scholar: 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?

If it was proved to my satisfaction, I'd be happy to admit I'm wrong. I seriously doubt that I will ever have to. If you find better evidence that a sketchy article like TFA, feel free to bring it to my attention.

/EIP
//Though I don't check it often, so I might not respond promptly.

Im just messing around with you.

Forget the alien angle thing to this. That is Greer's thing, and it is irrelevant, scientifically speaking.

This being is a biological creature and not a hoax it was tested be two leading Stanford scientists. One a specialist in skeletal abnormalities and one that is a specialist in genetics.

They performed DNA testing, CT scans and Xrays. The being has a visible heart and lungs.

They said, not Greer, that it is real, it is unlike anything that is known to medical science and that it is not a fetus.

I can't link from phone so read my previous comments and links.

If i'm in possession of something that of a biological 'creature' that seems to have never been known before, I'd pretty much give it to as many scientists as possible to get definitive results. And not just two bods from Stanford, regardless of what their qualifications are. This is potential humanity changing and yet, that's it? Inconclusive results? Most likely human. Nolan even states that he will publish a final paper on it when he's finished with it but has already said that DNA doesn't provide all the answers. But it's likely human.

So, despite all the early Greer PR for the documentary, we have something that's not an alien. And based on the miniscule bits of the figurine being tested (ie not every part of it) there's suggestion that it's human. However, bear in mind that if you scrape a few bits of a dildo for DNA testing, I bet you can conclude the dildo is human too.

What needs to be done and stop with the wishy washy bullshiat these stories engender, is to have full scientific testing of everything. Personally, if there's evidence of hearts of lungs and shiat in the figurine, test those bits too, and so on and so forth.

As a project in PR and media interest for the documentary, the story has done remarkably well. I've grown to hate UFO and alien assholes as the evidence is so flimsy, improbably and unbelievable, that I can't watch documentaries anymore with these subject matters. It give s me a headache. However, I was interested in this one as Greer was such a polarizing figure on the Joe Rogan Podcast. Of course, I didn't buy into his bullshiat but I was surprised that others did, initially. As such, when the documentary came out, I skipped all the UFO Disclosure bollocks and went to the little 'alien' tests at the end. Disappointed. But not unexpected.

Greer is a hack, even the UFO community thinks he's a hack. BUt nice try with the documentary and the little alien gimmick. It suckered even me for a few minutes in making me watch his documentary. For further evidence of his bollock, I suggest listening to him on Joe's podcast and the shiat he spews. It's unbelievable - at least for most.


Firstly, I must say I appreciate your response. Secondly, I probably won't do much justice to it since I'm still on my phone and 3 beers deep. But I'll try..

I completely understand your reservations with Greer, he says some really sketchy things. I know this.
Like you, I want scientific proof.

When I initially heard about this, I was skeptical but still have a fascination with these type matters.

When the report came out and said this was human DNA I was confident that Greer was running a scam. But I had to be sure. I reached out to Dr. Nolan and picked his brain, per say.

After talking with him, and reconsidering his report. I have to say I am very intrieged with this whole thing.

Again. I'm not claiming alien. I am saying it is a intact biological organism.

I only say this because of the previous mentioned scientists test results.

Dr. Nolan is not claiming ET either. But you have to understand this is a real being, with human DNA, with no known human defects.
 
2013-05-01 06:03:57 PM
I think that it is some kind of weird teratoma or pregnancy that developed wrong and was retained. The question is how did they determine the age. It could have existed inside the mom for years.
 
2013-05-01 06:07:27 PM

MacWizard: Jeez, forget the alien thing.


Apparently you skimmed my post and read "blah blah blah ALIEN!!! blah blah blah", because you then went on to repeat precisely one of the points I just made about why this thing is demonstrably not alien.
 
2013-05-01 06:07:28 PM
I wanna know which one of you Total Farkers spawned that thing?
 
2013-05-01 06:13:17 PM

KimNorth: Really a humanoid  mutation that survived that long, 6 -10 yrs inChile at 8 inches long? Don't think so...But what do I know.


Maybe they remembered to punch holes in the lid
 
2013-05-01 06:27:57 PM
So can someone who has read all this explain the DNA test for the rest of us.  Who conducted it, was it done by multiple labs etc.?   Human DNA is almost always found when specifically tested for just from contamination; these remains have obviously been handled by many people.
So did they grind up a tooth or use bone marrow? I mean it is not hard to imagine someone having touched it and leaving copious amounts of trace DNA if that is as deep as they went.  Even more likely that some nerd got so excited thinking he had proof of alien life accidentally jizzed all over it.
 
2013-05-01 06:38:02 PM
Ghastly
If it is a real human skeleton then I'd wager it's a grossly mutated and deformed fetus that was miscarried.

If that thing slid out of me, I'd be screaming in Lovecraftian horror.
 
2013-05-01 07:02:35 PM

internut scholar: 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.


Look doofus...It is a HOAX. TRhe guy you insist on quoting and whose website you keep referring to thinks ALIENS FOLLOW HIM AROUND. If you really believe this guy then you are a total moron.
 
2013-05-01 07:12:11 PM

czetie: MacWizard: Jeez, forget the alien thing.

Apparently you skimmed my post and read "blah blah blah ALIEN!!! blah blah blah", because you then went on to repeat precisely one of the points I just made about why this thing is demonstrably not alien.


No, I read your entire post and "forget the alien thing" is not just directed at you. Your post was just the last one to bring it up. It's not just an illogical assumption. "It's not an alien" seems to be the only real conclusion reached by whatever research has been done and the point of every article I've seen about this.

Personally, I'm betting on weird anomaly, and that's only because I still have faith in science, not because I think such a scam is impossible to pull off. Science finds anomalies all the time.
 
2013-05-01 07:15:58 PM

Dano33: [cdn1.screenrant.com image 570x300]


came for this pic...now leaving most satisfied...
 
2013-05-01 07:16:03 PM

stryed: 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.


Some have actually studied both human and non-human mammal skeletal anatomy.  The skull in that photo, and the other photos I have seen, has a sagittal crest and a nuchal crest.  The zygomatics are broken away.  The pelvic girdle is obscured in exactly the places that would be needed to identify whether it was bipedal.  From what others in the thread (who care more about this than I do) are saying, the geneticist did not extract the DNA from the object itself, but from pieces that he was told came from it.  I haven't seen actual X-ray images of the object, only photos online, any of which could have been manipulated (I can't tell from the pixels).

Given that we know people sometimes create hoaxes, and we know that scientists can be fooled by a dedicated hoaxer, and the guy, Greer, who's pushing this is apparently a known kook, and the back of the skull looks a lot like a coati skull, and the front doesn't seem to fit on the back properly, you have to admit that "hoax" is a possibility.

Given that we don't know if any aliens actually exist, and that if they did, they would not likely be able to fly to earth, and if they did, they would not be likely to just leave one of the dead crew lying around, I'd say that hypothesis is somewhat less likely.

Imagination is fun and all, but this has all the hallmarks of a fake.  If I'm proven wrong, I'll admit it and apologize, but I am honestly not particularly worried that I'll have to.
 
2013-05-01 07:21:21 PM

ThatIrishGuy: Dwight_Yeast: Looks like alien mummy jerky to me.

[bbsimg.ngfiles.com image 599x599]

Did you say jerky mummy?

/Emperor Nimbala
//Hot and smokey.


Came for some mummy jerky, leaving happy.
 
2013-05-01 07:21:23 PM

Xploder: Look doofus...It is a HOAX. TRhe guy you insist on quoting and whose website you keep referring to thinks ALIENS FOLLOW HIM AROUND. If you really believe this guy then you are a total moron.


If you haven't figured out by now that the point of the articles (there are several) is that the guy who thinks aliens follow him around (and thought this was an alien) IS COMPLETELY WRONG, then you are the total moron.
 
2013-05-01 07:46:17 PM
How easy is it to manipulate a genome for DNA testing? Would reknown scientist be satisfied by Dr Greer's word if he is the one who provided the sample? I somehow doubt the latter since credibility of the scientist would be in question, and according to the documentary the standford scientist did take rudimentary precautions in terms of conducting the analysis of the sample (wherever it came from)
/bsc biology
 
2013-05-01 07:53:54 PM

MacWizard: Xploder: Look doofus...It is a HOAX. TRhe guy you insist on quoting and whose website you keep referring to thinks ALIENS FOLLOW HIM AROUND. If you really believe this guy then you are a total moron.

If you haven't figured out by now that the point of the articles (there are several) is that the guy who thinks aliens follow him around (and thought this was an alien) IS COMPLETELY WRONG, then you are the total moron.


He's not wrong...noone has come to deny that conclusion. Greer himself never says it is an alien in the documentary. He's not that dumb but he his apparently pretty sly. For the time being Internut scholar has the facts right.
 
2013-05-01 08:01:51 PM
It's a little big foot.
 
2013-05-01 08:24:11 PM

stryed: He's not wrong...noone has come to deny that conclusion. Greer himself never says it is an alien in the documentary. He's not that dumb but he his apparently pretty sly. For the time being Internut scholar has the facts right.


Not questioning Internut scholar. Kind of been agreeing with him, except that I haven't taken Sirius seriously yet, just because of Greer.

So who made the claim that it was an alien? The Examiner headline is "Tiny 'alien' skeleton debunked by DNA." It's hard to debunk something that no one said in the first place.

The LiveScience article doesn't use the work "debunk" but says, "Apparently when the mummified specimen was discovered, some had suggested the possibility it was an alien that had somehow landed on Earth, though the researchers involved never suggested this otherworldly origin."

If not Greer, who was it that "suggested the possibility it was an alien"? I don't think he has enough credibility to qualify as a "researcher," so I took that part to mean the actual scientists never suggested it.
 
2013-05-01 08:29:39 PM

internut scholar: They performed DNA testing, CT scans and Xrays. The being has a visible heart and lungs.


I read your links. I must have missed the heart and lungs. Could you show me, please, where heart and lungs were mentioned?
 
2013-05-01 08:34:50 PM
What bothers me is the the attitude of "deny any evidence" followed by "if there are aliens, then where's the evidence?"
 
2013-05-01 08:35:35 PM

FloydA: stryed: 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.

Some have actually studied both human and non-human mammal skeletal anatomy.  The skull in that photo, and the other photos I have seen, has a sagittal crest and a nuchal crest.  The zygomatics are broken away.  The pelvic girdle is obscured in exactly the places that would be needed to identify whether it was bipedal.  From what others in the thread (who care more about this than I do) are saying, the geneticist did not extract the DNA from the object itself, but from pieces that he was told came from it.  I haven't seen actual X-ray images of the object, only photos online, any of which could have been manipulated (I can't tell from the pixels).

Given that we know people sometimes create hoaxes, and we know that scientists can be fooled by a dedicated hoaxer, and the guy, Greer, who's pushing this is apparently a known kook, and the back of the skull looks a lot like a coati skull, and the front doesn't seem to fit on the back properly, you have to admit that "hoax" is a possibility.

Given that we don't know if any aliens actually exist, and that if they did, they would not likely be able to fly to earth, and if they did, they would not be likely to just leave one of the dead crew lying around, I'd say that hypothesis is somewhat less likely.

Imagination is fun and all, but this has all the hallmarks of a fake.  If I'm proven wrong, I'll admit it and apologize, but I am honestly not particularly worried that I'll have to.


Unless you are privy to information that I am not, I believe you are mistaking.

Dr. Nolan extracted the DNA from the specimen himself. He is the one that ordered the full battery of tests. He also recommended what other type of procedures should be carried out, Xray, CT scan ect.
The CT scan found a heart structure and lungs.
The radiologist, Lachman examined that data. He concluded from those scans that there are no known human abnormalities that would account for this.
Nolan found no genetic markers frim the DNA to account for the deformation of a human.


As far as Greer is concerned, he only arranged the specimen to be studied by Nolan's team. It isn't even in Greer's possession. I understand why skeptics distance themselves as soon as they see Greer's name. But they must understand what role he is in here.
He is taking the results and "running" with it. Nolan et all are not.

Again.... Unless Nolan and Lachman are complete buffoons, this thing is legit.

We will be talking about this again too.
 
2013-05-01 08:43:37 PM

namegoeshere: internut scholar: They performed DNA testing, CT scans and Xrays. The being has a visible heart and lungs.

I read your links. I must have missed the heart and lungs. Could you show me, please, where heart and lungs were mentioned?


I posted a few links, but check the main pdf, there is also a link,in the pdf to view the ct scan.
Just search for "lungs"
Make sure you read the reports from the scientists. Remember, they are not out to prove this thing ET, just verify if it is a biological, humanoid, and not a hoax.
 
2013-05-01 09:00:30 PM

MacWizard: stryed: He's not wrong...noone has come to deny that conclusion. Greer himself never says it is an alien in the documentary. He's not that dumb but he his apparently pretty sly. For the time being Internut scholar has the facts right.

Not questioning Internut scholar. Kind of been agreeing with him, except that I haven't taken Sirius seriously yet, just because of Greer.

So who made the claim that it was an alien? The Examiner headline is "Tiny 'alien' skeleton debunked by DNA." It's hard to debunk something that no one said in the first place.

The LiveScience article doesn't use the work "debunk" but says, "Apparently when the mummified specimen was discovered, some had suggested the possibility it was an alien that had somehow landed on Earth, though the researchers involved never suggested this otherworldly origin."

If not Greer, who was it that "suggested the possibility it was an alien"? I don't think he has enough credibility to qualify as a "researcher," so I took that part to mean the actual scientists never suggested it.


You are correct. No one except Greer is suggesting this thing is ET, but thats his thing. He is like the Ancient Alien "theorists", we don't know, therefore aliens.

The "straight" scientists are playing this straight down the line.

Greer is muddying the waters by even being involved with this. But that is were the catch 22 lays. It was the people that have this creature that invited Greer to inspect it. Greer inturn was smart enough to have independent people study it.

I too have many suspicions about Greer, but to his credit, and according to Dr. Nolan's account to me, he told me even Greer was very open to what the scientific results were, and still to be.
He acknowledged that Greer speculates, but her isn't the straight scientist, so that privelage is afforded to him.
At this point, Greer's wild speculation is just as good as any scientist's theory, until there could be repeated data.

Which brings me to something else.... There are rumors that there is another one of these creatures. And if that is the case, then im sure you could see what the implications of that would be.
and thats a big IF, but at this point I would not be shocked.
 
2013-05-01 09:04:26 PM

MacWizard: 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


Ah, appreciate the clarification
 
2013-05-01 09:08:08 PM
internut scholar:

Which brings me to something else ... There are rumors that there is another one of these creatures. And if that is the case, then im sure you could see what the implications of that would be.

Invasion?
 
2013-05-01 09:13:02 PM

KarmicDisaster: internut scholar:

Which brings me to something else ... There are rumors that there is another one of these creatures. And if that is the case, then im sure you could see what the implications of that would be.

Invasion?


Lol. We can defend with fly swatters and squishing them with boots.

No. It would mean that the chances of this being a deformed human just got lower.
 
2013-05-01 09:15:29 PM

justtray: I'm going with aliens. Aliens seeded the earth with DNA, evolution is the basic fundamental that created us as who we are, life is present throughtout the universe and is mostly similar with respect to using DNA under the same basic conditions. This thing is some kind of freak off-shoot.

Yeah, I know it all seems like BS, but that's where I'm dropping my money. I want to believe.

I also found this quote freaky from the article on Buzz Aldrin on why we aren't really searching Mars where we should be (something I harp on in every Curiosity thread);
"Because the foundations of every fundamentalist orthodox belief system on earth would be up-ended".


That's a seemingly intriguing statement, but has he ever followed up on it? Offered any explanation as to what he meant and how he came to the conclusion?

You can write the rover team and ask them why haven't Jose whatever areas Buzz Aldrin apparently thinks is more worthy of search.
 
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 »






Report