The controversy surrounding the Peruvian Paracas skulls found in 1928 by archaeologist Julio Tello continues.
Brien Foerster, a researcher of the skulls, supposedly had genetic testing done in an unofficial capacity.
The results concluded that the remains were most definitely not human, but skeptics have clamored to reject these findings, resorting to logical fallacies and character assassination to discredit those involved.
To be clear labeling someone a conspiracy theorist in an effort to discount their theories isn’t logical, scientific, or ethical; nor does it disprove or refute what was claimed with any merit or substance.
Case in point: anatomical differences between the Paracas skulls, and human skulls, in and of itself, is enough to suggest non-human origins for the Peruvian find. The skulls are 25% larger and 60% heavier than human skulls, which is a volume and density differential that cannot be explained by head binding— a popular explanation cited by some.
In decidedly illogical and unscientific attempts, skeptics point to the character of the researchers—their belief in extraterrestrials—as evidence that the conclusion of their non-human origin is unfounded, yet this is a logical fallacy.
What someone believes doesn’t change the truth, which is that these skulls are far too large and heavy to be from normal human beings—and there’s more to consider as well.
In order to disprove a point—such as the assertion these skulls are not human, based on genetic testing and anatomical differences—one needs to provide evidence for what they actually are, a positive argument. Skeptics need to refute Foerester’s argument with specificity and particularity, yet no refutation has taken place. Nor have skeptics even attempted to explain what the skulls actually are, with any degree of plausibility. Instead, they resort to half-cocked arguments that fail to disprove anything and lack any specificity.
One popular “debunking” attempt asserts macrocephaly as the cause of greater volume and weight of the skulls. Macrocephaly is a medical term referring to an abnormally large skull. This condition is often held up as an explanation for these finds being human in origin, and while it does explain the increased volume, it fails to address the anatomical differences, and genetic discoveries made last year.
Elongated skulls, in particular, the Paracas skulls, have a single parietal plate, but modern humans have two. Furthermore, this phenomenon is not isolated to a single skull, as many different elongated skulls share the same trait. This suggests that there is, in fact, a definite genetic difference between these skulls and modern humans; meaning, we are dealing with “a completely new human-like being.”
These points do not prove the Paracas skulls are, in fact, genuine ET or human-hybrid remains. But it does mean that the best explanation provided, thus far, is the one supplied by Foerster.
The discernment lesson here is: in order to refute a claim or disprove evidence, one must provide evidence and a positive argument. One must define what a thing is, which then demonstrates or proves what it is not. In other words, to properly “prove a negative” one must positively define what something is. Simply saying the words “this isn’t real” is not a positive refutation; it proves nothing.
At this stage, the controversy around these skulls is more of a distraction from what we do know about them, which is that based on anatomical differences (which are not being disputed by anyone) these skulls are most certainly not human.
The moral of this story is that discernment, or the ability to understand the truth about something, is more than just labeling a thing true or not. One must actually know why with specificity.
As individuals seeking the truth, take care not to be dissuaded by skeptics who provide shallow and baseless arguments for their unfounded claims.
Could bizarre skulls with ‘non-human’ DNA be proof of aliens on Earth?
CLAIMS that bizarre skulls with elongated craniums that were dug up in complex burial chambers could be the remains of aliens are causing a storm among conspiracy theorists.
by Jon Austin
The 3,000-year old Paracas skulls have long been held up by UFO hunters as evidence of ancient alien visitations due to their extraordinarily huge foreheads.
They were discovered on the desert peninsula of Paracas, on the southern coast of Peru, by native archaeologist Julio Tello in 1928.
He found more than 300 of the odd skeletal remains in a complex grave system.
Scientists say it was the most extreme example of skull elongation, a deformation practice carried out by several ancient cultures by binding infants heads through pieces of wood, ever found.
But alien conspiracists are having none of it.
They claim the Paracas skulls were so elongated as for it to not be humanly possible to achieve.
They have pounded on the findings of alleged DNA tests on the skulls that showed they had not come from homo sapiens, because other examples of cranial deformation did not alter the size, weight or cranial volume, as seen in the Paracas skulls.
Although, if indeed accurate, the tests did not confirm they were not from one of our earlier ancestors instead.
|YouTubeCGI image of how the elongated skull beings may have looked|
However, many alien believers have taken the extra leap that it must mean they are of extra terrestrial origin.
According to a report on the Conspiracy Club website the DNA results are amazing.
It said: “A recent DNA analysis performed on some of these skulls has presented amazing results that could challenge the current perspective of the human evolutionary tree.
“Since their craniums (Paracas) are 25% larger and 60% heavier than regular human skulls, researchers strongly believe that they couldn’t have been modified through binding.
“They are also structurally different and only have one parietal plate as opposed to the two normally found in human skulls.
“These differences have deepened the decade-old mystery around the Paracas skulls and researchers haven’t been able to explain their origins.”
“These differences have deepened the decade-old mystery around the Paracas skulls and researchers haven’t been able to explain their origins.” — Conspiracy Club
Brien Foerster, the director of the Paracas History Museum, sent samples of hair, skin, teeth and bone from five of the skulls for genetic testing.
According to Mr Foerster the genetic laboratory was not informed about the samples’ origins in order to avoid biased or influenced results.
He said the conclusion was “the mitochondrial DNA (from the mother) presented mutations unknown to any man, primate or any other animal” and “the mutations suggested we are dealing with a completely new human-like being, very distant from Homo sapiens, Neanderthals or Denisovans”.
According to one genetic researcher “the Paracas individuals were so biologically different from humans they wouldn’t have been able to interbreed with them.
He added: “I am not sure it will even fit into the known evolutionary tree.”
The Conspiracy Club report said: “The implications of this discovery are huge.
“Who were the mysterious Paracas people?
“Did they evolve here on Earth on a path so different from us that they ended up looking drastically different?
“If not, where did they come from? Are any of them left?
“This breakthrough brings up more questions than it answers but counts as another piece of evidence suggesting that we are not alone.”
However, this conclusion has been questioned by sceptics, who are not convinced by the “genetic research” news of which was released via social media rather than through a scientific journal as is the norm.
Some even concluded the research findings were just an elaborate hoax.
Suspicions were also raised when the identities of the scientists were not released.
Research by sceptics later uncovered that those involved had a history of involvement and belief in research into paranormal subjects such as the Yeti and so-called alien hybrids, an alleged cross breed between humans and aliens.
They also questioned Mr Foerster’s impartiality in commissioning the research as the museum is a private, not state venture, he runs tours specialising in pseudo-archaeology and has released a pseudo science book about the skulls.
While none of this may dampen the conspiracists’s enthusiasm for the results, it seems their being proof that aliens were buried on Earth 3,000 years ago is by no means conclusive.
Stillness in the Storm Editor’s note: Did you find a spelling error or grammar mistake? Do you think this article needs a correction or update? Or do you just have some feedback? Send us an email at [email protected]. Thank you for reading.