• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Lloyd Pye and Starchild


Mindsky said:
I was looking for updates on the Starchild skull, and thought I'd post a link to a website dealing with it.

There's a reported strange skull that Lloyd thinks may be a alien hybrid. The skull is fairly interesting and this case has seemed under reported.

The Starchild Project - The Home of Research for the Starchild Skull

Hope it's of interest.

I wanted to update everyone. We have been in touch with Lloyd Pye and he'll be a guest on The Paracast on our April 8th episode.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
I wanted to update everyone. We have been in touch with Lloyd Pye and he'll be a guest on The Paracast real soon now, perhaps as early as our April 8th episode.

Great. It took the poor guy around 6 years to get enough donations for the first series of tests. You'd think scientist would be crawling all over this skull, but they haven't been. Scientist act more mysterious and puzzling than the greys sometimes.
 
I don't buy the star child. I think it's far more likely that it represents a super-duper, ultra rare deformity or genetic condition that simply hasn't been seen before (and quite possibly no longer exists).
 
CapnG said:
I don't buy the star child. I think it's far more likely that it represents a super-duper, ultra rare deformity or genetic condition that simply hasn't been seen before (and quite possibly no longer exists).

I'm waiting to conclude, I see no reason to yet.
 
This looks interesting. I would have liked the site to contain some refutation and rebuttal. I hope the show will. I'm looking forward to it.
 
interestedINitall said:
I would have liked the site to contain some refutation and rebuttal. I hope the show will.

Keep hopin'. :rolleyes:

If there isn't some kind of clear DNA that can be pulled from the skull, and proven to be of extraterrestrial origin, I don't know how you can rule out genetic deformation. Occam's Razor would seem to apply here.

I can show you similar freaks here in Southern Ohio. The Elephant Man could be prom king in this town. Geesh.
 
hopeful skeptic said:
I can show you similar freaks here in Southern Ohio. The Elephant Man could be prom king in this town. Geesh.

Ha! There's evidence of that on here. ;)

hopeful skeptic said:
If there isn't some kind of clear DNA that can be pulled from the skull, and proven to be of extraterrestrial origin, I don't know how you can rule out genetic deformation. Occam's Razor would seem to apply here.


Yes, that's true, of course, but I'm really trying to wait and see.
 
There isn't much rebutal to the skull. Many mainstream scientists have turned their heads and don't seem to want to deal with it. People like to jump to conclusions for some reason. Strange when it's scientist who are supposed to look then conclude. I rather conclusions jump to me I guess. I'm lazy.
 
A.LeClair said:
There isn't much rebutal to the skull. Many mainstream scientists have turned their heads and don't seem to want to deal with it. People like to jump to conclusions for some reason. Strange when it's scientist who are supposed to look then conclude. I rather conclusions jump to me I guess. I'm lazy.

In listening to the story, I agree with David that the Starchild skull has problems. Serious problems.

In saying that, I hope that the guest was sincere, and that his forthcoming book is only a means to provide a little extra income to keep going. I'll leave it at that.
 
Looking at that skull and the starchild website for the first time, I was curious to know whether any of you know of the Bulgarian 'alien' skulls. I'll try to post some info on them tomorrow if anyone is interested. Until then, here are two pics.

Cherep-4.jpg


ZenkoiCherepa001.jpg


By the way, my first impressions of the website are that whoever is behind it is seeking nothing more than personal gain. But I'll look at it again.
 
I wonder if Pye will be back à la Jim Sparks. It's not that I think it's important for him to return but it might be interesting to hear him answer David's post interview criticisms. That's assuming he has "answers", of course.

Was it just me or did anyone else find his hawking of that book a tad embarrassing? I understand Gene's point about books and DVDs allowing researchers (again, an assumption) to fund their work but Pye's plug had a real "Come on down to Crazy Eddie's!" tenor.
 
interestedINitall said:
I wonder if Pye will be back à la Jim Sparks. It's not that I think it's important for him to return but it might be interesting to hear him answer David's post interview criticisms. That's assuming he has "answers", of course.

Was it just me or did anyone else find his hawking of that book a tad embarrassing? I understand Gene's point about books and DVDs allowing researchers (again, an assumption) to fund their work but Pye's plug had a real "Come on down to Crazy Eddie's!" tenor.

Yes, I kinda cringed, at the collectors edition aspect of it, because I knew people would hold it against him. What guest doesn't hawk stuff? Randle did. Birnes has. Friedman does. If not here definitely elsewhere. Jeff comes to mind as not doing so. He has no book. I haven't listened to every minute of every show and there might have been others. David's friends didn't hawk products. They just came to mind. Many do. I try to address the message and data over attacking the messenger, when there isn't hard evidence to do so. Example would be with Morten, where his claims are factually displayed via "wayback machine" and then where it's found out that no such universities etc. exist.

Pye is a fine man given my past interactions with him. I don't have any dirt on him so far. Nor do others that I know of. It's always speculation and spin. You can take what he says in a positive or negative way. If anyone does have dirt, feel free to post, I'll have a look at it.

I'm just glad he actually has had tests done, and willing to do more. Unlike many in this field.
 
I find it funny how somehow peer review has come into such high regard. Most the great physicists, scientists who were the first to come up with the foundational modern theories we have today suffered severe criticism for their theories and did not listen to there colleagues. Tesla is an extreme, extreme example of this Einstein another. We are all now benefited the better because these people wouldn't back down when they knew they were the ones who were correct and not their hundreds of peers in opposition..

I'm not saying that Pye shouldn't give for peer review or that he won't benefit from it, but it's not the be all end all by any means.. Considering his position or any person in the position of having potential evidence of alien artifact; I don't think peer review makes a whole lot of since. Historically people in mainstream science have not even wanted to get involved at looking at the evidence unless it's ridiculously obvious.

David's problems with the star child skull are irrational to me.
Because some high minded anthropologists and whatever else dismiss the star child skull as cradle boarded hydrocephalus, that it means something?

It means next to nothing.

Why?
..because they can't provide any examples of anything like the skull; it seems just about that simple.

Pye has personally researched thousands of deformities throughout history.
You'd think there would be some scientist or skeptic out there that would want to adress the "deformities" of the skull as being something seen before or even address the skull as to how a person could have had such deformities and why it's not unthinkable. I've yet to see any articles that even address it in any detailed manner and I've certainly looked. Those skeptical articles I've found address like 2 things and that's it and things Pye has long, long since addressed before.. And until I see that I have no reason to condem any of Pye's actions or thoughts on the skull.

Has anyone read anything countering Pye's arguments?
Other than counter productive articles like this one that don't actually address the skull in any real detail:
http://www.theness.com/articles.asp?id=30
 
EXPERTS have labeled the star child skull-cradle boarded hydrocephalus, not just some guy off the street. Pye considers himself an expert because he read a few books on the subject and thinks thats good enough to refute expert opinion. He spent years looking for experts that would look at this skull and only quoted or used thier opinion when they agreed with his opinion on the skull. What this subject needed was to have an investigator who was willing to look into all possible leads, not to have one with tunnel vision.
 
From what I can tell it appears he has looked at what seems to be all possible leads. Because he can handle critics well. They refuse to debate him. As I said, I haven't seen a single scientist or even half brained debunker address more than one or two of the things about the skull.. And the two things they address are in ways that are clearly ignorant of what Pye has already rebutted in clear concise terms. I've seen it over and over again once Pye replies at that point the skeptics shut up and don't say a word or change the subject completely.
These "experts" criticizing him aren't worth their weight in **** from what I've seen.
Someone prove me different that they have given information that puts this man in his place, if you have a link or two.. I'd love to see it.

Btw I'm 50/50 of the opinion that it will probably be shown in the end to be a freakish mutant human or a mating between a human and some earthly offshoot that resulted in deformed child or something else.. I don't hold sway to either camp. I'm not someone who's obsessed with "oh boy it's an alien!" But I recognize what I see to be fallacious debunkers attacks on the skull and Lloyd Pye.
 
Men Around Screen said:
Looking at that skull and the starchild website for the first time, I was curious to know whether any of you know of the Bulgarian 'alien' skulls. I'll try to post some info on them tomorrow if anyone is interested. Until then, here are two pics.

Cherep-4.jpg


ZenkoiCherepa001.jpg


By the way, my first impressions of the website are that whoever is behind it is seeking nothing more than personal gain. But I'll look at it again.

That looks like the backside of a pelvic bone to me, minus the coccyx bone.
 
I have nothing to debunk Pye with and am ashamed for going a bit off topic. The pictures of the skull I posted is the second skull to come from an area in the Rhodope mountains. They were found in the space of 2-3 years. Originally for the first one I remember reading that anthropologists had studied it and proclaimed the bone structure incomparable to anything known. The DNA analysis came up with no match.

Some people on this Bulgarian language site debunk this as a broken calf skull.
Череп на извънземен в Родопите - част втора : България | Статии - Fenomenibg.com
 
Back
Top