Starchild

[Guy.W]

David - I was kind of startled by your reaction to the Starchild interview. I'm sure you researched this guest before you had him on right? I don't understand why you would have him on only to tear him apart afterwards. I seems your mind was made up even before the interview started. I mean, as listener I even felt attacked.

In the past you seemed to have a fairly level headed discussion after each quest. I was really shocked at how you conducted yourself after the interview. Very harsh. Just my opinion.

He's actually using science to prove or disprove his theory. He seems fairly knowledgeable about DNA, Bone structures, etc. I found him very compelling and knowledagble in his field. I think the jury is still out. Is it an Alien? personally I don't think so. But who knows right? It could be.

Its my understanding that pretty much all UFO and paranormal investigators are considered pseudo-scientists. Freidman, and the like are scientists in other fields. They have to apply certain skill sets and best practices they've learned when doing investigations. Mr. Pye appears to have done that. I hate his website though.

I actually think that this is a deformity and that the mother or guardian of the child was banished or killed with it because of its deformity. This was common practice all over the world.

I also have an Issue with Jim Sparks. First of all I don't believe what he's selling. Don't think for one moment if a Human being was running around with the so-called knowledge this man has of ET's that he wouldn't be in some Government facility right now under lock and key.

But I don't understand why you take someone like Jeff Ritzmans stories at face value and not Jims. I mean whats the difference? Aside from the fact that you and Jeff are now friends and that Jeff didn't appear to be making it up? I mean wheres the science in that? What science is backing up jeff's claims? What separates it from Jim's? Why is the sky blue?

 

[Aaron LeClair]

David - I was kind of startled by your reaction to the Starchild interview. I'm sure you researched this guest before you had him on right? I don't understand why you would have him on only to tear him apart afterwards. I seems your mind was made up even before the interview started. I mean, as listener I even felt attacked.

In the past you seemed to have a fairly level headed discussion after each quest. I was really shocked at how you conducted yourself after the interview. Very harsh. Just my opinion.

He's actually using science to prove or disprove his theory. He seems fairly knowledgeable about DNA, Bone structures, etc. I found him very compelling and knowledagble in his field. I think the jury is still out. Is it an Alien? personally I don't think so. But who knows right? It could be.

Its my understanding that pretty much all UFO and paranormal investigators are considered pseudo-scientists. Freidman, and the like are scientists in other fields. They have to apply certain skill sets and best practices they've learned when doing investigations. Mr. Pye appears to have done that. I hate his website though.

I actually think that this is a deformity and that the mother or guardian of the child was banished or killed with it because of its deformity. This was common practice all over the world.

I also have an Issue with Jim Sparks. First of all I don't believe what he's selling. Don't think for one moment if a Human being was running around with the so-called knowledge this man has of ET's that he wouldn't be in some Government facility right now under lock and key.

But I don't understand why you take someone like Jeff Ritzmans stories at face value and not Jims. I mean whats the difference? Aside from the fact that you and Jeff are now friends and that Jeff didn't appear to be making it up? I mean wheres the science in that? What science is backing up jeff's claims? What separates it from Jim's? Why is the sky blue?

I agree with much of what you said Guy.

As for the difference between Jeff and Jim, Jeff isn't selling anything, doesn't seek out interviews, and is known for debunking things. Jeff's story isn't as problematic as Jim's in many ways. Switching examples your point is still sound however. In my view at least. Jeff's experience also lacks any sort of political, religious, and ecological message, which is often a motive for fabrication.

 

[Open_Mind2007]

Starchild needs a better investigator due to the fact that this one has had his mind made up from the beginning. I also think David should have got on his case during the interview and not wait till the he was off the phone. I also had a problem with David's hard hitting questions for the abduction guy...like what did it smell like, did you ever use the bathroom..etc. Oh well ... crap questions for a crap story I guess but thats another subject. The main problem with this guy is that he is not an expert on biology, has no degree or anything. He went to many experts and all though some could be wrong, i doubt so many would be. For him to say that these so-called experts are wrong and he,(who read books on the subject and has no formal training), is right is just idiotic. In the end I am sure he will be wrong and if not...I am sure he will be raking in the cash.

 

[David Biedny]

Open_Mind2007, my questions about smell and bodily functions to Sparks had a very specific purpose, part of which I think is fairly obvious, part of which is not. The bathroom issue is not dealt with in the book, and it's surprising to think that someone could sit for many hours without having to urinate. I was curious to see how Sparks would respond to that question, one I imagined he would not be prepared for (I'm pretty sure NO ONE has ever asked him that), and I found his response and the way he worded it to be very telling.

Guy W. feels that I was being too harsh with Pye. The truth is that I held back. Anyone who does some background research on him will see that he's made some really outrageous, and IMO incorrect, claims. There's a private email thread between myself and Pye that's very educational, very revealing. I personally have serious issues with his objectivity and credibility. I'd be very surprised if this skull turns out to be anything other than a deformity. We shall see. Or not.

dB

 

[Mogwa]

After visiting Pye's starchild site and viewing the facial features reconstruction art, I decided to create a 3D model of my own. My reconstruction seems to be a bit more human looking than the other examples offered there.
I don't claim the model to be anything more than slightly informed speculation. Working from a few photographs can never be an adequate substitute for having access to an accurate three dimensional cast, or a highly detailed stereoscopic photo layout in constant scale. That would allow for identification of attachment points for the muscles and other subcutaneous tissues. A really well trained artist in forensic reconstruction would also want to use ethnic morphologic profiles for variables like skin thickness, elasticity, and body fat ratios. But I'm not that talented or educated in the discipline, so take this work with a grain of salt.

 

[Guy.W]

A.Leclair - I understand your point with the differences between Jeff and Jim, however David's whole point regarding Mr. Pye was the science and not the shill. I want to also point out that I wasn't trying to call into questions Jeff's stories, they are very intriguing and mirror a few situations involving myself. Except mine definitely weren't Alien.

I would really like to see this show develop into a kind of meeting of the minds with Open minded scientists and thinkers.

I am growing very tired of the endless parade of kooks trying to sell me something. from the Hoaglands, greers, sparks, etc Its just getting old. I would just as soon listen to Gene, David and Jeff sit around and just talk about different topics. maybe throw in a guest or two here and there.

Anyways, its a great show as always. I look forward to it every Sunday

 

[Tom Levine]

After visiting Pye's starchild site and viewing the facial features reconstruction art, I decided to create a 3D model of my own. My reconstruction seems to be a bit more human looking than the other examples offered there.
I don't claim the model to be anything more than slightly informed speculation. Working from a few photographs can never be an adequate substitute for having access to an accurate three dimensional cast, or a highly detailed stereoscopic photo layout in constant scale. That would allow for identification of attachment points for the muscles and other subcutaneous tissues. A really well trained artist in forensic reconstruction would also want to use ethnic morphologic profiles for variables like skin thickness, elasticity, and body fat ratios. But I'm not that talented or educated in the discipline, so take this work with a grain of salt.

Mom?

What are you doing here? Put your clothes on.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

The image looks a little Down Syndromish. Interesting.


Pye on Victor's list David or did you get on another one? I know he was on UFOupdates, though rarely posted. I know you said private thread, but if possible is there somewhere we could read what you are talking about?

 

[nshanks]

I for one prefer David and Gene's style of leaving their criticism of a guest until after they leave. I don't want to hear arguments on the air that lead to a guest hanging up and leaving the interview. Let them say their bit, do their book promotion etc. and that way you get their side of the story.
If David calls BS on a guest directly, the Paracast becomes The O'reilly Factor - and I'm sure that's the last thing he wants.

DB's call on this guy was right on the money.
Pyle kept searching until he found a physician that gave him the answer he wanted - end of story.
Who really buys the old "everyone else is out to protect their career" angle?
I was thinking about Occam's razor the entire time I heard that interview.
Common sense has to rule this one folks - no legitimate peer reviews = no story.

 

[Rick Deckard]

Common sense has to rule this one folks - no legitimate peer reviews = no story.

Get your professional 'buddies' to review your research and you're good to go? I'm not sure I like that.

I'm not defending this particular case but don't you get the impression that a lot of commercial research is done this way? You *start with a conclusion* about the benefits of your latest product then commission research to support that conclusion. If the results aren't to your liking you re-commission with a different research group and repeat until you *are* happy with the results.

 

[nshanks]

Get your professional 'buddies' to review your research and you're good to go? I'm not sure I like that.

And there aren't many "buddies" on his reference list in the first place.
http://www.starchildproject.com/WhatisSC.html#References

Personally, I like to see lots of people with letters behind their names associating themselves with a study.

I'm not defending this particular case but don't you get the impression that a lot of commercial research is done this way? You *start with a conclusion* about the benefits of your latest product then commission research to support that conclusion. If the results aren't to your liking you re-commission with a different research group and repeat until you *are* happy with the results.

I thought it was start with a hypothesis?
Which in this case was alien hybrid. A tad far out there, perhaps?
Nice unassuming name, too.

 

[Rick Deckard]

Nice unassuming name, too.

Yeah, I previously said as much in another thread...

 

[Tommy Allison]

I read through the thread, and thought I would weigh in on the Starchild Skull.

I am doing the forensic reconstruction on the skull.

I was sent an MRI copy of the skull to work from, as well as the partial maxilla that I then made a mold off of. There was still a bit of the orbit which allowed me to extrapolate a lot of information about the placement of the eyes, as well as the lower jaw.

The skull has some issues. I'm a skeptic by nature, and all things being what they are, I have my own conclusions about the skull itself and what it is. If you have read all of the stuff on Lloyd's site, you have a pretty good idea of what he believes.

I saw that someone had posted their model of the skull, and I thought I would share mine.

if you go to

or www.comicspace.com/madrobotommy you can see the in progress pictures of where I started, to where I stopped with the skull. I am finishing the musculature, and the dermal surface this week, and will have corresponding video of that as well.

Bear in mind that Lloyd is not associated with my work outside of his loaning me the skull and maxilla to work from. I'm not making money from this endeavor, because like most people, I'm interested in the truth, and enjoy this sort of work.

Hope to hear your opinions and thoughts.

Tommy Allison

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Common sense has to rule this one folks - no legitimate peer reviews = no story

Hard to get peers to review this sort of thing when they use the fact that there hasn't been peer reviews as an excuse to not give it the time of day. Catch 22.

Stanton Friedman was once asked what NASA has to say about trace cases and soil samples gathered from ufo sightings etc. He says, he doesn't know, they refuse to look at it. Should we discard trace cases because the scientific community refuses to look at it? Or should we try and wake people up by going public in hopes for support so scientist will actually give it the time a day and do actual science? As Hynek once said, "Scientist don't always act scientifically". In the scientific community, the scientist quite often do not wish to step out on the dance floor, but make fun at the few dancers who do. All the while complain about the lack of dancers on the floor. Why they don't step on the floor and do a better dance is puzzling.

 

[Mogwa]

Beautiful work, Tom. My own tentative conclusion is that the skull belongs to an individual displaying clear characteristics of hydrocephaly and Down syndrome, but I'm not a qualified forensic anatomical reconstructionist. I look forward to seeing the finished product.

 

[Rick Deckard]

My own tentative conclusion is that the skull belongs to an individual displaying clear characteristics of hydrocephaly and Down syndrome, but I'm not a qualified forensic anatomical reconstructionist. I look forward to seeing the finished product.

My money is on 'Casper the Ghost' (when he was living - perhaps he was just called 'Casper' at that time... ):

 

[Tommy Allison]

A hydrocephalic's skull, never sutures. It has permanent softspots, or gaps in the cranial plates.

Do a google search for various skull deformities, and you'll see what I'm saying is true.

 

[Mogwa]

Casper is a definite possibility. So is Ted Kennedy. If his head gets any bigger he can wear a bushel basket for a beanie. Or a yarmulke.

 

[Tommy Allison]

just uploaded the next batch of Starchild recon pics to my comic space webpage.

www.comicspace.com/madrobotommy

Let me know what you think.

 

[Rick Deckard]

just uploaded the next batch of Starchild recon pics to my comic space webpage.

www.comicspace.com/madrobotommy

Let me know what you think.

Still looks like "Mars Attacks" to me - how many layers have you got to apply before you're satisified that you're done? When do you apply the skin and hair? How long do you think it'll take?