THE STARCHILD IS OUT OF THIS WORLD...
…And New Technology Can Finally Prove It!
By Lloyd Pye
In Lincoln, Nebraska, an ophthalmologist surgeon named Fred Mausolf studied the Starchild’s extraordinarily shallow eye sockets. He found them to be unlike normal human eye sockets in virtually every way. The foramen openings for both the optic nerves and the associated nerves and blood vessels needed to make a human eyeball function properly were skewed down and inside to the middle part of the nose, which would have put the Starchild’s eyeballs - assuming it had eyeballs - well below where human eyes normally were positioned. Also, their inner surface areas, while astonishingly shallow, were symmetrical to an equally astonishing degree. This expert could not imagine how those eye sockets - as bizarre as they were - could be the result of deformity. Again, the Starchild’s genes seemed to have told them to grow that way, and if that were true, I could only conclude that they weren’t normal human genes.
Carbon 14 Analysis
In my home city of New Orleans, Louisiana, Dr. Joseph Smith, a chief radiologist at a children’s hospital, arranged a CAT scan that established none of the Starchild’s cranial sutures were fused in any way. He ruled out deformity as a result of cranial suture fusion - especially the crease in the saggital suture between the expanded parietals. Also, inexplicably, the Starchild’s inner ears were shown to be on the order of twice normal size and, once again, perfectly symmetrical. Then Carbon 14 analysis showed that death for both skulls had occurred 900 years ago, ± 40 years.
DNA Analysis: 2003
The Holy Grail of biological testing, DNA analysis, was carried out by Trace Genetics in the summer of 2003 using equipment at the University of California at Davis. Researchers Jason Eshleman and Ripan Malhi found that burial in a mine tunnel for 900 years was like preserving both skulls in a climate-controlled storage locker. The human skull produced an easy recovery of its mitochondrial DNA, showing it was from a common haplogroup for Mesoamericans, haplogroup A. Its nuclear DNA was also recovered easily, showing it was a female. One down, one to go.
The Starchild’s mitochondrial DNA - inherited from and passed along only the female line - was recovered as easily as its companion’s, and proved to be of a separate Mesoamerican haplogroup, haplogroup C. This meant that even though their relationship was such that the female appeared to bury the Starchild and then laid down beside it to die (most likely by suicide), they were not, as we had assumed, a mother and child. That left us with only the definitive test to complete: What about the Starchild’s nuclear DNA, which would reveal the genetic heritage of both of its parents?
Right out of the box there was a problem. Relative to a normal human, the Starchild’s bone had proved extremely difficult to cut, even though it was half as thick and half as heavy as normal human bone. Then, when Jason and Ripan put it into normal solvents for dissolving human bone, it resisted those routine attempts to break it down. Ultimately, a very powerful solvent had to be administered to get the bone into a condition to be tested, after which six attempts brought no recovery at all - not even a trace of nuclear DNA.
How could that be? In the first place, if the Starchild’s bone was from a normal human, normal solvents should have easily dissolved it. Secondly, after 900 years in optimum preservation conditions, the small degree of degradation in the bone should have made it easy to recover its nuclear DNA, as was the case with the female’s. And why was it that only the Starchild’s nuclear DNA resisted recovery, not its mitochondrial DNA?
There was only one plausible answer: something was “wrong” with its father’s DNA. Somehow Dad’s contribution to the Starchild’s genetic package had produced a genome that would not respond to the chemical primers used to recover segments of human nuclear DNA.
What could be done about this frustrating technical stalemate? According to Jason and Ripan, nothing, at least not in the short term. They told me that in 3 to 5 years they expected the headlong rush of their field’s technical improvements to create an atmosphere in which problems like ours with the Starchild would be resolved. So what, I asked them, could I do now? “Get the bone’s biochemistry tested,” they told me. They wanted an explanation for why it had been so difficult to cut when they removed their samples.
I spent all of 2004 in London getting as many tests done as we could manage with our time and resources. One of the first things we did was arrange an analysis by the scanning electron microscope at the Royal Holloway Scientific Institute outside London. It revealed something utterly astonishing: embedded in the matrix of the Starchild’s bone were fibers of some kind, fibers which seemed to be incredibly durable because they had been shredded rather than sheared by the cutting blade that removed the bone samples from the skulls. Such fibers had never been found in any other bone in any other animal species on earth, so this was yet another blinking red neon sign that the Starchild skull represented something extraordinary.
Later, forensic geologist Dr. Ken Pye (no relation to me) discovered at his laboratory outside London that a red residue of some kind was scattered in the Starchild’s cancellous holes. Normally upon death, corpses activate a wide array of internal bacteria that scour every vestige of marrow from the cancellous holes in every bone, leaving them, in effect, sparkling clean. So the residue discovered in the Starchild’s cancellous holes was something else not found in any other bone in any known species on earth. Certainly not in human bone, so it was more evidence of the Starchild’s uniqueness.
A Breakthrough: 2006
In the summer of 2006, three years exactly since discovering that the Starchild’s nuclear DNA could not be recovered by the current technology, and precisely when Jason and Ripan predicted a breakthrough might occur, the breakthrough did occur. But it was not in the sensitivity of the primers used to recover DNA, as was expected. It was much, much better than that. It was a new technique that did away with primers entirely!
454 Life Sciences of Branford, Connecticut, announced that it had found a way of sequencing DNA in a base-pair by base-pair arrangement, bringing all 3.0 billion base pairs in an average human genome within eventual reach of their sequencing machines. This was astounding news, but even more astounding was that it was already being applied to sequencing the elusive nuclear DNA of Neanderthals. Experts around the world were already hard at work on it, having sequenced the first few million base pairs, and they expected to complete the entire Neanderthal genome by the end of 2008.
While this was extremely welcome news in its own right, what flew under the radar was that this same technology could be applied to recover the entire genome of the Starchild! It meant we can now sequence every gene in every chromosome contributed by its human mother and its father, whatever he was. We will be able to recover its genome and - just as others will do with the Neanderthal genome in 2008 - we will be able to compare the Starchild’s father’s DNA, gene by gene, with those of normal humans to precisely determine how far or near he was relative to the human norms.
That glorious day is now expected to be sometime in 2010. It could be as early as 2009, but the best guess now is 2010, give or take a few months. Inasmuch as we have already endured eight years of this interminable wait, two years more does not seem so daunting. In fact, as I have started to say when asked, I think that after what I’ve been through in the preceding eight years, I can do two more standing on my head in a deep mud puddle.
Upside down or upright, we can settle into the two-year wait secure in knowing every indication of numerous conclusive scientific tests strongly suggests that we will ultimately prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the Starchild skull belonged to a being who was a product of mating - whether natural or in vitro - between a human mother and a father who was surely something other than entirely human. But will that make him an “alien” in the extraterrestrial sense of the word?
As with Neanderthals, it will depend on where his genome falls in relation to normal humans. Will it be fractionally different, or as much as 1%? Or how about 2%? Or 3%? Certainly that would make him as alien as E.T., and the Starchild’s incredibly different physiology and morphology certainly points in that direction. All we have to do is be patient, lay our bets, and wait.
To read more about Lloyd Pye and to support this very important research, visit his Web site at: http://www.LloydPye.com. All of the images used in the article are copyright protected and owned by Lloyd Pye. This article is published with expressed written permission of Lloyd Pye.
Anyone interested in pursuing the whole story is also welcome to contact Bell Lap Books or your usual book source outlets.
This article is published with the expressed written permission of Lloyd Pye for publication on The Alien Jigsaw: alienjigsaw.com