You're all a bunch of Neanderthals!

"

Raycheetah wrote:

Yeah, 'cause Wikipedia is less reliable than whatever source declares those skulls to be from "Nephalim."

Lotta tinfoil could be wrapped around those crania... =^[.]^=

tinfoil or not, those skulls exhibit some very odd features that cant be explained by intentional deformation of babies skulls

the current paradigm in many areas of science is incredibly narrow minded and arrogant. we pretend that the ideas and methods of science are flawless when a lot of it is just circular reasoning (A proves B therefor B proves A, etc). you look for the evidence that supports the current view, while you discard everything else. if you cant ignore it, you modify the theory, make "exceptions", and somehow turn theorybreaking data into supporting evidence instead. all in the name of science

man love his simple and rational world where he is in control, and god forbid that ideas that challenge that view are taken seriously. the galileos of our time are most likely to be treated the same way their predecessors were. they are going to be ridiculed, threatened or worse. out of fear, because we have not changed

"

fsg wrote:

"

Raycheetah wrote:

Yeah, 'cause Wikipedia is less reliable than whatever source declares those skulls to be from "Nephalim."

Lotta tinfoil could be wrapped around those crania... =^[.]^=

tinfoil or not, those skulls exhibit some very odd features that cant be explained by intentional deformation of babies skulls

That's a very bold, and, as you state it, unsupported assertion. It may be true, but you provide no solid evidence that skull deformation can't possibly be the cause. "Looks like" doesn't suffice.

What got me was the "nephalim" part. I know the Bible, and I know what that is supposed to mean, in this context. It ain't science, rocket, or otherwise. =^[.]^=

"

That's a very bold, and, as you state it, unsupported assertion. It may be true, but you provide no solid evidence that skull deformation can't possibly be the cause. "Looks like" doesn't suffice.

What got me was the "nephalim" part. I know the Bible, and I know what that is supposed to mean, in this context. It ain't science, rocket, or otherwise. =^[.]^=

I'm gunna hit you with some good ol' philosophical thinking here. From your perspective, which I respect, you believe that those very large, grotesque and non-human looking skulls look as if they were physically modified by binding of the skull with boards. Although, countless of tribes of peoples throughout the world have done this, WHAT had caused them to do this? What was their influence? why did their religions revolve around human sacrifice, complex pagan rituals, and worshipping odd looking creatures like this fella. why do Egyptian crowns have elongated cranial spaces? Was it something that happened years ago? Possibly before this infamous "Flood" happened? Did this phenomenon happen afterwards also? No one will know, but I can tell you one thing. That first skull I showed you, definitely is not what you think it is. All of the cranial modified skulls look unnatural and bulky, while the other, much older ones, look like their overall shape is very smooth and compatible with the jaw and what not.

Also, take this baby "nephilim" for example. Do you think that a child that small would have a head like that after only a few years of modification? perhaps

The ONLY historically-supported theses, for which there is definitive proof, are cranial modification, and, possibly, natural genetic abnormality. If those don't appear to fit with the physical evidence you present, then provide something besides conjecture to support your theory.

There is plenty of allure in the notion of ancient astronauts/nephilim/what have you, but, until and unless you can present something more concrete than conjecture, it is all pseudo-science, at best, and BS at worst.

The Bible never said anything about the Nephilim having misshapen skulls, and I am unaware of any related myth-cycle mentioning that characteristic, either. So, we appear to be left with aliens. I would welcome credible genetic analysis of the remains presented (and would expect 100% Terran human results), but other than that, there are no other explanation besides culturally-prescribed modifications or physical deformity which does not require more than a little willing suspension of disbelief.

As for why? Akhenaton (Tutankamun's father) suffered a genetic condition which, among other things, caused him to naturally have an elongate skull. This has been attributed to the custom among Egyptian royalty of marrying within their own families, leading to an increased expression of such anomalous physical characteristics. His might not have been the only instance of this one in Egyptian history.

It isn't much of a stretch to imagine that, in a culture in which such characteristics mark the high-born (though Akhenaton is a poor specific example, as his reign was not a popular one), those who seek to emulate them might also seek to mimic the characteristics which set them apart. Or, in some cases, it might simply be seen as more attractive. There are cultures in which the women elongate their necks by wearing coils of metal rings, for that very reason.

There are plenty of "down-to-Earth" explanations which do not require us to believe that, somehow, aliens crossbred with humans (biologically unlikely, in any event, as we would be more easily able to crossbreed with brine shrimp, for example, than with a species from another star system).

At any rate, I have no expectation of shaking whatever beliefs you hold about the skeletal remains you linked. But you will have to be more than persuasive to convince me that they represent anything other than human intervention, or possibly the expression of (otherwise natural) genetic abnormalities. You have to provide some evidence, and not merely an interpretation of myth and ancient art calculated to support your hypothesis.

On the other hand, it'd make for a helluva great novel or movie. =^[.]^=

"

fsg wrote:

the current paradigm in many areas of science is incredibly narrow minded and arrogant. we pretend that the ideas and methods of science are flawless when a lot of it is just circular reasoning (A proves B therefor B proves A, etc). you look for the evidence that supports the current view, while you discard everything else. if you cant ignore it, you modify the theory, make "exceptions", and somehow turn theorybreaking data into supporting evidence instead. all in the name of science

You just described current "global warming" theory, conveniently renamed to "climate change" when theorybreaking data was introduced.

"

Raycheetah wrote:

That's a very bold, and, as you state it, unsupported assertion. It may be true, but you provide no solid evidence that skull deformation can't possibly be the cause. "Looks like" doesn't suffice.

quick googling provided this source, which is taking a relatively legit approach, mentioning nothing about nephilim, aliens or atlantis. as many as 300 super elongated skulls where found at the Paracas Peninsula in the 1920s

http://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-places-americas-opinion-guest-authors/elongated-human-skulls-peru-possible-evidence-lost







also a little on how the dating, considered to be legic science, may be way off



the point im trying to make, is that we doesnt even have to bring aliens into the equation for this to be considered way to far out there to be taken seriously. even if we're just dealing with a lost human species it is still too much too handle. if this infact is a lost human species, it is not a stretch to assume that the elongation of skulls practiced by man is an attempt to emulate the looks of these people, which takes us to the conclusion that they have had a major impact on various human civilizations, and thus history must be entierly rewritten

then of course you could take it even further and connect this with myths of atlantis, ancient aliens, illuminati and lizard people from sirius B. that does however not make the presence of these skulls, and the implications made by that fact, less real.

It's like religion, whetever anyone say, many will never stop believing it.

Religion - Evolution
Unproven - Unproven.

The truth must be somewhere.

The DNA evidence, as cited in the article fsg links to, indicates a wholly human origin, as expected. I have already mentioned that similar cranial characteristics have historically been linked to certain genetic abnormalities which appear in at least one royal Egyptian bloodline; while it is certainly possible to posit a population of some size with similar characteristics, to declare them a whole, new species is a bit much. Without some evidence of from where they came (the article indicates that neither the Paracas nor the Nazca are genetically related to other local populations in Peru, though outer space is still an unlikely origin), it cannot be claimed that these skulls represent anything other than an abnormal, but otherwise human offshoot, at best.

If genetically similar remains were to be located in some other place, especially in any significant quantity, then, yes, the hypothesis that these skulls represent some substantial population of variant humans could be supported. As it is, they appear to have been a culturally noteworthy genetic outlier, and to attribute to them any special intellectual or spiritual abilities, simply based on cranial morphology, should be left to the ancient civilizations which may or may not have seen fit to emulate their condition artificially.

See also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip_the_Pinhead

Certainly not as extreme, but an example of a naturally-occurring elongate cranial structure.

Personally, I'd love to see solid evidence of a heretofore unknown variant human population; it'd make the world a more interesting place. But it'd be hard to prove without more solid evidence than is available. =^[.]^=

"

Raycheetah wrote:

The DNA evidence, as cited in the article fsg links to, indicates a wholly human origin, as expected.

the confirmed DNA tests, done by germans, were on nazca skulls. nazcas are not the paracas. nazcas were the culture that supposedly replaced the paracas. what i can read from the article is that DNA tests on the actual elongated paracas skulls have been done, but the results are not yet published

im not suggesting that they are aliens, but they could very well be a lost human species that possessed greater intelligence than the average homo sapiens

"

Raycheetah wrote:

As it is, they appear to have been a culturally noteworthy genetic outlier, and to attribute to them any special intellectual or spiritual abilities, simply based on cranial morphology,

no, that is true, we can not say with certainty that bigger cranial capacity equals greater intelligence. but current evolutional beliefs suggests that it might be the case. we've all seen the charts in biology books depicting the cranial evolution of man from small 600 cc australopithecus skulls to the 1500 cc homo sapiens brain. a 25% larger cranial capacity is about the same difference as between homo erectus and homo sapiens.

and when you are done with all that...

Explain this...


and this...



and for gaaawd sakes this...