I wish I had a dollar for every TV show, website, or ancient alien enthusiast email that touts the bogus idea that elongated skulls are proof of either aliens, nephilim, or both. It’s utter nonsense.
These enthusiasts regularly suggest and assume that mainstream archaeologists, anatomists, geneticists, and pathologists are hopelessly befuddled and bewildered by these skulls. They aren’t — that narrative is as bogus as the above interpretation.
Elongated skulls from places like Peru and other Pre-Columbian contexts are well known. They are the product of either deformity or deliberate modification / alteration. They have been scrupulously and methodically studied. Here’s one example:
This (very expensive) scholarly publication is current (2013). It’s 281 pages of scholarly study of these skulls via multiple perspectives. Here’s the Table of Contents. Take note of the highly technical nature of the research.
I don’t think I’m going out on a limb when I say that those who promote these skulls as evidence of alien hybridization or nephilim haven’t read, much less addressed and refuted, material like this. And THAT is precisely what such “researchers” need to do — produce data that overturn the science represented in works like this one. To be blunt, if you’re following someone whose research promotes those ideas, you’re being duped.
It simply isn’t true that the scholarly community in the relevant fields and sub-fields are fearful of these skulls. They’re not reeling in the wake of such “evidence” for those ideas. They’re laughing.
So, what does it say about those who profit from such shabby non-research by selling books and DVDs?
What if they’re Christians?
Hopefully, they’re just deceived or gullible.
Agreed – I hope it’s not intentional flim-flam.
One book just not constitute a complete assessment of the phenomena of the elongated heads, found especially in Paracas, Peru. New evidence is constantly emerging that trumps prior knowledge, and proper DNA investigative work has not been done to show the origin of these unusual beings. Carbon dating also indicates that mummified remains are not as old as commonly thought.
Not all elongated skulls, having only one parietal, were created via cranial deformation, sometimes called “cradle-boarding.” Some are far too young for this process to have been possible, (normal formation period typically is three years) and the sheer number of these skulls indicates more than an isolated case of some form of rare disease that could possibly elongate a skull in this fashion. Further, arm-chair critics who never have gotten off their a–s and actually been to these places should not make comments without personal experience other than something that they’ve read and respected, that may now be sorely out of date.
This book represents the state of research to the current day on the issue. Before referencing “cradle boarding” and promoting the idea that it’s nonsense, the data supporting it (and other modification techniques) put forth by decades of research on these skulls (including those of Paracas) needs to be addressed and overturned. That’s how real science works. Claims of conspiracy and persecution aren’t science.
In other words, the nephilim promoters (and I still haven’t had anyone show me the Bible verse for nephilim having long skulls) need to address, with science, research such as presented here:
http://www.isita-org.com/Jass/Contents/2012vol90/Tiesler/22781584.pdf
The point would be that the nephilim side needs to show, scientifically, why the many (and there are MANY) studies of cranial modification on the skulls from this region are inadequate explanations. They aren’t doing that and, frankly, won’t. There’s no popularity in it.
On the demonstrably bad quality of Foerster’s “dna work” on the skulls, see this thorough hammering:
http://ancientaliensdebunked.com/another-bone-to-pick-with-peruvian-nephilimalien-hybrids/
What DNA testing, and results are you aware of?
Not sure I understand the question …. but – I’m talking about DNA testing of mummies with such skulls or the skulls. They’ve never turned up anything other than full humanity.
Some genetic testing is done for disposition. For example, the article linked below notes “This model is clearly one of mechanical force superimposed on genetic predisposition, and has been argued in other studies of artificial
deformation in humans (Ossenberg, 1970; El-Najjar and Dawson, 1977).”
http://publish.uwo.ca/~white2/Publications_files/White_1996_AJPA.pdf
I’m not referring to the bogus dna testing for “alien dna” of skulls such as those from Paracas. As I’ve blogged before, those touting this stuff need to give the world the test results, name the person(s) who did the tests, and the name the lab. That way, there can be peer review. I know a geneticist right now that I’d send the material to.
Yeah, because we can always trust archaeologists can’t we?
Yes, we can – when their data is peer-reviewed for fakery and errors.
Dear brothers here–The Father be glorified !–Reading this exchange of posts, it started beautifully with referring that they are Christian brothers here that we are talking about—Would it not be more constructive to just make a covenant to stick to what each other can study and seek out together in. –Otherwise it just looks like two (I hate to say it (brothers) are just MAYBE, (and I did say MAYBY)Competing for the fame of bringing something from the ancient world to light. Now here, it may just be My own perspective, and some may have different light on it, but here is what I discern. You Mike, who are sincere and good hearted,intelligent,and not in this for the fame or money(at least as far as I can discern) and have given so much–just love and adore you.—–And then we have brother –Yes, I will name an obvious one–LA Marzulli–Who also seems good -hearted. My(personal) feeling is, that even though he is good -hearted, and in many ways like you Mike, I think He has caught some of the Hollywood bug. Something he said in one of his Acceleration radio broadcast( that, if he had to follow the Pretorist view of things, he would shut down and become a Buddhist) makes me think he should take a Sabbatical and seek and solidify his Theology first, before rushing headlong in to this Paracus skull thing.( I am just talking about his general study of Theology,not the Pretorist subject) Anyway,even though most of his other stuff I think is a good possibility, I feel he went out on a limb with the skull thing. But what I want to say here, is, maybe if you guys arranged a meeting with each other ,and see if The Holy Spirit would give you spirits to help each other with, (I mean , just think if maybe you Mike, could give some Theological light to LA, and He might approach what he is doing with more Theological enlightenment.)Its funny of me to say that actually, in totality, because even though I trust most of your Theology,I have trouble with what you call”science” You sometimes sound like you think God is subject to mans science, in his state of not even having “The beginning of knowledge”, as it is in the unredeemed sector..This is why I loved the statement by the brother”Yeah, like we can trust what Archeologist say”Knowledge of God,and which is where All science comes from, if it is to be true.– Anyway, that is just a dig to you there, and also on all this stuff.May what is on GODS heart prevail !
God isn’t subject to “man’s science” – there’s no such thing as “man’s science” — science reveals what makes creation tick. I think you’re talking about ideas and interpretations of scientific data.
At any rate, general revelation (nature/science) is just as real and true as what theologians call special revelation (the Bible). There are no gradations of truth. Something is true or it isn’t. One true thing can’t be “more true” than another true thing. And all truth has the same source. Both science and the Bible require interpretation, naturally, and that’s where the issues are. But general and special revelation are not in conflict. People make them conflict (on both sides).
What happens in many Christian circles is a denial of truth in the name of defending truth. These skulls are what they are, not what someone wants to make them.
I don’t do what I do to compete with anyone or focus on anyone. I just write about what I care about and don’t want people to be deceived. It’s no more complicated than that.
Ok, got you Mike—-you explained that well. It was simple and clear what you were commented about at first, sorry for messing your post up, LoL—
no problem!
Notably, there is no mention of depictions of elongated skulls as portrayed on temple walls in Egypt, thousands of years before the elongated skulls of which this book speaks. I assume the theory would be that since we have supposedly been on a continuing upward curve of evolution that the “primitive” Egyptians were performing some primitive ritual just as has been assumed of Mesoamerican head-boarding. My two cents? Pre-dynastic Egypt was far more advanced than we are now. Akhenaten, Nefertiti and family are all represented with elongated skulls, which I believe they had. More modern approaches, as in Mesoamerica, are emulations of those times, those peoples. It is a form of tribal memory and an adoration of those beings who were perhaps at one time thought of as gods. I would certainly have to have a damn good reason to want to deform my infant’s cranium. Wouldn’t you? The practice of elongating the skull didn’t just pop up as a fad someone tried and it caught on. It is high emulation of something actual, once witnessed, and retold to retain through the ages in this ritual form.
Since the word “Meso-American” is in the title, there’s no reason to expect comment on the Egyptian context. The Egyptian examples were also not deliberate modifications.
The Egyptian skulls have nothing to do with aliens or being smarter. DNA work done on the families of Tut and Akhenaten a few years ago established that – an inherited (known) condition.
Leo, glad to meet you–It is nice to see someone who shows humility in what he says–Thank you. You said what you did with tact. Like Mike, who can say what he does from long study, and honesty,and with true humility, (the false stuff is not what God wants) I wanted to be helpful to you in one small area that I am knowledgeable in that you talked about. Just to give you something in your seeking truth. And that is about what you said concerning deforming your childs skull. Certainly understand your feelings on that, but as someone who has studied American indian practices, a great deal (I have read The Jesuit relations , in full, also Hodges volumes, and Bancroft’s work, all authoritive early sources)and cradle headboarding is a MILD example of what these people used to do just for a “fad”–They just did not think the way we do!-Which is a major theme of all these discussions. Now this is just a comment given to help us all in this discussion, for what it is worth, and just happens to be the little part I am knowledgeable in.I am not dis-agreeing with what you said as your main point or agreeing, I personally am still seeking like many of us here, but I will leave the rest of the issues to those who are more expert in their fields. Hope this helps you Leo, and all
I’m not basing cranial modification research of these mummies on feelings, nor do I have “feelings” about them – it’s data. Data aren’t feelings. Cultures are also different, and research advances, which means early sources can become obsolescent in places. What I posted is the major volume on the current state of research on these skulls. The points were simple and straightforward: they are well known, no one in the relevant fields (the contributors) thinks they are anything but normal humans.
If you check out ancient depictions of the Egyptian Queen Nefertiti the features that stand out are the elongated head and her slender long neck. The Anakim Giants in Canaan were descended from Anak which translates as “long neck; giant”. I agree there is some unfounded wild speculation out there on this subject but speculating that Egyptian Pharaoh’s and other people groups could have been attempting to mimic events they had witnessed (like encountering Nephilim or giants) does not seem entirely too far fetched. Comparing Christian researchers to Madam Blavatsky as you did in your last book is a little below the belt as well. The copy of the Facade I still have has a very nice review from LA Marzulli on the back cover. As long as you take the “fallen angel/celestial being” approach to Genesis 6 then this speculation will continue and it is not without Biblical merit.
First, you need to do some homework. Do you really think I wouldn’t know the word for “neck”? I have a PhD in Hebrew. I didn’t miss this. It would be nice to get a bit of credit for 15 years of grad school in this stuff from time to time.
Semitic scholars (people who actually do philology in the Semitic languages) do NOT agree that ʿanaq (“neck”) is the source for Anaqim/Anakim. And even if it did, it means “neck” (that is, it does not inherently mean LONG neck – but neck, as in the thing that connects your head to your shoulders, which all people have, regardless of length). The word is used of normal people [i.e., in contexts where giants are not in view – Prov 1:9]). it can also mean “necklace” (Song Sol 4:9).
Many scholars consider Anaqim/Anakim to be a word of non-Semitic origin. One candidate, based on very ancient Greek (which had a letter called the digamma, which corresponded to the ʿayin – first letter in ʿanaq). Early Greek sources use the term of quasi-divine beings and warrior-kings (sound familiar? like gibborim). There is also a Mycenean connection, which is intriguing since that leads us to the Philistines (who were among the Sea Peoples from the Aegean), which are of course associated with the Anaqim/Anakim remnant after the conquest. Here’s a good article on it:
MacLaurin, E. C. B. “Anak/Anξ.” Vetus Testamentum 15, no. 4 (1965): 468-474.
You can access it here: https://www.drmsh.com/MacLaurinAnakVTarticle.pdf
Nefertiti is part of the Tut / Akhenaten family group that was part of the DNA study I mentioned in my last comment. (And how long is long? I don’t think her neck looks unusually long at all). Anyway, the skull elongation is a known genetic condition (there are actually a couple genetic “disease” possibilities – nothing super-human). So your trajectory here is also useless.
Lastly, what does a long neck have to do with an elongated skull? The two do not always (or even mostly) appear together. Again, since the word is used of normal people [i.e., non-giant contexts – Prov 1:9]), it is INHERENTLY IMPRECISE for the connotation that you and others seek to gain from it. It is this inherent imprecision that makes the word a useless argument – this besides the fact that Anaqim probably doesn’t derive from it anyway.
This speculation is simply that – it has no biblical merit.
The takeaway: If you or Lynn or anyone else wants to make arguments from Hebrew or other ancient Semitic languages, you need to do better than this. I won’t be shy about critiquing the ideas.
Dr. Heiser,
I thoroughly enjoy your work. I appreciate your response to the comments on this thread. I have listened to much of Marzulli’s work and am suspect. You’ve now further validated that for me.
> produce data that overturn the science represented in works like this one
Sadly, fringe science proponents seem allergic to contact with scholarly works.
I can’t wait for the day when alien abduction proponents engage the scholarly literature on memory, amnesia, hypnosis, etc. But they seem happy merely to repeat the dubious medical claims printed in “Interrupted Journey.”
I am currently reading “Memory” by historian Alison Winter. It provides great suggestions on where alien abduction buffs (and perhaps Betty Hill herself) got their outdated (and undemonstrated) notions about memory.
(On a comical side note: When Harvard psychologists Richard McNally and Susan Clancy studied alien abductees, they found their subject reports did not hew closely to the standard Hopkins/Jacobs/Mack model. Instead of engaging the findings, Stan Friedman attacked the researchers for not using John Mack’s subjects (a bizarre methodological critique). McNally, unaware of Friedman’s complaint, revealed at a conference that Mack himself recommended they get their own subjects! Stan could have found this out by placing a call or sending an email, but he so loves violating his four “Rules for Debunkers,” we can understand why he made not the least effort to verify any facts whatsoever. Scientific ufology — that’s entertainment!)
I’m surprised Stanton didn’t criticize them for a misspelling. He often majors on the minors – a convenient distraction tactic.
Thanks for addressing this subject Mike, particularly your comments
about Peru and the research being conducted there.I trust your
scholarship,motives, and integrity.I fail to understand, when presented
facts, why people can’t accept the truth.I think peer review is very
important and suggest those trying to establish credibility regarding
their work, heed your suggestions.
Well, I’ve been wondering that for years!
For background: I have a Ph.D. in archaeology and have spent a lot of time around skulls, modified and unmodified, including teaching human osteology and excavating in Peru.
To the commenter who assumes it would take a lot to motivate someone to modify their child’s skull, and it couldn’t possibly be a fad… A fad is exactly what it was (well, actually different fads in different times and places.) People do odd things for beauty and prestige all the time. Deforming the skull is nowhere near as dangerous or painful as footbinding or anorexia, for example.
Plenty of 21st century Navajo people have flattened heads (the occipital bone) simply because cradle boarding is a traditional way of carrying infants. That’s what a “papoose” is.
Chinook and Flathead women who had children with French voyageurs insisted on flattening their babies’ heads because only slaves had unmodified skulls. (What, you want little Pierre to look like a slave?!)
Maya texts indicate that nobles modified their skulls to resemble ears of maize, which played a major role in their creation stories.
Cranial modification was performed in Europe into the (Christian) medieval period.
A couple American friends of mine made their kid wear a plastic helmet to prevent his head from getting any broader. Purely aesthetic cranial modification.
Heck there are people who put coral inserts into their skull nowadays in hopes their skulls will fuse with it so they can have little devil horns and whatnot. They’re not doing it to imitate the gods, either.
There is no such thing as an “upward curve” of evolution. Evolution is just change in a population over time. No better, no worse–just different. And in fact, when it comes to behavior, humans have a tendency to reinvent the wheel over and over.
As for the thing about skulls with only one parietal bone, it’s just not true. In some modified crania, the coronal suture closes more quickly than in modified skulls–a reaction of the bone to the loads placed upon it. By the time an individual reached middle age, the suture would be obliterated.
Alexandra – thanks for the input. Can’t recall if it was this post or another, but I have posted a link in the past to a medical journal article about precisely your point in the last paragraph. The suture is even hard to detect with X-rays in such cases.
Time and time again I always mention that we must guard ourselves from over philosophizing scripture and the very nature of man as we was warned by the Apostle Paul. All this nonsense of extra DNA, and Ancient Aliens stems from either beliefs in evolution, or evolution that is mixed in with intelligent design by anyone other than God with a mix of occult, Satanic worship. When a future generation see photos of us with all the tattoos, piercings, and what not… are they going to say that we were being influenced by Aliens, or that we were Alien bred with their DNA? The point that is being discussed here by Mr. Heiser is spot on in as far as provable data concerning these skulls… there is absolutely nothing mysterious, hocus pocus Alien nonsense going on here… they were just simple fads and fashion statements for the time and days of these cultures. Some might have been genetic defects due to the fact that early humans might have been more easily affected by radiation due to after the fall of Adam after being cast out of the protective sheath that God had placed in the abiding places of Adam and Eve, thus creating giant races and tribes here and there, along with other physical deformations before and after the flood. It is much easier for most to believe in aliens, and evolution than to believe in the natural created order of man by the Supernatural, infinite power of the Lord. All this ancient alien thing is just what it is… nonsense. To this very day we see weird fashion statements, bodily manipulations of human parts, and deformities of conjoined twins, people with dual rows of teeth and extra digits on the hands and feets… wadded hands and feet… midgets, giants, and so forth. Just like King Solomon said, “There is Nothing New Under The Sun”. All of a sudden, we know more than the early translators of scriptures, and all of a sudden we know that we are mixed in with Aliens, but it is just that… nonsense. Men need to give themselves more credit than trying to push an alien agenda.
I may want to add that we are living in very deceptive times, and everyone seems to want to have an explanation to satisfy their scientific indoctrinations heavily being promoted through the school systems, books, internet, and most definitely television. Be careful on what material you choose to want to distort in order to satisfy your philosophical minds, and get lead into a dark path of no return. The bible, and the early writers, along with the early translators of scripture wrote very specifically the visions and sightings of those days, and they most certainly had the words and terms to describe if they were seeing UFOs, and what not. God’s word is very direct, and to the point, and not something to sit around and philosophy different alternatives, and explanations. Most people are under the assumption that these early writers were writing and speaking in simple caveman languages and writings to say they meant something else… Do not be mislead. Mr. Heiser definitely knows what he is talking about, and speaks with authority. The scriptures speak with authority, and we should reflect that authority that was placed on the early writers and translators of the scriptures, for they were closer to the early language. Be careful, for we are living in very deceptive times. Use common sense in context with the scriptures.
I have a very elongated Head current day. would like more information any studies going on now
Can you parse the first sentence for me – a specimen or your own head?
My own
You can find various studies in medical literature. The anthropological literature pertains more to ancient societies. Using Google Scholar will give you an idea of what’s been published. You have to use keywords like cranium, cranial, deformation, etc. to find them.
I am presently reading this study which according to the author comes from an “especially surprising scarcity of work” into cranial modification. My issue, as an armchair scientist, is that the work clearly only refers to “Artificial cranial modification” and does not investigate what represents the totality of “elongated skull forms”. Having seen the different varieties of elongated skulls that have been found, this study is clearly not interested in investigating skulls that are clearly and obviously NOT modified. So sorry professor but please indicate a study that does not make a massive assumption as its starting point. Not very scientific.
Where’s the evidence of non-modification? Give me the sources and I’ll gladly post them. And human deformities don’t count, because you’re wanting to defend something alien or “angelic” – so let’s have the data and the studies. On this blog, you’re not allowed to simply assert things without providing data.