If you’ve surfed the web at all in the last day or two you have probably heard about this “discovery.” One piece I saw on Yahoo News described the skeletal remains in the picture below as those of a “giant-headed mummy” with a “triangular skull.” It must be alien — right?
At first glance, the “giant-headed” description may cause readers to zip right past the fact that the specimen is twenty INCHES long. Here is another picture you likely won’t see on the archaeo-porn websites seeking to derive up their hit traffic. It puts things into perspective.
The specimen is most likely an infant whose head was wrapped to achieve the shape, as I have blogged about before (and lots of infants have misshapen heads without wrapping anyway). This is the opinion of the discoverer, at any rate (if it really is a discovery, as opposed to a hoax). But that of course doesn’t deter audience-seeking web journalists from using words like “alien” and “extraterrestrial.” But iust couldn’t be the result of head-wrapping, known to have been practiced over nine millennia, including in Peru.
Otherwise, is it just me, or are several of the teeth in the skull a different color? And maybe it’s my imagination that the jaw is also out of proportion. I’m sure there’s no hoaxing involved. I’m also sure the Colts will be in the play-offs this year.
At any rate, at least one report I read noted that there appears to be the remains of an eyeball in the right eye socket (pardon me while I ignore the fact that if this is ancient that shouldn’t be there). But if by some material this non-bone material survived all this time, that would be prime DNA testing material. We can all wait now for the “oh, if only we had the funding [and please help us with that]” lamentations that will likely follow (either that or “the scientific community won’t allow us to test it”). My money is on this turning out to be another in the long line of “finds” that do nothing but perpetuate the cherished mythology.
This is another fine example of how gullible people r & how important not only learning is as well as being taught some common sense. Happy Thanksgiving to you 4 u made me grateful 4 being of a higher intellect than most of the bafoons that watch and beleave all the youtube conspiracies.
Really like your blog about debunking, a few years ago I was watching Zeitgeist and all those people speaking about ‘secret’ history etc and I was taking it in without questions because their main points seemed very believable. But then i came accross a debunking video for Zeitgeist’s religion part and it avalanched from there on, finding refutement for most things ive read/seen. Right now i trust the question more than the possible answers, like who could’ve done it, who has the most benefit, why is it so etc. Like why would you do that to your child’s skull, maybe you’re trying to mimic something, then what would that be. Iirc in Egypt some did that to their children to make them look like aristocracy, who looked naturally with elongated heads due to inbreeding. Would that be the same case here.
some theorize that the “mound” shape of the elongated skull (for the Peruvian samples) had to do with achieving a mountain shape (the dwelling of the gods). That’s just a guess. Since there are no textual records to explain it, we are left to guessing.
I think that the mandible looks perfectly normal for an infant of (I’d guess) around 1-2 years. The fontanelle is still open, so the child has be under two years (unless head binding can prolong closure – I’m not sure about this), but teeth have erupted and there appear to be first molars present, indicating an age of over 13 months. I wouldn’t be too worried about the absence of incisors or cuspids, as they can fall out very easily, even with permanent dentition.
It’s clearly a very human infant. It’s quite disgusting that alien proponents are prepared to use human remains in this way!
thanks for this – the teeth look phony to me, and I was wondering about the mandible proportioning.
Conspiracy theorists don’t let logic get in the way of stupidity.
The jaw and teeth are normal but the size almost proves that is an infant.