Nope. For those who’d like a longer answer, read on.
We’ve all heard people on radio talk shows go on and on about the “mysterious” elongated skulls from South America. There are those who say that scientists and scholars refuse to look at this evidence, or that the same are befuddled to explain them. Not true, and not true. These skulls are so well known that you can buy replicas of them-sold by medical supply companies for the purposes of studying the deformation. Here’s an example from this medical supply company:
Anthropologists have actually been publishing on these skulls since the 19th century. Here are two examples from the 1860s and 1880s (scroll down a bit in each from the top to find the beginning):
On the Cranial Characters of Peruvian Races of Men
Here’s a more modern analysis of the cause of the head deformation: skull binding. How do they know it’s skull binding? Because the devices used to bind the skulls have also been found by archaeologists.
Artificial Cranial Deformation at a Tiwanaku Complex (1995)
If you’re wondering, “Yeah, but what about Akehnaten and those weird skulls?” I already blogged that here, posting a 2009 medical journal article on this.<-->
Hey, just came across this site through a bunch of random links trying to find more information about the “Anunnaki,” which a friend told me about. Reading this site and the comments on this page made me realize how important the skeptic movement is and the good work you’re doing. I had no idea so many people believed these sorts of things! I’ve dealt with crazy ridiculous beliefs in the religious realm a lot but this is new territory for me. Although I guess they all boil down to the same thing (believing claims that there is no evidence for).
Keep up the good work!
[Reply]
I have been looking for evidence that the conehaeds had larger brains than normal, and I can’t find it. I fact I can’t find anything one way or another. What have you guys found out? And is there evidence that cradle boarding or other head tweaking can cuase the brain to increase in volume?
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
July 1st, 2011 at 10:32 PM
I’ve never seen anything to suggest it, either.
[Reply]
Thanks.
[Reply]
a complementary note on sitchin [this apart from his possible desires for profits] He may believe
his theories, creating for himself and for others an alternate reality to believe in.. influencing
people which are dissatisfied with the reality we are living in.
All this process of creating new realities is natural specially for strong minds being able to influence others, however this process could be labeled occult each time it contains outright lies., it becomes unatural when it start conflicting with the truth.
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
July 7th, 2011 at 7:39 PM
I tend to think he did believe it, though I have had “insiders” in the conspiracy / ET lecture circuit say very nasty things about Sitchin’s motives (anything from money-grubbing to being a tool of some Illuminati group). I think self-delusion is more likely.
[Reply]
thanks msh…keep up all your truthful works.
God keep you.
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
October 6th, 2011 at 11:11 PM
thanks – I had to laugh at the Hovind note!
[Reply]
i came here to be enlightened.instead i see bickering of old men.sad.i don’t think anybody is right or wrong.Furthermore i think sir MSH is a little cocky.but that’s neither here nor there.PROOF keyword.for the non believers and believers.Everyone submit your proof before your allegations please. also,is that a donation button there??wow. happy hunting truth-seekers
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 10:12 PM
No one is right or wrong? Now there’s a lesson in logic.
[Reply]
what i am most intrested in about aincient culture is body mod and there difrent value but the elongated heads realy atract me and the notion you get difrent brain functions seems it has to be so but if you get more brains idk what about the bird seed test like they did on the star child skull and the human skull were star child held 1n a half more that there brain was biger it was a deformity said by our aothority figures but with more brain room could you not do that with elongated skull as well
[Reply]
If anyone will ever notice, Mike never gives conclusive evidence for his findings, rather he regurgitates evidence backed by other thinkers, for whom of which could be scrutinized for their bias findings as well. If any person here was reading the blogs you would have seen this post:
Mike reid Says:
18 August 2010 at 10:25 PM.
Mr Heiser thank you for your answers to all the tough questions. I dont know if God is real or if aliens are real. I cant explain why millions of people all over the world claim to have seen some sort of UFO but this whole idea about the oldest civilation known to man wrote about aliens really had me going. But thanks to you i am back to normal. Do you beleive in GOD??
MSH Says:
22 August 2010 at 4:05 PM.
Yes. Thanks for the reply!
Now how you take the opinion of someone as bias as that? A person who talks about logic and follows an illogical faith. Now ordinarily I would not attack someone who believes in higher entities, yet this irrational bedfellow constantly berates people and their opinions and scoffs at their approach, despite however improbable their statements or ideology. He cast me out from his Sitchin forum because he could never directly answer some pertinent questions I had about the tablets and knowledge of Celestial bodies. Most quasi-punduits of knowledge always brace for the logic script, without ever lending credence to the lack thereof in pre-dawn civilization. And they will quote some author or Doctor for whom cast only a one-sided opinion or scope and they embrace it as their own ideology and broadcast it as the gospel; the end all on the subject or subjects.
Instead what you will find Mike doing is rather methodically ostracisizing people for their views, simply because they do not elaborate his own and showers down praise to those that do. He will say over and over, I am busy, I have a life-check my Sitchin site! So on and so forth. I have yet to see Mike truly engage in a conversation or debate in which he actually debates fact from fiction without copping-out with a statement of “illogical-argument” and awarding someone to a hall of fame for idiots. For all this man and his grandeur, have anyone ever heard of him and his accomplishments in his field of study, what paramount breakthrough has he contributed to society and all factors of knowledge? The answer is none. So he is so self-predicating and self-absorbed that he involves himself in a forum of debate over “mythology”, for which he postures himself to debunk, through logic and science and yet he continues to follie his own beliefs by enterating slight retorts and absurd attacks, without ever truly debating the subject.
He is a feeb, amongst feebs! And he knows it. To all, check out his Sitchin Blog and despite if you agree with me or not, look at his response and lack thereof. And see for your self, what this, man, is truly made of, if you can call him as such .
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
November 23rd, 2011 at 9:27 PM
What I do is simple. When people make ridiculous claims (like ancient astronauts), then the burden is on THEM to produce actual evidence for such claims. I therefore: (1) insist they produce such evidence; (2) insist they use sound logic when talking about evidence and drawing conclusions. This isn’t rocket science, and there is no mystery. I don’t need to argue FOR anything when someone else is making a claim. If they don’t want the claim evaluated, then they should not make it. How simple is that? We’ve now hit the ten year anniversary of me asking (publicly, before an audience of millions on Coast to Coast AM) that Sitchin and his followers produce actual tablets and tablet references for his alien ideas. Guess what? Nothing offered to date. Hey Gregory, maybe you can fill the gap where your mentor failed. I won’t be holding my breath.
[Reply]
Pingback: PaleoBabble » The Peruvian “Alien Skull”
Mike, my friend, I truly am not a Sitchin follower. I try to pride myself on following my own instincts and intellect. Fundamentally, Science is always on the button and can be replicated through method. However, every now and again, something extrodinary baffles and rocks’ the foundation of scientific theory and knowledge. Einstein, a man for whom we can all agree, far exceed our own intellect said in many quotes, void of each other and they list as follows.
“Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius — and a lot of courage — to move in the opposite direction.”
“Imagination is more important than knowledge.”
“The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education.”
“Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.”
and he also says, “For everything we think we know, we know nothing at all.”
So yes Mike I will conclusively agree that mankind essentially is daft and easily pursuaded; it is a fault of our being. However, I find that people who do not promote convential thinking on Outer-World contact, influence or representation, are quick to debunk evidence put forth, however I have yet to see any person likewise to prove that their is an absolute fact that what people are learning and experiencing is a myth and part of a grand delusion.
As for my your comment about filling in the gap where Sitchin could not, I truly have no remark to such an inane statement. My last post was only pointing out the fact you tend to elude debate and you are real crafty at absconding the point or question by overtly stating your methodology and your public appearances, purportedly begging for Sitchin followers to correct you.
Fine and so be it Mike. I will chalk my older post on the Sitchin DNA portion of this Site, as I was not astute enough to grasp and underlining factor or point and that perhaps I am too stupid to grasp the obvious. I will choke that down, for this simple request and statement.
We are no longer going to refer to Sitchin. We are on a completely different scope now. “We are pushing reset now.” We have a new scope of conversation and idealism.
We proof have you that there are no other forms of intelligent life ?
and
What proof have you that any intelligent life forms have not visited or that are not visting Earth to this day?
Very simple, very layman’s in terms.
Let us start a true debate, of course, unless, you are scared of being bested by a person lacking a college pedigree, such as yourself. I truly want to end this never ending discussion with mindless statements.
Thank you
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
November 25th, 2011 at 11:14 PM
we can start the debate when you produce primary textual data.
If you cannot meet this simple request – to produce actual textual evidence for your views, then I won’t be wasting my time or that of readers with your posts. I don’t debate what doesn’t exist — so you have to put forth data. It’s a simple, straightforward request.
[Reply]
Sorry for some the grammatical errors, should have done dome proof reading of my writing. Again, it is your move Mike.
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
November 25th, 2011 at 11:15 PM
whatever – see my earlier post. If you are so smart, put up the data. I’m not holding my breath here.
[Reply]
Oh, Jesus folks! Mr. Genius here knows it all!
This is an easy debate, then.
You sir, produce me some primary textual data that prove they do not or that is not imperically possible.
And I will get together my trove of unique circumstances and we can debate from there.
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
November 26th, 2011 at 10:48 PM
you still haven’t made it clear what we are supposed to be debating. Can you do that? Last call.
Are we really going to debate “circumstances”???
[Reply]
Mike,
Do you believe in God? Don’t crawfish on this. You have a post that will validate that you do; or you elaborated to such a dgree that it appeared you were conceding to the fact of believing in God.
So answer my question.
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
November 26th, 2011 at 10:49 PM
sure (finally a clear question).
[Reply]
I guess what I should be asking is do you believe in Alien Contact; yes, no? If not, then do you believe that some of the supposed claims are at best founded in some plausible fact. The more I banter with you the more I realize that I am daft for arguing with you. We can argue points of contention all day but surely we can beg some fundamental answers, to gather collected responses. And thus I would hope we could open the floor for serious discussion.
Furthermore, do you honestly think that it is not, at all, even remotely possible that we have been at some point visited by advanced beings? Thank you.
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
December 6th, 2011 at 5:00 PM
I don’t believe we have been contacted by aliens. There is no physical proof of intelligent ET life. However, I tend to think that most people who report strange experiences and sightings are genuine – that is, they are not hoaxers. The issue is how they are processing the experience, though. Without actual data, it is not reasonable to jump from an unusual experience to pretending to know with any degree of certainty what it was. On the larger question, “could there be intelligent ETs out there?” I ‘d say sure, maybe. But without actual proof, it’s just pure speculation.
[Reply]
Oh, and by the way. All science is based, in some respect, to circumstantial belief or knowledge. Until otherwise concretely disputed or founded. And unfortunately, these forums are a paradox for such a conundrum.
Of course I am preaching to the choir in this respect.
Ciao!
[Reply]
I just want to say thank you MSH for this site, it really opens the mind. You should however reconsider letting some of these replies on to your site since the needless banter adds nothing to the actual evidence. It really just seems like when asked for evidence the fanatics simply argue to keep themselves convinced instead of searching for the evidence or atleast admitting that they can not find said evidence. Yes science is based on speculation but it is than followed by evidence to support the speculation.
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 4:56 PM
I presume you mean “deleting” some of the comments? I know what you mean, but I typically only delete items or block people who go beyond posting nonsense to getting profane.
[Reply]
goodbye!
[Reply]