Friday, July 27, 2018

The Atacama Desert Alien

Some time back, when all this broke about the Atacama Desert skeleton, I learned that some seven percent of the DNA had not been identified. The other 93% was human. I didn’t want to draw a conclusion then, about this, because, well, all the evidence wasn’t
Dr. Steven Greer
Photo copyright by
Kevin Randle
in. Oh, it was fairly conclusive, but I thought, since additional testing is being scheduled, we could wait until all that testing was done.

Yes, I have seen most of Dr. Steven Greer’s documentary, Sirius, but I walked out somewhat early, when it began to delve into the MJ-12 hoax, suggesting that MJ-12 was a real committee. MJ-12 was hiding the proof that aliens were real and had crashed one of their craft near Roswell. Don’t forget, that same document claimed another crash near the Texas – Mexico border was also real but it turned out to be a hoax. I have reviewed that information on numerous occasions on this blog.

Now, it seems that we have the final word about the Atacama Desert being, and it doesn’t suggest alien. A referred scientific paper just published answers the questions about the tiny being. You can read it here:

The abstract for the paper tells us about the topic and some of the information to be revealed. It said:

Here we evaluate Bhattacharya et al.’s (2018) recent paper “Whole-genome sequencing of Atacama skeleton shows novel mutations linked with dysplasia” published in Genome Research. In this short report, we examine the hypothesis that the so-called “Atacama skeleton” has skeletal abnormalities indicative of dysplasia, critique the validity of the interpretations of disease based on genomic analyses, and comment on the ethics of research on this partially mummified human foetus. The current paper acts as a case study of the importance of using an anthropological approach for aDNA research on human remains. A critical evaluation of the ethically controversial paper by Bhattacharya et al. highlights how an understanding of skeletal biological processes, including normal and abnormal growth and development, taphonomic processes, environmental context, and close attention to ethical issues of dealing with human remains, is vital to scientific interpretations. To this end, close collaboration with palaeopathologists and local archaeologists through appropriate peer-reviewed journals will add to the rigour of scientific interpretation and circumvent misinterpretation.
There are a series of conclusions about the study and what they found during their research. I’m not going to publish them all here because you can read that for yourself. I will note, however:

Close collaboration with archaeologists and/or palaeopathologists is a vital part of informed scientific research on human remains from the past. A nuanced understanding of skeletal biological processes and environmental context is essential for accurate scientific interpretation and for acting as a check on the ethics and legality of such research. Unfortunately, there was no scientific rationale to undertake genomic analyses of Ata because the skeleton is normal, the identified genetic mutations are possibly coincidental, and none of them are known to be strongly associated with skeletal dysplasias that would affect the phenotype at this young age. We caution DNA researchers about getting involved in cases that lack clear context and legality, or where the remains have resided in private collections. In the case of Ata, costly and time-consuming scientific testing using whole genome techniques was unnecessary and unethical.
I, of course, would hope that this would close the book on this controversy, but nothing in the UFO field ever goes away. Remember the Alien Autopsy? There are those who believe that some of it, or
Creation of the alien for the autopsy.
all of it, is real. Doesn’t matter that the men who created the hoax have admitted it. Doesn’t matter that we have photographs of them putting the alien together. Doesn’t matter that we have drawings of what they were going to do. There are people who will never let go.

So, I’m sure it well be the same here. No matter what the scientific research says, no matter the qualifications of those conducting the research have, the refrain will always be, “Government conspiracy to hide the truth.” This matter should be closed now, but we all know what will happen. The truth will be buried under a pile of crap because “I want to believe.”


Louis Nicholson said...

Good post. I'm sure Dr. Greer has already greatly "poo-pooed" the scientific analysis and claimed those doing the analysis are part of some conspiracy.

RedTornado2008 said...

This is the same Dr Greer who has people sign a non-disclosure form for his seminar on disclosure. I do think the word irony can be applied.

And yes, Dr Greer is already screaming cover-up that his 'alien' has been found to be human.

Most have accepted the Starchild skull is human after exhausting research done by Chase Kloetzke, then again there are others who will never accept the truth.

The idea is finding the truth no matter where the path takes us.

Unknown said...

Kevin wrote:”Remember the Alien Autopsy? There are those who believe that some of it, or all of it, is real.”
I’m one of those who think the UFO community has missed an opportunity to better understand the nature of our UFO. The AA footage is a real event, filmed by a real cameramen (Jack Detmar Barrett) and is evidence that we share our planet with another civilization.
Kevin wrote: “Doesn’t matter that the men who created the hoax have admitted it.”
Ed Replies: Spyros has claimed credit, but there is overwhelming evidence that he wasn’t involved until after the fact. He did work for Ray but they didn’t meet until April of 95 at Cannes. Ray had been showing photos and describing the footage long before that. Spyros’s so-called evidence is weak at best. He is a con-man and bankrupt who was kicked out of his own magic society for lying and creating controversy. His description of how he constructed the creature is pure BS. This is clear to anyone who understands fiber-glass and how it is used and its limitations. Ray has never said it was a hoax, never! He still insists that there was original footage, a crash site and cameraman and drawing from the cameraman.
Kevin wrote: Doesn’t matter that we have photographs of them putting the alien together.
Ed replies: The only photos were taken of the Alien creature created for the Ant&Dec movie. John Humphrey’s has always maintained that he copied the original AA footage for the creature he created. He never mentioned that Spyros was involved and refuses to be interviewed.
Kevin wrote: Doesn’t matter that we have drawings of what they were going to do.
Ed Replies: What drawings are you describing. The photo is from the Ant&dec movie. I have spent sixty years, on and off, studying the UFO mystery. The “Alien Autopsy” footage is a SNAFU that the UFO community could have taken advantage of but didn’t. Skeptics like Kevin kept folks from taking a close look. Check out the AA page on facebook.
Also the crash site:

KRandle said...

Ed -

I rest my case.

Daniel Transit said...

edward gehrman said...

Check out the AA page on facebook.

Ed, I note the 26 july post from Colin Woodford concerning a crop formation at Chesterton Windmill, containing '..elements of classic motifs like the "keys"....'

Is it not the case that you maintain that there were two Roswell crashes and one of them was near a windmill?

According to William Steinman, script from the Aztec UFO recovery was sent for study and interpretation to William F. Friedman & Lambros D. Callimahos (p.41 UFO Crash At Aztec).

William F. Friedman lived in an old windmill:

'..Keys that jingle in your pocket, words that jangle in your head...

Like a circle in a spiral, like a wheel within a wheel
Never ending or beginning on an ever spinning reel
As the images unwind, like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind!'

purrlgurrl said...

You know, someday I'd love to see a serious, academic study profiling the psychology of Ufology's hard-core faithful (you know, the people who continue to insist it's all true even when confronted with irrefutable evidence that it's not and never was).

TheDimov said...

Hey Ed, do you still write up a Christmas list, and leave your teeth under the pillow?
Just curious.

Brian B said...

At first it seemed like Greer was legitimate -- I mean years ago when he got started -- then something went haywire......whatever it was the man seems lost in a world of make believe now.

No surprise the results show him so absolutely wrong about that so-called "alien".

Paul Young said...

@ Ed Gehrman.

I'm just curious to know if there is ANYONE who you would finally believe, if he/she told you the "Alien Autopsy" was a hoax?

And if so, who is that person?

Unknown said...

The Alien Autopsy is not a hoax. I've listened to the witnesses and
then investigated their narratives. I am an authority on the footage
and its history. I know all the players and there stories. If you spend
time really studying the Alien Autopsy, I think you'll soon lose your skepticism, too.
And Danial, you wrote "Is it not the case that you maintain that there were two Roswell crashes and one of them was near a windmill?
Yse there was one alien craft which blew apart and resulted the Foster Ranch crash site and the site that is connected with a windmill being the second. This happened on July 2nd, 1947. It's connected to the Alien Autopsy in a very interesting way.

KRandle said...

Ed -

Until you can present some actual, physical evidence, very few are going to accept your claim. Until a frame of the film is analyzed by an independent lab such as Kodak, you have nothing other than the interviews with alleged witnesses... take a lesson from the Roswell Slides. At least the proved the slides were from 1947.

And, for those interested in this whole, sad tale, take a look at:

09rja said...

The Alien Autopsy footage can't possibly be the real deal. For starters, autopsies on most people take longer than that.

Unknown said...

Kevin, List
There is more than enough evidence currently to begin to understand the AA and to rebut much of Spyros’s interview. But there are few folks who want to spend time discussing a matter that has already been declared a hoax, primarily on the word of an illusionist. Spyros insists that the cameraman doesn’t exist, but we know his name: Jack Detmar Barrett. We’ve found the crash site he described.
Which one of us is telling the truth? Is the cameraman a real person, or a figment of Ray’s imagination? Or is Spyros correct and the cameraman never existed before. If you’re not 100% sure, then maybe you should take another look.