top of page

Starchild Skull -Deformed Human Remains Found in Mexico (Part 2)

In part 1 we went over the history of the Starchild Skull. The skull is the center of a debate between scientists against, alternative history theorists, and even scientists for the skull not being human. None of the parties involved have come out to claim that the skull is alien, except for Lloyd Pye himself.

The Starchild Project takes the position that the skull's non-human status is still in question, and no definitive conclusion can be reached without further testing. Skeptics, as they often do, argue against the straw man that is the implied possibility that the skull is extraterrestrial in origin. They dismiss study of the skull outright because of their inherent belief that there is no possibility for anything outside established thought to exist.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

-William Shakespeare, Hamlet

Skeptical Arguments for Mundanity

The skull is weird, sure, but is it really outside the bounds of human genetic misfunction? Professional skeptics make their money by catering to an audience that expects the rejection of fantastic events and evidence. They want everything reduced to simplistic facts, quietly explained by current thought.

First in their sights is the size of the skull itself. Congenital Hydrocephalus is a condition where cerebrospinal fluid accumulates in the skull. This causes pressure on the skull, which creates an enlarged cranium in babies. Congenital means present at birth.

A one-year-old girl with hydrocephalus showing "sunset eyes", before shunt surgery

Professor Steven Novella, a clinical neuroscientist, who has not inspected the skull in person, is a proponent of the Congenital Hydrocephalus argument. He believes that the skull holds all the physiological evidence for his argument. This goes against Dr. Bachynsky's report of not finding the tell-tale erosion on the inner table of the skull, usually caused by Hydrocephalus.

According to the Starchild Project's website, there are several common arguments against the non-human hypothesis. They offer brief descriptions of the arguments and a brief counter of each. Very little substantiation is given either way.

One of the arguments given is that the lack of frontal sinuses are a result of Progeria. You might recognize Progeria from the Robin Williams film, Jack, where it was misrepresented for dramatic effect.

Progeria can cause deformations of the facial bones. It is mainly a disorder that causes a form of rapid aging to occur. The Starchild Skull shows no other signs of Progeria, according to the Starchild Project.

This disorder can also cause the bones to lighten and thin out. Often leading to weaker bones overall. Osteoporosis is a common symptom of Progeria, and is the cause of the brittle bones seen in those afflicted with this disorder.

The Starchild Skull's bones are thin beyond the norm for Osteoporosis. Coupled with the fact that the bones are actually more dense than regular human bone, this discounts that theory.

Personally, the shape of the Starchild Skull does seem similar to the images of people suffering from Progeria.

The flatness of the back of the Starchild Skull is another strange detail. Dr. Robinson's report found no evidence of artificial cranial deformation. Skeptics are sure the cause is cradle boarding, or some other artificial cranial deformation practice.

Artificial Cranial Deformation is an ancient practice where an infant's skull is bound by ropes and planks in order to force the skull to develop into artificial shapes. This practice has been found on every continent and throughout the ages of human history.

There are a couple more arguments against the Starchild Skull being non-human. Most important to the debate is the DNA evidence. Skeptics point to the discovery of mitochondrial DNA as well as both X and Y chromosomes as evidence that the skull is that of an unfortunate child. They discard the notion of non-human DNA being found as simple contamination.

The Starchild Project counters with the notion that any contamination should be identifiable, at least partially, due to it originating on Earth. They hold that the level of variance from the genetic standard would make the Starchild unviable if it was made by human parents. It would have died long before reaching 4-6 years.

Further DNA testing is the only thing that will settle this part of the debate. Any mundane explanation would satisfy skeptics. Conversely, no explanation other than extraterrestrial origin might satisfy believers.

The Starchild Project closes out their article by claiming that the individual abnormalities can be easily explained, but when they are all put together in one skull, things become murky.


Man sits in an armchair with a laptop
I'm no doctor, also, this isn't a picture of me

The truth is out there. Be it human or alien, the Starchild Skull deserves further study. Should it rove to be human, the skull represents the opposite of a miracle. I suggest we use the word, Malacle, which I just invented.

Having that many deformities and genetic disorders, and surviving long enough to wear down his teeth, is truly anomalous.

There is much knowledge hidden in the Starchild Skull.


Never miss a new story

Thanks for submitting!

bottom of page