I saw these pics on another forum I post on and was really intrigued by them and wanted to hear some of your opinions on this, so what do you all think???
Premodern
[SIZE=+1]Discuss....[/SIZE]
Premodern
alien skulls or some kind of deformaties?
- Thread starter AUDRAA
- Start date
funny how we use these same type of head structures when we make alien movies though isnt it?
There were ancient cultures that practiced "Head binding" where they would take infants and strap them to a board and tightly bind their head so it would deform as the baby grew. Below is a engraving of "head binding" by a Chinook Indian. See how it forced the head into a cone shape?
but why???
The Starchild fascinated many from anthropologist to surgeons, ophthalmologist to neuroradiologists. Several theories emerged over the years: those of human-alien hybrid, cranial binding and genetic defects.
Initially there were thoughts that the unusual shape of the skull was due to cranial binding practiced throughout South America, where the skulls were located. However there were no signs of forced compressions leading to deformations normally caused by binding of the skull. Binding that took place in South American cultural groups always occurred above the inion, the most prominent projecting point of the occipital bone located at the base of the skull.3 In the Starchild’s case, the flattening of the skull extended past the inion (figure 2).
Figure 2: The back of the skull is flat past the inion. This proximity to the spine was unattainable by normal skull binding. If the deformities of the skull were caused by binding, there would have been deformities evident in the frontal region of the skull, which was not visible. Furthermore, binding of this kind would leave a soft spot at the crown of the head, yet the Starchild skull was well sutured. Thus there is insufficient evidence to suggest the Starchild skull’s unusual shape was caused by cranial binding.
Pye, the skull owner, believed that the Starchild was a human-alien hybrid.1 The theory intrigued many people. Pye asserted that many of the features of the Starchild were alien in origin. The depths of the eye sockets of the skull were shallow and distorted from the normal position. Ophthalmologists Dr. Tony Townsend and Dr. Hugh Parsons established that the Starchild would have had eyeballs bulging off the face.5 ‘The Starchild’s neck would have been one-third to a half the width and volume of a normal neck because the foramen magnum was shifted forward an inch from its position in a normal skull.
Initially there were thoughts that the unusual shape of the skull was due to cranial binding practiced throughout South America, where the skulls were located. However there were no signs of forced compressions leading to deformations normally caused by binding of the skull. Binding that took place in South American cultural groups always occurred above the inion, the most prominent projecting point of the occipital bone located at the base of the skull.3 In the Starchild’s case, the flattening of the skull extended past the inion (figure 2).
Figure 2: The back of the skull is flat past the inion.
Pye, the skull owner, believed that the Starchild was a human-alien hybrid.1 The theory intrigued many people. Pye asserted that many of the features of the Starchild were alien in origin. The depths of the eye sockets of the skull were shallow and distorted from the normal position. Ophthalmologists Dr. Tony Townsend and Dr. Hugh Parsons established that the Starchild would have had eyeballs bulging off the face.5 ‘The Starchild’s neck would have been one-third to a half the width and volume of a normal neck because the foramen magnum was shifted forward an inch from its position in a normal skull.
The top one reminds me of coneheads.
The bottom one another type of alien.
Case solved! Its an ancestor of West Ham's chairman, Eggy Magnusson!:24:
This one reminds me of a Neandertal, at least in the lower part (browridges down). They all could very well be pre-humans with birth defects. I know with the Starchild skull, they tested it's mitochondrial DNA and foudn that it had a human mother from a known Native American haplogroup (defines genetic popluations).
I've been waiting for the amateur anthropologist to chime in
I forgot I still had my physical anthropology book and I was too lazy to look them up online.
Case solved! Its an ancestor of West Ham's chairman, Eggy Magnusson!:24:
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!! Peter.
You damn ass!
:24::24::woohoo::24: STILL ROTFLMAO
That is just soooo wrong.
There were ancient cultures that practiced "Head binding" where they would take infants and strap them to a board and tightly bind their head so it would deform as the baby grew. Below is a engraving of "head binding" by a Chinook Indian. See how it forced the head into a cone shape?
^^^^ This.
They can also be birth defects. End of story.
As a very amateur guess if it's due to head binding , could it be to denote status or intelligence.
What makes me suggest it is that in Elizabethan times a high forehead signified intelligence and the hairline was shaved back to exagerate that.
Or it could just be a cultural trend, like feet binding.
Good for them. All I know is I ain't squeezing my head for nutten. F-that.