Update on the “Starchild skull”
The so-called “starchild” skull (source Wikipedia)
On the main site, I’ve added a page on the so-called ‘starchild’ skull. I originally wrote a short post about it here in January 2010; it is worth visiting this older page for the comments! The skull seems to arouse all sorts of irrational passions among its proponents…
What the new page attempts to do is to analyse the data in a more thorough way than the original blog post. This is difficult because the only access we have to any of the data is filtered through the distorting lens of Lloyd Pye, the “curator” of the skull. None of the scientists who has carried out tests has ever produced an independent scientific paper giving the results because the tests have been privately commissioned. This must cause us concern, particularly when Mr Pye starts playing number games and extrapolating wildly from the results. His analyses show none of the caution we would expect from a scientist, although he is always careful to label his analyses as “provisional”.
How good of Mr. Pye to play the ‘Question Mark Game’. At this point, could we trust any data from the skull at all? Even it if it did manage to find it’s way to a real lab for real analysis?
If you are going to write a critique on something please do more homework than just looking at wikipedia.
If you’re going to criticise my research, at least have a look at the main article. Wikipedia is only mentioned here because I acknowledge it as the source of the photograph!