STARCHILD

        Ancient Bone Baffles Science

Click for the eBook 

    The known history of the Starchild Skull begins in the 1930s, when an American teenage girl was on vacation with her family near Mexico's Copper Canyon region. She went exploring alone and found a long-abandoned mine tunnel. Inside it she found a full human skeleton lying on its back. Beside it was a grave-like mound of dirt with an arm bone sticking out of the dirt and the hand bones wrapped around the upper arm bone of the skeleton lying on the surface. Using her hands she dug the buried skeleton out of its shallow grave.

    The girl attempted to recover both skeletons but lost most of the bones in a flash flood. Ultimately, all she brought back to her home in El Paso was the two skulls, both somewhat battered in the flood, and a detached piece of maxilla that belonged to the "misshapen" skeleton she found in the grave. For the remainder of her life she kept both skulls in a cardboard box as souvenirs of her trip, assuming the odd looking skull was the result of some kind of human deformity.

    The woman died in the early 1990s, and in 1998 the two skulls were given to Ray and Melanie Young of El Paso, Texas. Melanie, a neonatal nurse and physical therapist who understood that the "misshapen" skull was in no way the result of a typical human deformity. She was determined to have it expertly evaluated to find out what it really was. To do that, she and her husband Ray enlisted the help of Lloyd Pye, an author and researcher in the field of alternative knowledge, who became the skull's caretaker and research coordinator.

    Lloyd Pye founded the Starchild Project in February of 1999, and in the course of the past ten years has overseen the scientific testing of the skull in three countries (the US, Canada, and England). While doing that he has regularly informed the media and the public about those results, and he continues to oversee ongoing research that will lead to an ultimate definitive conclusion about the unusual skull.

OVERVIEW OF THE SKULL

>   The skull's bone is about half as thick as normal human bone.

>   The bone weighs about half as much as normal human bone.

>   The bone is substantially stronger than any known bone on planet Earth, with a mineral profile more like dental enamel than bone.

>   The bone was radio carbon dated in 2003 to be 900 years old (+/- 40 years).

>   The skull was reportedly found in an abandoned mine tunnel in the Copper Canyon region about 200 miles SW of Chihuahua, Mexico.

>   The skull is morphologically unique, and does not match the physical profile of any known human deformity.

>   The bone of the skull contains an as yet unidentified reddish residue that had never been seen before in bone (this is not desiccated bone marrow).

>   The bone of the skull contains microscopic fibers that have never been seen before in the bone of any animal.

>   Attempts to recover DNA from the skull easily produced its mitochondrial DNA, which proved its mother was fully human. However, no nuclear DNA could be recovered using human-only primers, which strongly indicates that the skull's father was something other than a typical human.

Comparison of the thickness of the
Starchild bone and normal human cranial bone



Residue inside the Starchild bone



Microscopic fibers inside the Starchild bone
 

                    CURRENT RESEARCH BEING CONDUCTED

    In the summer of 2003 the Starchild's DNA was sequenced and analyzed by Trace Genetics, a laboratory dedicated to the recovery of ancient DNA. (At 900 years of age, the Starchild DNA is considered "ancient.") Two types of DNA were sought, its mitochondrial DNA (which contains only the mother's DNA) and its nuclear DNA (the entire genomic package that comes from both parents). Its mitochondrial DNA was easy to recover and proved its mother was human. In six full attempts its nuclear DNA could not be recovered. This was an overwhelming indication that its father was something other than entirely human, but that was all that could be determined by that process. What was needed, but was unavailable at the time, was a test to recover the entire genome so the genetic heritage of both parents could be recovered and studied in detail.

    In the summer of 2006 a company called 454 Life Sciences (now a Roche Applied System company) announced it had developed entirely new technology that would allow the sequencing of an entire genome base-pair by base-pair, all three billion of them (in a typical human). This was exactly what was needed to establish the Starchild's genetic heritage, but the cost of analysis (multi-millions at that early point) put it well beyond the reach of the Starchild Project in 2006. However, everyone understood that improvements in the technology would drop the price over time, so the team accepted that testing could not be  initiated until sometime in 2009 or 2010.

   Now testing with the 454 Life Science technology is set to begin some time in 2009. This testing will utilize the Genome Sequencer™ system, which is fully capable of recovering and sequencing the entire genome of the Starchild Skull. When this result is obtained, its genome can then be compared in every detail to other known genomes and the question of its humanity can conclusively be resolved.

11 different specialists who have examined the Starchild Skull and its X-rays.

1. The skull in question has a provenance that is not verified at present. That situation may change in time, but for now all that can be said with certainty is that the skull is real, it is comprised of calcium hydroxyapatite (the essence of all mammalian bone), its parts are configured "naturally" (not cobbled together or in any other way hoaxed), and it presents numerous physical anomalies that do not conform to standard skull norms.

2. The skull remained in my possession in Vancouver, B.C., for the better part of one year. I was given complete discretion to study it in any way I saw fit. My analysis derives from extensive examination of the skull itself, combined with analysis of X-rays and CAT scans. I have shared these data with colleagues who have given opinions that will be mentioned in this document as their input becomes relevant.    

3. In general, the skull has the basic components of a human skull: i.e., a frontal bone, two sphenoids, two temporals, two parietals, and an occipital. However, these bones have been markedly reconfigured from the "normal" shapes and positions such bones usually have. In addition, the bone itself has been reconstituted to an equally marked degree, being somewhat less than half as thick as normal human bone, with a corresponding weight of roughly half normal. The reconfigurations and the reconstitution are uniform throughout all axes and in all planes of the skull. There is no asymmetrical warping or irregular thinning that is the hallmark of typical human deformity.

4. The morphology of this skull is so highly unusual as to be unique in my forty years of experience as a medical doctor specializing in plastic and reconstructive surgery of the cranium. Because of its uniqueness, I undertook an extensive review of current literature on craniofacial abnormalities, which failed to uncover a single similar example. In short, it seems to be not only unique in my personal experience, but also unique throughout the past history of worldwide study of craniofacial abnormalities. This is significant.

5. Specialists who examined the skull and associated X-rays and CAT scans were:

      Dr. Fred Smith, Head of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital, New Orleans, La.

      Dr. David Hodges, Radiologist, Royal Columbian Hospital, New Westminster, B.C.

      Dr. John Bachynsky, Radiologist, New Westminster, B.C.

      Dr. Ken Poskitt, Pediatric Neuroradiologist, Vancouver Children’s Hospital

      Dr. Ian Jackson, (formerly of Mayo Clinic), Craniofacial Plastic Surgeon, Michigan

      Dr. John McNicoll, Craniofacial Plastic Surgeon, Seattle

      Dr. Mike Kaburda, Oral Surgeon, New Westminster, B.C.

      Dr. Tony Townsend, Ophthalmologist, Vancouver

      Dr. Hugh Parsons, Ophthalmologist, Vancouver

      Dr David Sweet, Forensic Odontologist, Vancouver

6. Dr David Hodges, a radiologist, stated that the suture lines were open and growing at the time of death. Dr. David Sweet, an internationally renowned forensic pathologist at the University of British Columbia, was of the opinion that the skull was that of a 5-6 year old, based upon the dentition in the right maxillary fragment[1].

7. Though some specialists who looked at the skull disagreed, I have always supported Dr Sweet in his belief that this was the skull of a 5-6 year old child.      

8. Dr. Bachynsky noted that there is no evidence of erosion of the inner table of the skull. Such erosion would be consistent with a diagnosis of hydrocephaly, so this condition can safely be ruled out as a cause of the abnormalities expressed. Hydrocephaly also causes a widening of the sutures, again not expressed here. There was consensus agreement to both of these observations by other experts conversant with these features.

9. Dr. Kaburda carried out special three-dimensional X-rays which measure certain fixed points in any skull, allowing for comparison of any particular skull to the established norm. These accumulated results were compared to a statistical analysis of 100 human skulls. This skull was found to be more than ten (10) standard deviations outside the norm, i.e. the statistical center of a Bell curve. This is another strong indication that the skull in question is unlike anything previously seen or investigated.

10. Doctors Townsend and Parsons examined the orbital cavities and concluded that the being may well have been sighted, but if so, its visual structures deviated strongly from the norm. The cavities, while astonishingly symmetrical, were less than 50% normal depth. The optic foramen, which carries the optic nerve from the brain through the orbital bone to the eye, is nearly an inch lower than it would be in a normal human skull. However, attachment points for the muscles that control an eyeball's movements were still to be felt on the inner surface of the orbit, indicating that a ball rather than some other mechanism was its most likely expression.  

11. If indeed these sockets held eyeballs, those of normal size would have greatly protruded from the face, creating a serious liability of damage during routine activity. Because the eyeballs occupy a position lower in the face than is normal, and they rest in a socket markedly reduced in rectilinear shape and depth, they would have been significantly reduced in size. In either case, however, large eyeballs or small, they would require upper lids three or four times more extensive than normal upper lids to be lubricated in the manner necessary for human eyeballs to function properly.  

12. Doctors Hodges and Poskitt found the brain inside the skull was abnormally large. This was determined by lining the intracranial cavity with a plastic bag that was then filled with Niger birdseed. This gave a size of 1600 cubic centimetres, which is 200 c.c. larger than the typical adult size of 1400 c.c. This is even more unusual because the size of the skull compares most favourably with a small adult or a child of about 12 years old. This extra brain capacity is apparently due to the deep shallowing of the eye sockets, a total lack of frontal sinuses (not even vestigial bumps are discernable), and significant bossing (expansion) of the upper rear of both parietals.

13. In any case, they observed, the extreme slant of the rear parietals and the occipital bone challenges whether this skull could have contained typical brain matter, and casts further doubt that its cerebellum was typical. In a normal skull, the cerebellum rests at the base of the cerebrum, supported by the internal occipital protuberance and the twin flares of the sagittal sulcus and the transverse sulcus. With this support mechanism, over the course of a lifetime the cerebrum’s weight does not press down onto the cerebellum and distend it such that it will cease to function properly. In this unique skull, however, the entire weight of the brain slants directly down on the area that should hold its cerebellum. Instead of the rounded area typically present for support, there is a wedge-shaped area of perhaps one-quarter of normal. Furthermore, the internal protuberance and sulcus ridges are significantly reduced. What effect would the weight of a notably amplified brain have on an unsupported cerebellum carried into adulthood? It presents a genuine conundrum.

14. Personally, I was most concerned with determining how the rear of the skull could have become so flattened, from the atypical fossa (depression) in the sagittal suture between the parietals, down to the foramen magnum opening. This could not have been caused by any kind of flattening or binding device because the surface of the occipital reveals the subtle convolutions inevitably present in unaltered skulls. Skulls that undergo any kind of shaping technique will always reveal such technique with a distortion of the bone surface. Lacking even a hint of evidence of shaping, and of any unnatural or premature fusing of any sutures, it is entirely safe to say that the extreme flattening of the skull was caused by its natural growth pattern and is not artificial. This too is significant.  

15. Another of my concerns is that the external occipital protuberance (inion) is absent from its notable position in the center of the occipital bone, and indeed is represented by an actual slight fossa (depression) in the surface. (As mentioned earlier, the same is true for its internal counterpart, which has been greatly reduced.) It seems clear that the neck of this being attached to its skull much lower than in a normal skull, centered under the balance point for both lateral and medial flexion. Even more unusual, the neck itself seems to have a circumference somewhere in the range of 50% of usual neck volume, which presents yet another example of the thorough uniqueness of this specimen. 

16. In addition to lacking frontal sinuses, there is no sign of the brow ridges evident in normal skulls. Its upper orbits are thin edged rather than rounded. Its zygomatic arches are greatly reduced and significantly lowered from their usual positions. Its mastoid processes are less than normal, as are all connective points for the lower face (which would attach to the coronoid process and condylar process of the missing mandible). Based on these observations, its lower face may have been as much as 50% reduced from normal. On the other hand, its inner ears are noticeably larger than normal, again pushing into the range of 50% larger. This is also true for the condyles abutting the spinal atlas.

17. A detached upper right maxilla contains two molars [recent note: one has been lost to testing]. Tooth wear on the molars indicates maturity was reached, yet another set of teeth are present in the maxilla and appear ready to take the place of those mature teeth when and if they are lost or are no longer useful. The question of age at death remains open.

18. Carbon 14 Dating has shown the Human Skull to be 900 years old ± 40 years[2]

                          Is the Starchild Skull a deformity?

    Since investigations began in 1999, multiple illnesses, ailments, and deformation processes have been suggested to explain the appearance and composition of the Starchild skull. Even Lloyd Pye, now the Project's research coordinator, originally and reflexively believed that it must be some sort of deformity.

    Each of these suggestions has been taken seriously, and conscientious research has been undertaken to try and find a simple medical reason for the anomalous skull. At this time, no known medical condition or cultural practice has been found that can explain the Starchild skull.

Most Commonly Suggested Explanations

Could the unusually flattened rear of the skull (occipital region) be caused by Cradleboarding?

Could the bulging sides of the skull (parietal regions) and abnormal cranial shape be caused by Hydrocephaly?

CRADLEBOARDING

Cradleboarding (also known as cradle-boarding, or cradle boarding) is the practice of securing an infant's head to a flat piece of wood known as a cradleboard for safety and convenience, and in some cases to deliberately alter the shape of the head. A similar flattened appearance can also be caused by an infant frequently laying prone on a hard surface for the first few years of life. In either case, the pressure on the soft infant bones causes the bone at the rear of the skull, called the "occipital," to flatten.

This flattening is very pronounced, but does not extend below an area of the skull known as the "inion," or "external occipital protuberance." All humans have an inion. It is a small lump of bone at the rear of the head to which the neck muscles attach. One of the more usual features of the Starchild skull is that it does not have an inion, and in fact has a slight indentation where the lump of the inion should be. No explanation for this has ever been proposed, and no other case of this has ever been uncovered by the Starchild Project researchers.

The Adult Female skull reportedly found with the Starchild (shown right) was cradleboarded. Note that the shape of the skull is normal and round except for the noticeably flattened area from the inion to the top of the head where the skull pressed against the hard surface.

The Starchild also has an abnormally shaped occipital, but unlike a cradleboarded skull, the flattening extends far below the area of the inion. Both X-rays of the Starchild skull (see below) show subtle convolutions in the rear bone of the skull. Such natural convolutions are not present in areas of bone that have been artificially flattened by cradleboarding or any other means.

Dr. Ted Robinson is a craniofacial surgeon who headed a group of 11 experts who carefully examined the skull. Their findings care be read HERE. Dr. Robinson was certain that the Starchild skull could not have been cradleboarded, saying:

"This could not have been caused by any kind of flattening or binding device because the surface of the occipital reveals the subtle convolutions inevitably present in unaltered skulls. Skulls that undergo any kind of shaping technique will always reveal such technique with a distortion of the bone surface... it is entirely safe to say that the extreme flattening of the skull was caused by its natural growth pattern and is not artificial."

 

HYDROCEPHALY

Hydrocephaly (also called Hydrocephalus) is a condition where abnormal accumulation of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in the cranium causes an increase in internal pressure which pushes outward against the skull. This fluid accumulation can occur at any time in life, and has various potential causes including congenital defect, hemorrhage into the brain, infection, meningitis, tumor, and head injury. The CSF can collect inside the tissues of the brain, externally between the brain and the cranial wall, or both. The points where the bones of the skull join together are called "sutures," shown below left as the black lines separating the bones of the skull. In infants and children with unfused cranial sutures the increased internal pressure from hydrocephaly causes the skull to enlarge by forcing the sutures, the weakest points of the skull, to expand in all directions. In adults the condition can be extremely dangerous if untreated because suture fusion prevents the cranial expansion and the pressure is placed directly on the brain.

 

There are other types of hydrocephaly that don't result in abnormal CSF pressure, but as these don't apply to the investigation of the Starchild skull, they won't be discussed.

It is often suggested that the Starchild skull was hydrocephalic as an infant, causing the abnormal parietal expansion and overall distorted shape of the skull. When a skull is expanded by hydrocephaly the  cranial sutures are forced to widen and the skull is distorted (shown above right). Dr David Hodges, a radiologist, and Dr. Ted Robinson, a craniofacial surgeon, examined the Starchild skull, its X-rays and its CAT Scan results, and were positive that the suture lines were healthy and growing at the time of death and did not indicate hydrocephaly, or show any other widening or abnormality.  Dr. Bachynsky, another radiologist who examined the evidence with Dr. Robinson, and various other experts, found no signs of erosion by CSF on the internal surfaces of the skull, and supported Dr. Robinson in his conclusion that the Starchild was not hydrocephalic. Read their full report HERE.

     

X-Rays of the Starchild skull (left) and a hydrocephalic patient (right). Note the very different cranial shapes, with the hydrocephalic skull expanded in all directions, like blowing up a balloon, while the Starchild skull maintains a structured shape. Also note the visible the imprints of veins on the Starchild but not in the hydrocephalic. In cases where there is CSF between the cranium and brain, no vein imprints are visible.

The Starchild skull does not have a shape consistent with internal pressure forcing the cranium to deform. Only the parietal regions of the skull, solid hard plates of bone, have been expanded, while the soft sutures remain unchanged. It is physically impossible to exert enough pressure on the skull, even in its soft infant stage, to change the shape of the solid parietal bones without affecting the soft suture lines.

This angled view (left) of the rear of the Starchild skull clearly shows a highly abnormal "dent" at the Saggital suture (indicated with red arrow), the line where the two parietals join. This is the weakest point where, if any pressure was inside the skull, the most bulging would be evident. The fact that this suture is healthy, unfused, unwidened, and not bulged outward proves that the shape of the skull could not have been caused by any sort of internal pressure like hydrocephaly.

                                                                         SCANS AND X-RAYS

EXTERNAL FEATURES OF THE STARCHILD SKULL

The Starchild Team 

Ray and Melanie Young
STARCHILD SKULL OWNERS

Ray and Melanie were given two skulls, including the Starchild Skull, in 1998. They entrusted these skull to Lloyd Pye for testing, and co-founders The Starchild Project with him, but maintained a low public profile until 2007. They make occasional public appearances with the skulls, and were featured in a National Geographic Channel documentary.

They currently reside in El Paso, Texas, and are active proponents of The Starchild Project.

               Starchild Skull Owners
             Ray and Melanie Young

Lloyd Pye
RESEARCH COORDINATOR, FOUNDER

Lloyd Pye became involved with the Starchild Skull in 1999, and founded The Starchild Project in February of that year. He's the chief USA fundraiser, international spokesperson and research coordinator.

He has also written the seminal book on the skull, titled "The Starchild Skull", and he has appeared in numerous television documentaries, on national and international radio, and written a series of articles for publications in the USA, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Italy Japan, and Brazil.
       Research Coordinator Lloyd Pye

 

Belinda McKenzie
UK HEAD OF OPERATIONS

Belinda McKenzie of London, England, is a noted activist and philanthropist. She contacted Lloyd Pye in 2003 and was soon an indispensable asset to the Starchild Project team. She personally invested in the project, providing needed funding as well as assembling a publicity team to establish a UK base from which the Starchild Project was able to launch an extensive testing program that revealed some of the most compelling data about the Starchild bone.

Back to Top