The Archaeology Review site posted an article by Carl Feagans in the Pseudoarchaeology section titled Artificial Cranial Modification in Antiquity and the last 10 Years.
The article is premised on that, “There’s been a lot of chatter on social media about so-called ‘elongated skulls’ again lately” so Feagans wrote it since, “I’ve written pretty extensively on the topic of artificial cranial modification (ACM) in the past 20 years” partly, “For those not familiar with ACM as a human practice or if you only know of it from pseudoarchaeological sources.”
He defines ACM in part as:
…intentional or even accidental reshaping of the human skull during infancy when cranial sutures are soft, plastic, and un-fused. It happened on every inhabited continent throughout human history and prehistory…when an infant is consistently strapped to a cradle-board, with the head bound to prevent damage to the neck as the mother works…consistently sleeping on a hard surface, such as a cave floor…though fronto-occipital flattening…Technically, there are other forms of ACM beyond cranial shaping. This includes trephination and dental modifications…
Let’s jump to the fun part ;o)
Some of the Pseudoarchaeological Claims About ACM
Missing Cranial Sutures
A recurring claim is that elongated skulls possess an abnormal anatomical structure featuring only a single parietal bone and completely lacking a sagittal suture. In human anatomy, the sagittal suture often fuses and obliterates naturally with age, or fuses prematurely due to the mechanical pressures applied during childhood head binding (Parmar et al. 2012). This is a normal anatomical feature. It’s not a mystery. At all.
But that’s not exciting enough for pop-Nephiologists—who are the reason for me to even post about this.
There’s also:
Foramen Magnum Out of Place
This is a claim I’ve read mostly from Brien Foerster, but significance-junkies and mystery-mongers are quick to hop on it because it sounds science-like. They’re using scientific, anatomical terms after all.
They’ll claim an elongated skull’s foramen magnum is too far to the back of the head and that the foramen ovale are missing. Neither is true and can often be seen in the very photographs the claimant is showing. Rather than compare the foramen magnum to the back of the skull, compare it instead to the basal portion of the occipital bone that resides between the vomer (roughly where the roof of the mouth starts) and the foramen magnum itself. In other words, measure the big hole where the spine goes from the teeth side instead of the backside. It’s in the right spot.
He then bluntly states:
One of the most common, but completely bogus, claims is that “elongated skulls are 25-30% larger” and “60% heavier.” You’ll see this claim over and over and it seems like a fair assessment, particularly if you’ve never held one of these skulls in person. The shape is deceptive. Never does the person making the claim show the work. They say bigger and heavier by using percentages that make it science-sounding without showing the science to prove it. This, my friends, is pseudoscience.
In every single skull that’s ever been measured, the volume and mass are consistent with normal human variation (950 cc to 2,000 cc). ACM redistributes bone material without increasing either mass or volume. The cranial walls can become thinner or thicker, depending on the shaping process, but no mass is added.
Right on schedule, we get a reference to pop-Nephilologist (meaning a guy who makes a living by selling un-biblical fantasy tall-tales to Christians) Marzulli: I’ve asked many of his adherents, “Why does LA assert that Nephilim were very, very big and asserts he has their skulls but can only ever show us regular sized skulls?”: 99% don’t even attempt an answer, and 1% merely assert that, by golly, they must have shrunk since the exodus days:
Non-Human or Exotic DNA
This mostly centers around an attempt by Brien Foerster and L.A. Marzulli, two self-described researchers (with no apparent qualifications or training), who cosplayed as aDNA scientists once to “extract” DNA from one or more skulls in a museum where they are frequently handled. They made little effort to control for the inevitable contamination–a fact of life for genuine researchers of aDNA. Real genetic researchers, experienced in handling aDNA samples, will tell you contamination isn’t a matter of “if,” it’s a matter of “when” and “are you prepared to account for it.”
This is done in a variety of ways, one is by collecting DNA samples from each person handling the artifact and the samples. There was no indication that this standard procedure was done at all. In a nutshell, they sampled the skulls by collecting hair samples and powdered bone collected by drilling into the foramen magnum. As for the labs that processed the DNA, that’s all they’re going to do: process whatever sample you give them in whatever condition it is. Even if it’s compromised. They do not run checks for it unless you supply control samples.
Foerster and Marzulli’s results showed that all the hair contained mtDNA that included the H2A haplogroup, most common in central and western Asia. They report a single mtDNA result from “the most elongated skull” of the samples, which tested as belonging to the T2B haplogroup, which ranges from the British Isles to Saudi Arabia. The highest concentrations are in the latter region. There is no reason to believe the DNA they got results back for was for the individual that once was that skull. So many people have handled these specimens in the decades since they were dug up, looted from the ground in a most undignified and inhuman manner only to be put on display as a curiosity.
Theres’s also the following issue:
Red Hair Proves Non-Native Ancestry
Promoters of pseudoarchaeology will often argue that red hair found on some mummified Peruvian skulls proves that they were non-indigenous, aliens, nephilim, or just pre-Columbian settlers. The fact is that in death, much happens to the body. Cells begin to cool immediately, and bacteria begin the process of decomposition. The chemical reactions and interactions might vary from interment to interment due to humidity, acidity, temperature, air flow, etc. In short, the body itself may act as a bleaching agent for the hair, oxidizing the less hardy eumelanin, leaving intact the more resilient pheomelanin with its red pigmentation (Houk and Siegal 2015)…
While the prevalence of red hair in South America during pre-Columbian times is probably less than this [“1-2% of the world’s population are redheads”], it wasn’t zero. The presence of red hair on a the skeletal remains of a human being in Peru is only evidence of red hair on the remains. Not that the person was always a red head. Or that they came from some distant land. Or that they’re an alien or nephilim, or whatever other crackpot idea someone might invent.
I’ve no idea why we should think that Nephilim had elongated skulls or red hair—besides that pop-Nephilologists desperate for content merely assert that Nephilim had elongated skulls or red hair: oh, and multiple digits, double row of teeth, were whatever giants means, etc.
Thus, when, “Promoters of pseudoscience (such as Brien Foerster, L.A. Marzulli, and Lloyd Pye) claim that elongated crania belong to aliens, human-alien hybrids, annunaki, or biblical nephilim giants rather than human beings practicing head binding. They do so at the expense of any data to support their claims.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby.
If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out.
Here is my donate/paypal page.
You can comment here and/or on my Twitter/X page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.
Leave a Reply