Firstly, is it “gray” or “grey” alien? Drive me crazy, kidda like “cacao” and “cocoa.”
Secondly, I am referring to Nephilim skulls as that is common parlance, within certain circles (such as “Christian UFOlogy) for skulls that are elongated, may be missing otherwise naturally occurring cranial sutures, are reportedly larger than usual, etc.
Now, I have done a bit of writing on the folly of the issue and problems involved in attempting to reconstruct a skull or bones of any sort including fossils. I am also referring to reconstructing them in whatever forma: illustrations, paintings, sculptures, computer animation, etc.
The main problematic issue is that the reconstructions show just how much worldview philosophies come into play when interpreting evidence. For example, there is such a thing as forensic reconstructions, many of these turn out to be very accurate yet, these (employed as they are in, for example, the criminal system) are of known and modern day humans for which the sample size, in terms of living examples, is in the billions.
When we seek to reconstruct an unobserved creature then much guess work comes into play and this is where worldview philosophy reigns supreme: especially a Darwinian one. Biology is a science but Darwinian evolution is a worldview philosophy.
This is quite clear from this video on Homo Naledi as well as my series on Atheist and Darwinian Science and Story Telling
Now, when it comes to Nephilim and/or giants we get the usual array of fakes, oddities which may be real or fake and reconstructions.
From the bottom image below, you will note that this is actually as bad as evolutionists’ reconstructions of supposed ape-men or even dinosaurs that supposedly had feathers: see:
Alan Feduccia scientific orthodoxy, censorship and feathered dinosaurs
Is the feathered dinosaur “Anzu wyliei” the “chicken from hell”?
Scientific Cenobites, part 3 of 9 (regarding Gigantoraptor).
From the skull we do not and cannot know the color of the skin, that it lacked hair, the color of the eyes or that they were completely black, there is obviously a nose cavity but no nose on the reconstruction, the missing teeth are taken advantage of so as to make the mouth smaller, no ears were reconstructed, etc., etc., etc.
But why is this? Yes, the skull is odd but it was reconstructed as such so as to push a narrative: one that the artist wanted to promulgate.
As you will note at the end of the Homo Naledi reconstruction video, another skull was reconstructed in a likewise manner and it came out looking like a humanoid gray/grey alien type because the reconstruction was commissioned by a TV show the purpose of which is to push the alien narrative.
Taking on the Darwinian evolution tactics of forcing interpretations of evidence towards desired ends—to end up seeing that which one has already decided they want to see—is not going to help anyone who is already involved, at whatever level, in a field that is considered to be as fringe as Christian UFOlogy and/or anything to do with issue relating to Nephilim in general.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter
page, on my Facebook page, on my Google+ page and/or the “Share/Save” button below the tags.