UFO Trail talks to Dr. Garry Nolan about “Atacama” specimen and Starchild Skull

We’ve covered previous stories on the Sirius project, the Atacama alien and Lloyd Pye’s Starchild skull, even speaking with Dr. Garry Nolan. But here is an update on how a scientist volunteered to help investigate some weird mysteries.

The UFO Trail: Dr. Garry Nolan Talks Ata, Starchild Skull and Science.

Dr. Garry Nolan is a geneticist at the Stanford School of Medicine. He is among the mainstream scientists showing a willingness to review evidence of what some believe to be an extraterrestrial presence, as demonstrated in his work on Dr. Steven Greer’s Atacama Humanoid and the late Lloyd Pye’s Starchild Skull. Whatever we may make of Greer and his tactics, his inclination to include Nolan in the examination of Ata should be considered a most relevant and interesting turn of events within the UFO community.
In an effort to keep up with the ongoing saga, I recently emailed Dr. Nolan and asked if he would field a few questions for a blog post. He agreed.

Some of the highlights:

  • A paper on the Atacama specimen is in the works.

The specimen has interesting mutations, but all mainstream genetics. Nothing more can be said at this point as we are going to let the academic review take its course.

  • He mentions the caution that must be taken with DNA samples to distinguish contamination.
  • He notes how HE reached out to both Steven Greer and Lloyd Pye, killing the notion that scientists are closed-minded and ignore weird findings. He wanted to participate.
  • The Starchild skull is unique but fully human.

We had it examined with two high end instruments and by a noted bone specialist. While the skull is certainly unusual (no one can deny that), it also did not fall under the provenance of any known genetic syndromes (despite the skeptics online) according to local experts. So I think the Starchild group’s statements about that latter point are credible.

However, that doesn’t mean it’s not a NEW, purely human, syndrome that affected the skull structure of the deceased. According to the bone specialist he still felt it fell within the realm of “unusual, but still human”. He didn’t rule anything out, but he also didn’t suggest “not human”. Interpret that last statement with all due care.

Dr. Nolan, interestingly, notes the impression we also get from Pye’s followers of pushing their ideas too far. We’ve seen that here. I can’t even count how many followers have berated us for hiding the “Truth” about the Starchild skull. I don’t think they will ever accept the scientific viewpoint that is it strange but NOT alien.

That was very generous of Dr. Nolan to answer questions for Jack’s piece. We are grateful for the information and look forward to seeing a scientific opinion about these strange and anomalous specimens.

The six-inch "alien" from the Sirius project.

The six-inch “alien” from the Sirius project.

Comments are tightly moderated. Please follow the Comment Policy.
This is not a forum or free-for-all. Only thoughtful additions and pertinent opinions will be approved.

  5 comments for “UFO Trail talks to Dr. Garry Nolan about “Atacama” specimen and Starchild Skull

  1. bbnews
    June 4, 2014 at 1:38 AM

    Maybe the concept “xenonormal” should be used more often; see: http://www.assap.ac.uk/newsite/articles/Xenonormal.html

    Xenonormal – something that appears paranormal but which has natural causes.

  2. Lee
    June 4, 2014 at 2:57 PM

    Hey! I got one of these as a prize from a box of Cracker jacks!

    • Anthony
      June 4, 2014 at 9:07 PM

      EW!

      I’d of thrown up every last bit if I’d found that in there. Happily, I would’ve sued for permanent mental scarring.

    • June 6, 2014 at 8:41 AM

      It does remind me a bit of those skeletons that were all the rage when I was a kid.

  3. Dave
    June 8, 2014 at 10:53 AM

    A couple of points on the Starchild comments by Dr. Nolan.

    Firstly, it is interesting that he agrees on the fact that the skull is likely NOT due to known genetic deformities. Hopefully, we can put to rest the frankly pseudoscientific opinion of Dr. Steven Novella who claims that the skull is likely due to hydrocephaly. Novella has never examined the actual skull. So far, everyone who HAS examined it agrees that it is not due to hydrocephaly. Who knows, perhaps the nonsense written in this regard over at Wikipedia will finally get corrected.

    Secondly, it is pretty much fair to say that the majority of scientists DO ignore weird findings like the Starchild skull. Lloyd Pye has described how this happened on a number of occasions when he visited universities. Dr. Nolan is an exceptional case and should be commended for his reaching out to the Starchild Project. There are probably a few others like him. However, this (of course) does not “kill the notion that scientists are closed-minded and ignore weird findings” as you put it Sharon. The highly unusual nature of the skull should have attracted scientists in their droves to something so interesting and potentially ground-breaking. Even if the skull is completely human, there has been nothing like it ever discovered before. That alone should have attracted major funding from top universities. But it hasn’t. You have to ask yourself why.

    Thirdly, Dr. Nolan does NOT say that the skull is fully human. He says that an (unnamed) bone specialist regards the skull as “falling within the realm of unusual, but still human” and that this colleague also “did not rule anything out”. Furthermore, we do not have any of his/her reasoning for this. So as it stands, we have Dr. Ted Robinson (bone specialist) claiming that the skull is probably not human (with accompanying report on why this may be the case – see Starchild website) and we have another bone specialist (unnamed) who claims that it probably is human but we don’t know why they think so. What is needed in more open and accessible debate between these academics and specialists. Published papers and responses etc. Time will tell I suppose. Premature and over-reaching conclusions (like “it is fully human”) are unhelpful.

Comments are closed.