Recently, our investigation team has once again been contacted by another media outlet that has featured our Starchild Skull research. It appears that a gentleman from (which is ironic, seeing that he refuses to check the most up to date, transparent, scientific evidence) has been following up after our information goes public and requests he be given time to present why we are liars. He has left comments that we have either ignored or we stated he should actually read our research and at times reiterated some of our facts – to no avail, he continues to seek attention.

A quick review of any YouTube videos pertaining to the Starchild Skull, or looking at some of the comments on the owner’s own website will result in the realization this individual is not alone –  many people hold fast to the belief that the Starchild was alien in spite of facts that are easily checkable and verifiable from our investigation on our website and even from the scientists who conducted the tests if someone really wanted to do their homework.

Investigating Trolls

Although, if the opportunity came up to fly to Norway and investigate alleged Troll sightings, we’d be all over that – but we’re talking about a not-so-ancient species of troll here. Mostly our feedback has been extremely positive about our results, and yet, there are some who hold so tightly to their deeply held convictions that they have resorted to name calling and listing outdated and inaccurate information to support their beliefs. It seems no amount of listing the actual facts will change their minds. This pinged our interest – why would someone fight so hard against objective real proof? Why waste their effort? Turns out, there is a quite normal, scientific explanation why this is the case. It seems this happens a lot, not only in the fringe sciences, but in all the sciences. For example, a hypothesis is made that would be groundbreaking frontier science if proven accurate, then, legitimate scientists, using the scientific method, conduct research and the hypothesis is proven wrong. The facts are publicized and further research on the same and/or similar material is investigated to either collaborate or dispute said facts in a highly scientific and professional manner. (Hmmmm, we’re looking at you, Brien Foerster, and those skulls you claim are also alien-hybrid Starchild Skulls … they do look very similar to the original Starchild Skull. Perhaps some legitimate scientific tests are in order before any proclamations are made, though, that might ruin your tours. See below – Funding Bias)

But wait, it’s not over yet. A huge swath of people have so incorporated this wrong hypothesis into their worldview that anything that differs from that is literally viewed as a threat by their brains, according to several scientific studies. It seems that this effect doesn’t really happen when the facts don’t threaten our personal world view, but if the facts directly challenge or contradict a long-held belief, then that fight or flight response will take place and it is normal for the mind to even strengthen its previously held convictions, even in the face of indisputable proof, known as the backfire effect.

A study in 2013 found that in these instances, the people literally become distrustful of the source of factual information. In a way, this is a form of self-preservation. According to an article in Scientific American, these effects are shown to be stronger if the initial beliefs are not based on actual facts. What helps the person who is pushing back against facts is to “reframe the issue in untestable ways.” This is obviously not scientific, but provides an imaginary hook to continue to hang their convictions on.

Even when someone is able to accept correct information, if the previous beliefs were strong, they could influence their thoughts. For example, when The Field Reports – Chase Kloetzke and Kerry McClure – recently filmed an episode of Gaia’s Beyond Belief with George Noory, presenting the results of the Starchild Skull investigation, George, who was a close friend of Lloyd Pye (previous researcher of the Skull) and long-time champion of the Starchild Skull being the smoking-gun proof of aliens, seemed to have a hard time 100% accepting our results, presenting some of the results (of which we now know as being incorrect) from the Starchild Project,  and posing questions of implausible  conspiracies affecting the results. We assured him that everything was done in the most proper, professional, scientific way and even that Lloyd Pye, himself, was presented with forged results, which probably played into his confirmation bias.

So Biased!

Let’s look at more biases that can cause someone to cling to an incorrect belief. These are all completely normal things we all do in different situations. It is when we are aware of them that we can possibly look beyond them and try to see information in a completely unbiased, objective way. Before and during our investigation, we had to continuously check ourselves to make sure we didn’t fall victim to these biases, as they could affect our research. This is why we were not trying to prove the Skull was one thing or another, why we didn’t accept money from anyone, and why we were only seeking the truth and presenting all of our findings in an open manner. That is an important facet of a truly objective investigation.

Here are additional common biases that could be causing people to reject factual information and to hold fast to incorrect information or could have caused the research information previously available to not represent the whole truth…

  • Confirmation Bias – the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one’s preexisting beliefs or hypotheses. only argues with information that supports his claims that the Starchild Skull is alien, which we have proven to be outdated and inaccurate.
  • Measurement Bias – using instruments or research methods that may influence the results towards the researcher’s expected outcome (also related to expectation bias). Many of the inaccurate results from previous research was because the measurements were being compared to an adult skull when the Starchild was a child.
  • Funding/Publication or Sponsor Bias – basically, research results can be influenced by parties who may have a financial stake in the end product. This was absolutely true with the published results by the Starchild Project which was a corporation formed to protect the monetary interests of those involved.
  • Bias by Omission – when certain facts are hidden from the public or certain tests ignored if they do not jive with the expected results. This is why some of the previous DNA results were never released until the Starchild Project became aware of the new investigation. These previous DNA tests from reputable, named sources showed that the skull was 100% human and our DNA tests confirmed this.
  • Social Desirability Bias – this is when the results are presented in a way to appease the masses. Again, the previous investigation catered to those who clamored for alien proof. We have insider information that meetings were held to filter any outgoing information and we personally read the rule in their corporation’s legal agreement (which was filed in the state of Florida if you want to research it for yourself) that states information will be agreed upon before being made public. We presented results absolutely knowing there would be push back. We were only interested in answering the question – is it or isn’t it an alien.
  • Habituation Bias – providing the same answers to questions over and over. This bias happens because people fatigue from being responsive and paying attention, like a psychological rut. Perhaps this is why we didn’t want to argue with trolls over and over the same facts we presented in our research that they clearly didn’t read and why Checktheevidence hasn’t truly researched all of the new information and updated his website. Perhaps he should follow his own advice.
  • Embedding – this one was even illustrated in the movie, 22 Jump Street, when Jenko and Schmidt are in a therapy session. Their therapist, Dr. Murphy explains, “Embedding is our tendency to latch onto the first bit of information that we’re offered and overlooking or even ignoring contradictory information.” This one is obvious.
  • Halo Effect – unfortunately, this may be one of the main reasons for the people to desperately cling to false information. This is when another person or object is held in a certain light because of a single, positive attribute. Cognitively, this bias happens because when people admire someone, they believe their information to hold more value. Comment after comment in YouTube video forms and various websites proclaim the late Lloyd Pye to be a genius and such a forward thinker. He was so loved and admired. His ideas were innovative and he was a wonderful, charismatic public speaker, and a good friend to many. There is no doubt that many feel that the idea of accepting that his hypothesis is proven wrong is somehow disrespecting his legacy. Those who were closest to him know that this couldn’t be further from the truth. He just wanted to have his work completed and the truth revealed. He would be happy to know that it is finally finished.

How to Convince the Inconvincible

Although, we don’t feel it is our job to convince anyone of anything, we just presented facts and the facts concluded the final results. However, we did feel the need to show why people may be so unwilling to accept said results and present our case against Mr. Checktheevidence. We don’t need to go item by item; we’ve done that in our research paper. Anyone can go through that with a fine-tooth comb and now, that, combined with a healthy knowledge of biases that we are all susceptible to, will help people make a more objectively fact-based conclusion.

Something important to remember, is the fact that false beliefs persist because they spring from one’s perception of self. It’s not the beliefs that they feel are being threatened, but one’s own person. So, when someone feels they are in danger in this fashion – they may lash out and try to correct any “misperceptions” or whatever new information doesn’t match up with their beliefs. We understand. However, studies are showing that this sense of self can greatly impact one’s ability to accept new factual information. One study showed that by simply writing down about a time when you truly experienced happiness and then being exposed to factual information that contradicted previously held beliefs, that people were more able to accept this new data more easily.

So, Mr. Checktheevidence and anyone else who somehow takes personal offense from a DNA test conducted on a 900-year-old skull, sit down, put your feet up, have a beverage of your choice and think about happier times, then realize scientific results are in no way a reflection of who you are, or who we are, or anyone for that matter – they are simply facts.