The impression I'm getting from all of this is that Foerster has a single example of a human skull that he's using as a reference as if he wrongly assumes every human skull has identical features. Or that he simply has a book to sell.
It's hilarious that this is the test everyone clamors for you to do in all your other videos..... And here it is but no one's watching it. So much for intellectual curiosity I suppose
He's very good friends with that guy L.A Marzulli. Please call him out too. He speaks the same lingo with Brien but with a more spiritual twist but it's all B.S
The difference between shaped skulls to look like the Aliens and real elongated skulls is the real ones have two skull plates , and human shaped skulls have three plates in the skull . Those wiggly lines in the skull separate skull plates.
@@paulisfat8077 there's head binding skulls and naturally formed skulls. The head binders are obviously copying a more advanced people who had natural elongated skulls. They look completely different.
@designingtheenemy5869 "more advanced people" 🤦🏻♀️ nope. This is just the shape they liked. Like older generations of Chinese people believed foot binding was the ideal shape for a woman foot.
@@jrmckim I've seen the actual head binding skulls and the supposed naturally elongated skulls and they are completely different. The head binding skulls look like stretched playdough.
I also like how I could guess your political bent before checking 😂😂 It's no surprise you beleive this sort of thing. How's things in alternate reality?
@@paulisfat8077 My political bent is based on 22-years of intense research plus another few decades of curiosity and life experience.... What's yours based on? Asch Conformity & Virtue-Signaling, with Kudos from others just as brainwashed as yourself?
@@robertcarsten4050 Or, you can debate me on camera and PROVE your big mouth. (psst, watch this now, watch how Junior weasels his way out, now that he's been called out ......)
They have found the remains of 1 million year old Hobbit humanoid types, to think there were humanoids who had weirdly shaped heads, isn't that abstract lol. The British museum attached the jawbone of a baboon to a human skull and said it was the missing link for 50 years. They run science today.
Oh, dear... Typical creation sycophant, spouting misunderstandings, and errors, and mashing 2 separate strawman topics. It would seem that you are talking first about Homo floresiensis, a small archaic human, only colloquialy called Hobbit, due to its small size, but not actually unique for that. It had distinctly difference skull features, but was not an alien, (nor even from a skull/body modifying community), from around 700,000 years ago, and up to ~60,000 years ago. Your 2nd point was wrong, The Natural History Museum, (correct name) did NOT perpetrate the fraud. Charles Dawson, an amateur archeologist and suspected accomplices presented a small human skull, and other sophisticated (for the time) fraudulently created specimens, including, not a baboon, but an orangutan jawbone & some modified teeth. Numerous other modified specimens were subsequently "found" with the assistance of someone from the museum's geology section. The fraud was suspected almost immediately but not until 41 years later, by other scientists was testing done, with much more up to date methods, and investigative procedures. It stands as an example of the caution and procedural methods needed for examination and classification of fossil specimens. To claim that the museum perpetuated the fraud, and that it controls science is just as fraudulently a lie. Yours is a typical misrepresentation, and lack of attention to detail, that creationists claim, and slander, in relation to science.
@@johnrap7203 no big deal, just every time they find remains they keep having to "change" their dates and more theories come to light. Darwin only had a theology degree when he created the theory of evolution at the age of 22. He had no a scientific degree whatsoever. Just because you're obsessed with monkey bones doesn't mean you automatically have the right answers and it's honestly insane to see supposed scientific people get so angry just off people having questions about existence. Lol.
@@designingtheenemy5869 Another error! "Charles Darwin was born on February 12, 1809. His scientific work On the Origin of Species was first published on November 24, 1859. That means that Darwin was 50 years old when he wrote and published On the Origin of Species." He was 22 when he began his journey, but after 5 years, he returned, and spent 20 years working, and studying on his specimens, data, and other specimens and samples given to him by others. People keep making assertions, without double checking their data. Especially creationists!
@@johnrap7203 Darwin was a 22 year old with a theology degree when he started making up the theory of evolution out of thin air lol. Dawkins said himself that a theology degree is useless. These are the same people who touted a human skull with a baboon jaw attached to it at the British museum for 50 years and said it was was the missing link. They run science today. Crazy they would have the do that considering all the evidence they have of the real missing link lol.
He himself possesses a distinctive mandible but it doesn’t make him an alien!😅
🤫🧏♂️
The impression I'm getting from all of this is that Foerster has a single example of a human skull that he's using as a reference as if he wrongly assumes every human skull has identical features. Or that he simply has a book to sell.
It's hilarious that this is the test everyone clamors for you to do in all your other videos..... And here it is but no one's watching it.
So much for intellectual curiosity I suppose
Part of that is RUclips's algorithm. Many people now only watch what is spoon fed to them while scrolling.
He's very good friends with that guy L.A Marzulli. Please call him out too. He speaks the same lingo with Brien but with a more spiritual twist but it's all B.S
The difference between shaped skulls to look like the Aliens and real elongated skulls is the real ones have two skull plates , and human shaped skulls have three plates in the skull . Those wiggly lines in the skull separate skull plates.
See my video on sutures. I go over this in detail.
That guys head could convince me he’s an alien with his logic😂
He just looks like a huckster lol. I wouldn't buy a used car from that man.
Appreciate your content ❤
clock his tea!
You’re awesome
I'll say it for you, Jon....Brian is a liar.
Are ovals not round?😂
"different people"
You mean different races?
The title on the pic indicates these examples are all East Indian.
@hughjanus5336 thats just one paper tho
That is not a head binding skulls lol
It very evidently is. Luckily you beleiving it is or isn't is not a prerequisite for what it is.
🫵🤡
@@paulisfat8077 there's head binding skulls and naturally formed skulls. The head binders are obviously copying a more advanced people who had natural elongated skulls. They look completely different.
@@designingtheenemy5869pure vibe based arguments...... Super convincing
@designingtheenemy5869 "more advanced people" 🤦🏻♀️ nope. This is just the shape they liked. Like older generations of Chinese people believed foot binding was the ideal shape for a woman foot.
@@jrmckim I've seen the actual head binding skulls and the supposed naturally elongated skulls and they are completely different. The head binding skulls look like stretched playdough.
Now explain Giants with double rows of teeth and six fingers and six toes.
Someone is lying to you and you're very gullible.
There, solved it for you.
I also like how I could guess your political bent before checking 😂😂
It's no surprise you beleive this sort of thing. How's things in alternate reality?
@@paulisfat8077 My political bent is based on 22-years of intense research plus another few decades of curiosity and life experience.... What's yours based on? Asch Conformity & Virtue-Signaling, with Kudos from others just as brainwashed as yourself?
@@rackattackgamer7928"curiosity and research"
..... Somehow still falls for every hoax imaginable.
Okay grandpa time to get off the internet
@@robertcarsten4050 Or, you can debate me on camera and PROVE your big mouth. (psst, watch this now, watch how Junior weasels his way out, now that he's been called out ......)
They have found the remains of 1 million year old Hobbit humanoid types, to think there were humanoids who had weirdly shaped heads, isn't that abstract lol. The British museum attached the jawbone of a baboon to a human skull and said it was the missing link for 50 years. They run science today.
Those are certainly all words.
Oh, dear...
Typical creation sycophant, spouting misunderstandings, and errors, and mashing 2 separate strawman topics.
It would seem that you are talking first about Homo floresiensis, a small archaic human, only colloquialy called Hobbit, due to its small size, but not actually unique for that.
It had distinctly difference skull features, but was not an alien, (nor even from a skull/body modifying community), from around 700,000 years ago, and up to ~60,000 years ago.
Your 2nd point was wrong, The Natural History Museum, (correct name) did NOT perpetrate the fraud.
Charles Dawson, an amateur archeologist and suspected accomplices presented a small human skull, and other sophisticated (for the time) fraudulently created specimens, including, not a baboon, but an orangutan jawbone & some modified teeth. Numerous other modified specimens were subsequently "found" with the assistance of someone from the museum's geology section.
The fraud was suspected almost immediately but not until 41 years later, by other scientists was testing done, with much more up to date methods, and investigative procedures.
It stands as an example of the caution and procedural methods needed for examination and classification of fossil specimens.
To claim that the museum perpetuated the fraud, and that it controls science is just as fraudulently a lie.
Yours is a typical misrepresentation, and lack of attention to detail, that creationists claim, and slander, in relation to science.
@@johnrap7203 no big deal, just every time they find remains they keep having to "change" their dates and more theories come to light. Darwin only had a theology degree when he created the theory of evolution at the age of 22. He had no a scientific degree whatsoever. Just because you're obsessed with monkey bones doesn't mean you automatically have the right answers and it's honestly insane to see supposed scientific people get so angry just off people having questions about existence. Lol.
@@designingtheenemy5869 Another error!
"Charles Darwin was born on February 12, 1809. His scientific work On the Origin of Species was first published on November 24, 1859. That means that Darwin was 50 years old when he wrote and published On the Origin of Species."
He was 22 when he began his journey, but after 5 years, he returned, and spent 20 years working, and studying on his specimens, data, and other specimens and samples given to him by others.
People keep making assertions, without double checking their data. Especially creationists!
@@johnrap7203 Darwin was a 22 year old with a theology degree when he started making up the theory of evolution out of thin air lol. Dawkins said himself that a theology degree is useless. These are the same people who touted a human skull with a baboon jaw attached to it at the British museum for 50 years and said it was was the missing link. They run science today. Crazy they would have the do that considering all the evidence they have of the real missing link lol.