After Lloyd passed away on December 9, 2013, I felt strongly that I needed to get all his notes and hard copies of all tests that were done. I didn’t want anything falling between the cracks. It was a very stressful time for Lloyd’s family, Amy and me. Amy was not helpful in this endeavor. She became very defensive and hostile about me asking for this information.
All I had available to me was what was the Starchild Project website, the book The Starchild Skull and the e-book. All the major points such as: the SEM (scanning electron microscope), the Blast report (Basic Local Alignment Search Tool), the pictures of the fibers and red residue were just screen shots and photo shopped. Plus, there was no reference to who and where these studies were done. So, I had to assume that what we had was all we had. This was very troublesome for me. With my background in nursing the saying goes “If it isn’t documented it wasn’t done.” This in no way means that I was questioning the integrity of Lloyd’s research. But I knew that in the end science would never accept his research.
Within days after the partners of SCP Research, LLC had their conference call with Chase Kloetzke the Starchild project website was changed completely. Now the board had voted to change servers and revamp the site however the content would remain the same.
Well, that was not the case. Low and behold the content moved away from its strong position on the Starchild skull being alien and took on the position of we just don’t know. This is what I had been saying all along! Funny what a spunky cheerleader can do. Thank you Chase you rock.
Not only did the focus change but miraculously there started to appear DNA gel sheets that no one had seen before (except Amy and Lloyd). During the first days of the new site I was a mere footnote as the original owner. Now, that too has changed and I have finally been recognized as the founder of the Starchild Project. The next thing that appeared out of thin air is the original report of the 2003 DNA done at Trace Genetics Lab. (The purpose of this website is not to go over Lloyd’s but for something this important here is the link to the report.)
These changes were done without consent of the board members (to include Ray or myself) nor was anyone informed when the site was changed.
Also with Lloyd’s passing, (he left big shoes to fill) we had lost our only spokesperson. There were many opinions about who could fill these shoes. Matthew, felt he could do this but he was concerned about his reputation, who can blame him for that?
After going over what original experts have said from the beginning I found that they said the Starchild was a 5-yr. old. While later Lloyd and Amy changed their opinion, and stated with authority that the Starchild was older than what their own experts had said. Lloyd and Amy claim that the Starchild older due to the wear and tear of the teeth.
Here is what their experts say:
Dr. Kaburda carried out three-dimensional scans which measure certain fixed points in any skull, allowing for comparison of any skull to the established norm. These accumulated results were compared to a statistical analysis of 100 human skulls. This skull was found to be more than ten (10) standard deviations outside the norm, i.e. the statistical center of a Bell curve. This is another strong indication that the skull in question is unlike anything previously seen or investigated. (These Scans have disappeared)
Dr Matthew Brown, a Dentist in London, made close-up X-rays images of the maxilla in September 2004. He states that the roots of unerrupted teeth are consistent with those of a child who was about 4½-yrs. old. (These x-ray films have disappeared yet they are on the website)
Dr David Hodges, a radiologist, stated that the suture lines were open and growing at the time of death.
Dr. David Sweet, an internationally renowned forensic pathologist at the University of British Columbia, believed the skull was that of a 5-6-year-old, based upon the dentition in the right maxillary fragment. (These CT scans have disappeared yet they are on the website)
Though some specialists who looked at the skull disagreed, Dr. Robertson has always supported Dr Sweet in his belief that this was the skull of a 5-6-year-old child.
The only reason for the X-ray films, CT films, DNA Gel sheets, and original copy of the 2003 DNA results to be missing is that they are only in the form of electronic file.
Come back to follow the investigation as it unfolds