[uote]The point is that you want more proof when the hypothesis is ordinary, and less of it when the hypothesis is extraordinary. That shows you're predisposed to accept the extraordinary hypothesis.
[/quote]
No. The fact that there are some medical view points that contradicted this theory of hydrocephaly needed more proof to me. As for the hyrid theory, I said that it still needs proof, but it exists as a theory since the hydrocephaly one seems not agreed upon by all scientists.
from :
www.belllapbooks.com/The_Starchild_Skull_Sample_Chapters.pdf "“One is an orthopedic surgeon,” she said, “the other, a pathologist. I could add an EENT (eye, ear, nose and throat) specialist, but I don’t know him well. These two I consider friends. They’ll give you a fair hearing.”
Because Roberta Fennig was their friend, the orthopedic surgeon and the pathologist agreed to meet with Ray and Melanie one afternoon at the pathologist’s office. The married couple sat, watching and listening, as two bona fide experts tried to determine what they were looking at. One would suggest a possible deformity, then the other would offer a better alternative. Soon they drifted into genetic deformities. Lingo and jargon flew like darts around the room, leaving Ray and Melanie duly impressed—and confused.
“Can you give us a bottom line?” Ray finally asked.
“Most likely a cradleboarded hydrocephalic,” the orthopedic surgeon pronounced, in an opinion that would often be voiced by others. “Notice the adult skull, the flattening at the rear of the head? That’s cradleboarding.”
“Even today, in certain primitive cultures,” the pathologist added, “all babies are strapped to their mother’s back as she goes about her daily work. If the work includes regularly stooping over, the baby’s head can’t be left to shift freely or its neck will be injured. So it’s bound to a board to hold it still, and in a few months its soft skull fully conforms to the board’s flat surface.”
“Also,” the surgeon added, “hydrocephaly, water on the brain, is a rather common birth defect. Add that to the extensive cradleboarding in the atypical skull, and this is really nothing to get excited about.”
“Are you sure?” Ray pressed. “I mean, absolutely sure?”
The men looked at each other, and then the pathologist spoke. “Not with only this much to go on. There is always room for different interpretations.”
“However,” the orthopedic surgeon added, “you can be confident no reputable specialist will tell you anything other than what we’re telling you. It simply has to be some kind of natural deformity. Whether it was caused by a known genetic defect or a unique flaw at conception is irrelevant.”
“Are there no other possibilities?” Melanie asked, trying to coax either man to speculate about the unmentioned issue of alien life forms.
“None we can consider,” the surgeon answered. “You see, science has a starting point from which we all work, based on Occam’s razor. That’s the idea that the simplest solution to a problem is usually the correct one.”
“Right,” the pathologist chimed in. “So Occam’s razor applied to this skull tells us that while it is undoubtedly strange and unusual, it falls within the possible range of natural deformity because that range is, for all practical purposes, infinite. In other words, with deformity anything is possible, and given an infinite range of possibility, this skull surely fits somewhere.”
Based on Dr. Fennig’s guardedly positive reaction, the Youngs had worked themselves into a mild frenzy of anticipation that these gentlemen would confirm that their skull was simply too unusual to be a typical deformity. Consequently, they left the meeting deflated enough to be ready to tuck the skull box in their garage and be done with it.
What was the point of taking their “kids” to anyone else? Two highly qualified experts had spoken. If they couldn’t trust friends of a friend, who could they trust?"
seems he is trying to say that orthopedics say this bcz it
should be a deformity, and they didn't go into details about it.