This is interesting, but it raises red flags that the skull is named 'star child' before any real conclusions are made. Where is the alternate explanation of what this is? It certainly seems that the desired outcome is what is driving the interest in this skull. He also keeps referring to science as 'they', without citing any actual studies or inquiries.

I'm not a scientist, but the theory of evolution states that occasional random mutations appear in the genetic lineage of a given species, and when that particular trait is passed on, the development of that species changes. Could the genetic differences in this skull be explained as a mutation that didn't get passed on? Isn't that more likely than "a human mother gave birth to an alien baby"?

Here are some excerpts from the wiki entry:

DNA testing in 1999 at BOLD, a forensic DNA lab in Vancouver, British Columbia found standard X and Y chromosomes in two samples taken from the skull, "conclusive evidence that the child was not only human (and male), but both of his parents must have been human as well, for each must have contributed one of the human sex chromosomes". Further DNA testing at Trace Genetics, which specializes in extracting DNA from ancient samples, in 2003 recovered mitochondrial DNA from both skulls. The child belongs to haplogroup C, while the adult female belongs to haplogroup A. Both haplotypes are characteristic Native American haplogroups, but the different haplogroup for each skull indicates that the adult female was not the child's mother. Trace Genetics was not able to recover useful lengths of nuclear DNA or Y-chromosomal DNA for further testing.

Explanations
Potential explanations for the skull's unusual features include the use of cradle boarding on a hydrocephalic child, brachycephaly, Crouzon syndrome, congenital hydrocephalus, or potentially progeria.

Moving this video to marinara's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.