1. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    20170621-121232-17mre.

    A documentary from Gaia.com claims that what looks like a mummified corpse is evidence of a new species, possibly of extraterrestrial origin.

    Now several red flags pop up. Most immediately that Gaia.com has a history of creating videos promoting the idea of ancient aliens, none of which panned out into actual evidence.
    20170621-121829-hwied.
    But what of the mummy itself? It's claimed that it was found in the Nazca region of Peru. This makes some sense as similar human mummies have been found in the region (which is very dry, and so bodies protected from the elements are naturally preserved by drying out).
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauchilla_Cemetery


    The fetal pose of the three-fingered mummy is also consistent with the typical pose of genuine mummies, which were bound that way in bundles of cloth
    20170621-122519-pcabg.
    Image source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauchilla_Cemetery#/media/File:Nazca-chauchilla-c07.jpg

    And ancient mummies are continuing to be found in Peru:
    http://www.peruthisweek.com/news-inca-mummy-found-in-southern-peru-100783


    So what is this three-fingered mummy? I can think of a number of possibilities that I'll give it what seems like the more likely order to me.

    1. A modern fake mummy, created from a combination of human and animal bones, create for the show
    2. Modern Fake, but created locally, without the show's immediate knowledge
    3. Older fake, created for tourists
    4. Very old fake, actually mummified, but made from human and animals.
    5. A deformed human
    6. An unknown species of animal
    7. An extraterrestrial species, like a visiting alien
    Suspicion of a modern fake comes in part from the people involved:

    Jaime Maussan is a UFOologist - a journalist well known in UFO circles as someone who hypes evidence-free claims of aliens, etc. He appears to be the person who led Gaia to the mummy.

    Jay Weidner of Gaia has a long history of making esoteric videos like "chemtrails and the sun", and does not seems like a neutral documentary filmmaker. He holds some quite strong unscientific beliefs, like:


    Dr. Konstantin Korotkov appears to only be an expert in pseudoscientific topics like a form of Kirlian photography, which he uses to investigate the physical manifestation of the soul leaving the body.

    Dr Jose de Jesus Zalce Benitez has worked with Maussan before, most famously with "Roswell Slides", where he performed extensive analysis of a photo that he said was of a non-human body at Roswell, but which turned out to be a mummified child on a museum shelf in South America. So he does not have a very good track record.

    M.K Jessie appears to be a real radiologist but really gives very little information other than saying that based on the small images she has been given she think it's unlikely to be a modified human skeleton.

    Natalia Zaloznaja (probably better transliterated as Natalya Zaloznaya, Наталья Залозная) - the supposed "head of image analysis" may well be a real doctor, but does not say anything of note.

    So simply based on the track record of the people involved, I would have to put "fake" as the most likely explanation in the absence of additional independent evidence.
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2017
  2. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Last edited: Aug 2, 2017
  3. tinkertailor

    tinkertailor Active Member

    I used to do a lot of work in ceramic sculpture, and that is honestly what I thought this was at first glance. It looks exactly like clay does when it reaches its fully dry state, before being fired in a kiln. We even call that state 'bone dry'. There's a lot of dust created during this phase and it can often flake off onto the surface which the piece is resting on. Here's an example found online of a bone-dry piece of pottery, with residual dust, dried bits of clay, and flakes on the board which it is resting on.
    [​IMG]
    Now, plaster can look the same way. When I look at the creature's skin, it looks like someone could easily have taken paper or cloth of some sort and painted it with a very wet, liquid clay or plaster called 'slip' by ceramic artists, placing it over an armature or form to create the appearance of wrinkled, desiccated skin. For the bones and armatures, I think they painted over something darker, perhaps metal? There are areas on the toes where you can see the thin outer "skin" flaking off, and see the dark material underneath... Certainly not bone, unless aliens have dark bones. This would be really simple to make, a difficulty on par with a middle school art class's papier-mâché project.
     
  4. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    The do show a CT scan of the mummy, which, if genuine, does suggest they are actually bones.

    Things that strike me as particularly fake looking are the face, which looks like it has been sculpted from clay.
    20170621-140429-f1vm6.

    And the hands:
    20170621-140535-s2ux6.

    Here there seems to be a "cuff" where the more human looking arm ends, and the more alien looking hand begins.

    If I wanted to fake such a thing, I would use a real human skeleton (and preferable an actual real peruvian mummy, of which there are probably still many in undiscovered graves) then add fake hands, feet, and head.

    The Skull is interesting, as from the x-ray shown it looks like a real skull, but oddly shaped.
    20170621-141730-z577b.
    However cranial modification in humans are not unknown, and many far odder shaped skulls exist. Skull binding has nearly died out, but still exists. Getting an odd shaped skull would not be impossible.
    http://tomboybklyn.com/the-cultures-of-head-binding/
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Compare the x-ray of the feet to normal human feet:
    20170621-143627-s3b3v.

    Key for discussion:
    20170621-143700-5y7zi.

    The first thing to notice is the Cuneiforms. There's a matching Medial Cuneiform that normally support the Metatarsal (I) of the big toe. Howeever this is missing, and we have what looks like the three middle toes, but on a bone structure that normally supports five toes.



    20170622-121632-pluia.

    This suggests a largely normal human foot (note the shape of the ankle bone) with the big and little toes removed (or possibly genetically missing), then the three middle toes separated all the way back past the metatarsals.

    20170621-145230-qbtm7.
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2017
  6. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Similarly one might create a long three-fingered hand by removing the outer two digits and then splitting the flesh down between the metacarpals which are normally inside the hand.
    20170621-150609-7h18i.

    Once you've gone down that road, you could easily extend it by adding additional bone segments, like in this earlier example from the same people with a structurally implausible number of bones:
    20170621-151050-y2wht.
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2017
  7. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    plus his "big toe" starts in the wrong place on 1 foot. I wonder how and if the alien could walk
    f1.JPG

    of course I'm having a hard time flipping this xray in my head (my spatial issues).. the overlapping foot is backwards on the xray.. can xrays flip feet...or am I just confused because of my spatial glitch issues?
    f2.JPG
     
  8. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Genetical abnormality is a possibility, however I'v not found any abnormality that leads to missing a thumb and little finger so neatly. There is however the condition of Arachnodactyly which can lead to abnormally long fingers.

    upload_2017-6-21_15-28-33.

    I don't think it's particularly likely, but if you wanted to create a very odd hand skeleton with genuine human bones, you could remove the outer finger and thumb from someone with Arachnodactyly hands.
     
  9. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    That Xray is rotated. The mummy's right root is the one with widely spaced toes.
    20170621-153105-79n54.
     
  10. tinkertailor

    tinkertailor Active Member

    Good points. It was mainly the skin tone that screamed 'fabricated' to me, since it's all the same white tone and texture and on real Incan mummies, it varies based on a lot of different circumstances, like the presence or lack of clothes, the parts of the body that were laid on the ground versus exposed, etc.
    Skeletons are pretty easy to get, even if they didn't get an actual mummy. A medical skeleton would work if they had to find one, or perhaps a skeleton of a large primate. Point is, it could be a looot of things.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. thehat

    thehat New Member

    I have worked in sculpture with both clay and plaster, and the object in question seems to me to be a fake coated in some ceramic or plaster-like material, and NOT mummified skin.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Some meetings were held yesterday regarding the "mummy" (or perhaps some other mummies), about which I was told:


    The videos were live-streamed by local journalist César Gerardo Cayo Espino https://www.facebook.com/cesargerardo.cayoespino?fref=nf

    I'm sadly lacking in Spanish, so I'm going to post these videos in the hope someone can extract some key information, like a quote from the director.

    I think this is the culture director:
    https://www.facebook.com/cesargerardo.cayoespino/videos/1510309119026480/

    THis is the meeting, the director (?) gets up to speak at 39:00
    https://www.facebook.com/cesargerardo.cayoespino?fref=nf

    There was some coverage on the local news:
    https://www.facebook.com/cesargerardo.cayoespino?fref=nf
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. To add to the pile on re it being a fraud--actions speak louder than words. If the people who are claiming to have discovered this mummy believe they have the most important scientific discovery of all time, they certainly aren't acting as I would expect them to. Instead of having the discovery verified by one or more of the dozens of top-flight research universities that would gladly donate their resources to be a part of such a ground breaking discovery, they instead made a cutely-edited video and a click-baity viral video campaign.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  14. NobleOne

    NobleOne New Member

    What verification? They didn't even prove or support their claims with any scientific paper or written record, AFAIK. All those people have is faked mummy and they are trying to keep it that way. Even their presentation of the mummy is too much commercial considering the claim of discovery. No discovery photos, videos, nothing. Only some dubious X-ray images, supposed DNA testing, Carbon dating but no papers. No proofs whatsoever! This mummy should be stigmatized currently with fake.
     
  15. I'm pretty sure we agree...