Ann K
Senior Member.
Your list is excellent ...for a group who really want to investigate an artifact seriously. But I have no reason to think that Maussan and his staff want any in-depth analysis.
NorCal Dave
Senior Member.
So, looking at a few of the symbols on the ball:
We can speculate that the Indus river/ Harappan culture may have known how to make useless circuit boards on salad bowels as far back as 3000BCE. Note from the Indus/Harappan script:
We can speculate that the Indus river/ Harappan culture may have known how to make useless circuit boards on salad bowels as far back as 3000BCE. Note from the Indus/Harappan script:
John J.
Senior Member.
Ah, but that might have caused by the unimaginable forces at play in the cosmos, perhaps as the ball navigated a series of Einstein-Rosen bridges to get here.
Or maybe the two bowls were a bit scratched before they were stuck together.
I'm just astonished by our great luck as a species that the
Edited to add: And someone with Jaime Maussan's contact details.
Mendel
Senior Member.
Why would the chuck it sits on be wired, if not for a conductivity test?
Note the bottom half does not have the "moon" designs.
Where is the square design in the center? Note both bigger and smaller traces can be seen.
No solder dots, no small traces, no center design. Did they sit it on the "good side" to weigh it? Does this metal globe have 3 poles?
Note the bottom half does not have the "moon" designs.
Where is the square design in the center? Note both bigger and smaller traces can be seen.
soldering iron is probably used to create these solder joints：
No solder dots, no small traces, no center design. Did they sit it on the "good side" to weigh it? Does this metal globe have 3 poles?
I noticed an issue
John J.
Senior Member.
This is more clearly seen in a still from the Maussan video posted by @Calter in post #48:
So only one "pole" of the ball has the decoration and symbols- and as Mendel has seen, there's a problem
(well, not so much for most of us, but maybe for Mystery Buga Ball advocates):
I think this is evidence of fakery. The ball's makers took some photos, which they've put in the public realm, of the ball before it was finished (or perhaps of a near-identical ball lacking the "IC").
FatPhil
Senior Member.
Because colouring in is exactly what you do with priceless otherworldly artefacts.
John J.
Senior Member.
Yes, maybe (darn it!), I'm not so confident about the missing design now. As @FatPhil implies, if it has been inked in, it's a pretty strange thing to do with an emissary from the stars.
Black washes and inks are frequently used by D&D, Warhammer and similar hobbyists to provide rapid detail contrast and shading when they're painting metal miniatures.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
That appears to have been done to all the engraving on the ball, now that you mention it. But, interestingly, it is not apparent in many of the scratches. This suggests either the wash was applied after the engraving but BEFORE the scratches, or that the wash was applied in a more targeted manner, with some attention to not making surface detail "pop" except where desired.
MonkeeSage
Senior Member.
Possibly a weld seam running diagonally across the bead with holes drilled in it?
Footage of another alleged sighting in the area
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/1kwfn11/sighting_of_more_spheres_in_buga_colombia/
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/1kwfn11/sighting_of_more_spheres_in_buga_colombia/
John J.
Senior Member.
Do the stills match imagery from the video? -I might not have put that very well; do the still images (toward the end of the video) come from the moving video footage that we see? The still images look much more detailed.
There might be a second person filming, approx. 23 seconds in, lower left of frame.
Last edited:
NorCal Dave
Senior Member.
Yeah, it looks like it could be the same event filmed from 2 different devices. As for the still, if it's screen grab, we should be able to line it up with the video.
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/1kkw9oi/ct_scan_of_the_sphere_of_buga_colombia/
This offset core reminds me of a bowling ball. Here's a bunch of them with the core exposed.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
There's a reddit thread about some supposed "fibre optics" along with a debunk showing it's likely just a reflection of the LEDs in the cheap ($26.99) microscopy camera they are using to look at this alien artifact
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https://i.redd.it/89trwedt463f1.png
This screenshot of a X post is commented on by Nolan and the Reddit thread with a sceptical bent in the title is posted by serial r/ufos thread starter TommyShelbyPFB who in general posts a lot of pro current US "disclosure" stuff.
There is a clear drive to distance Maussan's obvious hoaxes from the "serious" UFO work happening elsewhere.
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https://i.redd.it/89trwedt463f1.png
This screenshot of a X post is commented on by Nolan and the Reddit thread with a sceptical bent in the title is posted by serial r/ufos thread starter TommyShelbyPFB who in general posts a lot of pro current US "disclosure" stuff.
There is a clear drive to distance Maussan's obvious hoaxes from the "serious" UFO work happening elsewhere.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
I measured the ball diameter based on the scale in the CT image, assuming we are seeing a section at the middle of the ball.
The total ball is ~27cm and the inner ball is ~24.5cm
These are both larger than the given max dimensions of a USBC ten pin bowling ball which apparently has a max diameter of ~22cm
The total ball is ~27cm and the inner ball is ~24.5cm
These are both larger than the given max dimensions of a USBC ten pin bowling ball which apparently has a max diameter of ~22cm
External Quote:
John J.
Senior Member.
From @Mick West's post #95. This is a bit confusing.
Although false colour can be used, CTs conventionally are monochrome, just like x-rays.
Lighter tones normally indicate greater radiopacity, therefore density.
Unless we know what the colours represent, it is very difficult to assess the relative densities of the different coloured areas.
If these are CT images, whoever took them would know that. Providing the image without a key to interpreting density is unhelpful.
If this is a sphere and the surface/ skin is metallic, we might expect the circumference of the disc above to be very radiopaque.
There might be a suggestion of this, more in the top half of the picture, but if so that layer is thin (thin beige line under yellow line).
Probably a coincidence, but the "porosity" of the "crust" of the sphere (indicated by the light blue above) has some similarity to how a section through the bone matter of the skull is depicted in medical illustrations...
(click to enlarge if interested)
...which is how the bone might look to the naked eye, but on CT it is frequently solid white, as the radiographer is often trying to image much less dense structures (e.g. of the brain).
Once again, we have something apparently connected with Jaime Maussan which has been (it is claimed) CT'd or MRI'd, but for which appropriate background details are lacking, and in the absence of a convincing radiographer's report.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
A reverse image search on the CT scans gave me this tweet with some more images and this video including a short section showing some 3d rotations of the CT scans
Source: https://x.com/FeministLetter/status/1921754866235404611/video/3
Source: https://x.com/FeministLetter/status/1921754866235404611/video/3
Ravi
Senior Member.
Could be uncalibrated imagery. If the scale was not set correctly, one could be easily off by 10%.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
This makes it look like the gap between the outer part and the inner part.
THe problem with CT is you can apply all sorts of post processing, to hide differently measured areas, or apply visualisations that will make things look a certain way based on the assumption that it was a body that was scanned etc.
I think we are looking at maybe some solid inner part (like the bowling ball idea) that gives it weight then a maybe a lower density filler, then the two welded together metal bowls.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
If we get validatable measurements then at least we now have a way of getting the inner parts dimensions based on the scale.
Kyle Ferriter
Senior Member.
r/aliens moderators removed the post and the r/ufos post contains only a 1m17s part of the "video 1" portion, not the full 3m36s one that was posted on r/aliens, which includes 1m40s for "video 1", 1m5s for "video 2", and then the remainder at the end is a sequence of still images. I don't know what the original source the r/aliens reddit user got the video from, but that would be useful information.
The r/ufos post cites this tweet as their source, which contains the trimmed "video 1" plus some still images.
Source: https://x.com/JosCRios/status/1927348537429238221
Here is the original video file from the now-deleted r/aliens post:
John J.
Senior Member.
A reverse image search on the CT scans gave me this tweet with some more images and this video including a short section showing some 3d rotations of the CT scans
Aluminium is aluminium. It's hardness doesn't change "if magnetism is applied".
AFAIK it's not magnetic at anything near STP because it doesn't have unpaired electrons like ferrous metals do.
"Measurements aren't precise due to its changing fields" reeks of being a hoodwinker's excuse for not providing real data.
If it's aluminium, its properties should be (relatively) easy to measure. Aluminium's properties are very well understood.
Aluminium's really useful, but it isn't magical.
And, like the claimed implants of Maussan's mummies, despite the implied extraterrestrial origin of the sphere Maussan and his confederates/ backers have somehow forgotten to do an isotopic analysis, which might provide evidence of an alien origin.
Or not, if it's been made on Earth.
Aluminium is much used in the aerospace industry- but not for the most heated surfaces of vehicles re-entering the Earth's atmosphere I don't think, and not for the leading edges of the fastest jets.
However, it is readily available and quite a lot cheaper (and easier to work AFAIK) than e.g. titanium, so maybe more appealing to a hoaxer on a budget whose potential audience won't ask awkward questions.
I guess we can't be sure that Feminist Love Letter is quoting Maussan, or tweeting with his approval?
Either way, I think we can be fairly confident that this is clearly bunk, with F.L.L. and/ or Maussan (or an associate) using "sciencey" terms that don't make sense to describe the team's "findings".
Can't help but think of the phrase "Not even wrong", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong
(although I suspect the claims made for the sphere would be easily falsifiable if impartial, competent investigators were allowed access).
Ben Harris
Senior Member
No they don't want any serious analysis. That would spoil the grift.
Giddierone
Senior Member.
Reminds me of this old newspaper story from 1887 about a metallic sphere that came out of the sky. It had engravings on it and some indecipherable symbols and they held a Bunsen burner to it to try and understand it's composition...
Source: https://x.com/giddierone/status/1932462108010070158
Source: https://x.com/giddierone/status/1932462108010070158
JMartJr
Senior Member.
The whole "This metal thing fell out of the sky, let's hold fire to it to see what it is" thing seems extremely unlikely, if you actually did not know what it was. Bombs are metal things that fly out of the sky, if you happen to find unexploded ordnance, no matter how odd looking to you, this could end badly. But even if it is an alien space machine of some sort, would it have any sort of defense mechanism, any sort of flammable fuel? Would there be teeny aliens in there that you are about to roast alive? Would the advanced civilization behind the ball interpret setting fire to it as a hostile act? If you did not know what it was, or even if you thought you knew what i t was and what you thought was "super high tech alien flying thing with, for some reason, poorly done engravincs on it," trying to set it on fire seems a really obvious Bad Move.
On the other hand, if you know it is just some hollow aluminum ball Tio Jaime made in his basement metal shop, and so knew it was safe to hold a blowtorch on it...
On the other hand, if you know it is just some hollow aluminum ball Tio Jaime made in his basement metal shop, and so knew it was safe to hold a blowtorch on it...
Gary C
Senior Member.
Yup. Examples of things that:
Source: https://whitefleet.net/2016/08/31/c...r-cluster-munitions-dangers-to-noncombatants/
- Fall from the sky
- Are metal
- Should not be held over a fire
Source: https://whitefleet.net/2016/08/31/c...r-cluster-munitions-dangers-to-noncombatants/
OriginalManc
Member
The whole video or a very high percentage is CGI. If you look at what is supposed to be gaps in the trees you will see they are 3D elements/objects placed in front of the trees and shubbery. The largest one (S9) doesn't change angle as the camera movesIf you look at ProPixel Video Analysis video on X of the scene you can clearly see the mistakes. The "sphere" disappears, smears the background etc
Attachments
Last edited:
I never got around to improving this but I don't think it's necessary anymore to show how people are faking things with an object suspended by a drone, it was pretty much identical to the videos being posted.
I haven't watched all these videos posted yet but I think if they do not have sound then they're using a drone as they are very loud even at 100-200 ft away.
Mendel
Senior Member.
Where did you find that?
NorCal Dave
Senior Member.
You may be better than me to figure that out. I did note back in post #13 that the object falls vertically from the sky and goes behind some brush where it is lost. When it's acquired again, it's moving horizontally. The brush hides the change in direction. In looking at that, I noticed that event though the camera was moving all over the place looking for the ball, this frame stays frozen, exactly the same and un-moving for 3 frames:
Either the moving camera suddenly became completely still, or there is some sort of edit here that resulted in 3 of the same frozen frames strung together.
FatPhil
Senior Member.
Elsewhere, it's been stated that ProPixel posts AI-mangled videos which are beyond useless for extracting information:
@jarlrmai: "The video they post looks weird, like it superficially looks like the Jellyfish video and there's hints of AI use (diffusion) in their comments"
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/jellyfish-ufo-from-tmzs-ufo-revolution.13304/post-344650
@Mendel: "Yes. Commentators on reddit make a good case that this is exactly what it looks like: an AI hallucination loosely based on the original video."
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/jellyfish-ufo-from-tmzs-ufo-revolution.13304/post-344652
From the "Jellyfish UFO from TMZ's 'UFO Revolution'" thread ( https://www.metabunk.org/threads/jellyfish-ufo-from-tmzs-ufo-revolution.13304/ )
Shadowplay
New Member
Starflint
Active Member
How did they manage to get UNAM to approve and publish such a report?：
Source: https://www.facebook.com/MaussanOficial/posts/1280789836746613
https://maussantelevision.com/?fbcl...uLZveRjrGrklCDi_1Q_aem_JkQV1K-5z1hPPknm2AsWFA
This is the official page of the researchers in the document:
https://www.iim.unam.mx/iafigueroa/
https://www.iim.unam.mx/dr-ignacio-alejandro-figueroa-vargas/
Additionally, at the end of the document, it mentions a notary named SALVADOR XIMENEZ ESPARZA with the number 126. I looked it up and found that he had been dismissed from his public position in 2017 for repeatedly falsifying documents and corruption issues.However, one year after his dismissal, he was exonerated due to insufficient evidence in the appeal and subsequently reinstated to his original position.
https://hipocritalector.com/portada...sa-fantasma-en-fraude/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
https://radioexpresionmexico.com/re...nez-esparza-por-diversas-irregularidades.html
Also, I'm not sure if I didn't look correctly, but I couldn't find this report on UNAM's official website
Source: https://www.facebook.com/MaussanOficial/posts/1280789836746613
https://maussantelevision.com/?fbcl...uLZveRjrGrklCDi_1Q_aem_JkQV1K-5z1hPPknm2AsWFA
This is the official page of the researchers in the document:
https://www.iim.unam.mx/iafigueroa/
https://www.iim.unam.mx/dr-ignacio-alejandro-figueroa-vargas/
Additionally, at the end of the document, it mentions a notary named SALVADOR XIMENEZ ESPARZA with the number 126. I looked it up and found that he had been dismissed from his public position in 2017 for repeatedly falsifying documents and corruption issues.However, one year after his dismissal, he was exonerated due to insufficient evidence in the appeal and subsequently reinstated to his original position.
https://hipocritalector.com/portada...sa-fantasma-en-fraude/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
https://radioexpresionmexico.com/re...nez-esparza-por-diversas-irregularidades.html
Also, I'm not sure if I didn't look correctly, but I couldn't find this report on UNAM's official website
Last edited:
OriginalManc
Member
I agree you with you're thoughts on ProPixel, and have attached images from the source video. If you zoom in you will see the CGI foliage as well as the white 3d objects in front. S13 below again shows the white objects, blurred imagery in the distance, but it's clear if you watch the video it's a green screen too. Time stamped (
Source: https://youtu.be/VKpqc9jKZNg?t=1321
)
Attachments
I'm sorry, but what exactly about the foliage makes it CGI? I'm just seeing low-resolution, noisy compressed images.
Can you post just one image and explain precisely why it is CGI?
Giddierone
Senior Member.
There are plenty of examples on YouTube of people using hobby drones to drop bait for sea fishing. Some have lines as long as 250m and string multiple bait to a line which they drop remotely.
Mendel
Senior Member.
I see a gap.
That indicates the big tree on the right and the trees left of the gap in that picture are at roughly the same distance, so there's not much parallax effect.
Similar threads
Trending content
-
-
-
Thread 'Issues with Dalia Bergoin's presentation at Contact in the Desert'- Charlie Wiser
Replies: 13 -
-