Recently viral Buga, Colombia, "alien" metal balls

What they should be able to share, now (if reasonable, elementary investigations have been performed) might include:
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.
 
So, looking at a few of the symbols on the ball:

Screenshot 2025-05-09 5.57.51 PM.png


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:


Screenshot 2025-05-09 6.09.22 PM.png
 
If it is claimed the sphere cannot be scratched/ have material removed, the team have immediate, testable proof- that they should be confident would be supported by anyone else performing the same investigation-
That ship has sailed, that claim is no longer available... as it is already quite extensively scratched...

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.
smaller.png


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 balloon ball was witnessed, and retrieved, in a town with appropriate facilities for examining an alien artefact. :rolleyes: Edited to add: And someone with Jaime Maussan's contact details.
 
It the German Company actually makes working metal detectors, the first thing they reasonably should have done is test the sphere's electrical conductivity. They literally have to have that equipment in their shop.
 
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.
soldering iron is probably used to create these solder joints:
1745464871947.png


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?
1745395642596.png

I noticed an issue
 
Note the bottom half does not have the "moon" designs.

This is more clearly seen in a still from the Maussan video posted by @Calter in post #48:

x2.JPG



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):

x3.JPG

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").
 
I think it is the same sphere. That "integrated circuit" thing in the images where it is visible, looks like it (engraving) has been filled-in with a black marker pen to make it stand out.
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.
 
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.
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.
 
Footage of another alleged sighting in the area
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/1kwfn11/sighting_of_more_spheres_in_buga_colombia/

Video 1: "Two recordings were made at 10 a.m. on May 7, 2025, by a farm worker known as "Don Mario." That morning, he was working with a tractor alongside his coworkers when he noticed a sphere near his position. He stopped the tractor and began filming the mysterious object."

Video 2: "After losing sight of the first sphere, Don Mario noticed a second one in the area, which he immediately began to record."

Photographs: "The photographs show a metallic appearance that reflects the terrain beneath it, at the same time, the reflection of the sun can be seen. The sphere features a belt with holes, very similar to the sphere that fell on the other side of the city of Buga."
 
Footage of another alleged sighting in the area

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.
m.JPG
 
Last edited:
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.
View attachment 80683

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.
 
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.
 
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

External Quote:
The United States Bowling Congress (USBC) regulates ball parameters including diameter (between 8.500 and 8.595 inches or 21.59 and 21.83 centimetres), circumference (between 26.704 and 27.002 inches or 67.83 and 68.59 centimetres), and weight (maximum of 16 pounds or 7.26 kilograms, no minimum).[4]
 
ct qry.JPG


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).

ct qry.JPG



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)

OIP.jpg
...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.
 
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

External Quote:
The United States Bowling Congress (USBC) regulates ball parameters including diameter (between 8.500 and 8.595 inches or 21.59 and 21.83 centimetres), circumference (between 26.704 and 27.002 inches or 67.83 and 68.59 centimetres), and weight (maximum of 16 pounds or 7.26 kilograms, no minimum).[4]
Could be uncalibrated imagery. If the scale was not set correctly, one could be easily off by 10%.
 
1748379659317.png


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.
 
Could be uncalibrated imagery. If the scale was not set correctly, one could be easily off by 10%.
If we get validatable measurements then at least we now have a way of getting the inner parts dimensions based on the scale.
 

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:
 
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
v.JPG

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).
 
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...
 
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:
View attachment 80697


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.
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

  • S7.png
    S7.png
    188.4 KB · Views: 2
  • s6.png
    s6.png
    164.8 KB · Views: 6
  • s5.png
    s5.png
    1 MB · Views: 5
  • s4.png
    s4.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 4
  • s3.png
    s3.png
    479.5 KB · Views: 1
  • s2.png
    s2.png
    1 MB · Views: 2
  • s1.png
    s1.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 2
  • s9.png
    s9.png
    1.4 MB · Views: 1
Last edited:
We had a thread about this kind of thing... Meaning something hanging below a drone. This demonstration convinced me.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/or...er-in-georgia-usa-7-3-2023.13202/#post-303352
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.
 
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...
Where did you find that?
 
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

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:

1749588525256.png


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.
 
If 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
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/ )
 
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

1749614231997.png


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:
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. If 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
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/ )
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

  • s13.png
    s13.png
    801.4 KB · Views: 3
  • s12.png
    s12.png
    533.8 KB · Views: 5
  • S11.png
    S11.png
    535.2 KB · Views: 13
  • S10.png
    S10.png
    1.2 MB · Views: 18
  • S11.png
    S11.png
    535.2 KB · Views: 4
  • s12.png
    s12.png
    533.8 KB · Views: 8
  • S10.png
    S10.png
    1.2 MB · Views: 15
My next project is to attempt to fly a balloon and a beach ball with my drone. I plan on attaching these objects with a length of monofilament fishing line.
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.
 
Are we seeing a butterfly here? Been some time since we had a butterfly, even if not the intended UFO in the shot.

s1.png
 
Back
Top