The Nazca 'alien' 3-fingered mummies of Peru

[findingneo]

Thanks for your answers WB.

FWIW, oh! Ok, young person speak.

Just so I know, what qualifies as a hoax?

[WalterBosley]

lol, What qualifies as a hoax? The Nazca Mummy qualifies.

When I was in journalism school, the professor explained the definition of obscene. He told us that the original judge on an early obscenity case described it as 'You may not be able to specifically define it but you know it when you see it'. That said, in the case of the Nazca Mummy, we have a MAJOR CLUE: Jaime Maussan's involvement with the 'Roswell Mummy'. Even if Maussan didn't directly fake the mummy story itself in that case, it was brought to him and he promoted the hell out of it before investigating the situation (if we are to assume he didn't already know it was BS...). That case is revealed for what it was, True Believer excuses are bandied about, excuses are made for their darlings, etc etc. Along comes another mummy, the Nazca Mummy, which looks suspiciously more "alien", including ridiculous fingers on the hands that look SO unnatural and clunky as to be immediately suspicious. And, adding to the suspicion, we once again have a murky and even more shady history of acquisition on this one and the odds for a fraudulent specimen become greater. Then we have the milking of the whole thing by Gaia, to fuel the flames of faith in the True Believers (with dollars to subscribe). And top all that off with Jaime Maussan, who either knows damned well what's really going on or whose sincere judgment is so way off that he's the easy mark preferred by the hoaxers around the world -- either possibility still making him the first reason we should question what's going on here. Not to mention now we are going to hear cries of 'conspiracy!' every time someone comes out and provides an analysis that doesn't jibe with what people wish and pray and hope it will be (ET hybrid).

For the record, to answer an earlier question someone posed about when the hoax was perpetrated, offering the cute suggestion of thousands of years ago, the answer to that question is that the mummy was, in my opinion, altered shortly before Jaime Maussan and company presented it.

The Nazca Mummy is not what the True Believers wish it to be. It is a real mummy, stolen from Peru and physically altered to perpetrate a fraudulent claim that an ancient 'ET hybrid' has been discovered. That it 'inspires discussion' does not excuse nor change that.

Posted by findingneo (here)
Thanks for your answers WB.

FWIW, oh! Ok, young person speak.

Just so I know, what qualifies as a hoax?

[Niv]

Posted by WalterBosley (here)
I said Bara said the Lakehead DNA result is allegedly fake, wasn't referring to the mummy on that specific point.

Is the implication of this that the entire DNA results were falsified or were modified? I'm wondering since the results of that test wasn't exactly high five material for the mummy folks.

[WalterBosley]

I don't know those specifics yet.

Posted by Niv (here)

Posted by WalterBosley (here)
I said Bara said the Lakehead DNA result is allegedly fake, wasn't referring to the mummy on that specific point.

Is the implication of this that the entire DNA results were falsified or were modified? I'm wondering since the results of that test wasn't exactly high five material for the mummy folks.

[findingneo]

Ha,ha...thanks WB, funny man. You could have perhaps had an alternative career had your special agent qualities not been appreciated.

Glad you think my suggestions are "cute" WB, that is the nicest thing you have said to me. Yes, that was me that asked that question.

In a country that is apparently a little lacking in some mod cons, I am surprised such a hoax could be pulled off with a back yard job, and fool the scientists studying them.

BTW, did the background story around the Nag Hammadi scriptures make them any less real?

Ok, I see where you are feeling there is a possibility for fraud WB. Fair enough, but I hope you don't miss something genuine because you are a True Disbeliever, instead of a neutral investigator.

At what point did the story get "muddy"? What was the story prior to Jaime Mausson? Is there one being talked about?

Of no importance, but just curious, the tomb looks like it is in a small ditch in the desert rather than on a mountainside. What do you think WB?

Thanks
FN.

[WalterBosley]

Not interested enough in the situation anymore to care what the tomb looks like.

"and fool the scientists studying them." They are not fooling any REAL scientists!

Anyway, not interested in this anymore. It's a hoax. Your digs won't get me to respond to this any further, Sweety.

Posted by findingneo (here)
Ha,ha...thanks WB, funny man. You could have perhaps had an alternative career had your special agent qualities not been appreciated.

Glad you think my suggestions are "cute" WB, that is the nicest thing you have said to me. Yes, that was me that asked that question.

In a country that is apparently a little lacking in some mod cons, I am surprised such a hoax could be pulled off with a back yard job, and fool the scientists studying them.

BTW, did the background story around the Nag Hammadi scriptures make them any less real?

Ok, I see where you are feeling there is a possibility for fraud WB. Fair enough, but I hope you don't miss something genuine because you are a True Disbeliever, instead of a neutral investigator.

At what point did the story get "muddy"? What was the story prior to Jaime Mausson? Is there one being talked about?

Of no importance, but just curious, the tomb looks like it is in a small ditch in the desert rather than on a mountainside. What do you think WB?

Thanks
FN.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by findingneo (here)
Of no importance, but just curious, the tomb looks like it is in a small ditch in the desert rather than on a mountainside.

My understanding was that just one person has been producing the mummies, in a kind of succession, not revealing where the tomb is, or allowing anyone else to go near. (That's a major red flag, of course, if that's the case.) But right now I can't find a source for that.

Do you have details and/or photos of the tomb you can share? That would be much appreciated.

[Kristin]

I've studied forensic art for many years. I am in fact planning on working professionally as a forensic artist with a specialization in skull reconstruction as a way to gracefully retire. My studies have included working with text books from the IAI and this includes a strong functional background in medical anatomy and medical illustration.

I have no doubt that this is a fake mummy. I can tell just by looking a the hand x-rays. The fingers were taken apart and recombined to form the longer digits. It's obvious if you know what you are looking at. Yes, this is a fake, however, what is interesting is that this may have been a hoax created hundreds of years ago to age the wrappings properly. They would have made hoaxes then too as a form of entertaining the elite, money is usually a contributing factor in any hoax. In that sense it's a very interesting find, but real? No.

[Shadowself]

I agree Kristin...the part I attempted to circle here is what caught my attention...

[Kristin]

Great photo, actually what immediately caught my eye was the placement of the metacarpals and the phalanges, they do not match positional joint sections and have been moved to create the appearance of elongated fingers.

[WalterBosley]

I sincerely doubt this was hoaxed hundreds or thousands of years ago. Art hoaxers and antique hoaxers have been 'aging' things in our modern times and rather convincingly. The parts you can point to as evidence of an ancient or centuries old hoax are either aged fakes OR they are authentic old parts that the present-day hoaxers incorporated into their fake to make it seem more convincing.

Let's not make this more complicated than it actually is.

[Spiral]

Posted by WalterBosley (here)
I sincerely doubt this was hoaxed hundreds or thousands of years ago. Art hoaxers and antique hoaxers have been 'aging' things in our modern times and rather convincingly. The parts you can point to as evidence of an ancient or centuries old hoax are either aged fakes OR they are authentic old parts that the present-day hoaxers incorporated into their fake to make it seem more convincing.

Let's not make this more complicated than it actually is.

Ain't you the party pooper !

[Kristin]

Posted by WalterBosley (here)
I sincerely doubt this was hoaxed hundreds or thousands of years ago. Art hoaxers and antique hoaxers have been 'aging' things in our modern times and rather convincingly. The parts you can point to as evidence of an ancient or centuries old hoax are either aged fakes OR they are authentic old parts that the present-day hoaxers incorporated into their fake to make it seem more convincing.

Let's not make this more complicated than it actually is.

Hundreds, sure why not?... thousands... most likely not which is why I would never say thousands of years, it defies judgment. Easy to hoax visually old material, but very difficult to hoax carbon dated authentic old material which (for a good hoax) would need to be used. This material would be easily acquired in the late 1800's and early 1900's, then tourists were actually buying samples of mummy parts as trophies. There were many mummies being tossed around in early 1900's for the curious and this is when they were first being displayed on a world wide level as a type of carnival attraction in museums and as traveling side show attractions.

I find the metal to be more revealing. Some interesting older hardware holding things together supports the older hoaxed mummy idea, which is where my thoughts went to with regards to the actual age of the hoax. However, the use of hardware rather then synthetic material also lends to this. The age of the hardware itself and what alloys were used to make them would in fact give us a proper date for when the hoax occurred. Simple, not complicated at all.

[uzn]

Posted by Kristin (here)

Posted by WalterBosley (here)
I sincerely doubt this was hoaxed hundreds or thousands of years ago. Art hoaxers and antique hoaxers have been 'aging' things in our modern times and rather convincingly. The parts you can point to as evidence of an ancient or centuries old hoax are either aged fakes OR they are authentic old parts that the present-day hoaxers incorporated into their fake to make it seem more convincing.

Let's not make this more complicated than it actually is.

Hundreds, sure why not?... thousands... most likely not which is why I would never say thousands of years, it defies judgment. Easy to hoax visually old material, but very difficult to hoax carbon dated authentic old material which for a good hoax would need to be used. This material would be easily acquired in the late 1800's and early 1900's, then tourists were actually buying samples of mummy parts as trophies. There were many mummies being tossed around in early 1900's for the curious and this is when they were first being displayed on a world wide level as a type of carnival attraction in museums and as traveling side show attractions.

I find the metal to be more revealing. Some interesting older hardware holding things together supports the older hoaxed mummy idea, which is where my thoughts went to with regards to the actual age of the hoax. However, the use of hardware rather then synthetic material also lends to this. The age of the hardware itself and what alloys were used to make them would in fact give us a proper date for when the hoax occurred. Simple, not complicated at all.

Classical Cargo-Cult. They assembled 1000s of years ago things that looked like it had 3 fingers but they used normal bones and tissue. Look especially at the last Video of this Thread:
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...f-other-Worlds

[Kristin]

Uzn, sorry I could not take the video seriously, as they wore gloves but placed the object on a regular table cloth... If you could explain what "Classical Cargo Cult" means I would be most appreciative. Thank you.

[Kristin]

The Classical Study of Cargo Cults
(from first edition of Introducing Anthropology of Religion) In some parts of the South Pacific, colonialism and even contact with Europe had been intermittent to minimal before 1900 or even the early 1900s. However, two epochal events occurred in this period to change all that— the two World Wars. These conflicts brought foreign men and foreign goods to these areas in quantities never seen before. Thousands of soldiers and other strangers came ashore and unloaded caches of goods the likes of which no had ever imagined. Indigenous islanders could have no idea where these people, and even more so their goods, came from; the one thing they knew was that the strangers had a lot of “cargo” and that the whites never seemed to work for any of it. The strangers stood around, marched around, sat around, but they never produced anything — yet they had an inconceivable largesse of stuff. Cargo cults were an indigenous attempt to make sense of this new situation and to acquire some goods for themselves; not surprisingly, their initial interpretation was religious. As Peter Lawrence put it, the cults were “based on the natives’ belief that European goods (cargo)...are not man-made but have to be obtained from a non-human or divine source” (1964: 1

Hmmm, that's really interesting, thank you

[uzn]

With Cargo cult I mean that they imitated something with their Mummy. Something they saw or their ancestors saw or experienced.

For example native american (maybe a bigfoot):






or in recent times:

[Kristin]

Fits the idea of the early 1900's timeline as well. Now if we could discover when that metal was produced... very interesting to be sure.

[WalterBosley]

It seems to me that it doesn't matter when the hoax was fabricated. It's still a hoax. Which makes it meaningless in this discussion.

Unless someone is writing a book on hoaxed sideshow objects.

[Kristin]

Posted by WalterBosley (here)
It seems to me that it doesn't matter when the hoax was fabricated. It's still a hoax. Which makes it meaningless in this discussion.

Unless someone is writing a book on hoaxed sideshow objects.

The conversation is what is fascinating, I actually learned something about Cargo Cults I did not know today. I'm very interested in forensics and love it when historical anthropology comes into the mix. Makes it all the more inviting. Yes, a hoax is a hoax is a hoax. For me I enjoy not just looking at a few details but understanding the larger perspective.