Unusual Mummy

Unusual mummified body recently found in Nazca, Peru.

Humanlike, it measured 5’-6’ tall, with an elongated skull and apparently, no external ears, just earholes. Most distinctive were the fingers and toes – long and thin, and 3 in number. (See picture)

Carbon dating suggests it is about 1700 years old. DNA samples have been sent for analysis.

It is a real mummy.

Question is, is it the result of birth defects? Is it extraterrestrial? Is it a hoax? Something else?

I will post when I find out more.

Comments | 17

  • You know your identity is protected

    Gaia is the only internet outlet for any information and updates about this “unusual” three fingered mummy. Gaia is a membership site with its top plan selling for $95.40 per year. However, you are blocked from knowing the true identity of Gaia through a private service Registrant Organization named PERFECT PRIVACY, LLC.

    Internet domain name Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC provides registrant information to the public for “Gaia” through “Whois?” at https://www.whois.com/whois/gaia.com.

    PERFECT PRIVACY, LLC states “You know your identity is protected because your personal information is not published in the WHOIS database. Instead, Perfect Privacy’s name, address and phone number are made publicly available. The benefit of this arrangement is that the WHOIS directory publishes Perfect Privacy’s name, address, and phone number instead of YOUR real name, address, and phone number. The WHOIS directory requires an e-mail address for every purchased domain name. When you purchase a private domain registration, we create a private e-mail address for that domain. Thereafter, when messages are sent to your private e-mail address, we handle them according to the e-mail preference you selected for that particular domain. With Perfect Privacy you can have all the benefits of a domain registration without exposing your personal information for everyone to see.

    If you really need to follow up more with this “topic” you can go to https://www.gaia.com/ and plunk down your membership payment and sail along this secrecy path as more information is “made available” to you. Ha. Ha.

    • And your point is…?

      So the people who own Gaia wish to remain anonymous?
      The same is true of most of the corporations in America. That’s one of the principal reasons they incorporate.
      In Spanish, “Inc”. translates as “SA” for Sociedad Anónyma. French and Portuguese are very similar.
      Anonymous donations to politicians are a problem. This isn’t.

      “Gaia is the only internet outlet for any information and updates about this “unusual” three fingered mummy.”
      That’s called an “exclusive”. It doesn’t mean they made it up.

      “Gaia is a membership site”
      So, they sell subscriptions. That’s not illegal. This is America. It’s called “free enterprise”.
      The Brattleboro Reformer also sells subscriptions. You can get a few free articles for free, then ya gotta pay.
      Personally, I find Gaia more entertaining than the Reformer.

      I also have a subscription to Netflix. Is that permitted?

      • What a Conehead

        I cannot imagine why any legitimate sources in the fields of paleontology, comparative anatomy, archaeology or any other scientific discipline would “wish” to remain anonymous.

        Moreover, I made no “point” about corporations, politicians, illegalities, exclusives, entertainment, Netflix or any other distraction you wish to dredge up.

        The best way to spread fake news is to keep its sources secret.

        You’re getting hysterical.

  • A little more information.

    There are more than one of these bodies. This one has been determined to be female and has been dubbed “Maria”. The body is covered with a white dust which is thought to be part of the mummification process. The skin underneath is slate grey.
    Carbon 14 and DNA testing have been performed as well as cat-scans. Results are not yet available.

    BTW, The American Museum of Natural History in NYC is currently having an exhibition on mummies: http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/mummies/mummies-in-peru

    The Chinchorro people, who lived in what is now Peru and Chile, were the world’s first practitioners of mummification, thousands of years before Egyptians.

    A few years ago the bones of a six-inch skeleton with a large head were found in Chile
    There was speculation that the so-called “Atacama humanoid”, nicknamed Ata, was either an aborted fetus, a monkey or even an alien
    Now scientists at Stanford University have carried out conclusive DNA tests which have found the remains are those of a mutated human

    The story can be found here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2313828/Is-really-human-DNA-tests-inch-skeleton-alien-looking-creature-sized-head-prove-actually-human-claim-scientists-new-documentary.html

    • You pretend to sit on the fence

      The info about “Maria” and the DNA testing, as well as cat-scans and the “Results are not yet available” scheme, is specious, delaying tactics because a CAT scan radiology report, for instance, is available soon after the procedure is completed. And hoax has been ongoing for what, for fourteen years now. There is no logical reason for delaying the availability of the results, except for enticing people to buy a membership with Caia, waiting breathlessly for the next update.

      Your reference and link to the American Museum of Natural History in NYC is a distraction. There is no reference at the AMNH website pertaining to mummy specimen your article is about.

      All other references to “mummies” from any era do not substantiate your article in any way. “Ata,” the “six-inch skeleton with a large head” found in Chile that you mentioned was in 2003 not a few years ago, as you say. The specimen was dated to only a few decades ago and likely was a fetus with birth defects. So what was the point of mentioning it in your article? You also mention that “Now scientists at Stanford University have carried out conclusive DNA tests which have found the remains (Ata) are those of a mutated human.” Yet, there is no mention of this in searching the Stanford University website. So one is left with relying on that “rag” the Daily Mail from the UK for any point of reference.

      Apparently, you pretend to sit on the fence, and play the game of “is this for real or is this a hoax,” all the while perpetuating a nonsensical story of no value except for those of our reading audience who may be captivated by fake news. You did the same thing with the bogus Alex Jones “Sandy Hook” fake news and other you’ve presented here.

      • Skeptics

        There’s always skeptics. There’s even people that don’t believe the earth is round.
        What I believe is not important.
        I am presenting stories that may be of interest to some because they’re different.
        “dog bites man” is not a story, “man bites dog” is.
        If you don’t believe it, that’s not important either.
        Instead of feebly trying to debunk everything I write, why don’t you let others make up their own minds.
        The Daily Mail may be a “rag”, but their story accurately reports what I saw at least a year ago in a documentary about the same subject. (Sorry, I no longer have the link). In the Doc, the Stanford immunologist Garry Nolan spent a lot of time discussing the DNA analysis in depth.

        • But not this time

          While I’m reasonably sure you have a belief-dependency of some kind, I did not address your beliefs in my comments.

          Moreover, you cannot address me as “not believing” something. I do not believe in believe and suggesting that I do believe is misapplied.

          I doubt if our readers see my comments as “feebly trying.” And, it is not true that I debunk everything you write.

          As far as allowing “others make up their own minds,” my comments in no way impedes them, but more likely can assist them.

          The fact that the “rag” accurately reported what the documentary portrayed in no ways implies that the documentary itself was accurate.

          I’m convinced that Stanford Professor Garry Nolan was accurate when he said the little skeleton was not alien, but contained humanoid DNA.

          I am also totally agreeable that you present “stories that may be of interest to some because they’re different.” As I said, I do not try to debunk everything you post, and are often enough in agreement.

        • "Instead of feebly trying to debunk everything I write..."

          When you keep promoting claims that 2 + 2 = 5, with the pretext that you are just featuring an interesting viewpoint which may or may not be true: Don’t be so surprised when a mathematician debunks your nonsense.

      • Sitting on the fence

        “Apparently, you pretend to sit on the fence, and play the game of “is this for real or is this a hoax,”

        I‘m not playing any games or pretending at all. I genuinely have not made up my mind what this is.
        As I stated in the original post: “is it the result of birth defects? Is it extraterrestrial? Is it a hoax? Something else?”
        If it’s a hoax (which it may well be, but which has not actually been proven), it’s a benign one,

        Our beloved and benevolent government has perpetrated many hoaxes (and is still doing so).
        Some of those hoaxes resulted in wars in which millions have died. Not very benign, eh?

        There have been numerous hoaxes involving human remains.

        One of the most famous was the “Piltdown Man”. In 1912, an amateur archaeologist claimed that he had discovered the “missing link” between ape and man. After finding a section of a human-like skull in Pleistocene gravel beds near Piltdown, East Sussex, England.
        It was conclusively exposed in 1953 as a forgery. It was found to have consisted of the altered mandible and some teeth of an orangutan deliberately combined with the cranium of a fully developed, though small-brained, modern human.
        What I find most amazing is that it took 41 years from its alleged initial discovery to its definitive exposure as a composite forgery.

        The Cardiff Giant was one of the most famous hoaxes in United States history. It was a 10-foot-tall purported “petrified man” uncovered on October 16, 1869, by workers digging a well behind a barn in Cardiff, New York. Both it and an unauthorized copy made by P.T. Barnum are still on display.
        The Cardiff Giant appeared in the 1901 Pan-American Exposition, but did not attract much attention. Iowa publisher Gardner Cowles, Jr. bought it later to adorn his basement rumpus room as a coffee table and conversation piece. In 1947 he sold it to the Farmers’ Museum in Cooperstown, New York, where I once saw it. It is still on display there.

        Is it possible that life exists elsewhere? NASA suggests that in our galaxy we have 4.5 billion earth-like planets. Faced with these numbers, it is highly probable (in the mathematical sense) that some, if not many support forms of intelligent life.
        To think otherwise constitutes extreme hubris (or a “belief” that a guy in the sky created all this in 6 days).

        • I could tell it was a hoax just by looking at the photo

          To reply to this comment it needs to be noted that my “sitting on a fence” comment was made in reference to you original piece about the conehead three finger so-called mummy, not your later mentions of the “six inch” skeleton. In either case, the fact that you “genuinely have not made up (your) mind what this is” is what’s troubling.

          Before I researched the links you provided and my own research, I could tell it was a hoax just by looking at the photo. But, I would not base my comments solely on the photo, which necessitated me researching the alleged discovery which culminated with the link I found this morning: http://doubtfulnews.com/2017/06/nazca-alien-mummy-revealed-in-promotiona

          (Btw, NASA guesstimates, “There are tens of billions of potentially habitable planets in the galaxy,” said Natalie Batalha, co-author of the paper and the Kepler mission scientist at NASA’s Ames Research Center. Note that habitable planets only suggests the possibility of life, and, not necessarily sentient, intelligent life. Neither does habitable equate mammalian consciousness.)

          • Condemnation before investigation

            Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance. Albert Einstein
            Shakespeare was right when he wrote: There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy. Hamlet (1.5.167-8)

          • Dusty old fools

            As soon as I saw your Einstein quote I did not think it was something he’d say. Unlike you, I do research on my topics when I don’t know or am not sure of something, to which…

            “I’ve seen this quote variously around the Interwebs, and more recently in a member’s signature here, and wondered where it actually came from. It really doesn’t sound like the kind of thing a scientist would say, at least not in the context it’s commonly finding itself used nowadays. Initial investigation (Googl’ing) soon showed that there’s no evidence of Einstein (amongst several others) having said it. Looking a little further I found the source is much, much older, and it’s had a pretty fascinating journey; from the original author, an 18th century clergyman, to its contemporary (mis)quoting – visiting with homeopathy, Alcoholics Anonymous, Freemasonry and the Jehovah’s Witnesses along the way.” See Full Text: https://www.metabunk.org/einstein-condemnation-without-investigation-is-the-height-of-ignorance.t7015/

            You also conveniently omitted what I really said, which is: “But, I would not base my comments solely on the photo, which necessitated me researching the alleged discovery which culminated with the link I found this morning:http://doubtfulnews.com/2017/06/nazca-alien-mummy-revealed-in-promotiona… ”

            You said, “Shakespeare was right when he wrote: There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
            Quoting the obvious to me in any context, archaic or not, is useless. “All” scientists know that they don’t have all the answers. They don’t need to be told that by dusty old fools like Shakespeare.

  • Non-Gaia site

    I’ve located a non-Gaia website which appears to have relevant information: https://www.the-alien-project.com/en/media-alien-project/
    I just found it this morning and haven’t had enough time to dissect it. There’s a lot of stuff, much of it in French or Spanish.

    Here’s a video promoting an upcoming conference: https://www.the-alien-project.com/en/

    According to “The Alien Project”, the main object of the Inkari-Cusco Institute is not ufology, but archaeological research, ”within framework and respect of the procedures and regulations governing modern archeology”. (see the website: http://www.instituto-inkari.org).

    If anybody wants to pursue this, kindly post what you discover. Thanks.

  • Evolving Scam


    I discovered this link this morning that deals with the three-fingered conehead that originated this article.

    The comments are as interesting as the article. I especially like the boxed Editor notes from “idoubtit” She’s quite good.

    • Interesting

      It lends credibility to the Hoax theory.

      There are still some people who consider a spherical earth to be a hoax. I know a guy who does. He’s employed, has a family, and drives a nice car. To external appearances he appears completely normal, but he believes the earth is flat AND CLAIMS TO HAVE PROOF.

      Modern flat Earth societies date from the middle of the 20th century. These organizations are based on the archaic belief that the Earth is flat. The International Flat Earth Research Society (IFERS), the first such organization, was founded by Englishman Samuel Shenton in 1956. When satellite images showed Earth as a sphere, Shenton remarked: “It’s easy to see how a photograph like that could fool the untrained eye”

      • Zetetic Idiots

        It’s not a hoax theory. The “doubtfulnews.com” site doesn’t merely lend credibility, it exposes and debunks the hoax.

        [Flat Earth: Unlike you, I would not lend any credibility to anyone who believes in a flat earth and I would not see the topic as deserving of any meaningful or credible attention, except in a humor or half-witted pseudoscience context.]

    • Interesting

      Please delete this (double post)

Leave a Reply