New mummy hoax: look who is involved!

[Walter Bosley]

LMFAO No surprise here...

Nazca nothing!

 

[Constance]

I think it's unfortunate to see so many members here engaging in knee-jerk reactions to this artefact discovered in Peru just because Mausson is interested in it. It is possible that the artefact could, after thorough testing and examination by various kinds of scientific specialists, turn out to be a naturally 'mummified' member of one primate species or another associated with the evolution of our own species. How could that possibility be less than interesting, and developments concerning the artefact's nature and origin be more worth waiting for?

 

[Bob Watson]

I think it's unfortunate to see so many members here engaging in knee-jerk reactions to this artefact discovered in Peru just because Mausson is interested in it. It is possible that the artefact could, after thorough testing and examination by various kinds of scientific specialists, turn out to be a naturally 'mummified' member of one primate species or another associated with the evolution of our own species. How could that possibility be less than interesting, and developments concerning the artefact's nature and origin be more worth waiting for?

oh yeah... like that's was worth waiting for?

 

[DaveM]

I would suggest that everyone should go to the Google search engine and type in the words 'Jaime Maussan hoax' and kindly tell us all what shows up.

 

[Walter Bosley]

I think it's unfortunate to see so many members here engaging in knee-jerk reactions to this artefact discovered in Peru just because Mausson is interested in it. It is possible that the artefact could, after thorough testing and examination by various kinds of scientific specialists, turn out to be a naturally 'mummified' member of one primate species or another associated with the evolution of our own species. How could that possibility be less than interesting, and developments concerning the artefact's nature and origin be more worth waiting for?

I understand what you're trying to say, but this is not that. You'll see.

 

[Constance]

We'll find out when we find out, if we find out. As of now, nobody knows, including you.

 

[Han]

I think it's unfortunate to see so many members here engaging in knee-jerk reactions to this artefact discovered in Peru just because Mausson is interested in it. It is possible that the artefact could, after thorough testing and examination by various kinds of scientific specialists, turn out to be a naturally 'mummified' member of one primate species or another associated with the evolution of our own species. How could that possibility be less than interesting, and developments concerning the artefact's nature and origin be more worth waiting for?

Hello Constance

I respect that you are willing to give Jaime another chance, that is up to you.

The reason I will not is because I am aware of the threat that our shared history is under.
I suspect that this latest mummy has some genuine parts, but that those parts were 'looted'.

Rather than go round in circles trying to explain why I feel so strongly, I request that you watch the first ten minutes of the video below:

It is about Ancient Peru:

Skip to four minutes twenty seconds (04:20) for the most relevant part.

 

[Waller]

I think it's unfortunate to see so many members here engaging in knee-jerk reactions to this artefact discovered in Peru just because Mausson is interested in it. It is possible that the artefact could, after thorough testing and examination by various kinds of scientific specialists, turn out to be a naturally 'mummified' member of one primate species or another associated with the evolution of our own species. How could that possibility be less than interesting, and developments concerning the artefact's nature and origin be more worth waiting for?

Wait for the findings first?

Novel idea.

 

[Han]

@Waller would you like to speak about some of the previous 'findings' of Mr Maussan et al? even though: I would prefer to refer to them as leavings!

 

[Squiddly Diddly]

I heard somebody on KGRA trying to stand up for Maussan saying we should give him the benefit of doubt.

Everyone of his fairytales has more holes than a collander.

 

[Han]

Oh no! you mean the magic colander has already been revealed? I had £500000 tickets to the main event!
I was waiting for the findings!

 

[Squiddly Diddly]

He is probably bringing it to next years CITD, the poor old misunderstood fraudster.

 

[Han]

I said it once, and I'll say it again, he deserves every reverberation he gets.

 

[Constance]

I respect that you are willing to give Jaime another chance, that is up to you. The reason I will not is because I am aware of the threat that our shared history is under.
I suspect that this latest mummy has some genuine parts, but that those parts were 'looted'. Rather than go round in circles trying to explain why I feel so strongly, I request that you watch the first ten minutes of the video below:

Thank you for the link, Han. I watched about five minutes of it and would continue except that my computer's sound/audio device is not presently working. I'll return to the video when I have the device reconnected.

I of course understand your disgust with looting of burial sites and archaeological sites in general, your reactions to hoaxing of prehistoric artefacts, and your feelings about the need to preserve the integrity of archaeological evidence discovered in our time. I also think that we know too little about the prehistory of human experience and expression on earth and that we need to find out more about the humanly lived past for many reasons, particularly psychological and philosophical reasons, in order to more fully understand the nature of consciousness and mind as developed in our species and others. In other words, we need to be able to place and comprehend our existential and cultural experience in the context of the ways in which other humans, and human-like others, have experienced and shaped their lived realities. It's an endless inquiry, to be sure, but a necessary one.

 

[Walter Bosley]

We'll find out when we find out, if we find out. As of now, nobody knows, including you.

That's just it, Constance, I and many others do know what we're talking about here. We do know this is yet another disappointment or outright lie. You are wasting your faith on this. How many times must you keep giving the same person chance after chance after chance when that person is repeatedly shown to be wrong and probably making stuff up? Your diligent support is not going to magically make it true this time.

I merely suggest you do some serious thinking on this Nazca Mummy issue.

 

[Constance]

That's just it, Constance, I and many others do know what we're talking about here. We do know this is yet another disappointment or outright lie. You are wasting your faith on this. How many times must you keep giving the same person chance after chance after chance when that person is repeatedly shown to be wrong and probably making stuff up? Your diligent support is not going to magically make it true this time.

I merely suggest you do some serious thinking on this Nazca Mummy issue.

It's not about Mausson; it's about what it's possible to learn from discoveries of anomalous artefacts from the deep past. So far it's not proved that we are dealing in this case with a hoax, though that is still possible. Why get exercised about that possibility? In the meantime, I'm not wasting any 'faith', energy, or emotion on this case. I'm merely suggesting that we 'wait and see' what comes out of thorough multidisciplinary scientific research concerning the nature of this object found in a cave in Peru and reportedly now carbon-dated to the remote past.

 

[Walter Bosley]

It's not about Mausson; it's about what it's possible to learn from discoveries of anomalous artefacts from the deep past. So far it's not proved that we are dealing in this case with a hoax, though that is still possible. Why get exercised about that possibility? In the meantime, I'm not wasting any 'faith', energy, or emotion on this case. I'm merely suggesting that we 'wait and see' what comes out of thorough multidisciplinary scientific research concerning the nature of this object found in a cave in Peru and reportedly now carbon-dated to the remote past.

Yes, the part of the thing that is real may have been dated (What is the source on that...?), not the parts which believers claim makes it 'alien' or 'another species of human'. Those parts -- or the alteration of said real parts -- are what's going to blow the cover off the hoaxers.

Meanwhile, serious researchers get marginalized. It is a business after all, lol

 

[Han]

Hi @Walter Bosley I believe that you were at 'contact in the desert 2017'? did you happen to see these 'artifacts' by any chance?

The Upcoming Spectacular "Contact In The Desert" Conference In May In California - Hidden Inca Tours


It is probably worth mentioning that the pictures above are not of Jaime's 'mummalien' (mummy/alien) but I suspect that they are from the same 'source'.

Thank you

 

[Constance]

Yes, the part of the thing that is real may have been dated (What is the source on that...?),

I read it in a post at ATS, about midpoint. I have not read the whole thread yet. It grows apace. Link:

Strange Mummies From Nazca Studied By Medical Team, page 1

not the parts which believers claim makes it 'alien' or 'another species of human'. Those parts -- or the alteration of said real parts -- are what's going to blow the cover off the hoaxers.

Could be. But nothing can be proved on that front without the kind of physical examinations that can only be performed by medical and forensic scientists, including some incisions into one of the wrists to withdraw questionable materials appearing in the x-rays and to analyze their composition. It will be awhile before that kind of work is done, and it might require the support of the Peruvian government. Nothing to get upset about yet.

Meanwhile, serious researchers get marginalized.

Not necessarily. Much depends on what the Peruvian government does or permits to be done, or not done, with this artefact.

It is a business after all, lol

That's the state of most of the world these days -- lots of business and lots of crime.

 

[Han]

Thank you for the link, Han. I watched about five minutes of it and would continue except that my computer's sound/audio device is not presently working. I'll return to the video when I have the device reconnected.

I of course understand your disgust with looting of burial sites and archaeological sites in general, your reactions to hoaxing of prehistoric artefacts, and your feelings about the need to preserve the integrity of archaeological evidence discovered in our time. I also think that we know too little about the prehistory of human experience and expression on earth and that we need to find out more about the humanly lived past for many reasons, particularly psychological and philosophical reasons, in order to more fully understand the nature of consciousness and mind as developed in our species and others. In other words, we need to be able to place and comprehend our existential and cultural experience in the context of the ways in which other humans, and human-like others, have experienced and shaped their lived realities. It's an endless inquiry, to be sure, but a necessary one.

I can not disagree with anything you said.

My personal feeling is that the stakes are so high, that we should adhere to the strictest of standards when it comes to evidence.
I am sorry that your sound is not working.
The section of the video/documentary I felt was relevant to this situation and thread, is a brief interview with the head archaeologist at the city of Cahuachi (Peru) regarding looting.

Here is a section about looting from a book about ancient Peru:

Cahuachi in the Ancient Nasca World




Like any illegal trade it is about supply and demand.
If people didn't buy things without the proper provenance, this trade would not be lucrative enough for the looters to pursue.
I can guarantee that if this was happening in England, say at 'stone heng' for example there would not only be outcry but measures put in place to prevent it.

I am afraid that I suspect Jaime has purchased an illegal artifact.
Now if I suspend my disbelief for a moment and pretend that he did actually find the first bonafide genuine 'ET' Mummy, it has now been removed from its original location and all 'context' lost, deliberately or not, it has gone and can never be recovered.

Unfortunately I can't really do anything about it, other than complain here, or to anybody willing to listen.
I hope I am wrong about the origin of the Mummy.