Fact Check: Nasca mummies are real

The Claim: "Nasca mummies are real"

The assertion that the Nasca mummies, often referred to as "alien mummies," are real has gained traction in various media outlets and public discussions, particularly following recent hearings in Mexico's Congress where researchers presented findings that purportedly support the authenticity of these mummies. This claim raises questions about the nature of the mummies, their origins, and the validity of the evidence presented to support their existence as extraterrestrial beings.

What We Know

Congressional Hearings: On November 7, 2023, Mexico's Congress held a session where researchers claimed that a set of three-fingered mummies from Peru are authentic and could potentially be evidence of extraterrestrial life. This session followed a similar event in September 2023, where scientific analyses were presented to support these claims, suggesting the mummies are approximately 1,000 years old 1 2.
DNA Analysis: Reports indicate that a DNA analysis conducted on the mummies found that about 30% of the genetic material was "not from any known species." This claim has been a focal point for those advocating the mummies' authenticity 4 8.
Skeptical Perspectives: Contradictory evidence has emerged from various experts and organizations. For example, some forensic experts have declared that the so-called alien mummies are actually dolls made from bones, dismissing the claims of extraterrestrial origins 10. Additionally, a report from a creationist organization asserts that the mummies are fraudulent artifacts, suggesting that they were fabricated rather than being genuine archaeological finds 6.
Historical Context: The mummies in question are linked to the Nazca region of Peru, where numerous archaeological discoveries have been made. However, the specific claims regarding these mummies have been met with skepticism due to the history of pseudoscientific claims surrounding similar discoveries 7.

Analysis

The evidence surrounding the claim that the Nasca mummies are real is highly polarized, with both supporting and opposing viewpoints.

Supporting Evidence: Proponents of the mummies' authenticity, such as those presenting at the congressional hearings, often rely on scientific analyses that suggest the mummies are ancient and possess unique DNA characteristics. However, the credibility of these analyses is questionable, as they have not been widely peer-reviewed or corroborated by independent scientists.
Skeptical Evidence: Critics highlight the lack of rigorous scientific validation for the claims made by proponents. For instance, the assertion that 30% of the DNA is "unknown" lacks context regarding the methodology used for the analysis and whether it adheres to established scientific standards. Furthermore, the involvement of individuals with a history of promoting pseudoscientific claims raises concerns about potential biases in the research presented 7.
Source Reliability: The sources of information vary in reliability. Mainstream news outlets like Reuters provide coverage of the congressional hearings but may not delve deeply into the scientific validity of the claims. In contrast, sources like creationist websites or forensic reports may have inherent biases that affect their objectivity. It is crucial to evaluate the motivations behind each source, especially when they may have agendas that influence their portrayal of the evidence.
Methodological Concerns: The methodologies employed in the studies supporting the mummies' authenticity are not fully transparent. For example, the specifics of the DNA analysis, including sample size, controls, and the criteria for determining "unknown" DNA, are not adequately detailed in the reports available. This lack of transparency complicates the assessment of the findings' validity.

Conclusion

Verdict: Mostly False

The claim that the Nasca mummies are real is deemed "mostly false" based on the available evidence. While there are assertions from some researchers regarding the mummies' authenticity, these claims are met with significant skepticism from experts in the field. The DNA analysis suggesting that a portion of the genetic material is "unknown" lacks sufficient context and rigorous peer review, raising doubts about its validity. Furthermore, credible forensic evaluations have classified the mummies as likely being fabricated artifacts rather than genuine archaeological finds.

It is important to note that the discourse surrounding these mummies is heavily polarized, with both proponents and skeptics presenting their cases. The lack of transparent methodologies and independent verification of the claims adds to the uncertainty. Readers should approach this topic with caution and critically evaluate the information presented, considering the motivations and biases of various sources.