Jaime Maussan and the Latest Round of Alien Creatures

 

Six or seven years ago, Jaime Maussan was involved in the research of two photographic slides I thought of as the Not Roswell Slides. The slides contained images that had been presented to UFO researchers as evidence of the aliens recovered near Roswell in 1947. The slides generated a great deal of controversy because the images released prior to a big event in Mexico City were badly blurred. The single available image was the result of a photograph of one of the slides shot from a computer monitor screen in a promotional video. Eventually, it was learned that the image had been purposefully obscured to tease the importance of the slides without destroying the value of them at the huge symposium held in Mexico City in 2015. Jaime Maussan was one of those involved, arranging for the venue, for some of the scientific investigations, and who proclaimed that the slides were evidence of alien visitation. Within two days the truth was learned. I followed the whole story on this blog and you can read many of those articles yourself just by typing Jaime Maussan into the search engine provided on the blog.

As so many know now, Maussan is back, again with more alleged proof of alien visitation, or maybe of some kind of other sentient lifeform that had evolved on Earth. Rather than just photographic evidence he had in 2015, he now presented two small bodies as proof of his claims. This time he was under oath and speaking to the Mexican Congress. He said that the small bodies were not part of our terrestrial evolution. He later said that they were not from a UFO crash.

Carbon dating by the National Autonomous University indicated that the bodies were a thousand years old. He said that he didn’t know if they were aliens or not but they were creatures that lived among us. Either way this discovery would rewrite history.

Not long after that presentation, journalists were invited to witness tests conducted by a forensic scientist, Jose de Jesus Zalce Benitez. Benitez, described as the Director of the Health Sciences Research Institute of the Secretary of the Navy, said, “Based on the DNA tests, which were compared with more than one million species… they are not related to what is known or described up to this moment by sciences or by human knowledge.”

That wasn’t all that Benitez said about his examination of the small bodies. Based on the X-ray and CT scans of the bodies, he said that there was no evidence of any assembly or manipulation of the skulls. In one of the news stories, it was reported that the “so-called bodies belonged to a single skeleton were not assembled.”

 And to add to the mystery, Benitez said, that one “was alive, was intact, was biological and was in gestation.” That suggested it was female, and that large lumps found inside could be eggs. No, I don’t know what he meant by one was alive but, quite obviously, both were dead, and according to the carbon-14 testing were a thousand years old.

But there are some problems here that seem to be missed by many of the commentators. Maussan when asked where the bodies had been found said that he would reveal that at the appropriate time.

This hints at some of the problems with the overall story that tends to confuse the issue. There has been discussion that the bodies were found near Cusco, Peru, but there are hints that they came from a location close to the Nazca Plain. In 2017, Maussan apparently made similar claims about possible alien bodies in Peru but a Peruvian prosecutor said the bodies were “recently manufactured dolls, which have been covered with a mixture of paper and synthetic glue to simulate the presence of skin.”

Those earlier bodies were not shown to the public at the time so that it was unclear if the bodies investigated in 2017 are the same as those displayed to the Mexican Congress just days ago. Maussan refused to reveal the provenance of the two bodies which does not bode well for authenticity.

There are more problems with the presentation. Gabriela Frias, described as a philosophy of science researcher, challenged Maussan’s claims of the “carbon-14 analysis” that had been conducted on the Nazca “mummies by scientists at UNAM.” Apparently, UNAM has since clarified some of this saying that “any subsequent use, interpretation, or misrepresentation of the results,” that is being used as “proof” that the bodies were nonhuman beings is not endorsed by UNAM.

All of this means is that one of the pillars on which the foundation of alien beings was built has collapsed. Without the provenance, without additional testing, the carbon-14 data is not quite as important as it seemed.

And part of, if not a large portion of the scientific argument and the suggestion that the testing has confirmed the alien, or rather the unusual nature of the bodies, is not as robust as it has been alleged. Much of that scientific research has been conducted by Jose de Jesus Zalce Benitez. His overwhelming excitement about the find and the research has provided the sort of scientific support that impresses much of the media who are unfamiliar with the history of UFO crashes and recovered aliens.

This isn’t the first time that Benitez has been involved similar research on other alien, or alleged alien beings. Part of the examination conducted in 2017 on either the creatures presented this week, or others that have slipped from the discussion, was attributed to research conducted by Benitez. I have only seen vague references to this, but it is somewhat disturbing.

Benitez’s name had also surfaced in connection to other alien beings. In 2015, two slides of a strange looking humanoid creature surfaced. Two men in the United States said they have found the slides under somewhat mysterious circumstances and had released poor copies of the slides to specific researchers. The being in those slides did look mysterious and was unidentified for a long period.

For months, attempts to identify the creature had failed. Jaime Maussan, (yes, the same guy) arranged for some forensic analysis with scientists in various disciplines including anthropologists. Richard Doble, a Canadian scientist was involved providing a long list of features of the being that suggested its alien beginnings. The two Mexican scientists were Luis Antonio de Alba Galindo and Jose de Jesus Zalce Benitez.

Richard Dolan wrote on May 6, 2015, the day after the presentation of the evidence in Mexico City, “All of these gentlemen [Doble, Galindo and Benitez] spoke in detail and with deep analysis as to why that body was not a human being.”

Within 72 hours of that presentation in Mexico City, the identity of the being was discovered when a better-quality scan of one of the slides became available. The Roswell Slides Research Group (and I must say in the interest of full disclosure most of whom were skeptics) had discovered the slides had been taken in a museum setting and they were able to “deblur” the placard that revealed the body was the mummified remains of a two-year-old boy that had been discovered in the 1890s. There is no doubt that the body on the slide was human, regardless of all the arguments about why it simply could not be human.

And here is the point of this rather long analysis. Maussan has been involved in the presentation of alleged alien bodies several times, whether those bodies are from an extraterrestrial source or developed here on Earth. In two of those, the remains have been identified. In one case, it was an unfortunate child and in the second, it was some sort of doll that was probably a modern creation.

To provide a scientific framework for these claims, Maussan relied on the testimony and expertise of several scientists. Again, in two of those cases, the scientists had been wrong. We now learn that some of those same scientists have been trotted out once again to attest to the authenticity of the examination of the remains. At what point does the track record of those involved in this latest revelation become something of an issue?

I suppose it is necessary to point out that all this smacks of hoax. What are the odds that one man would be involved in the recovery of alien creatures, whether from another planet or found ours? Isn’t it important to understand that the scientists who have made statements about the authenticity in the past have been wrong about what they were seeing in those past cases?

At any rate, I have held off on this for several days to check sources, to verify information and to be sure of what is being said. Without independent examination by disinterested third parties, there isn’t much left to discuss. Unless such tests are conducted, there is but a single conclusion. This is another in a long line of hoaxes involving alien beings.

If there is other and better information, from those disinterested parties I have mentioned, then this is the end of the debate. As always, I await better data but without it, this sorry tale has ended.