article translation

It has been more than five years since the so-called "tridactyl mummies of Nasca" appeared on the internet. Those series of alleged archaeological findings that the scientific community warned were modified and mutilated pre-Columbian human remains exploited for commercial purposes. On the other hand, it has been more than two years since these mummies entered the San Luis Gonzaga University of Ica (UNICA), with the approval of the Vice-Rectorate of Research of that academic institution (1, 2).

Despite the criticisms (1, 2), a group of professors at UNICA claim to be researching these remains to determine their authenticity. This situation does not seem to bother some university authorities; on the contrary, they reward this initiative. On March 18th of last year, the Vice-Rectorate of Research approved the distribution of "incentives with ordinary resources" to the teachers investigating the "tridactyl iconographic record in ancient Peru and its relationship with the tridactyl specimens found in the province of Nazca" (1, 2, 3).

The research has the consent of the promoters of the case, including Mexican ufologist Jaime Maussan, French citizen Thierry Jamin—President of the NGO Inkarri and infamous for attempting, in 2013, to conduct excavations at Machu Picchu—and the corporation Gaia.

Gaia is a subscription-based streaming platform that distributes "esoteric" audiovisual content. Its involvement allowed it to produce a series about the mummies in 2017 (Unearthing Nazca), just a few months after the case appeared on the internet. According to Gaia's annual report, the content from that year contributed to an increase in subscriptions, ending 2017 with revenues reaching $28.3 million. The affinity between Jaime Maussan and Gaia goes beyond the case's dissemination. Since 2017, some of Maussan's productions have become part of Gaia's on-demand repertoire. Additionally, Gaia funded and managed a large part of the early analyses conducted on the mummies (1, 2, 3).

The promoters' consent for this research excludes almost any intervention by the Ministry of Culture (Mincul). According to them, Mincul does not want the truth to be known and plans to make the remains disappear or destroy them (1, 2, 3, 4, 5).

In November 2019, during an annual congress (CONINTI) organized by UNICA's vice-rectorate, the group of professors presented some papers about their project. According to the presentations, professors Roger Zuñiga Avilés, Ricardo Cruz Condori, Edgar Hernández Huaripaucar, and Efraín Miranda Soberón are leading the current research on the mummies.

In the recent CONINTI 2021, held virtually from November 4th to 6th, the Vice-Rectorate of Research presented three conferences on this topic. The speakers were Thierry Jamin and two professionals who had collaborated with the promoters in previous years: Mexican biologist José de la Cruz Ríos López and Colombian educator Clara Martínez. During the closing speech, Vice-Rector Martín Raymundo Alarcón reaffirmed his position on the matter.

"I always heard that people from Ica have no identity [...]. Ica does have identity and has universal identity because today we are seeing that in Nasca and Palpa there were our practically extraterrestrial beings: the tridactyls. Ica does have universal identity, [...], and we have those tridactyls in the Vice-Rectorate of Research."

The most popular mummies have names. According to the promoters, Maria is a "humanoid" mummy measuring 1.68 meters, Wawita is a "hybrid baby," and Luisa, Josefina, Alberto, and Victoria are "reptilian humanoids" measuring 60 cm. All of them are tridactyls and are covered from head to toe in a white powder (diatomaceous earth). The UNICA Vice-Rectorate has custody of all these remains, except for Josefina.

In Retrospect
The nearly five years of dissemination were fueled by analyses commissioned by the promoters of the case in different countries. They also enlisted several professionals to interpret the reports, who, despite lacking experience in the study of mummies, concluded that the bodies were authentic.

Mincul and several academics have stated that the research on these remains lacks the authorizations required by Peruvian law (1, 2, 3, 4). This means that the excavation at the discovery site, the extraction and subsequent export of samples, and all analyses were conducted without any permission. In addition, there is no archaeological context or record of pre-Hispanic remains subjected to this unique mummification technique.

The genesis of the case lies in the "account" of a looter nicknamed Mario, who claims to have extracted the remains from a cave located in the intangibility polygon of the area inscribed on the World Heritage List of the Nasca Lines. When a fiscal inspection of the location indicated by Mario was conducted, no archaeological evidence of funerary characteristics was found. Furthermore, the case file states that the supposed discovery site was recently built, likely "as a result of mining activity."

Mario's real name is Leandro Benedicto Rivera Sarmiento (1, 2). According to the newspaper Los Andes, in 2007 he was arrested in Puno along with ten others, accused of fraud involving the "waterfall story, tumi gold, and theft of species." In 2010, various media outlets identified him as a member of the Palpeños de Ica gang, dedicated to the desecration of archaeological remains from the Nasca culture (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). On January 28, 2018, the French channel M6's program "66 Minutes" aired a report on the Nasca mummies. The fourteen-minute investigative report takes place in Cusco, Ica, and Lima, where they interview some key figures and gain access to the remains. The most revealing part of the report emerges in a conversation, recorded with a hidden camera, where Mario claims to possess another mummy valued at $100,000 (1, 2).

Amid the controversy, DNA analysis emerged as one of the main pieces of evidence that the promoters have been using to support the alleged authenticity of the "tridactyl beings" (1, 2, 3). In their arguments, they refer to the conclusions of the professionals who collaborated in interpreting the genetic reports. An article in the newspaper Clarín, published on May 28, 2020, echoes this narrative:

"Various legends point to the existence of beings from the stars who lived among us. And this discovery of the Nazca mummies opens the possibility that ancient civilizations on our planet may have been in contact with very strange beings, which, according to DNA analysis, are not similar to any known species on our world," says Maussan.

Up to now, the promoters have made public the DNA analysis of Maria, Wawita, Victoria, a hand with three fingers, and a brain. Laboratories in Canada, Mexico, Russia, and Sri Lanka issued reports on these analyses. However, in the dissemination of all these reports, the main focus has been on the Russian report.

The Russian Report
We had access to the Russian report through the Antropogénesis outreach project [1]. Below, we will delve into its content and complement it with additional information that contrasts with what is currently known.

The analyses were carried out at the Prenatal Diagnosis of Hereditary and Congenital Diseases Laboratory, now known as the Center for Medical Genetics. This laboratory belongs to the Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproduction Research, located in the city of St. Petersburg. The institute collaborates with some universities in training professionals and serves as the clinical base for the Obstetrics and Gynecology School at St. Petersburg State Medical University I. P. Pavlov and St. Petersburg State University.

The two numerical data mentioned above refer to the percentage of common DNA with Homo sapiens found in the samples of Maria and Wawita. This information aligns with the report: in Maria, it is 23.8%, and in Wawita, it is 25.6%.

The report suggests that these percentages indicate that the samples exhibit a high degree of contamination or are "sufficiently distant from the genome of modern humans." Furthermore, the laboratory assessed the similarity of these matching fractions of Homo sapiens DNA with the 1000 Genomes Project database. This international project, initiated in 2008, analyzes the genetic material of populations worldwide to develop a catalog of human genetic variation. The report includes a diagram illustrating the genetic dissimilarity between the samples and the 1000 Genomes Project catalog.

In order to clarify these results, the Antropogénesis project sought advice from geneticist Konstantin Leskov (Ph.D. from Case Western Reserve University) to review the report. In his review, Dr. Leskov points out the following:

The authors did not include the genomes of modern inhabitants of the area where the remains were found in the analysis. If reliable paleo-human DNA exists from Peru, it should also be used as a reference.

The DNA of representatives from Mexico and Puerto Rico cannot be a suitable replacement for the DNA from the geographical area of the discovery. Both countries are too far from Peru, both geographically and in terms of the set of polymorphisms in the population.

As a result, Mexico and Puerto Rico emerged as the only available populations geographically closer to the origin of the samples. However, as shown in the diagram, the current genomes of their inhabitants are closer to those of Europeans.

For its part, the Antropogénesis team points out that the placement of the mummies on the diagram lacks any unique particularity since it corresponds to their pre-Columbian origin. In other words, as such, they should be positioned among the current populations of the American and Asian continents.

The diagram shows the proximity of Maria and Wawita to current inhabitants of Mexico, Puerto Rico, and Asia. Source: Antropogénesis
The diagram shows the proximity of Maria and Wawita to current inhabitants of Mexico, Puerto Rico, and Asia. Source: Antropogénesis

Currently, the 1000 Genomes Project database includes 133 samples from the Peruvian population. Furthermore, in 2018, a study of the genomes of ancient inhabitants of Central and South America was published, including 15 individuals from Peru. Therefore, it is now possible to determine the genetic similarity of the samples with the human genome more accurately.

Considering the technical feasibility, Alexander Sokolov, founder of Antropogénesis, contacted the authors of the report a few months ago to evaluate the possibility of repeating the analysis. However, Dr. Alexey Komissarov, a Molecular Biologist and a member of the team that analyzed the samples, responded that he did not see much sense in carrying out this project. He added that "the quality of the DNA in the samples was low, and the level of contamination was high."

Recovering genetic material from mummified bodies is the most complex process faced by paleogenetics today. This is due to contamination and the age of the samples. Geneticist Jennifer Raff (Ph.D. in Genetics and Anthropology from Indiana University) addresses this issue in an informative article she published a few years ago, from which we will quote a passage:

"When an organism dies, its DNA begins to break down into small fragments. This process is affected by various factors, including burial conditions, the age of the sample, and its exposure to chemicals in the soil (or in the laboratory where it is stored). Fragmented and damaged DNA is extremely difficult to recover; a success rate of 50% is often considered good! [...]. Because the DNA in an ancient sample is so fragmented and damaged, the process of copying it in sufficient quantities to work with will preferentially copy any modern DNA that is present. So contamination is a huge concern in the ancient DNA community. Not only do we have to be careful to prevent it from happening, we have to be able to distinguish between contaminated sequences and legitimate ancient ones."

Dr. Komissarov's observations are evident in the report. The samples from the Maria mummy exhibit Y-chromosome haplogroups characteristic of the Eastern European population. The report refers to these traces of manipulation as "contamination from the same person." Furthermore, as Dr. Raff explains, the DNA of lifeless organisms breaks down over time, so ancient DNA consists of many short fragments. The report reveals that in the mummy samples, more than 60% of the DNA fragments are long, indicating a high degree of modern contamination.

It should be noted that the Paleo-DNA Laboratory at Lakehead University in Canada analyzed six samples from the Maria mummy. The report, which was published in the Alien Project, concludes that in all samples, DNA from "at least one female and one male individual" was found.

Regarding the percentage of DNA that does not correspond to Homo sapiens, the report states that some of these remnants contain DNA from ungulate animals. It explains that "this can be explained by the use of llama fat in the mummification." Furthermore, to determine the nature of the impurities, it is necessary to make comparisons with "all existing genomes." That is, with animal and plant genome databases. This procedure has not been performed; the report warns that only comparisons with viral and bacterial DNA were made.

The conclusion of the report aligns with the various statements that the scientific community has made regarding these remains: the mummies Maria and Wawita are human corpses.

Conclusion

Unfortunately, we were limited to only two samples, while in this type of analysis, more are generally used, at least 3-10 samples that are related in some way. Therefore, it is necessary to continue the research with a larger number of samples. Likewise, it can be concluded with a high probability that the DNA samples from Maria and Wawita correspond to human DNA, even though they do not match the DNA available in the 1000 Genomes Project database.

In early February 2018, news of the investigation in Russia made its way to local media. A short report by the TV channel НТВ included statements from Dr. Vladislav Baranov, a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the director of the laboratory that conducted the analysis (1, 2). Dr. Baranov reaffirmed the report's conclusion, stating that the studies of the samples concluded that "it is human DNA."

A few months ago, Dr. Komissarov expressed surprise at how the content of the report his team issued three years ago was misrepresented. "It's incredible how they distorted the study! Common contamination by fungi and bacteria in ancient human DNA became Martian," he said via Telegram communication.

As mentioned before, DNA analysis was also conducted in Canada, Mexico, and Sri Lanka. Bioarchaeologist Elsa Tomasto reviewed these reports and explained her conclusions in detail in a conference held at the National Museum of Archaeology, Anthropology, and History of Peru on April 4, 2019. The event is available at this link. Likewise, Dr. Lars Fehren-Schmitz, founder of the UCSC Human Paleogenomics Lab—one of the most important ancient DNA research centers—reviewed these reports. Both experts explained that the reports all coincide in indicating that the samples contain human DNA and a high degree of contamination.

Bonus Track: The Reptilian Humanoid
Regarding the other reports, reference should be made to the histological analysis conducted on one of the small "mummies" named Victoria. The report reveals that two skin samples, one from the scapula and one from the hip, were sent to a laboratory in Campeche, Mexico. The Alien Project attributes the authorship of the report to Mexican biologist José de la Cruz Ríos López; however, in the report, it is shared with pathologist Alejandro Martínez Vásquez.

The following sections make up the conclusion of the histological analysis:

The skin of the Victoria paratype consists of both the scapular and hip samples, which have a highly keratinized, acellular, and thick flat stratified epithelium, similar to the scales present in reptiles.
The skin of the scapular region has small, highly thickened white protuberances, resembling warts, which are distributed solitarily and in pairs on the skin, but are absent in the hip sample.
In the protuberance, the keratin becomes somewhat more compact and takes on an amorphous form.
There are no mucous glands, and there are no sweat glands either, so the loss of water through the skin is practically nonexistent (keratin keeps it hydrated and protected). This allows them to inhabit very dry places, such as the Nasca desert, where these bodies covered in diatomaceous earth for preservation have been found.
The Antropogénesis project forwarded the report to histologist Konstantin Benken (Resource Center for Microscopy and Microanalysis, St. Petersburg State University) to obtain a specialized review.

Below are some of his observations. The histologist points out that the researchers made mistakes typical of students by "confusing" the actual magnification of the image with the magnification of the microscope lens in the image descriptions. Additionally, the authors claim that under the microscope, the samples are similar "to the scales that reptiles have," without providing any comparison with reptile skin. Furthermore, the report lacks microphotographs of reptile skin.

The report does not provide measurements or parameters of any kind, so claims that a particular layer is "thick" or "thin" lack support.

The authors argue that the "absence of mucous glands" and sweat glands "allows" these beings to "inhabit very dry places" in the present day, such as the Nasca desert. However, the report omits the fact that only two small skin samples were analyzed and ignores that human skin also has areas without glands or hair.

The descriptions of the last two photographs specify that an inverted microscope was used, which is a common microscope where the light travels in the opposite direction. Konstantin Benken explains that this clarification is absurd because its use is not a microscopy technique like Nomarski contrast, phase contrast, or polarized optics.

The review concludes as follows:

The incompetence of the researchers in the field of microscopy and histology is evident; necessary data is not provided, and it is possible that the sample preparation protocol was violated. The conclusions are not substantiated, the photographs do not show what the authors claim, there are no high-magnification photographs that could be used to draw conclusions. There are no numerical measurements of thicknesses or other characteristics. There are no qualitative or quantitative comparisons with human or reptile skin to evaluate similarities or differences.

A Self-Goal
Regarding biologist José de la Cruz Ríos López, it is worth mentioning that he also supports another controversial investigation involving Jaime Maussan (1, 2). This affiliation dates back to May 5, 2015, when Maussan held a paid event called BeWitness, where he presented images of an alleged "specimen of unknown origin." Shortly thereafter, several media outlets demonstrated that it was the mummified body of a two-year-old child found in Mesa Verde National Park, USA (1, 2, 3).

The biologist was part of the initial group of professionals who, with the assistance of Jaime Maussan and Gaia, traveled to Peru and gained access to the mummies in 2017. In the following years, he participated as a speaker in all the conferences organized by the promoters on the case (1, 2, 3). His most recent professional contribution is also his first publication in a specialized journal, which is part of a Bulgarian editorial of questionable academic reputation. The article is titled "Applying CT-Scanning for the Identification of a Skull of an Unknown Archaeological Find in Peru" and was published on October 8. Currently, the biologist maintains that all the mummies are authentic. However, in his publication—both in the abstract and in the conclusion—he asserts that the heads of the small mummies were fabricated from the deteriorated skull of a llama.

On the other hand, IARAS, the publishing house that published this research, is listed in the predatory publisher section of the current Beall's List. A predatory publisher is characterized by engaging in non-transparent academic practices, lacking a proper peer-review system, and failing to meet quality standards in its publications (1, 2, 3, 4). Jeffrey Beall, an American researcher and librarian, coined the term "predatory" for such journals and publishers (1, 2) and published an extensive list of them (Beall's list) on his Scholarly Open Access blog. In January 2017, Beall removed his list, but thanks to academics and collaborators, it has been recovered and is still being updated at beallslist.net.

The co-authors of the publication in question are Georgios A Florides and Paul Christodoulides. Both gained some notoriety in academic circles with an article questioning global warming, which Elsevier's Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews retracted in 2017. The editor of Elsevier withdrew the publication due to plagiarism, although several academics had warned—over three years—that it also contained multiple errors in its argumentation (1, 2). Moreover, Paul Christodoulides is a co-author of a peculiar study published by one of IARAS's journals in May 2020. The article claims that a series of photographs taken during the Apollo 11 mission on the Moon were actually taken in a photographic studio.

Science vs. Pseudoscience
It is essential to highlight that the first academic publication on this topic was released on December 5, 2020. The prestigious publisher Springer published a monumental work of over a thousand pages on the study of mummies, involving the intellectual cooperation of the world's top experts. Dr. Guido Lombardi (Peruvian University Cayetano Heredia. Lima, Peru) and Dr. Martín Conrado Rodríguez (Canary Institute of Bioanthropology. Tenerife, Spain) debunked the Nasca mummies case in 14 pages.

Dr. Lombardi is one of the signatories of the statement issued by the scientific community through the World Committee on Mummy Studies on July 8, 2017, against the modification and promotion of these archaeological remains. He also participated in a similar statement made two days later at the Lima Art Museum. In this regard, we asked Dr. Lombardi two questions.

It has been more than four years since you signed the World Committee of Mummy Studies statement. What reflections do you have on the time that has passed?

Guido Lombardi: People deserve the truth, not lie upon lie. For that, there is science fiction, which can be both artistic and profitable, honest and legitimate. Let's hope that the producers reflect and redirect their actions. Don't associate with thieves and traffickers anymore; don't plan more deception or forgery schemes. Use your funds and talents to finance and promote legitimate research. Science doesn't reject extraterrestrial life, on the contrary! But don't falsify it so crudely; the world needs more light, not the opposite.

Some promoters argue that this case could boost the tourism industry in Nasca and Palpa, making it a Peruvian Roswell. What is your opinion on this proposal?

GL: On the one hand, it would reinforce the idea, even racist, that the Nasca Lines could not have been made by ancient Peruvians. On the other hand, it is based on falsehoods, a house of cards. I have proposed that the ancestral bodies, violated in their rights to the extreme of pretending to strip them of their human condition, should be exhibited in the PNP Museum when it reopens.

It should be added that the tourism industry developed around the story of the alleged UFO crash in Roswell was not built on the mutilation of human remains or the plundering of archaeological sites.

Finally
The delay in finding a solution to this case by the relevant authorities makes the last two paragraphs of the article we published over a year ago on this topic compatible:

"The neglect of archaeological sites, the trafficking of cultural goods, and the increasing workload of the Public Prosecutor's Office that deals with more cases than it can handle are just some of the factors that enabled the development of this case and urgently need attention... the reasons why the mummies became popular in ufological circles are obvious, and the open possibility that they confirm a wide range of beliefs will continue to drive their dissemination for a long time. This fact, by itself, reflects the problems our society faces in terms of education. However, acceptance in the scientific community will remain elusive."