Unique aerospace vehicles coming out of the ocean in Puerto Rico. Photo by José Fernandez.
How can we as “disclosure activists” and as practitioners of “exopolitics” (and, in many cases, as contact experiencers) really assist society to accept and to adapt to the disclosure of an extraterrestrial, multi-dimensional presence? Should we simply allow a more classic, militaristic interpretive tendency (as within the effort of To the Stars Academy of Arts & Sciences) convince politicians and citizens worldwide and let that extension of our political biases take its course or should we try to find another way of doing things?
I think that we (in fact, eventually, ALL of us and not just ‘experiencers’ who have been awakened to a vaster reality) must try to understand why we are as we are in terms of maintaining our personal identities, sense of meaning and moral politics. I think that our ability to see and our blindness impeding seeing how to “connect the dots” (in a healthy, healing, constructive way) is related to how consciousness itself is capable or not of embracing more aspects of reality in a coherent way. And some of the people speaking about this (although in less spiritual terms) are moral and developmental psychologists. As boring as these studies might be (in contrast to cover-up revelations, for instance) they can serve as foundations based on empirical research to learn why we create dominance hierarchies and why we fight so much with each other, whether we are in the 0.1% elite group or in any other social strata.
In order to establish contact with healthy, benevolent interstellar beings on a par with their alleged lofty ideals and in a mutually beneficial fashion, with sovereignty as a species that can be sustained, we probably first need to be able to leave our”self-perpetuating wheel of unending conflict.”
What makes ‘sense’ to us is generally related to our intuitions of what is and is not. And this is an expression of the Principle of Identity. And the Principle of Identity (related to how we cognitively intuit what is and is not in our mental schemas and in relation to perception) is probably rooted in the equivalence of consciousness with being itself. It is rooted in the fact that we are (being) because we experience (cogito ergo sum). Thereafter, our interpretive experience is rooted in the self-evident fact that we first know that we are because we experience. It is an automatic part of our conscious awareness and even of our personal identity-based political operations in any “real world” we may be participating.
By extension, constructive “common cause” identity politics, and destructive, “common enemy” identity politics is based on that capacity of recognizing expressions of what is or of existence and being. We could summarize (according to some developmental psychologists like Kegan, Kohlberg, Peck, Cheryl, Gilligan, Fowler, Cook-Greuter, Baldwin, et al) our capacity to embrace and understand varies from person to person.
Levels of Ego Development according to one of the developmental psychologists, Suzanne Cook-Greuter. To face the challenge of DISCLOSURE we probably need a large percentage of the population and/or its cultural-political leaders in a Green (Pluralist), Teal or Turquoise stage of development. How could someone in a predominant “Amber” stage of ego development (the Diplomat- Conformist) act in the name of pluralist, world-centric values for the good of all humankind while willing to admit into his or her circle of care and concern non-human, extraterrestrial (or even intraterrestrial) beings?
It can be summarized as if the personal room for our consciousness and its degrees of possible embrace or identification with reality and interpretations were larger or smaller. It might also operate under a greater or lesser intensity of subjective walls or subdivisions in that inner conscious “space” or “room” and we would have biases possessing our conscious experience without us being aware of it, limiting how much and how we embrace what we disclose to ourselves in our experience.
The more we expand our consciousness as a permanent average trait the more we can embrace a “common emphasis” identity politics versus a “common enemy” identity politics. This issue related to how our CONSCIOUSNESS is freer and more inclusive or instead possessed by inner walls and biases that affect our interpersonal relationships, politics, ufology, disclosure. If we do not nourish a trusting environment we may not be ready for healthy social coordination after major UFO, experiencer revelations.
According to Ken Wilber (working with the information provided by some of those developmental psychologists) a large percentage of the population primarily functions in a premodern, mythic, authority-based level of development coloring their self-identities in which it is IMPOSSIBLE to feel, think, value and include multiple truths multilaterally, fact-based and pluralistically, or in a true modern democratic way, not to speak of the capacity to find a way to harmonize ideological differences via an integrative approach.
Dr. Jonathan Haidt emphasizes (conservative and liberal) moral TENDENCIES (rather than developmental levels) affecting self-identity and identity politics but his work is seriously related to this discourse and to how disclosure activists may effectively work in society beyond participating (even if based on reason) in the blame game.
In a world that needs to come together to process shared human problems: degradation of the oceans, climate change, nuclear warheads, terrorism across borders, artificial intelligence and job loss, information glut, and a long etc, the popularity of ethnic nationalism (now achieving power through democratic elections) is dismantling the international order that (at least in principle) promoted larger swaths of humanity to come together in cooperation with healthy democracies around a world of shared human rights using reason and facts to agree in applications.
How can a “post-truth” world order or a more disunited world made up of more dominating but competing for populist, nationalist polities welcome “the others”? (ETs). How can societies learn to deal in a constructive way and as part of a more unified global humanity if an “us vs them” mentality prevails?
If the classical liberal institutions and classical liberal people’s values in the world are in disarray as we tend to hold on to limited answers, how are we going to add the cultural challenge of verifying an extraterrestrial presence? The “rooms” or “spaces” in our consciousnesses need to expand.
I propose that as “disclosure activists” we also need to understand our own human psychology and what motivates us in order to engage in a more intelligent disclosure discourse and activism. Are most of us liberals (in the liberals vs conservative sense)? How can we value and speak with conservatives (both recognized by Wilber and Haidt as necessary)?
I definitely think that we need to study the work of moral psychologists like Johnathan Haidt and also the works of integrative philosopher Ken Wilber (who emphasizes developmental psychology). One emphasizes tendencies and, the other, capacities. And we need to understand both if we are to become aware of why we are how we are and why we become so invested in our beliefs.
If we are to overcome what may be the greatest challenge of all (probably challenging human nature as we normally experience it) we need to rise beyond opinions about each other. It must even go beyond the genuine and fantastic critiques of what an elite may be doing to us to retain control of us.
In order to be politically and exopolitically responsible we must really focus on understanding our tendencies and that of others (in regular citizens as well as elites and, simply, those in positions of leadership), tendencies naturally bearing on the degree of openness, personal biases and/or various specific interests toward the complex issue of disclosure. Simultaneously, we also need to understand why (sometimes, due to developmental level incapacity) many cannot rise to the challenge of disclosure because they – quite simply – they cannot rise above standard belief systems and cohere explanations discovering what they have in common and – from this platform – inform, share, educate.
The greatest transformative challenge humanity faces would be so deeply transformative that it cannot simply be based on simplistic belief system solutions. Revealing the degree of mischievousness with which an elite controls the cover-up or if a handful of contactees communicating with “space brothers” were – after all – correct in what, otherwise, looked like airy-fairy recommendations and narratives would be probably remain superficial, cosmetic solutions prone to produce more interpersonal conflict unless ‘we’ who care about truth, evolution and disclosure (at least as many of us as possible) come to value understanding why we are as we are, what can we really become and how to go about educating and transforming our current manifestations of “human nature.” This is why we need to expand our sphere of interest into Social Psychology, Behavioral Genetics, Biosociology, and other sources of information that shed light upon our “human nature.”
Thus far, the “UFO community” has made some contributions to society at large (albeit mostly preaching to the choir) but has not been able to provide a basis to come to basic agreements or to integrate the best information. We are also divided by our tendencies, often to the point of not recognizing each others’ contributions. So, we have also shown to the world how we subdivide ourselves as any other social group with a political message.
Do we simply need to become more conscious through more validated or grounded revelations, information, and through spiritual practices or do we need to re-engineer our tendencies and our developmental capacities by re-engineering our genes or simply becoming aware of why we are as we are (and to change our behavior and attitudes accordingly) is the key to become politically and exopolitically successful “citizens” in a complex, multi-dimensional cosmos?
A person to keep in mind to deepen this necessary conversation is Dr. Sean Esbjörn-Hargens who (probably in 2019) will be exploring (from an Integral Meta-Theory perspective) the issue of extraterrestrial contacts, Ufology, society, exopolitics.
Wilber, K. (2007). Integral Spirituality. Boston: Integral Books
DO WE FINALLY HAVE SOME PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OF NON-HUMAN, INTELLIGENT ENTITIES? Isn’t this exopolitically important? Could this case offer more evidence than ever before about alleged humanoids?
For instance: There has been IN-DEPTH GENETIC SEQUENCING: BUT TO DATE (until January 2019) NO UNIVERSITY (AND ONLY VERY FEW SCIENTISTS) HAVE CARED TO GET INVOLVED IN WHAT MAY BE BIOLOGICAL/PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OF ENTITIES THUS FAR NOT MATCHING KNOWN EARTHLY SPECIES. Moreover, FEW IF ANY IN THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING UFO AND FEW EXOPOLITICAL or UFO COMMUNITIES HAVE COMMENTED OR CARED, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SOME INDIVIDUALS LIKE CAPTAIN ROBERT SALAS. SEVERAL GENETIC LABORATORIES HAVE FOUND IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES AND ‘ANOMALIES’, EVEN AFTER NEXTGENERATION SEQUENCING (NGS) LIKE ABRAXAS: A REPORT FROM ABRAXAS IS FOUND IN THIS LINK Thanks to Instituto Inkari: https://www.the-alien-project.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/ABRAXAS-EN.pdf
Thus far (after about 2 years since the news broke out), the almost nil interest or involvement by academic circles, in general, is telling: ‘Scientific’ dogma, fear of reputation loss and prejudice (and not just the imposition of secrecy) overcome the scientific spirit of curiosity and play an important role against a substantial type of paradigm shift. The exopolitics community should care when physical evidence of a totally unknown humanoid species is coming together. If verified, these bodies may represent that humans (the Nazca) and humanoids of unknown origin lived in close proximity. Perhaps the possibility of some kind of a disclosure shift is not only in the hands of a major Government officially disclosing but also in the hands of a few caring, aware, motivated citizens. Perhaps (as Margaret Mead said) we should not doubt that only a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.
Thus far, there has been little interest in the UFO, disclosure and exopolitics community in the developed West or even in Spain. Is it because people mostly care about cases they are used to and in their own language? And in Perú there has been little serious media coverage and lots of detractors trying to find every possible fault, publicly discrediting and laughing about it. But perhaps the sheer weight of evidence accumulated and the dedication of some individuals in favor that SOME of the samples may be genuine (besides a request from the Peruvian Congressperson (Armando Villanueva) for there to be an official investigation) could be reverting the apathy.
I think that this situation on the so-called “THREE-FINGER, HUMANOID, DESICCATED NAZCA BODIES” is gradually becoming a seriously important revelation for humanity to reassess who we are, what life is, a possible extraterrestrial presence in Earth’s past, possible hybridization between homo sapiens and other species, etc. It also shows (thank goodness) that a few individuals care or are able to process the new possibility which is largely dismissed or ignored by scientific, media, political and other representatives of modern institutions.
But bone and tissue structure in these and many other images plus genetic tests performed by several labs are coming together to show that at least SOME of the many samples/specimens under research belong to new species or to hybrid species previously unknown to science. I believe that, taken together, this evidence overcomes some previous objections. If I mention some of the objections from skeptical scientists or scientists having a contrarian view it is because we need to engage in a civil dialogue and facilitate the exchange of views among interested scientists.
It is obvious to me that these DICOM, high-resolution, tomography images are genuine and, in the “María” body, the bones appear to be much more hollow, the teguments in hands and feet show continuity with bones that fit well. No cut of fingers. The rib cage is a little different. In “Josefina” the alleged eggs… are looking more like real eggs.
As of today, only radiologist Dr. Raymundo Salas Alfaro and Inkari Institute know the tomography lab. More should be revealed soon. Thanks to Dr. Alfaro’s efforts we now have these higher quality images and more specific descriptions. Allegedly, other labs that were approached were scared or worried in terms of their reputation and didn’t feel inclined to work with this research. I’m glad that (in spite of the legal consequences that the samples were illicitly obtained by a huaquero-grave robber) some persons and institutions are taking big risks in the name of humanity. I think it is a unique situation and should be treated as such. Many archaeological discoveries were made in an informal manner by huaqueros and others. I do not condone grave robbing to sell bodies or artifacts in the black market but it seems that the huaquero here nor only wanted to make money but to show a discovery for analysis for the world to know and that is why they first approached for guidance my friend Dante Rios Tambini who then took samples to Instituto Inkari.
We must recognize the contributions of radiologist Dr. Raymundo Salas Alfaro, biologist José de la C. Rios López, and analysis of forensic physician José de Jesús Zalce. I am glad that Jaime Maussan is working with these scientists. I’m told that the name of the clinic where the high-resolution tomographies took place should be revealed soon.
Below: A horizontal view of Maria showing very hollow bones. The tomographic bone density shows that the density is low because they are more hollow as biologist José de la Cruz Rios points out. If the bones are so hollow, could they still be strong due to a different chemical composition or structuring? We need more testing. Humanity needs to save and secure the bodies and study them with care.
Lateral right view of Maria. The fingertips have a similar ending as theropod dinosaurs. The calcaneus bone is different and the skulls’ brain capacity is larger than average (1650cc).
Posterior view – torso
Another posterior view-torso
Forensic physician José de Jesús Zalce observed in a recent interview that Maria has no scapula, cocxys or sacrum but I am told by biologist Ríos López that he made a human error confusing names and that he was referring to the specimen named “Josefina.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wS1iAoxVdzY&t=275s
Maria’s spine lesion. Maria has her internal organs and is not a classical, regional “mummy.”
However, María was found in a classical Nazca mummy position.
Unique bone structure.
Detail of a subluxation of the jaw. No ear pavillions.
Detail of the spine with 12 pairs of ribs. Are they completely like ours?
DICON tomography images at 128 cuts of resolution shed new light.
In one foot, the middle finger broke off but the other fingers show continuity and no artificial alterations. The radius-carpus articulation is well articulated and gives origin to 5 phalanxes. The phalanges still possess their capsules in each inter articular line. The carpus has 8 bones. Another image (not available here) shows a cavity lesion in the right lung.
Another view of Maria’s right hand
Detail from hands
What are these skin protuberances?
Previous photo of Maria’s horizontal fingerprints.
To be fair, I need to show this previous X-ray plaque by which other scientists determined that proximal phalanxes had been added to the feet. Issues like these need to be decided after careful scrutiny.
A more recent image with a broken finger
One of María’s feet with a hook-like ending 8.6 inches. They have 5 phalanxes.
María’s 5 phalanxes in the feet
Details of extremely hollow bones and feet similar to Therapods as pointed out by biologist José de la Cruz Rios López.
In Maria’s feet, the Achilles Heal is inserted in the Astragalus bone rather than in the calcaneus bone.
Maria’s rib cage: It appears to be somewhat different. Is she a hybrid?
The body named “Josefina” (approx 23 inches tall) allegedly has a metal piece contoured around his chest. It has been affirmed by the Maussan team that the metal was analyzed in INGEMMET (the Metallurgic, Mining and Geologic Institute of Peru) in Peru with anomalous results to be revealed soon. Hand and arm mobility was probably restricted due to the fact that Alberto only shows one large bone in the forearm. No fibula, cubit, radius, tibia. He would have walked like an oviparous entity. The pelvis would be made of separate bones built in a circular manner. (biologist José de la C. Rios López).
An upper, frontal view of “Josefina.” 8 specimens like this have been analyzed. Apparently, she had a broken clavicle. The alleged implant or, perhaps, the prosthesis has a HU (density) of 5,241.52. In other images, it is shown that The viscerocranium has no sutures, that the cranium has 3 fenestras and a pneumatization in the occipital area. The Magnus foramen is square. The clavicle is fused or is a furcula as in birds and some dinosaurs. A short mouth/snout aperture adapted to feeding by sucking liquids. According to biologist José de la C. Rios López theskin is scaly, the neck could be retractile. Victoria and Alberto are defined as “humanoid reptiles” by biologist José de la C. Rios López.
The hands of the 60cm beings still show articular capsules, tendons, ligaments. They only have 4 phalanges instead of 5 as Maria.
“Josefina” (also approximately 23 inches tall) is apparently pregnant with eggs. They are translucid and seem to show structure (embryos?) inside and (although probably calcified with a 2,470.91 HU density) may not be placed metal objects as alleged by skeptical scientists. The cranial perimeter is large and would not be that of a pre-Hispanic dog as alleged. “He” has a different number of fenestra and a very light head.
The spinal column of this second species of 60 cm in height is medial (located in the middle rather than further back). This is why the posterior apophysis is longer than what was known before. This is why there are some structures of unknown function in an area posterior to the spine. They might have to do with swallowing. (José de Jesus Salce, forensic physician).
Interestingly, reporter Jois Mantilla and José de la C. Ríos López pointed out to me that an ENERGY EMANATION seems to come out of this specimen “Josefina” with the tomography. It is in the coming out from the metallic piece place on the upper chest. I don’t know but it might not be an “artifact” of the tomography. It would be necessary to know under what frequencies this energy emanation becomes visible. Here it looks like a reddish flame.
Forensic Archaeologist Flavio Estrada who worked in forensic cases for the Public Ministry in Perú has necessary opinions that must be listened to. He stated that it is the energy of the tomographic machine hitting against the metallic body. In the same manner, Mr. Leopoldo Zambrano Enríquez commented that by using the original tomographies sent to France with 5Gb of information, and using DICOM visors what we are seeing is something that in radiology is known as an artifact “in solar rays” produced by the dispersion of X rays upon hitting the metallic plate. I think that these comments need to be included in a respectful way in order to be fair. However, more tests should be carefully conducted. The artifact known as “solar rays” seems to be different because the “rays” are dark, straight and come together concentrically.
Alleged energy emanation detected.
Another version of the alleged energy emanation detected.
Three more images of the alleged energy emanation. Thanks to Peruvian reporter Jois Mantilla who has been promoting the preservation and formal study of these specimens in spite of great dismissal and opposition.
A frontal image in red color above the metallic object. The apparent energy emanation would be in a deep red color above the metallic piece.
The actual “solar ray” effect or artifact looks different. Here seen also in Josefina: converging, straight, dark lines (“rays”).
A frontal view. The alleged point of energy emanation on the middle of the metallic piece looks darker.
Another view of “Josefina” with the metal piece placed on the chest below what appears to be a one-piece furcula instead of a collarbone.
A tomographic measurement of the density of “Josefina’s” eggs
Another view of the eggs inside “Josefina” at a density of less than the maximum for bones.
Possible internal structures in the eggs. Possibleembrionic formation? Inkari Institute – Courtesy of biologist José de la C. Rios López
Possible internal structures in the eggs. Possibleembrionic formation? Courtesy of biologist José de la C. Rios López
A recent image of structures within the alleged eggs. They could be OVOVIVIPAROUS creatures. Shared on 01-27-2019. Ovoviviparous creatures gestate inside eggs in the parent’s body and may hatch inside before coming out.
According to biologist Jose de la C Rios López the bones are not cut as we can see with the high-resolution tomography. They are “crowned” and only in lesser resolution images seem to have been cut because they are more hollow than normal.
The crowned epiphysis of “Josefina” between the humerus and femur. Is it a different type of jagged connection?
From a study made with associated Russian scientists, the “knee” doesn’t show to be fabricated with cut bones.
The Histology (an analysis of the skin cells) of a small, headless specimen named “Victoria” was made by biologist Jose de la C. Rios Pérez. Here in Spanish, French and English. Here is the link published in “Alien Project”: https://www.the-alien-project.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Victoria-Histologie.pdf
From the conclusions section: – The Victoria paratype skin is composed of a highly keratinized, acellular and thick flat stratified epithelium similar to the scales of reptiles, for both the scapular and hip regions.
– The skin of the scapular region presents small, very thick,
white protuberances, whose appearance is like a wart. Its
distribution in the skin is solitary and also in pairs, but missing
on the hip sample.
– In the protuberance, the keratin becomes more compact and
acquires an amorphous form.
– Mucous glands are missing just like the sweat glands. The loss of
water through the skin is therefore nonexistent (the keratin keeps
it hydrated and protected), which allows it to live in very dry places.
As in the Nazca desert, where these bodies were found covered
with diatomaceous earth for their preservation
Remember that one of the specimens was of an infant named “Wawita”?
With the better images, Wawita’s hand was shown by Dr. Salas Alfaro to have been mutilated. He thinks that, since the specimen is in a very brittle condition, this alteration could have been done as a ritual in the pre-Hispanic past for some unknown reason.
Wawita’s feet also mutilated, modified.
However, we must also recognize that other scientists (for instance pharmaceutical chemist Dr. Ernesto Ávalos using infrared spectroscopy) have legitimately found that some specimens have been fabricated with modern materials such as palmitic acid (oil), paraffin (wax). In smaller quantity: glue, polyethylene vinyl acetate (plastic), cyanoacrylate. All modern components. These would not be the best or genuine specimens.
However, there appears to be a clear difference between different kinds of samples as follows analyzed. Some of the hoaxed ones (including fake hands) may have been analyzed together with previous images (with less detail) by the team from the Instituto de Medicina Legal de Ciencias Forenses del Ministerio Público (The Public Ministry’s Institute of Forensic Sciences and Legal Medicine). Thus (while naturally inclined towards skepticism by being outmaneuvered by huaqueros and by knowing that there is a large black market in Peru for genuine AND FAKE pre-Hispanic items), they would have sincerely concluded that the entire group of specimens given to them (and any other items considered to be part of the same group of specimens) is fake. I’ve interacted with BOTH group of scientists and think that both are sincere. Thus far they haven’t met with each other! There is suspicion between them! It is high time for these 2 groups of scientists to meet in a cordial manner and objectively clarify each little point of disagreement in a meticulous manner.
Regarding some of the GENETIC TESTS: Several laboratories found anomalies in the genetic profile of some samples: For the specimens named “Maria” and “Victoria” out of the main group of specimens most likely not faked (Maria, Wawita, Alberto, Josefina and Victoria- the headless specimen).
NEXTGENERATION SEQUENCING (NGS) LIKE ABRAXAS: A REPORT FROM ABRAXAS IS FOUND IN THIS LINK: https://www.the-alien-project.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/ABRAXAS-EN.pdf
A study commanded by the Incari Institute: Massive sequencing of a bone of Maria: Using the services of Dr. Sarah Kouhou, PhD. Only 33.675% corresponds to the human genome. 18.415% to bacteria. Virus and others in 9,384 readings.
A study commanded by Third Millennium using the services of BIOTECMOL. For the tridactyle specimen “Victoria” (the one without a head) – out of a Bone (with 2,400,000 base pairs), using last generation sequencing, only an alignment of 19.82% corresponds to Human DNA. And for “Maria,” only corresponds to an alignment of 34.935% with the human genome.
So according to these labs, for the 60cm tridactyles (to which “Victoria” belongs) and for “Maria,” there is no correspondence with homo sapiens and with what is known of terrestrial organisms in the Blast Base. More in-depth genetic tests need to be conducted for “María” but for the 60cm specimens they have already been conducted.
And the University of St. Petersburg did an exon analysis for a massive nuclear DNA sequencing and for Maria it found a correspondence of 23.8% of short fragments attenuated with the human genome.
Chart presented in the presentation room inside Peruvian Congress. Percentage of genome coincidence of Maria with homo sapiens (after massive DNA sequencing) according to 3 laboratories.
An important link to consider is: https://www.the-alien-project.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/2018-02-06-PALEO-DNA-MARIA-COMPARAISON-ADN.pdf
Observations of the biologist José de la C. Ríos López:
The bones of the most important samples (Josefina, Victoria, Alberto, and María) do not correspond to animals or even to human bones since these bones are hollow bones and this does not correspond to any mammalian animal of the earth. María presents this characteristic of hollow bones without the presence of tracts.
The eggs are less dense than the metal and less dense than the maximum density for the bones.
In the metal in Josefina’s chest, the values as metal are high. They are exact data of the tomographic equipment. There is no manipulation here. We have a reference between those eggs and the metal. The bones are less dense because they are hollow.
Both the x-rays and the evidence of the particularities of the bones coincide. The bones do not belong to any terrestrial mammal because of the said bones of fabricated animals.
Why Josefina’s bones and other specimens have furcula. Why do they have hollow bones? Why do they have a structure of a sexual organ? Why do eggs have conglomerate material if they are metal?
Why does Victoria’s histology show keratinized skin similar to reptile scales?
Why metals correspond in their preparation to pre-Columbian times? Why does carbon 14 in hands date 7000 years in Beta Analytic laboratories and laboratories in Brazil?
Where is it if Analysis of c14 to say that it is a MODERN armed?
Why does the head have 3 fenestrae in the posterior part of the eye socket if the species on the earth only have 2? No species of the earth has three openings behind the eye orbit as it has this being, which, through the tomography could be checked for its presence.
Why are there vascular nerve bundles if they are just bones of various armed animals?
The viscerocranium is composed of two types of tissues. 1. Bone tissue and soft tissue. Hence the lightness that it shows and we should add that fenestra orifices have pneumatizations. In addition, the bones that compose it are very thin sheets.
The weight of these heads (which were two loose) gave an average of 0.377 grams. Which is matches a big brain because the lightness of the head is compensated with the macrocephalic size of the encephalic mass.
The skull has a small short snout.
Why is the viscerocranium composed of two types of soft and bony tissues if it is supposed to be a dog’s skull?
Why do the extremities such as the femur and humerus have crowned edges and present the humeral head or epiphysis if they are only cut bones as they say?
Why are ribs ringed?
Why does the vascular bundle come together between the vertebrae of the thoracic waist?
Why does the vertebral column show compression of the vertebrae as a lesion?
Why was it buried in diatomaceous earth are they dried and in a perfect state of preservation?
Why does he have a hand in pronation? Why three fingers?
About a writing with which he challenged Salas Gismondi Why do they have a cranial perimeter different from other species of terrestrial mammals?
If you had in your hands the skulls show the carving that was done on them. It is not difficult to prove it. A carved bone leaves traces. And they have not shown it.
Why are there 2 sutures in the foramen magnum square?
And why are there 2 sutures in the skull of these beings that are not in the dog?
Where are the cuts and filings that they proclaim? Why if the skin is vegetable-based, the HISTOLOGY shows something else?
The left humerus of Josefina Reptil Humanoid, which they have indicated as cut and is the only argument they use to discredit these bodies as false, is not cut since it has the lower humeral head or epiphysis and its edges are crowned as it has pointed out the independent study conducted by the University of St. Petersburg Russia.
Regarding the specimen “María”:
Are the first phalanges of the hands are placed as phalanges of the feet?
José de la C Ríos replies: That is a presupposition because in reality the phalanges present their interdigital capsules.
Then, José de la C Ríos asks: Why did they call ‘modern fabrication’ a sample that Krawix (Paul Ronceros, according to interview) declares that he warned the forensic of the prosecution office not to analyze the part glued together … which he claims he had to glue because it had been broken?
Other observations: Why the mummy does not have the calcaneus bone like homo sapiens?
Why is the Achilles heel fixed in the Astragalus bone and not in the calcaneus?
Why does the mummy Maria have 3 phalanges in a set of bones of varying size and is at a 90-degree angle?
Why does each finger end in semicircular pads of approximately 1.5 cm with horizontal fingerprint lines?
The vertebrae from the spine located in the middle of the torso seem to be extremely hollow.
The skulls show a great degree of pneumatization or more cavities than those found in South American camelids like the alpaca, llama, guanaco and vicuña. The seem to be extremely light. Do they match a known species?
Good news: Some Professors from Universidad Nacional San Luis Gonzaga (mostly related to the natural sciences), among them engineers, physicists, physicians became interested in working to find out the truth. They were visited by Jaime Maussan and by an Instituto Inkari representative and saw some of the evidence. The university is located in the City of Ica, a few hours south of Lima by car and not too far from the alleged site of the findings in Nazca and/or Palpa. I drove to the City of Ica on Sunday the 27th and met them in person on Monday the 28th, 2019. I spoke with them and with the Vice-rector for research and sent them the information I had gathered telling them that I am willing to collaborate.
About a week later, archaeology students from that university wrote a statement rejecting the Professors initiative. The response may be because they follow a research pattern that requires first locating the exact place of artifacts or biological remains, including its historic, archeological context while natural scientists feel more comfortable with being able to analyze physical-biological samples.
Taken all together, the situation is crucially changing in favor of the reality that SOME of the 3-finger samples from the Nazca-Palpa area in Perú are genuine. Needless to say, this would be a very important discovery and part of different increasing types of evidence leading toward a form of disclosure revealing that other intelligent and/or humanoid life forms previously unknown to science have interacted for quite some time on Earth with humanity.
Consider the political, exopolitical and cultural consequences!
Note of clarification (11-08-2018): I think that many or all of the high-resolution tomography images are interpolated from 16 cuts to 128 cuts but not manipulated to show something different. Since the discussion was about “high-resolution” images, I had not noticed the word “interpolated” in the Alien Project site. I had also been told by a researcher into the case (of the team in favor) that there may also be another clinic that was used for original high-resolution images at 128 cuts but this is to be confirmed. Experts in tomography please comment.
An important link that has to be considered as per the favorable scientific analysis regarding images, some genetic tests, and other issues is in Inkari Institute’s “Alien Project”:
A Note on Genetic Findings (updated for March, 2019)
The complete genome sequencing of one of the smaller, 3 -finger, humanoid specimens found in the NAZCA-PALPA region of Perú was made using the following equipment: HiSeqX10.
Using a protocol for extracting ancient DNA and for amplifying it using Multiple Displacement Amplification. This particular study was made by CEN4GEN Institute for genomics and Molecular Diagnostics ( a Canadian Corporation).
The extraction of ancestral DNA was successful for 2 samples of the specimen that has been called “Victoria.” The sequencing generated more than 1000 million DNA fragments. The biological information analysis of the data was made with software designed and published by institutes like The New York Genome Center and the JGI of the U.S. Department of Energy. It required more than 500 hours of processing time conducted by Abraxas Biosystems.
Some of the more relevant findings are the following:
A portion of the DNA had similarities with human beings because the poorly protected samples had been exposed to the environment and to different persons. But…
1) The portion of the DNA that was similar to that of human beings was much smaller (14.29% and 15.26%) in contrast to the portion that was not similar to human beings.
2) There is approximately 54% and 76% of the DNA readings for samples 0002 and 0004, respectively, do not have a significant similarity (under the bioinformatic taxonomic classification of Abraxas Biosystems) with ANY of more than 1 million species or more than 41 million sequences that have been registered in genomic databases and DNA databases called “nt” and “refseq” of the NCBI which is the more complete public data base used by the scientific community.
The 1 Terabyte of data is being uploaded to an open-source page where other scientists can study it. They may need a supercomputer.
There has been controversy regarding who found the specimens and under what circumstances, including the lack of a clearly known archeological context. This has been used to dismiss the entire case or to object to further studies. In fact, I have been called “stupid” and crazy” by name and surname in the airwaves (radio and cable TV) for stating an opinion. This is called DEFAMATION. The opinion which I still sustain is that since we have physical, biological specimens at hand, we need to focus on them more than on the dubious information about who found them, their exact archaeological, cultural and geological context and whether they are being negotiated or not. While the latter issues are important (and more information should be found about them), the former issue (the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE that CAN BE ANALYZED) is more DETERMINING.
If (after all is said and done) scientists show that at least some of the samples have not been artificially assembled and that their genes do not match any biological specimens on Earth, the controversy about who found them and under what circumstances or whether he or she wants to sell them, or even that an ideal, standard scientific procedure was not followed, will not change the main findings.
I’m not a specialist in mummies but as an educated, concerned citizen, I value the fact that verifying the specimens can be of great consequence culturally, politically and exopolitically. This is why I try to offer information about it attempting to be as objective as possible.
Today the UFO, exopolitics, experiencer communities are divided into factions. There is some cross-over from one preference to another but I believe that the spirit of subdivision, of doctrinal partisanship prevents us from understanding and processing the whole of what is going on. More inclusivity is required. More integrative thinking is required…scientific, logical, intuitional, spiritual, experience-based, testimony-based…and all of it with a quality that is enhanced by attitude: respect, love for truth and humbleness.
Yes, for instance, it may be true that perhaps AATIP and BAAS are somehow guided by secret proponents and allowed to ‘white world’ some of the ET-multi reality technology, hopefully mostly for the good of humanity rather than for the good of a few. They might not be inclined toward dialogue with the UFO community but I’m inclined to attempt to tend bridges and to give them the benefit of the doubt instead of blanket suspicion and rejection. Humanity is altogether in this reaching out to other cosmic civilizations and to our roots in the past and – perchance – in the future. Then again, excessive trust in Military Complex-related initiatives can be naive, especially if the negative side of ETs is so emphasized by Tom DeLonge at TTSA and in the book “Sekret Machines” while considering the military and helpful associates as the good guys…guys hiding stuff to protect us. I welcome patriots doing the right thing with good intentions and what they do may be partially true and good for society and for establishing the UFO reality issue in more solid grounds but it may not be necessary (or adequate) that we completely abide by this initiative. I welcome it and want to tend a hand in friendship but also think that there’s much more in terms of a paradigm-shifting, educational process.
Decades of UFO research revealing all sorts of things in secret (maybe even unconstitutional) programs about UFOs (previous to AAWSAP-AATIP) cannot be denied. And we also need a non-militaristic approach. Definitely not a “business as usual” approach. Indeed we need a fresh way to look at these things covering the range from the nuts & bolts to consciousness science and to the most allegedly “airy fairy” but sincerely rendered.
For instance, by instantly dismissing what classic contactees said and – more currently – what plausible whistleblowers and insiders of the alleged “Secret Space Program” say in ways that not only partly coincide but which too many people (and not just belief-prone personalities) already consider as truthful and sincere would either be arrogant or proper of a belief-settled personality whose subconscious cannot even tolerate entertaining certain issues.
And regarding ET/inter reality beings, let’s not bad mouth these ETs/inter reality beings or become naively dependent on them. We need fresh eyes for everything, not generalizations about all being benevolent or malevolent. We need to exopolitically find out who is protecting us from unwarranted incursions and if a minority of ET/inter-reality beings coming into our system are inimical to our good, do we really need to develop a whole armada against them? Or can we rely upon outside-of-earth, exopolitical protection as some contactees have affirmed?
In reality the whole issue is complex… grandiose, fascinating, life-changing with all sorts of more or less credible versions according to many types of experiences. Let’s listen to statistics-contributing experiencers worldwide and to “unique case” experiencers as well. That said, I hope that people on the “inside” (secret decision makers) are more motivated by enhancing democratic values through worldview expansion via truthful education…more than making money, securing more personal power, sustaining outmoded beliefs or expanding the militarization of space under a “business as usual” type of awareness. As we evolve and more of us connect with cosmic community those modes of ruling over the masses become obsolete and – I believe – prone to attract similarly-minded ET/inter reality beings stuck in repeating certain unresolved issues from previous evolutionary stages…in spite of their technologies.
And, inasmuch as technology goes, yes, please, the powers that be acting today in this incipient but certain “basic level” revelation (through TTSA), please be clear about the type of technology that can be revealed, that should get or not get into everyone’s hands worldwide! Can a UFO-like craft be built without sharing the technology worldwide? We simply cannot give the power of deeper aspects of the universe to every immature member of society. Moreover, for those of us seeking further understanding, within the UFO community, let’s try to be humbler and not simply dismiss the more ‘far out’, alleged SSP (secret space program) revelations or each other’s main appreciations of plausible aspects about the whole UFO and ET ‘enchilada’.
It’s not so much a matter of believing or disbelieving, of embracing or of rejecting in the name of truth. It is more about extending a friendly hand and respectfully, carefully listening. Let’s make an effort to listen to those voices that make us feel uncomfortable. Some may surprise us as our tolerance for the extraordinary increases.
There are too many sincere-sounding informers or “insiders” that appear to coincide in fundamental assertions and – if the assertions about highly developed SSPs is true – that could mean that TTSA efforts would be incipient, long-termed, allowed and managed…perhaps by well-intentioned (or not) individuals acting as our superiors with an alleged right over us for some reason or another. Perhaps if having to choose between a 20 year long gradual revelation led by Established forces and sooner (and more extreme revelations), we need to welcome and consider them both as possible. And not just that but we may need to guide and modify both approaches in a participatory manner. In other words, concerned citizens and researchers need to be not only more inclusive but also more exopolitically active.
A Mission Rahma Photo
And let’s not forget not to dismiss either the possibility of repeatable (and sometimes verifiable) positive contacts with communicative, “space brother” types, as has been done through the Mission Rahma contact groups; is being done by other emergent “CE-5” contact groups and associated contactees. In some cases there would be contacts with beings precise and very mental but associated with spiritual masters highly in favor of assisting in the actualization of our deepest potentials without generating dependencies. So, let’s not simply dismiss this issue brought up by some contactees and experiencers that apparently bring some means of verification and more in-depth information about aspects of humanity’s history that cannot be ignored.
And, let’s not simply dismiss other plausible issues floating around in the UFO, exopolitics, experiencer communities falling back on comfortably thinking that they are “delusional” or “suspect” or “lying.” In an environment in which there are allusions to teleportation and time travel, SSP insiders working with ETs side by side, contactees speaking both with spiritual masters and friendly ETs that do not abduct, 3000+ “experiencers” mostly having beneficial encounters with little or no mention of what SSP insiders are telling, not to speak about a phenomenon that is “transdimensional” and “paranormal” and in which some of the main voices greatly differ as to who the “visitors” or “ancient aliens” may be we must ask ourselves how much are we willing to accept or at least to fairly consider. How much effort are we willing to put to debunk or to incorporate if it passes a truly careful analysis.
Is there a war in the heavens or are all beings that did not destroy themselves and were capable of leaving their home planet peaceful? Are there “Arkons” “Draco Reptilians” and former Nazis collaborating with them? Is there a “Cabal” that controls the U.S. military and USAPs (unacknowledged special access projects)? Was our species not only seeded by several ET species (some contributing and some harming us) but are we also today being hybridized by varieties of gray-looking beings which have a right to do so partly because we are destroying the Earth’s ecology and commons? Are all of those issues fantasies and neither the Government nor UFO “experts” truly know what is going on? How can science and “infallible” religious doctrines really be enhanced with a “transdimensional” ontology-metaphysics that begins to explain “the nature of reality?” How much of “the truth” is society at large – worldwide – really able to handle without a transdimensional, integrative ontology-metaphysics now that there is a political tendency challenging “liberal” (in the original sense of the word) democratic agreements and procedures, thus atomizing nation-states into separate, illiberal fiefdoms?
To evolve exopolitically in a field of research which may be the most complex of them all, we need to make the effort to connect with each other much more and with each other’s preferred explanations in a coherent manner. Connect what aspects or parts can truly fit together, even perhaps those parts which today don’t seem to fit together. And we must learn to also do it across cultural divides or cultural preferences, carefully correcting our personal mistakes… more aware of our own cognitive biases, selected belief reinforcements and blind spots.
This situation called “disclosure” is not only about the Government revealing that ETs are here but about growing up individually and collectively…as many of us as possible to shift our shared information field into a higher level…capable of harmoniously exchanging with beings that perhaps primarily do not think in “either-or” primitive terms. But it is an unprecedented shift; a different type of “consciousness.” It’s about co-creating a “we” consciousness and unified field incorporating many more beings with care and respect into our personal sense of identity. Either more of us do it for the collective “field” to withstand the encounter or others representing our subconscious need for “power elites” will steer us as they prefer or understand for various reasons, under incomplete appreciations. Thus, WE must connect with each other more and all true factions in Ufology, exopolitics, what we value in experiencer information must increasingly come together. And disclosure thus becomes a self education; an entire new attitude needed to adapt to what comes in shifting our “consensus reality.” Is this too much to ask for in order to face the greatest cultural, spiritual (and perhaps biological) needed modifications after the gravitas (the weight and seriousness) of what is going on becomes established and is widely felt? Not if disclosure is about the impossible becoming possible and if our self-determining freedom requires such a move.
To be exopolitically responsible let’s connect to see the information content filling the exopolitics “diagram” as a coherent whole.
Let’s try to educate ourselves and to be able to suspend judgement when necessary. Our intention and awareness to do this can go a long way towards succeeding in it. To listen to each other’s testimonies, to well thought opinions and research. Let’s try to listen to apparently contradicting testimonies but carefully, even if we don’t like it. They may be wrong but that may also have key kernels of truth or large segments of truth that we haven’t figured out how to connect with our preferred narratives. But let’ also care for fact checking as thoroughly as possible and for cross-referencing and to be personally willing to change our views when necessary.
To face the top challenge, we truly need to “grow up,” one by one and in what is acceptable to discuss in social settings; to be able to digest such a paradigm-shifting smorgasbord and to be able to make peaceful, intelligent, cooperative decisions about a variety of challenging truths with enormous consequences. Thus we will earn our cosmic sovereignty.