Are the “mummy” Maria’s hands human?

Introduction

According to an article  published on the web [1], a web paleontologist asserts that the hands of the Nazca specimen called Maria, woud be the products of fraudulent manipulation, realized from human hands. Without having practiced the slightest clinical examination, he adds that “the entire skeleton of the mummy presented by Maussan is absolutely identical to a human skeleton. And, if it can be proved that hands and feet have been modified, it is not legitimate to keep on  declaring that this mummy is a non-human species, since the skeleton is a human one. ”

His explanation is recalled below:

Transformation of a human hand

Just cut the side fingers of a human hand to get a three-fingered hand. Then the skin surrounding the metacarpus is removed (Fig. 1). What allows to disguise the metacarpuses and make them appear as phalanges.

Main humaine

Figure 1 : Human hand.

Here is the result of this operation (Fig. 2).

Main humaine modifiée. En pointillé orange, la forme extérieure de la « main originale ». En trait plein bleu, la forme extérieure de la « main modifiée ».

Figure 2: Modified human hand. In the dotted orange line, the outer shape of the “original hand”. In full blue line, the outer shape of the “modified hand”.

Maria’s hand study

Our demonstration is based on the DICOM files images obtained with a scanner by Dr. Raymundo Salas Alfaro  in Cusco and the clinical examinations  carried out by several medical experts.

We will specify that Maria’s parched and rigid hands are pressed against the body and can not be flattened.

Thus, it is not possible:

  • to carry out X-rays and scanners of the hands alone,  because it is impossible to slip a reflective plate between the hands and the body.
  • considering that hands cannot be flattened and that images are  2 dimensions representations in a 3 dimensions space, the perception of the real dimensions of the various elements can be modified by the perspective effects. Particularly,  the phalanges ones.

First of all, here is a video from the DICOM files (Vid.1) : an axial course showing Maria’s  right hand level. We observe alternately the phalanges, from the wrist up to the fingertips.

Video 1: Maria’s right hand, axial cut.

From the images showing each phalanx, we created a composite image of all phalanges (Fig. 3).

Composite image extracted from the video 1.

Figure 3: Composite image extracted from the video 1.

If, as pointed out by the paleontologist-detractor, the phalanx P1 was a human finger’s metacarpus rather than the proximal phalanx  of an unknown species’ finger, this hand would only have four phalanges.

Now the scanners are irrevocable, the fingers are composed of five phalanges.

On the other hand, these phalanges are all proportional to the previous phalanges, to the size of the hands, and the phalanges of the other fingers. And all this, without mentioning the symmetry of these phalanges compared with those of the same fingers on the opposite hand.

Moreover, an unescapable rule has obviously escaped him : whatever may be the size of a human hand, the proportion of its component bones,  is always the same. The length of each  metacarpal / phalanges bone set of a human hand finger, is governed by the following relationship : from the distal phalanx, the length of a phalanx or metacarpus is equal to the sum of the lengths of the two previous phalanges ((Fibonacci Sequence) [2,3]. This relationship is globally based on the Golden Ratio: 1.618 (Figure 4).

Proximal Phalanx Length = Metacarpus length / 1,618
Intermediate Phalanx Length = Proximal Phalanx Length / 1.618
Distal phalanx length = Intermediate phalanx length / 1,618

Le nombre d’or régit la relation de la longueur des différents os d’une main humaine.

Figure 4: The golden ratio governs the relationship between the length of different bones of a human hand.

This allows the winding of the fingers by the relative length of the different parts. [4]

Human Hand - Ring-fingerMaria's "inside" finger
Length mmLength mm
Metacarpus70Phalanx 1 P157
Proximal phalanx P14370/43 = 1,63Phalanx 2 P24057/40 = 1.43
Intermediate phalanx P22343/26 = 1,65Phalanx 3 P33040/30 = 1.38
Distal phalanx P31623/16 = 1,63Phalanx 4 P42030/20 = 1.50
Phalanx 5 P51120/11 = 1.81

Table I: Lengths and proportions of different bones of a human hand ring-finger and the Maria’s “inside” finger.

We find in Table I that the ratio between the length of an element and which that follows, in the case of a human hand, is relatively constant and approaches the golden ratio. But in the case of Maria’s hand, this relationship is not respected, which prohibits any serious attempt to bring the bone anatomy of Maria’s hand to a human hand. (Figure 5).

Scale comparation of a human hand ring-finger (top) and Maria's «  inside »  finger (bottom). MC: metacarpus - PP: proximal phalanx - PI: intermediate phalanx - PD: distal phalanx -P1 ... 5: phalanges 1 to 5

Figure 5: Scale comparation of a human hand ring-finger (top) and Maria’s «  inside »  finger (bottom).
MC: metacarpus – PP: proximal phalanx – PI: intermediate phalanx – PD: distal phalanx
P1 … 5: phalanges 1 to 5

Conclusion

The manipulation of a human hand such as imagined by this paleontologist is impossible for several reasons :

  • each finger of a human hand is composed of three phalanges with a metacarpus (apart from the thumb which is composed of two phalanges with a metacarpus). Transforming a metacarpus into a phalanx would produce a finger with only four phalanges. Now, Maria’s fingers have five phalanges (Fig. 6).

image issue du scanner montrant les 5 phalanges (P1 à P5) d’un doigt d’une main de Maria.

Figure 6: Scanner image showing the 5 phalanges (P1 to P5)  of Maria’s hand finger.

  • human hand  phalanges and metacarpuses lengths are governed by proportions based on the Golden Ratio. This relationship doesn’t exist for Maria’s fingers phalanges.

The various examinations (clinical, x-rays and scanners) have all demonstrated the impossibility of fraud or manipulation. Neather cuts, sutures, covering of the skin,  nor microsurgical procedures, always visible on scanner, have been found [5].

If the falsifiers had a microsurgery technology, so advanced that scanners couldn’t detect it,  the fraud should have been recent, and carried out with techniques not existing in the current state of  our technological level development. Such technical possibilities seem impossible, according to medical imaging experts. If, nevertheless, such a technology existed, it would be out of reach of simple treasure hunters.

On the other hand, if it was an old manipulation, we must remember that the C14 dates indicate that Maria is aged 1,750 years (+ or – 30 years), this would imply superior technologies compared to ours. Technologies that would have existed in the third century AD…

Some will object that scanners are not precise enough to detect manipulations. We will refer them to the opinion of the Mexican biologist [5], Sary Martinez who, in April 2018 in a public intervention with Thierry Jamin, reminded that “the scanners » used by Dr. Raymundo Salas Alfaro, in Cusco, are used to look after human beings . We can not believe that poor quality scanners would be used to make diagnoses involving human health ? The theory of imprecise scanners does not hold.

It is very surprising that this paleontologist based in Lima, Peru, did not have the idea of contacting the Inkari Cusco Institute, to access to the bodies in vivo. This would have allowed him to write a much more serious article … And to avoid being mended like a first-year student …We must remember that science is no longer restrained by experts who sufficiently disguise their beliefs in truths, without carrying any research out.

Scientists who actually studied Maria’s body confirm that no trace of manipulations has been found during their clinical observations. As a result, they conclude these hands are tridactyl in nature and have fingers with five phalanges, and are not either symptoms of congenital diseases.

References

  1. SALAS-GISMONDI R. : Momia de Nasca, parte 2: Análisis de las manos y pies. http://www.cientificos.pe/index.php/2017/06/28/momia-de-nasca-parte-2-analisis-manos-y-pies/
  2. DEMERS P. : Suite et rapports de Fibonacci dans les os des mains et des pieds des Primates. http://lisulf.quebec/FiboGoHo1879quater.htm
  3. DEMERS P. : Suite de Fibonacci chez quelques vertébrés pentadactyles : Humain, Gorille, Orang-Outang, Chimpanzé, Bonobo, Loris grêle. http://lisulf.quebec/00FiboPentaquinte%20.htm
  4. DUMONTIER C. : ;https://fr.scribd.com/document/342954616/anatomie-biome-canique-doigts-longs
  5. MARTINEZ S. : Entrevista con el Sr Thierry Jamin (Momias Nazca) 19/04/2018. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Za_Wmwf1Y8 de 17mn 44s à 22mn 26s

Translation of the excerpt:
Thierry Jamin (Instituto Inkari Cusco – Pérou)
Detractors say: “Yes, but Dr. Salas Alfaro’s scanner is not very precise”. This scanner is used every day to diagnose human beings diseases and he must be precise to detect abnormalities, show diseases or any other problem that human beings may have. Otherwise it would not be used by Dr. Raymundo Alfaro. If we cannot detect with this type of scanner, it would mean that whoever would mount this fraud, would have used a super surgery, that we could not be detected with this scanner but only with a much more precise machine … this would mean microsurgery etc. … and that’s not within reach of Mario or his friends. We would talk about an organization … it’s not reasonable … I don’t know what Sary thinks about it?
Sary Martinez Biologiste (Mexique)
Well, I agree with you, because if I start thinking that Dr. Raymundo Salas uses this device to diagnose, then what happens with patients if it is not precise ? He would not be in business for a long time (laughs). I agree with you for a good reason, because I also did my research projects on microsurgery a few years ago, and I know what it means to do that. Cuts are there, some poeple will say « no » but there are technologies to suture and it does not show … IF it shows! (She says). With a scanner, sutures can be seen, even if it was done with a chemical substance, they can be seen. Skin does not connect perfectly after being sliced, even if it is microsurgery. (she shows with her hands that the two opposite edges of the wound cannot join perfectly). And the “recovery” of the skin, how could they do that ? There is no mark, it’s as a cover, they have completely covered the body as with a glove, that’s it? It cannot be explained. On the basis of the photos, Thierry, they cannot affirm that, it would be necessary to be expert in proportions etc … to reproduce them with such perfection. We cannot judge on an X-Ray   image,   its quality is loosed compared to the scanner, it’s not the same thing. They can say anything they want, plus they do not have the program to read CD scanners in 3D, it is not the same as a photo on a video. I agree with you, I remain open to all possibilities until there are complete results, I am also 50/50 but the exams, the results are there (the scanners) especially for Maria. For the “grey”,  that part (results) of the skin is missing, which raised so much controversy and would help to get more real result instead of speculating … this is my opinion. But you get the evidence, no one but you, having the actual analyzes can draw conclusions, but   professionals must analyze them, we cannot have the same abilities as specialists. You can have knowledge but not as much as they do.
Thierry
I totally agree with you Dr. Biologist
Sary
No, no, Sary…

Alain Bonnet – Thanks to Marie-France Henry – Corrections, proofreading: Michel Ribardière. Translation: Catherine Rayer
Images : Adobe Stock – Instituto Inkari Cusco.

Share This