Case No. 249·Mexico
2023·Chamber of Deputies, Mexico City
Mexico.Maussan · Mummies before the Mexican Congress
On 12 September 2023, broadcaster Jaime Maussan presented to a hearing of the Mexican Congress two small mummified bodies, with elongated heads and three-fingered hands, which he said were found in Nazca (Peru) and 'not part of our terrestrial evolution'. UNAM denied endorsing the analysis and scientists called it a fraud; a Peruvian prosecutor had already described manufactured dolls in 2017.
Year
2023
Tier
B
Probability
10%
Category
Incident
Limited evidence: single-witness, local or without primary verification. Three independent axes: the «tier» measures the strength of the evidence; the «probability» estimates how genuinely unexplained the case is —a natural phenomenon can remain unexplained, so it does not equal «non-prosaic»—; and the partition of explanations (below) says what it most plausibly was. So a well-documented case can have a possible hoax as its most plausible cause, and a Tier B is not, for that reason, a hoax.
Primary documents · viewer

Context · the San Lázaro Legislative Palace (Chamber of Deputies), Mexico City
Palacio Legislativo de San Lázaro obtenido con dron 01.jpg · Wikimedia Commons · CC BY-SA 4.0 · open original
Part 01
The night in question
On 12 September 2023, the Mexican broadcaster Jaime Maussan starred in one of the most publicized —and embarrassing— episodes in the recent history of the UAP topic. During a public hearing on unidentified anomalous phenomena held in the Chamber of Deputies of the Mexican Congress, Maussan displayed two small mummified bodies, enclosed in glass cases, of humanoid appearance: elongated heads, three-fingered hands and large oval eye sockets. He claimed they had been found in the Nazca region of Peru, and maintained that almost a third of their DNA was 'of unknown origin' and that they were not part of 'our terrestrial evolution'. The image of the bodies presented under oath in a legislative chamber traveled around the world.
The scientific community's reaction was immediate and devastating. Maussan attributed part of the analysis to the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM); but Julieta Fierro, a physics researcher at UNAM itself, declared that the university had never endorsed such conclusions and that Maussan's data 'made no sense'. Various anatomy specialists noted that the bodies appeared assembled from human and animal bones manipulated to simulate an alien morphology.
The case, moreover, was neither new nor isolated. Already in 2017, when similar 'Nazca' mummies first circulated, Peru's prosecutor's office had concluded they were 'recently manufactured dolls', covered with a mixture of paper and synthetic glue to simulate skin. And Maussan himself carried a record of discredited presentations: in 2015 he had led the 'Be Witness' event, where he unveiled a supposed alien body that turned out to be the mummy of a human child. The 2023 Congress episode thus stood, before scientific consensus, as one more fraud in a trajectory of frauds, aggravated by having been staged inside a state institution.
Part 02
Why this case moved the needle
The Maussan episode before the Mexican Congress matters to the corpus not as evidence of non-human bodies, but as a case study of institutional capture by fraud and of the asymmetry between spectacle and proof. Its value is methodological and, above all, defensive: it shows how a legislative chamber can lend its symbolic authority to a baseless claim, and how the institutional wrapper —bodies under oath, flags, stenographers— is easily mistaken for scientific validation when there is none. For a corpus that seriously tracks the institutional dimension of the phenomenon, distinguishing the container (an act of Congress) from the content (some dolls) is exactly the hygiene the case forces one to practice.
That is why the posterior loads overwhelmingly onto the mundane/natural narrative in its fraud variant. The chain of evidence against is dense and convergent: UNAM's denial, the anatomical analysis pointing to assembled human and animal bones, the prior 2017 ruling by the Peruvian prosecutor describing paper-and-glue dolls, and Maussan's own documented record with the 2015 child mummy presented as an alien. The minimal mass of indeterminacy grants no credit to the non-human hypothesis —the case is, for practical purposes, resolved— but acknowledges the impossibility of auditing each specimen first-hand. In the corpus, Maussan 2023 is the anchor on the spectacle side: the reminder that an institutional platform amplifies but does not turn into truth, and that the right question before an 'alien' body remains who examined it, by what method and with what independent review.
Part 03
What's left on paper
Documented evidence
- Presentation of two mummified bodies by Jaime Maussan in Mexico's Chamber of Deputies (12 Sep 2023)
- Claim of non-human morphology (elongated head, three fingers) and DNA 'of unknown origin', supposedly from Nazca, Peru
- UNAM denial (Julieta Fierro): the university did not endorse the conclusions; the data 'make no sense'
- Anatomical analyses indicating assembly of manipulated human and animal bones
- Prior ruling by Peru's prosecutor (2017): dolls manufactured with paper and synthetic glue
- Maussan's record: 'Be Witness' event (2015) with a mummy presented as an alien that was a human child
Patterns it exhibits (1)
Entity form (1)
Location
Chamber of Deputies, Mexico City · 19.43°, -99.15°
Distribution of explanations
This case is classified among the model's hypotheses: the bar splits 100% by how much each explanation weighs (the uncertainty is spread across the hypotheses the case supports). Summed across the corpus they produce the comparable partition. It is a different question from the Probability above: that one estimates how likely the case is a genuinely unexplained phenomenon; this one splits which the explanation would be.
Modal hypothesis: Possible hoax 98% · sums to 100%
Structured analytical judgment, not a calibrated frequency. Forced classification: the mass the evidence cannot assign is spread across the hypotheses the case does support.
Related cases