Are the Mexican alien bodies real? (scientific journal, 2025)

Will one of the top 100 scientific journals listed here publish an article endorsing the view that the most likely explanation for the purported alien bodies presented in Mexico in September 2023 is that they are are genuine at any time before the end of 2025?

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:

Gotta be long the tails in your make believe trading account

Look at them and ask:

  1. Why is humanoid body found the first place? There are 1000 ways to hide it if aliens don't want to show themselves, and 1000 better ways to demonstrate yourself.

  1. Would this ribcage allow to breathe? Would these limbs move the body? Would this body support this head without falling front/back?

  2. Why to trust those who tell it's government of Mexico?

  3. Why to trust government of Mexico?

It's a YES for me because of the insane +5000% return for the small risk 😂

predicts YES
predicts NO

@cloudprism god you scared me

predicts NO

The list of 100 journals could be listed directly instead of through a science stan page with tons of ads!

The guy who brought them has literally shown confirmed fake “aliens” before…

@Chizardium don't worry, I'm sure he's legit this time.

@Chizardium If they were real aliens, the guy who got famous making hoax aliens would be first to find out about them and buy them, so it doesn't tell me that much.
The first people to get into anything are generally crazy, because to get to something first you have to start doing it before it makes sense.

@makoyass There is no reason to think these aliens are real, but this is correct.

People think it is evidence against a claim to show that the person making the claim has made false claims of that kind in the past.

But it is not; the person who would make the claim when it is true is exactly the same person as the person who would make the claim when it is false. They are not biased in favor of falsity: they are biased in favor of what the claim says.

@DavidBolin it's evidence against, but it's not overwhelming evidence (or, proof)

Cannot even fathom anyone bought YES on this

@SpennyFawcett People buy YES on "this resolves NO."

@SpennyFawcett As the Onceler once said, "who are you to say what the public will buy?"

@SpennyFawcett stay poor kiddo

@SpennyFawcett You get better at fathoming after a while. Lots of free mana to be had on aliens, economic doom, new physics, etc. It is hard to fathom but we manage.


predicts NO

>looking at the new alien claims

>ask the scientists if their aliens are humanoid or realistic

>they dont understand

>pull out diagram explaing what is humanoid and what is realistic

>they laugh and say "they're genuine aliens sir"

>look at the livestream

>theyre humanoid

@NcyRocks It's not unlikely for bipedalism and large skulls to be a convergent evolutionary attractor for technological species. Bipedalism enables covering larger territories (so, larger and much more complex, overlapping communities, more complex hunting patterns, need for long term planning, wider access to resources) and frees up the hands for tool use. Large skulls because brain.

I'd consider it a red flag if they had chins or noses (not attractors) but they don't.

predicts NO

@makoyass My real issue is that they look like vertebrates at all. They have four limbs attached to a main body, along with a head that has two eyes and a mouth. I'd be shocked if that exact schema evolved anywhere else in the universe that we might ever encounter. The particular resemblance to humans is a nail in the coffin.

@NcyRocks That is again just an convergent attractor. You don't need more than two eyes for stereoscopy, and higher animal eyes are expensive. The sensors go at the front so that the earliest predators could see what they're biting, and that is why the mouth is there too. It's at one side because that's the direction the animal moves fastest in. The brain goes close to the eyes for latency reasons. (The nose goes there because the first breathing hole went there, and because nowhere else on the trachea would be convenient for pointing a sensory organ at things)

These things were fixed early in evolutionary history and it will go the same way every time.

From what I've heard, there's not supposed to be a convergent genetic language though. I've heard it argued that we should expect them to have different bases or something, which would make the 40% convergent genes uh, well the machine wouldn't have worked. It's possible those arguments were wrong though. I don't think we actually know how early life chose its genetic language.

@makoyass Oh, another explanation for overlapping genomes is panspermia, which would also be an explanation for why our civs are alive (and small) at the same time.

Humans have 70% of their dna in common with worms. It’s about the number I’d expect if basal bilatera got panspermiaed to alpha cemtauri along with some autotrophs and then independently evolved to spacefaring before us. But this is still almost certainly bs.

Comment hidden

More related questions