r/AlienBodies • • Sep 21 '24

Research Exercises in Objectivity pt 1

30 Upvotes

How to Objectively Analyze Evidence: A Step-by-Step Guide for the Average Redditor

In today’s world, it’s more important than ever to base decisions and opinions on solid evidence. Truth, it seems, is becoming more and more subjective by the day and, with the internet being what it is, finding a corner of it that substantiates your own world view has become as easy as typing in a few keywords and unless you hold a degree, job, or focus in a particular subject or area discerning fact from falsehood can be a daunting task. Whether you’re debating an issue, making a personal choice, or evaluating information, being able to analyze evidence objectively is essential.

With this in mind, I've spent the last 2 weeks coming up with this 3 or 4 part (possibly more in the future since I whittled these parts down from 2 weeks worth of notes) "exercise in objectivity" out of my frustration for not being able to have a meaningful conversation on the mummies lately. I see a lot of great conversations get started only to quickly devolve into a shit fit off of something either side could've just conceded without it affecting their argument and I also see a lot of people on both sides asking great questions only to be mocked. Too often debates on the facts from either side devolve into arguments and attacks on personal character or are spent trying to convince someone their smoking gun evidence is a fabrication, misinterpretation, or at best anecdotal . I think if we become better communicators with each other we can have more meaningful conversations that cut to a truth we can all agree on and hopefully affect a change that benefits the overall UFO/NHI communities.

I tried keeping my examples unrelated to topics of this sub to avoid seeming like I'm saying one side is better than the other in analyzing the evidence brought to this sub or favoring one side over another. There are users on both sides of the proverbial aisle who exhibit poor skills in sourcing and analyzing evidence.

For the sake of clarity I just wanna preface my outline here. It's basically just a step followed by 3 - 5 points on it, followed by an example. By no means am I saying these are the only steps, points, or examples to achieve any of this. These are just what worked for me at university, my past career, and currently now as a redditor and I thought I'd share them in the hopes we can collectively utilize this for the betterment of this sub.

So, without further ado, here’s my step-by-step guide, I guess, on how to properly approach the analysis of evidence so you can arrive at a reliable, unbiased, and objective conclusion.


  1. Understand the Context and Define the Question

Before you dive into any analysis, make sure you clearly understand the context of the situation and the question or problem you’re trying to address. Ask yourself:

What am I trying to understand or prove?

What kind of evidence will help answer this question?

Does the evidence I'm looking at help prove my position or am I trying to make the evidence fit my position?

Are there any biases or assumptions I need to be aware of?

Example: If you're investigating whether a certain post exhibits something anomolous, clarify what you mean by "anomolous" (e.g., it's speed, it's movement, it's size) and whether you have pre-existing assumptions about that post


  1. Identify the Source of the Evidence

Evaluate where the evidence is coming from. The credibility of the source is crucial:

Is the source an expert in the field or a reputable organization?

Is the evidence published in peer-reviewed journals or other reliable publications?

Has the source been cited in other papers?

Has the source been criticized for bias or misinformation?

Tip: Cross-check evidence from multiple sources to see if it’s consistent.


  1. Evaluate the Quality of the Evidence

Not all evidence is equal. To ensure you’re basing your conclusions on strong evidence, consider:

Type of Evidence: Is it empirical data (like statistics, studies) or anecdotal (personal experiences)? Empirical data is generally stronger.

Sample Size: In research, larger sample sizes tend to be more reliable.

Methods Used: Were proper research methods employed? Studies using randomized control trials or meta-analyses are more reliable than those without controls.

Protocols: Were proper research protocols used? Research protocols are crucial because they act as a detailed roadmap for a research study, outlining the methodology, objectives, criteria, data collection procedures, and analysis methods, ensuring consistency, ethical conduct, and the ability to replicate results by clearly defining how the research will be conducted, minimizing bias and maximizing the integrity of the study findings.

Reproducibility: Can the evidence be replicated? Repeated results across different studies strengthen its validity.

If evidence can't be replicated, especially by multiple attempts or researchers, it generally shouldn't be accepted no matter how much we want the initial evidence to ring true

Red Flag: Be cautious of cherry-picked data or outliers that don’t represent the whole picture. If data needs to be withheld in order for a claim to be held true, then one shouldn't include it as evidence or proof when attempting to strengthen one's position or attempting to change the position of another.


  1. Check for Logical Consistency

An important part of evaluating evidence is ensuring that the conclusions drawn from it are logical:

Does the evidence directly support the claims being made?

Are there logical fallacies (e.g., correlation vs. causation)?

Is there sufficient evidence, or is the conclusion based on isolated examples or incomplete data?

Example: Just because two events happen together doesn’t mean one caused the other and absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.... It just means more data is needed to reach a factual conclusion.... Which leads me to my next point...


  1. Consider Confounding Variables

Sometimes evidence can be misleading because of confounding factors. Ask yourself:

Are there other factors that might influence the outcome?

Has the evidence accounted for these variables?

Does the evidence actually suggest a more plausible outcome antithetical to my position?

Example: If a study shows a correlation between ice cream sales and crime rates, consider whether external factors (like hot weather) could explain both.


  1. Acknowledge Biases

We all have biases that can cloud our judgment. To minimize bias:

Reflect on your own preconceptions. Are you leaning toward a certain conclusion because of personal beliefs?

Did you form this conclusion before even considering the evidence?

Consider potential biases in the evidence itself (e.g., who funded the study, do they have something to gain?).

Cognitive Bias Tip: Common biases like confirmation bias (favoring information that supports your belief) can easily distort how you interpret evidence. Being truly honest with yourself is key and I like to remind myself that if I care about the subject matter then simply confirming my own biases and ignoring what the evidence is actually saying will inevitably harm the subject I care so much for.


  1. Weigh the Evidence

After you’ve gathered and evaluated the evidence, weigh it carefully:

Is there more evidence supporting one conclusion than another?

Are there significant pieces of evidence that contradict the majority?

The goal is not to "win" an argument but to align with the best-supported conclusion.


  1. Remain Open to New Evidence

Objective analysis is an ongoing process. Be willing to adjust your conclusion as new, more reliable evidence comes to light and don't ignore re-examining past evidence when new insights have been gleaned.

Reminder: A good thinker always remains flexible in their reasoning. Certainty in the face of new or conflicting evidence can be a sign of bias.


  1. Use a Structured Framework for Analysis

To keep yourself grounded, rely on structured frameworks that require you to address key aspects of objectivity. For example, you can use tools like:

SWOT Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) to assess arguments from all angles.

Decision Trees or Logic Models to break down the logical steps of your reasoning.

Bayesian Thinking to update your beliefs based on the strength of new evidence.

How this helps: Frameworks reduce the chance of cherry-picking evidence by forcing you to evaluate all aspects of a situation.


Final Thoughts

Objective analysis of evidence requires patience, skepticism, and a willingness to challenge your own beliefs. By following these steps, you can develop a more accurate, thoughtful approach to evaluating the world around you. Applying this rationale to UFOlogy and it's adjacent fields serves to allow the subject and it's community to be seen as more credible, whereas simply confirming your biases against what the evidence is telling you only serves to erode not only your credibility, but the entire community as well the subject as a whole.

....... Keep an eye out for Exercises in Objectivity pt 2: Determining the Credibility of a Source/Sources


Pt. 2 https://www.reddit.com/r/AlienBodies/s/7E7auS1DRr

Pt. 3 https://www.reddit.com/r/AlienBodies/s/3klusKanH7

Pt.4 https://www.reddit.com/r/AlienBodies/s/meKPd8IS7S


r/AlienBodies • • 1d ago

Hello friend 👽

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

493 Upvotes

r/AlienBodies • • 7h ago

Image Trying to find photos- bodies?

3 Upvotes

I am trying to find some photos I saw in the last week or so-
They were photos of “Nordic” alien bodies on a morgue table as well as what looked like a Grey alien but with hair. The pics were likely AI, but they were cool and I wanted show my wife.

Anyone know what I am referring to and if so, can you link them?

Thank you!


r/AlienBodies • • 19h ago

Discussion Beyond Top Secret The Era Of Disclosure - Video Thoughts?

0 Upvotes

Does anyone follow dr. Greer and did you watch his latest amazon prime video. I am aware many think and say he is false, but he at least wants some disclosure and he doesnt seem to villain aliens. I also sense he is a bit controlling and egotistical about the matter. Even the people he interviews it just comes off that Greer is in control of the narrative a bit. What were your opinions ?


r/AlienBodies • • 1d ago

Speculation As far as I'm aware the only picture of a tridactyl before excavation from the discovery site.

Post image
25 Upvotes

r/AlienBodies • • 2d ago

The current facility setup holding the tridactyls at the University of Ica

Post image
173 Upvotes

The University of Ica plans to allow public visits.


r/AlienBodies • • 2d ago

Discussion Are We, Their Descendants? The Genetic Truth Behind UAP Disclosure

Thumbnail
gallery
0 Upvotes

DNA may show or may have already shown that these beings are a version of a human. But why assume they belong to another species? My friends, what if they are us, not from the future, but from a common ancestry?

My hypothesis is that life throughout the universe shares a common genetic heritage, shaped by ancient biological engineering. This planet may have been under panspermia millions or even billions of years ago by an intelligence with the technology to seed and influence life.

The uncomfortable possibility is that we are a biological asset within a much larger system, being monitored, managed, and perhaps even cared for. Maybe that is the real ontological shock of disclosure: the technology we possess may have been borrowed, reverse-engineered, or recovered from things that fell from the sky. Yet, despite all our technological progress, we may still be just one component of a much larger universal ecosystem.

Perhaps the hardest truth to accept is that we are neither alone nor the center of the story.


r/AlienBodies • • 5d ago

That “alien with laser scalpels” relief is a frog-headed figure from an Egyptian temple

Post image
19 Upvotes

You’ve probably seen this crop: long smooth head, no visible ears, a pointed blade in hand. It circulates as proof of a reptilian visitor.

The reliefs most often linked to it are in the crypts of the Hathor temple at Dendera. The inscriptions there, published by Dümichen in 1877, describe a figure with “the face of a toad, knives in his hands.” Frogs were tied to the Nile flood and fertility, and ivory knives inscribed with the goddess Heqet’s name were used in birth rituals to ward off evil.

I can’t pin this exact crop to one wall or one deity. Dendera has several frog-faced figures, and some commenters see a lioness, which would point to Sekhmet. Both are plausible. Either way, the context is temple religion, not genetics.

I’ve spent years tracing viral “anomalies” back to their source. The pattern is usually the same: tight crop, no caption, and the original context quietly removed. Anyone have the uncropped photo?


r/AlienBodies • • 6d ago

A first look at Dr. McDowell, Dr. Caruso, and Dr. Rodriguez studying Montserrat

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

20 Upvotes

r/AlienBodies • • 8d ago

Exposing user Dragonfruitodd1989

Post image
47 Upvotes

The following text portrays the intellectual honesty of user Dragonfruitodd1989. In this public statement, Thierry Jamin—the original researcher of the Nazca mummies, long before Maussan—threatens legal action under Peruvian law against tridactilos.org for copyright infringement against his institute, Inkarri. He also refutes claims that the mummy Josefina is at UNICA and expresses dismay over the "Large Head" publication, which his team's investigation confirmed to be a modern forgery.

Obviously, spurred by the threat of legal action, tridactilos.org corrected the errors; however, this incident clearly exposes that user's ongoing sensationalism and disinformation. Below is the English translation of Jamin's message:

CLARIFICATION LETTER:

I am Thierry JAMIN, president of the Inkarri Institute Cusco. I am sending you this message regarding your website titled https://tridactilos.com/ where you report on the non-human mummies of Nazca.

Several internet users have pointed out a copyright infringement on that page. In fact, you dedicate an entire section to the mummy named "Josefina" by the Inkarri Institute, and in that publication, you use various photographic documents belonging to the Inkarri Institute Cusco.

In these photographic documents, you indicate as photographic credit: "Credit to David," and as you know, Mr. David XXx is an exclusive collaborator of the Inkarri Institute. However, David is in no way the legal owner of the documents disseminated on your page.

To my knowledge, you never contacted the Inkarri Institute to request the publication of these documents. Therefore, we ask that you remove as soon as possible the documents that do not belong to you or correctly mention the photographic credits to whom they belong: Inkarri Institute Cusco, 2026.

If you do not do so promptly, we will be forced to initiate legal proceedings before the Peruvian authorities to enforce our copyright. We urge you to comply with Peruvian copyright law in the future... and with "professional ethics" (if this concept means anything to you).

We must also clarify that the JOSEFINA Mummy investigated by the Inkarri Institute was NEVER delivered to the UNIVERSITY of ICA; therefore, it is FALSE that it is there. According to our photographic archives, the Mummy presented as JOSEFINA actually corresponds to a body identified as Luisa.

One more detail in the interest of truth: the supposed "Big Head" was investigated by our institution and is nothing more than a modern mask. We are concerned that Dr. Zúñiga's team might fall for this type of deception, which adds nothing to the investigation of the non-human bodies of Nazca.

We appreciate the interest of our followers and the suggestion received to clarify these points, which are beyond our responsibility.

THIERRY JAMIN

Inkarri Cusco Team,
October 5, 2026


r/AlienBodies • • 8d ago

My final words on the published DNA runs (ancient0002, ancient0003, ancient0004)

50 Upvotes

Hey everybody,

I'm breaking my self-imposed social media ban to post a link to this.

https://xbio.ca/posts/nazca-mummies-human-dna/

There is a truly astonishing amount of misinformation out there about the DNA files that are published in the Nazca mummies case, and I feel like I've responded to most of it at various places on Reddit, in comments, DMs, posts, etc.

I re-ran all of the analysis I've done over the last few years, wrote it up, and made pretty pictures, some of which are interactive. There it is.

This sums up everything I can think to say on the published sequencing runs. So if anybody out there in the mummyverse is still talking about alien-human hybrids, chimp DNA, or repeating the lies about the samples of Maria and Wawita lying outside of normal human variation, you can send them my article.

As usual, I make all of the data available for people to look at themselves.

I'll answer questions for a couple of days and then I am going back to no social media. :)


r/AlienBodies • • 10d ago

Antonio's DICOM are now on tridactyls.org

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

93 Upvotes

Preliminary analysis suggests he was murdered and is a teenager.


r/AlienBodies • • 10d ago

Dr. Jesse does not get enough love.

Thumbnail gallery
12 Upvotes

r/AlienBodies • • 14d ago

Bazy Głębokie Reptilians

Thumbnail
0 Upvotes

r/AlienBodies • • 14d ago

Where is this from

Thumbnail
youtu.be
0 Upvotes

r/AlienBodies • • 17d ago

Jois Mantilla shared a first look at Drs. McDowell, Caruso & Rodriguez studying the tridactyl specimens.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

198 Upvotes

Will air nationally in Mexico.


r/AlienBodies • • 17d ago

Discussion The EBO Scientist Post: What It Claims, Where the Biology Falters, and What Later Retellings Add

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

r/AlienBodies • • 19d ago

Discussion I need help looking for an alien image that was supposedly seen by steven spielberg that inspired E.T

13 Upvotes

Someone linked the image in the comments of one of the ufo subreddits and i can't for the life of me remember where i saw it. The comment was just casually replying to someone in a thread saying something like "well this is a supposed leak pic of an alien that was captured that Spielberg saw that inspired E.T"

I had never seen the picture before. It didn't look that similar to E.T. but it was Alien was brown a little on the darker side... short and had these eyes that were somewhat far apart that kind of drooped with wrinkles around the eyes and looked almost sad? it was a really strange looking alien and it was just standing with a white background. It is bugging the hell out of me that i didn't save it. I didn't even think to save it because I thought it was a widely known alien pic. I tried searching with Ai on reddit and nothing comes up.

Edit: it looked like of photo of this alien but in color : https://youtu.be/8NvVPxELIbA?si=EkA1A7Q05FK-RLOC


r/AlienBodies • • 20d ago

Ross Coulthart on the tridactyls in his latest reality check.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

41 Upvotes

r/AlienBodies • • 22d ago

Faust tells Project Unity he saw the tridactyls, met the forensic doctors, has medical files, and convinced they’re real

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

60 Upvotes

r/AlienBodies • • 22d ago

Video KGB film of Operation Isis carried out in the Tomb of the Visitor

Thumbnail
youtu.be
0 Upvotes

r/AlienBodies • • 23d ago

Discussion The mystery of Peru's ‘alien mummies ’ deepens after two more corpses are found with slanted eyes and hair

Post image
23 Upvotes

r/AlienBodies • • 26d ago

Research A deep look at the 1992 Riviere-Rouge Quebec Canada EBE

Thumbnail
gallery
361 Upvotes

I've noticed with my recent post on here that there was some of you who weren't familiar with the 1992 Riviere-Rouge Quebec EBE. So here's a series of images from a Youtuber named newbeat2012 that doesn't exist anymore, you'll have to use the Wayback Machine to watch his video covering this EBE.
Also Credit to the YouTuber named Lately. For making a video about this EBE too, that's where I found out about newbeat2012. You can still watch his video on YouTube.


r/AlienBodies • • 28d ago

Research I found two striking similarities between the 1992 Rivière-Rouge Quebec EBE and the 2011 Siberia Russia EBE

Thumbnail
gallery
417 Upvotes

I’ve noticed that the mouth and deltoids of the EBE’s
Are very similar.


r/AlienBodies • • 28d ago

Discussion What's the most convincing proof of the Nazca mummies?

0 Upvotes

Believers frequently claim there is evidence available.

Weirdly, they never point to a single bit of evidence, just some website that is clearly bought and paid for by known hoaxers.

If the bodies are indeed legitimate, there should be at least one bit of irrefutable evidence that can convince anyone.

Where is it?

If you can't point to any, does that mean you gullibly believed a known hoaxer who peddled false COVID cures, a known hoax network, and a convicted grave robber telling you bullshit about the bodies? WHY WOULD THEY LIE?

Do note, that I will NEVER take any claims seriously because I am the only true observer of my reality according to philosophy, and that I don't trust mainstream science because they stopped answering my calls.

Nevertheless, I will arbitrarily determine myself the victor in any discussion, because I think it is normal for any actual scientific discussion to have a winner and a loser. I will also arbitrarily change my standards of evidence based on whether I want to believe it or not. This is NOT me being biased, as I am a scientist.

Edit due to the extreme dishonesty displayed by the commenters here:

Not only in this sub, people defend hoaxers for blaming mainstream science for "ignoring" these bodies, when in reality there is no rational argument for that at all.

They effectively behave like fanatical believers, they have no rational scientific reason to consider the bodies real, but stop at nothing to paint them that way.

Becoming liars and hoaxers themselves in the process.

Instead of engaging in personal attacks, that only show your lack of rational arguments anyway, you should demand that hoax team actually do their job: to meet the standards of evidence that every other discovery does and to allow access to the bodies by real experts and provide logical arguments based in verifiable data.