TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Genetic analysis of tiny mummified skeleton from the Atacama Desert

62 pointsby snake117about 7 years ago

7 comments

sampoabout 7 years ago
Just noting that the mummy is very recent, perhaps 50 years old. (Not a 50 years old person, but born and mummified about 50 years ago.)<p>&quot;Ata was stillborn or died immediately after her birth, perhaps 40 years before her remains were discovered.&quot;<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;science&#x2F;2018&#x2F;mar&#x2F;22&#x2F;genetic-tests-reveal-tragic-reality-of-atacama-alien-skeleton" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;science&#x2F;2018&#x2F;mar&#x2F;22&#x2F;genetic-test...</a>
评论 #16657495 未加载
评论 #16654479 未加载
评论 #16653707 未加载
vadimbermanabout 7 years ago
&gt; Ata’s bones contain DNA that not only shows she was human<p>The fact that there&#x27;s a DNA already means it&#x27;s not an alien, doesn&#x27;t it? Having a life form with the same uber-complex chain of nucleotides as the life on earth developed is as improbable as a server on an alien mothership being compatible with a Macbook. (Quick primer on the subject: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.airspacemag.com&#x2F;daily-planet&#x2F;cracking-aliens-genetic-code-180964124&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.airspacemag.com&#x2F;daily-planet&#x2F;cracking-aliens-gen...</a>)<p>Having said that, the NYT article reads like the researchers are still unable to explain the discrepancies between the age and the well-formed skeleton as well as the number of mutations. Were there any secret nuclear tests conducted half a century ago in Chile? But that would also probably be insufficient to cause all that. I would bet on experiments trying to cause deliberate mutations.
评论 #16654312 未加载
评论 #16655079 未加载
评论 #16655462 未加载
trhwayabout 7 years ago
not directly related, just by association - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Artificial_cranial_deformation" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Artificial_cranial_deformation</a> - i imagine that would be a one source of alien legends (not that i don&#x27;t believe in aliens myself :) One of the references in the article is about such practice dating back to Neanderthals (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.journals.uchicago.edu&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1086&#x2F;202808" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.journals.uchicago.edu&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1086&#x2F;202808</a>)
steve19about 7 years ago
I always had assumed it was a very clever hoax, now my heart bleeds for the poor little girl and her mother. Hopefully she will be reburied.
anfiltabout 7 years ago
Pictures I have seen before always made me think that skeleton was a hoax. At least the Alien lunacy has been put to rest.<p>Although, I bet there will be some people who would not believe the results.
ggg9990about 7 years ago
Warning: photo of dead baby at top of linked article.
pvaldesabout 7 years ago
mmh... I&#x27;m unsure about what to think. Reduced ribs, crest and pelvis shape suggest more a small monkey without tail than a human to me. Is too tiny for having calcified bones yet. Some things suggest human foetus, not stillborn. Other are not easy to explain.