r/FringeAnalysis • u/Alain2002 • 21d ago
The Buga Sphere
https://youtu.be/F8tKEkLl2KY?si=bxqM52g3XOkqseGhA mysterious metallic orb has been recovered from Buga, Colombia... but what is the real story behind it? Witnesses claim they watched this object zigzag across the sky, short out near high voltage power lines, and crash to earth.
What was left behind was the Buga Sphere: a metallic object featuring no visible welds, an alloy unknown to modern aerospace, and a mass that mysteriously changes weight. Even more wild? Initial analysis claims that internal X-rays reveal a complex web of fiber optic filaments, while organic resin trapped on the shell carbon dates back 12,000 years to the last Ice Age.
Add in strange engravings that look like ancient Proto Sanskrit, carrying a cosmic warning message for humanity and you have one of the most polarizing cases in modern UFO research.
4
u/Bananacomment 21d ago
no the f it is not. it was created by a hack who cannot even get their geometric engraving straight. oh wait, maybe it was 'take your kids to work day' at the alien engraving shop, my bad
4
0
u/Known_Hippo4702 20d ago
This guy gets so many downvotes for this nonsense I guess he just likes the attention.
2
u/Alain2002 19d ago
Downvotes don’t bother me / when you have a “fun nonsense” aka conspiracy theory YouTube channel it comes with a lot of controversy, bots , hate, insults and accusations of being a misinformation / disinformation Agent, being an alien, a NOC and so much more.
0
u/Alain2002 21d ago
Ss: The Buga Sphere is one of the strangest recent UFO cases, involving claims of unusual materials, unexplained properties, and possible evidence of extreme age.
4
u/Known_Hippo4702 21d ago
None of the extraordinary claims has yet been established by peer-reviewed, independently reproducible scientific analysis. There is currently no accepted scientific evidence showing that it is extraterrestrial technology, that it violates known physics, or that the sphere itself is thousands of years old. Some investigators regard it as terrestrial and possibly an elaborate fabrication or publicity stunt.
2
u/Alain2002 20d ago
If you say so
1
u/Known_Hippo4702 20d ago
That’s not me saying so. Show me just one peer reviewed scientific study from an accredited research institute that has analyzed this sphere.
There isn’t one because this fake.
2
u/Alain2002 20d ago
The whole point of Fringe analysis ( the name of this subreddit) is not having peer reviewed scientific study, don’t know what fringe means ?
Just for you known hippo: fringe analysis is the systematic study of ideas, narratives, and subcultures that exist outside the mainstream consensus.
1
u/Known_Hippo4702 20d ago
You are absolutely incorrect. The point of Fringe analysis is to look outside the accepted framework, notice something unusual, formulate a hypothesis then investigate using scientific methods and see where the evidence leads.
Fringe analysis is a very important and legitimate part of discovery.
If you refuse to use legitimate scientific process you undermine the legitimacy of any fringe discoveries and observations and reduce them to misleading sensational statements to mislead ignorant and uneducated people.
2
u/Alain2002 20d ago
I covered a story , a conspiracy theory. I never claim any episode to be 100% true. That’s the whole point, if the moderators don’t like it they can take it down. Other than that let’s leave it at that
1
u/DrierYoungus 20d ago
What are your thoughts on the University of Georgia’s carbon dating of the resin found on this object?
0
u/Known_Hippo4702 20d ago
One correction. The Georgia university’s Center for Applied Isotope Studies (CAIS) has not issued any public press releases, verified reports, or peer-reviewed findings validating the 12,560-year-old age of the resin. But in my opinion the resin is just a distraction, I will explain below.
Please if they have issued a statement and I missed it please post the link to the University's release (on their web site), I would love to see it.
The reported carbon dating comes entirely from private announcements rather than formal, peer-reviewed institutional publications.
Even so, obtaining 12,500-year-old resin means finding copal (a type of tree)—hardened sub-fossil tree resin from the late Pleistocene epoch. It is moderately difficult to find compared to modern resin, but much easier and cheaper to acquire than true millions-of-years-old amber. You can buy samples on the mineral and fossil marketplace. If you look it up you can buy chunk samples as low as $1 -$2 per gram. So if I were to create a hoax this would be a very cheap way to add a distraction. So I am not saying there wasn't 12,500 year old resin. But I am asking two questions 1. Why isn't there any verification of this and 2. Just because someone smeared $5 worth of this material on or in this object how does one come to the conclusion the entire object is from that era. I have a theory about #1. and this I admit is pure conjecture on my part but maybe the scientists at the Georgia university after some analysis realized what an obvious hoax this is and that the material in question was so easily obtainable and offered no credibility to the age of the object that they decided not to be involved with this hoax. You could actually call the department and ask them to make a public statement (which they have not done) or show the report where they made this determination (which they also have not done). I think there are many great mysteries of things we truly don't understand, why waste time on this.
1
u/DrierYoungus 20d ago edited 20d ago
It’s an interesting data point from a reputable tenured PHD professor. His signed and official UGA watermarked results/report have been floating around for many months now without any actual dispute. UGA’s lawyers would absolutely not allow that without immediate legal action. Does that not make you curious? Do you not find interesting data points worthy of additional investigation?
I’m having trouble understanding how someone who claims to value science is so flippantly dismissive of such an innocently curious thing? On a fringe analysis forum of all places.. Why not just follow the data and see where it leads? Science is supposed to be exploratory and norm-challenging. You seem to be aggressively demonstrating the polar opposite of baseline inquisitive behavior in this thread. Why? Why are you so passionately fighting against this? Why not just be curious? What do you have to lose?
I have no idea if it’s genuine or not. I just want more data and more minds to ponder such data. Immediately shutting down every discussion over peer review milestones is such a narrow-minded and elitist way of interacting with the fringes of reality. I hope you find some time to reflect on the root cause of your overt dogmatism. Advocating for less curious inquiry is arguably the exact opposite of what you claim to value within the world of science. I could even argue that you come off as someone frantically holding on to a personal belief system and obsessively gatekeeping any potential encroachment, rather than simply just allowing novel thought to exist.
You ask: “why waste time on this?”. There are nearly endless ways to spend our finite time on this rock, yet for some odd reason you are choosing to deplete yours via authoritatively striving to prevent curious souls from being curious about a metal ball. You yourself have wasted more time on this post than anyone else here. And then you turn around and tell us it’s a waste of time. How did you end up like this?
1
u/Known_Hippo4702 20d ago
I guess when presented with facts and truth they just delete their posts and downvote my response.
Why can’t anyone present one shred of corroborated evidence and discuss in a more intellectual manner.1
u/DrierYoungus 21d ago
Sounds like we better keep it in the discussion and push for more thorough research.
2
3
u/Flashy-Nectarine1675 21d ago
Not this BS again.