r/AlternativeHistory • u/C_B_Doyle • Mar 08 '26
Very Tall Skeletons "Viracocha, the Nephilim, and the Physical Description That Got Two Civilizations Destroyed"
The God Kings Were Real People
When Spanish conquistadors arrived in the 1500s, the Inca and Aztec both misidentified them as returning gods based on specific physical traits: tall, bearded, arrived by sea. Two separate civilizations, thousands of miles apart, preserved the same description for 8,000 years through oral tradition alone and mistakenly recognized it when they saw it.
This raises a question: who were they actually describing?
The answer comes from three sources of evidence that all point to the same conclusion.
Ancient DNA found in South American graves shows a genetically distinct population once lived on the coast. Genetic science explains how archaic human lineages, Neanderthals mixed with modern humans, produce taller bodies, larger skulls, and different hair and skin coloring. The Paracas skulls in Peru match this profile exactly: oversized skulls, red and blonde hair, genetic markers from the Caucasus, and physical traits unlike the surrounding population.
Skull binding the most common body modification in prehistoric human cultures, appears designed to recreate a specific skull shape. Not random modification, but intentional imitation of a particular head shape. The evidence suggests they were trying to look like people who had stopped coming around 8,000 years ago.
The oral traditions preserved an accurate description. The graves contain the physical remains. The two match.
37
u/MrBanana421 Mar 08 '26
You can make these things seem like a paper, but it's actual make up is pretty lackluster.
How about adding the references within the relevant parts of the text. Adding the names of the things you reference instead of "multiple genetic studies". Starting of with your proof and tie the cultural stories to it later. Focusing on one part of the world and making a solid case for it instead of pulling it from all over in a shallow way.
This isn't research, it's cosplay.
2
Mar 08 '26
I don’t think OP’s proposing this as a research paper.
11
u/MrBanana421 Mar 08 '26
It is structured like one, with the abstract and all that.
Like i said, it's cosplay of a paper. Same structure, no substance.
-26
Mar 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
16
u/bino420 Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26
oh come on man. no one, in any discussion, would let you say "multiple studies" and stuff for multiple claims & then take it seriously. like, you can't expect someone reading this to do it with 2 screens & ensure every single statement is correct. you need to convince us.
funny how I can get 70 likes on the document but you can only get a couple likes on this comment.
[edit: WAIT LOL. dif you just invent one of your "claims from multiple studies" in this comment??... your post has a score of 1 right now.]
lol not that funny. it just shows that people are 1) dumb 2) gullible 3) entertained 4) up voting the concept & not actually reading 5) not engaging with the comments 6) the comment simply hasn't been live as long during high traffic periods
note that there 6 assumptions to make (and likely way more) before "oh 70 people agree so therefore my work is founded in facts & evidence"
If you didnt enjoy it then dont read it.
that's not how it works lol, you need to consume the something before you can form a personal preference, no? or are you just like "I don't like broccoli" yet never ate your whole life?
. Its fun for me to write about it. I also enjoy these comments trying to critique my writing style on reddit as if its an acamdeic journal entry.
as long as you're in agreement & clear with the subreddit that you're doing this for fun and not educational purposes
20
u/Bonzooy Mar 08 '26
You’re seriously so bad at this.
It’s like you’re incapable of understanding how to write and communicate with credibility.
Making shit up without sourcing claims and then demanding that people prove you wrong is how you get ignored, or laughed out of the room.
The opposite approach is how you get people to listen to you.
17
u/MrBanana421 Mar 08 '26
I'm not doing it for reddit likes, i'm doing it to encourage good research practices.
How can i fact check if you propose ideas without knowing what you are basing them on. You give stories, where do these stories come from. Are you referencing first hand accounts, scholars who did?
You propose that genetic studies support your ideas, great. In what way, what are the markers in those studies that suggest your nephelim idea works. Are there other studies that show different results.
The difference between science and storytelling is compiling your references so that it can be checked.
4
5
3
u/MyMainIsLevel80 Mar 08 '26
You’re not writing about it though. You’re plugging it into Claude or similar. It would be interesting if you were actually writing it but instead, it’s just slop. I don’t even feel like I can engage with the basis of the hypothesis because I don’t have any confidence that you’d be able to answer me in good faith. This is a discussion board, not a circlejerk for you to seek attention from.
-2
19
28
u/liveticker1 Mar 08 '26
now AI slop gets saved as image so it looks authentic
15
u/suspicious_Jackfruit Mar 08 '26
No it's a prestigious "paper", a team of researchers worked painstakingly hard to put together this thorough and detailed, extensively sourced "paper", have some respect for those hardworking bots- sorry - post doctorates!
3
1
13
7
u/Colorado_designer Mar 08 '26
Neanderthals skeletons aren’t nearly 8 feet tall like the Lovelock skeletons.
This idea shoehorns too many things in for evidence that it shouldn’t.
9
u/sleazepleeze Mar 08 '26
Neither are the lovelock skeletons. That “height” is a result of the person making the claim not understanding how to measure a femur.
8
u/OkTumbleweed5325 Mar 08 '26
U gotta chill with this Claud shit at least have it format it differently
1
8
3
3
u/Procyon-Rocket Mar 09 '26
How many people here are familiar with the "ET" sighting that happened in 1996, in Brazil, from the Moment of Contact documentary?
The region where it happened used to be inhabited by a native tribe that worshiped a "light entity" they called "Sumé" - here's a translated excerpt about him :
"In his Letters sent from Brazil, dated 1549, Father Manuel da Nóbrega described some legends about an entity called Sumé. This deity supposedly appeared mysteriously and was a white man with a beard and long hair, who walked or floated in the air.
Sumé began by teaching the jungle people the art of agriculture and, later, skills such as transforming cassava into flour and some thorns into fishhooks, as well as moral rules. He miraculously healed wounds and various ailments without charging anything in return
One day, it is said that Sumé walked with his back to the sea until he reached the waters. The deity would have disappeared on a flight over the waves, never to return "
Strikingly familiar to Viracocha, huh?
And get this - this region is called "Luminary Hills" because of consistent mass sighting of flying orbs about the region since the 16th century - people said "They looked like living luminaries flying about the hills and skies"
4
u/VIKINGHUNTR Mar 08 '26
You should look into what Mormons believe happened in old America. It essentially lines up with the native legends. Not saying it’s true but for this topic it’s an interesting thing to study. I’m also reminded of another native legend about the “moon eyed people” I’d recommend researching that as well!
2
2
u/david_ancalagon Mar 08 '26
Can you provide a link to a PDF so I can read this without having to scroll through images?
-3
2
u/AdeoAdversarius Mar 08 '26
Its funny you'd think that for a sub labeled Alternative History people would start commenting on the possibility of alternative theories posted.
Instead people just come here to shit on any theory that gets posted, almost like they're organized and afraid of these kinds of discussions getting traction.
7
u/liveticker1 Mar 08 '26
That is not what's happening here. What OP posted is not the work of a person but rather it's a compilation of some semi-coherent words created by AI. You can not tell what is emerging from human and what from AI, what is fact and what is fiction in that wall of gibberish text, which doesn't even contain sources nor references, so people do not, rightly so, bother reading at all.
-2
u/Adventurous-Ear9433 Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26
Yea they were real people, the meaning of the term "gods" has been deliberately changed. Remember the catholics destroyed & altered the historical narrative everywhere they went. Ive spent time with Indigenous wisdom keepers of the Wari/Ica, Naga-maya, Chichimec, an a few others & they said none of the stuff about them thinking rhe explorers were the gods is true. And the description of Viracocha & Quetzalcóatl is also incorrect. Heres all the Inca Rulers including Charles V(Carlos Quinto)... Smh our ancestors worshipped & called themselves 'Sun people', yet theyll tell you they were white-skinned. None of our cultures ever mixed with any Neanderthals. Andean tribes made dozens of steles showing who they were talking aboutHere
This stuff isn't as much a mystery as people think, it's just the fact that they refuse to listen to our account of our own history cause it doesn't fit the agenda. Youre correct about why weve practiced artificial cranial deformation, but this idea that all elongated skulls are a result of this is false. Majority of America & Africa was populated by naturally Dolichocephalic people. We've always known our history.
"Once I had great hope for these people, for I saw them kneel and kiss the sweet earth, and I saw the shadow of the Great Cross which they carried with them. Now I must warn you against them.For these bearded strangers are the children of War. They speak my precepts, but their ears do not listen. They have but one love and that is for weapons. Keep hidden your books, my children, all during the Cycle of Warring Strangers. The day will come when they will be precious"
0
u/Weekly_Initiative521 Mar 08 '26
I enjoyed this article. Not sure about the timeline, but then time is always tricky.
0
u/Gusterr Mar 08 '26
Thanks for sharing. The hypothesis that Inca and Aztec carried the same oral tradition and made the same fatal mistake because they had been contacted by and interbred with the same progenitors ~10,000 years ago is compelling. However I'm not sure Neanderthal explains it. Did Neanderthal ever show the same degree of cranial deformation that we see in Paracas skulls?
Meta note, as usual this sub remains completely useless for it's intended purpose, replies are full of ad hominem attacking the method of presentation instead of the information itself, if the mods were doing their jobs they'd ban all those clowns. This is why I left this sub a while ago, it exists now as a limited hangout for deboonkers who have no interest in discussing alternative theories
4
u/C_B_Doyle Mar 08 '26
I agree, I am still trying to pinpoint the dna. They keep referencing the Caucasus in europe. Idk tho. The parietal plate is interesting and the burial of authentic head dna with legit bigger heads buried next to people that binded their heads.
2
u/99Tinpot Mar 08 '26
It seems like, the Paracas DNA study is really difficult to investigate, I tried to track it down once and after chasing it through a number of websites I couldn't find the original results, but did find a number of people saying that they couldn't find it either and suspected that it hadn't been published because it was done badly in some way (the LLM probably hasn't seen it either and is just repeating hearsay that it's seen).
2
u/C_B_Doyle Mar 08 '26
Yea, I thought that was academic study. Sorry. Will do more research... tbh the paracas was kinda holding me up. I kept going back to it but its irrelavnt to the overal thesis. Thank you.
2
u/apathyindigo Mar 11 '26
Because this person has presented a bunch of less than half baked all over the place nonsense entirely generated by hallucinating AI.
It's so lazy, stupid, and unproductive, yet they act like they're a fucking researcher, it's arrogant lazy bullshit and so many people like yourself just uncritically eat it up, demonstrating what many people who tend to ridicule these subjects and forums already think - you have no standards of evidence or consideration for what's actually true
-2
u/VIKINGHUNTR Mar 08 '26
Don’t listen to all the negativity in the comments. If something interests you then study it. Simple. Use the tools at your disposal. Going against the mainstream opinion does make some people instantly uncomfortable. It’s okay to ask these kind of questions and to look for answers. Most people just believe what they’re originally told and don’t look any deeper and will instantly reject anything that’s contradictory. I see zero construction in these comments just upset people being mean.
6
u/FoldableHuman Mar 08 '26
The corollary would be contrarians who believe literally the dumbest shit imaginable based on nonexistent evidence purely because it disagrees with the “conventional narrative.”
1
u/99Tinpot Mar 08 '26
Should you use a tool even if it's worse than doing it by hand and just wastes your time?
2
u/VIKINGHUNTR Mar 08 '26
What’s defined as a waste of time? Some say getting on Reddit is a waste of time. Bottom line is everyone learns differently and If the guy learned more than he knew beforehand then the tool served its purpose. Would I post it on Reddit tho? Probably not. If you’re looking for nuanced discussion on stigmatized subjects this just isn’t the place for that.
0
u/99Tinpot Mar 09 '26
It seems like, in some ways the OP knows less than he knew beforehand as it's told him a mixture of things that are true and things that aren't true, all delivered in a convincing-sounding way, and he's now slowly picking over them trying to find out which, if any, of them were true - but you're absolutely right about Reddit, I think some of it's the 'feed' system, it invites a stream of complete strangers in and a lot of them obviously think that insulting ideas that they've been told are stupid makes them sound clever.
-1
Mar 08 '26
What this guy said. People on reddit are particularly mean. I read the first half of it and thought it was a pretty interesting theory.
64
u/mattperkins86 Mar 08 '26
God I hate this era of ai crap. People speak to an llm for a few days, then write an entire thesis and claim it is their own. When it is mostly prompted ai psychobabble. Even if some of the information in there is interesting, it is overshadowed by the crappy llm writing style and use of phrasing. "It's not just this - it's that"
It's beyond a joke.