Mystery of the Belmez Faces

SharpEye

New Member
Recently I remembered a mysterious case that I’ve heard about regarding a series of human like patterns in the floor of a Spanish home. Allegedly, the faces began to appear on the floor, and reappeared despite initial attempts to remove them. Various tests were performed on the faces, to mixed results, with some detecting evidence of coloring while others have found no indication of paint. A 2014 investigation by the Spanish Tv Show Cuarto Milenio, with the report headed by “José Javier Gracenea, doctor in chemical engineering and general manager of Medco, and Luis Alamancos, forensiccriminalist, chairman of Gabinete Pericial Inpeval and director of the Spanish Institute of Applied Criminalistics”, who reportedly found no evidence of artificial tampering and failed to reproduce similar images. There also some “documentation” of the faces changing, with some of the photographs in the second link below. What do you guys make of these studies, and could it all be one large orchestrated hoax?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bélmez_Faces

https://www.researchgate.net/public..._An_Investigation_of_a_Supposedly_Strong_Case
 
I'd wager that the people making the faces use a variety of substances to create them to make pinning down how it's done tricky.
The lack of interest in setting up time lapse cameras filming the floor seems very marked to me.
 
What do you guys make of these studies, and could it all be one large orchestrated hoax?

If the Wikipedia article you've linked to (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bélmez_Faces) is a fair summary of the case, particularly the work/ opinions of José Luis Jordán, it seems very likely the faces are a hoax.

Some studies don't find the presence of specific types of paint, which of course doesn't rule out the presence of others, or other staining fluids.
 
@SharpEye In that article, the one called the "second face" (the one shown above) appears to be a poorly drawn, childish image, but the others shown, including the "fourth face", strongly suggest our old friend again, pareidolia, perhaps enhanced later after the resemblance to a face was spotted.

I would really like to see what the rest of the floor looks like; are there other streaks or mottled patterns throughout? A possible cause for that might be mold growth (and unless I missed it in a quick read, that explanation was not tested or mentioned) which might be caused by all sorts of spills or leaks over the years. They discuss a plexiglass sheeting placed over part of the floor which had to be removed eventually as water appeared under it, so it sounds as if it is a place where moisture sometimes seeps and mold might grow. That might explain the changes to the "second face" with time.

Whatever the origin, they look suspiciously like they have been artificially enhanced.
 
Last edited:
If the Wikipedia article you've linked to (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bélmez_Faces) is a fair summary of the case, particularly the work/ opinions of José Luis Jordán, it seems very likely the faces are a hoax.

Some studies don't find the presence of specific types of paint, which of course doesn't rule out the presence of others, or other staining fluids.
That’s a good point, but I’m still confused as to why the patterns couldn’t be replicated?
 
@SharpEye In that article, the one called the "second face" appears to be a poorly drawn, childish image, but the others shown, including the "fourth face", strongly suggest our old friend again, pareidolia, perhaps enhanced later after the resemblance to a face was spotted.

I would really like to see what the rest of the floor looks like; are there other streaks or mottled patterns throughout? A possible cause for that might be mold growth, which might be caused by all sorts of spills or leaks over the year. They discuss a plexiglass sheeting placed over part of the floor which had to be removed eventually as water appeared under it, so it sounds as if it is a place where moisture sometimes seeps.
Some have varying levels of detail, some could be chalked up to paredolia, but others seem pretty intentional.

Here’s a pic of some of the other faces:
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4926.jpeg
    IMG_4926.jpeg
    79.8 KB · Views: 2
I guess in these hard-pressed times it must be a relief to the creative sector that if the deceased, or extra-dimensional entities, can cross those most forbidding of barriers to our realm of life, at least they're not very good artists.
 
I guess I’m still trying to figure out why the researchers couldn’t replicate the face patterns. Maybe the material interacted uniquely with the mold? Just brainstorming, what do you guys think?
 
You could paint with something to encourage mould in one area or the other way around paint with mould inhibitor to only allow mould to grow in patterns you want.
 
That’s a good point, but I’m still confused as to why the patterns couldn’t be replicated?
"Were not replicated" and "cannot be replicated" are not the same thing.


I guess I’m still trying to figure out why the researchers couldn’t replicate the face patterns. Maybe the material interacted uniquely with the mold? Just brainstorming, what do you guys think?
Because they didn't hit on the exact technique, maybe didn't have the same drawing style, maybe the environment in the room was not exactly the same, etc.


Here’s a pic of some of the other faces:
For me, a useful test is "If you flip it upside-down, does it look like an upside down face, or just random splotches, or even a different right-side up face?"

faces.jpg

This is, of course, a subjective test, but then pareidolia is a subjective thing. To me, subjectively, this group (at least at this resolution) flunks the test -- most look like gibberish to me, a few look like upside-down faces (top row, extreme left), about as many look like a different right-side up face (second row, extreme right.)

Your mileage may vary, of course.
 
IIRC people sometimes use yoghurt on stone/ ceramic/ cement etc. garden ornaments and the like to encourage lichen and moss to grow, "ageing" the item in question.

I'm guessing the house owner (or someone else with access) has chanced across something that causes superficial stone discolouration- perhaps something quite common or widely available, which we wouldn't normally put on a stone/ ceramic surface intentionally.

Some of the lines/ details are relatively fine, so I'd guess a liquid, or something soluble, that could be applied with a paintbrush.

-While writing this, chanced across a couple of things that might be more relevant than yoghurt:
Spoiler: The faces were perhaps painted with silver salts originally, and latterly (and perhaps more crudely) with oil.

The Wikipedia article says
María Gómez, the purported psychic that allegedly produced the appearances, died in February 2004 at the age of 85. After her death the popular psychic researcher Pedro Amorós tried to "discover" more thoughtographic appearances in Gómez's house. A new wave of Bélmez faces thus took place.
Content from External Source
One psychic dies, and we might infer that there are no further changes to the faces (else why look for new ones?)

The death of María Gómez, in short, closes a case that was already closed, solved and practically forgotten.
Content from External Source
(author's emphasis),
from article Los caras de Bélmez (The Faces of Bélmez) by Fernando L. Frías Sánchez for the Sociedad para el Avance del Pensamiento Crítico (Society for the Advancement of Critical Thinking),
https://www.escepticos.es/webanterior/articulos/belmez.html (more on this in a bit).

-And had there been subsequent changes/ new faces post-María, I'm guessing the psychical community would tell us all about it.
A new "psychic" arrives, and new faces emerge...

Wikipedia continues,

However, Amorós' claims have been debunked in the Spanish media. In November 2004 the newspaper El Mundo published the article "New Belmez Faces Faked by 'Ghostbusters' and Municipal Government."[19]

In May 2007, journalist Javier Cavanilles and investigator Francisco Máñez published a book called Los Caras de Bélmez,[20][21] which has the double meaning of "The Faces of Bélmez" and "The Scoundrels of Bélmez", where they explain the history of the scam and pointed to María's son, Diego Pereira, as author of the mysterious paintings.
Content from External Source
The El Mundo story (in Spanish) is currently hosted on Wayback Machine, link below, written by Javier Cavanilles, 28 Nov. 2004:
https://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2004/11/28/sociedad/1101615058.html

Translated into English- I can't speak Spanish, so apologies for any mistranslation.

c1.JPGc3.JPG

Fernando L. Frías Sánchez's article Los caras de Bélmez for Sociedad para el Avance del Pensamiento Crítico,
is critical of the whole faces affair. He's confident enough to "point the finger", and alleges, or at least implies, the involvement of a photographer in the village who sold photos of the faces.

Frías Sánchez believes the faces were painted with photoreactive chemicals available to the photographer; apparently the newspaper Pueblo published an analysis showing the presence of nitrate and silver chloride approx. 6 months after the faces first appeared. He also believes the style of the faces changed after the death of the photographer.

Again, a computer translation from Spanish, I'm sure it reads more flowingly in the original.




María Gómez has died.
Have the faces of Bélmez died with her?


The Faces of Bélmez
by Fernando L. Frías Sánchez

"The greatest paranormal mystery of all time". This and other similar phrases are the ones we have heard the most these days on the occasion of the death of María Gómez, a humble woman who rose to fame in 1971 when the first of the "Faces of Bélmez" appeared on the floor of her kitchen.

The history of this phenomenon is well known. Or, to be exact, a part of the story: the appearance of the Faces, the "investigations" carried out on them by parapsychologists and "mysteriologists" from all over Spain... It is also known, although less publicized, the great profitability that was made of that matter: as a result of the Bélmez Faces it went from being a forgotten little town to making headlines, cramming itself with curious people attracted by that mystery and, of course, benefiting from the economic injection that that wave of paranormal tourism meant. And there would also be some benefit, without a doubt, for those most directly involved: although María Gómez did not charge to enter the house, she did not refuse to receive "the will" either, and few were the visitors who did not take as a souvenir some of the photos of the Faces sold by the village photographer.

But what few remember, or at least few have wanted to remember these days, is how short the mystery lasted. Almost six months after the appearance of the first Face, the newspaper "Pueblo" published the results of an analysis according to which those faces had been painted with nitrate and silver chloride. The trick, which was very ingenious, was that these substances react to light, so that the portraits were not visible until some time after they had been painted, and gradually appeared before the eyes, apparently without any human hand having intervened in the process.

As is often the case in these cases, the explanation was rejected. There were many interests at stake, and especially those of paranormal investigators: a mystery that ceases to be a mystery loses its appeal to the public and, of course, ceases to be a commodity with which those who are dedicated precisely to selling inexplicable events can continue to deal. So it didn't take long for them to go on the counterattack.

For example, through the chemical "counter-analysis" carried out on the faces. Carried out in the laboratories of the CSIC, the famous analysis indicates that the samples analysed correspond to ordinary and grinding concrete, without a trace of pigments or silver salts, a fact that of course the "mysteriologists" loudly highlight. They are very careful not to remain silent, however, that in the analysis itself the CSIC warns that the laboratory is completely ignorant of the process of taking samples and whether it was carried out with some type of control. The validity of an analysis depends fundamentally, in fact, on the fact that the samples analysed have been obtained in a controlled way, the only guarantee that they come from the object to be analysed, but in this case, as is often the case in the world of the paranormal, the controls are conspicuous by their absence, and the samples were collected in such a sloppy way that the CSIC even draws attention to the container in which it was carried out. They were delivered: a packet of sugar from a cafeteria.

On the other hand, the pro is more serious.notarial tocolo. Anxious to prove the supernatural provenance of the Faces, the "investigators" commissioned a Notary to attest that no one could paint them. To do this, the Notary drew up a record of the state of the kitchen, proceeded to seal it and, a few days later, broke the seals, attesting that the drawings had indeed changed. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like a very consistent test either. Among other things, because the silver salt method is characterized precisely by the fact that it is possible to make drawings that become visible gradually, even experiencing variations in their arrangement without anyone, apparently, having been able to make them. That is to say: just what the Notary attests to. A notary who, on the other hand, in various interviews has shown himself to be a fervent believer not only in the supernatural character of the Faces, but in many other phenomena of an esoteric or paranormal nature. This does not invalidate him as a Notary, of course, nor does it mean that he acted in bad faith or in violation of the obligations of his function as notary public, but it does allow us to suppose that, perhaps unconsciously, he did not adopt the precautions that someone more sceptical and, therefore, more inclined to think about the probability of fraud would have taken. A good example of this are the photographs of the seals he used: although they are correct, they do not seem very difficult to manipulate by someone with a minimum of skill.

Which, of course, Doña María or her husband did not have. And, of course, another of the typical "arguments" with which the supporters of mystery try to rule out the possibility of fraud also came to light. Whenever someone doubts a UFO sighting, a ghostly apparition or any other paranormal phenomenon, the "mysteriologists" dedicate themselves to turning the witnesses green, noting that they are people of little education, lack of imagination and, in short, incapable of concocting a false story or a fraud, not because of their innate honesty, but because the poor do not give so much of themselves. In this case, comments of this style abound, which brand María Gómez as a semi-illiterate woman, without education, simple... without enough lights to mount a deception, well. And, especially, without the necessary knowledge to invent the silver salts trick.
And the latter is probably true, but again it is a weak argument, to say the least, if we take into account that Doña María was not the only person related to the Caras. We must not forget the village photographer, the one who sold photos to tourists and who, obviously, would be familiar with the properties of silver salts. It is impossible, of course, to point to him as directly responsible for the appearance of the Faces, but the coincidence is significant to say the least, if we take into account that after his death the phenomenon underwent an important aesthetic transformation.

And the comparison between the Faces of the seventies and those of the eighties and later leaves no room for doubt: the hand that painted them changed. Although taking into account that "mysteriologists" insist that the phenomenon is not the work of any human hand, perhaps it should be said that the supernatural, ectoplasmic and paranormal entity that painted them changed.
Because the change in style of the Faces is remarkable. The first faces showed a more than acceptable workmanship, with great expressiveness and a technique that, although not perfect, was at least quite good. Those that emerged later, on the other hand, are much simpler, more childish.
This fact probably contributed to the decline in popularity of the Faces of Bélmez. He was not the only one, of course: the novelty of the "mystery" had passed, and not even the sensational appearances of well-known faces (such as Franco or Isabel Preysler) could rekindle the interest of an audience that was simply getting bored with it. And the "investigations" of the mystery sellers did not contribute much either: the recordings of psychophonies, the sessions of contact with the spirits and other paraphernalia only served to bring to light increasingly far-fetched theories, such as the one that linked the Faces with the cemetery on which they say the house was built, or the one that assures that they are the faces of María Gómez's mother and sisters. or the one that relates them, finally, to those killed in the combat of the Santuario de la Cabeza, in the Civil War.

The death of María Gómez, in short, closes a case that was already closed, solved and practically forgotten. And although his death has aroused ephemeral interest in the media, it is most likely that with his disappearance those Faces will also end up disappearing.

But the same will not happen in the fabulous world of the Paranormal Circus, of course. These days special programs, great reports, new investigations, extensive articles in esoteric magazines are announced... and everything indicates that, whether we like it or not, we are going to have Caras de Bélmez for a while.

Because that is what is not going to disappear: the Caras de Bélmez. Thus, in masculine. And if not, at the same time.
Content from External Source
 
Last edited:
I guess I’m still trying to figure out why the researchers couldn’t replicate the face patterns. Maybe the material interacted uniquely with the mold? Just brainstorming, what do you guys think?

As @John J. noted above, several people did replicate some faces with one technique and alluded to other possible techniques. The inability to exactly reproduce something can be a form of "Argument from Ignorance":


Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. The fallacy is committed when one asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.
Content from External Source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

And is a form of burden shifting. The person making the claim shifts the burden of proof to the skeptic, insisting that the claim be proven false. This is used all the time in UFOlogy, cryptozoology and the paranormal. Failure on the part of the skeptic to exactly reproduce a bit of dubious evidence, is seen as proof of the evidence and often the larger underlying claim.

The big claim is that Bigfoot is a real bipedal hominid roaming North America and the famous Petterson-Gimlin film is proof of this. Skeptics will point out the complete lack of any physical, fossil and DNA evidence for this creature, therefore making the film a likely hoax. Proponents of the film will challenge that the film has never been faithfully reproduced, which should be doable if it's fake. Therefore, it's real until proven otherwise.

The reality is it will probably never be reproduced because, like the faces of Belmez, there are too many variables along with the passage of time. Even if I wanted to try to make my own version of the Patterson-Gimlin film, it would be daunting. I'd need a similar costume with a similar sized individual. I would have to modify the costume like Patterson likely did. I would need an old Kodak 16mm camera and Kodak film. Ideally, I would shoot it at Bluff Creek, which even though I'm already in Northern California, is still 5 1/2 hours minimum with some off roading. And Bluff Creek looks nothing like it did in 1967. It's not going to happen.

Same with the faces. I've worked with lots of concrete in the last 30 years, not only can it be stained in all sorts of ways, but the staining will also vary wildly depending on the exact make-up of the concrete itself. Any recreation would need to first create an exact replica of the concrete from the floor in question. One can show how various materials can effect concrete in a similar way, but no one is going to make an exact replica.

Note also the guys who could NOT reproduce the images, José Javier Gracenea and Luis Alamancos, were part of a TV show. From the Spanish Wiki:


Cuarto milenio is a Spanish television program directed and presented by journalist Iker Jiménez and Carmen Porter. The program has been broadcast weekly on television channel Cuatro since November 2005, being the channel's longest running program.

The program explores a wide variety of topics, usually related to mystery and enigmas, though frequently reaching afield.[1][2] They include conspiracy, archaeology, history, criminology, astronomy, medicine, physics, zoology, psychology, parapsychology[3] and ufology.[4][5] It regularly feature experts in various disciplines, like psychiatrists, physicists, physicians, historians, anthropologists, criminologists, astronomers, naturalists, writers or journalists.[6]

Alternatively, it has been criticized as pseudoscientific,[9] pointing to its treatment of esoteric and conspiratorial fields,[10][11] and praised as a program of investigation and divulgation,[12][13] standing out by its consistent presence of scientific authorities and specialists as guests.[12][14]

Cuarto Milenio has been criticized for endorsing pseudoscience, spreading misinformation, and trivializing real world atrocities.

In a 2008 episode of the show, an image of a fake newspaper article from the satirical news website The Onion parodying the Stock Market, was depicted as an legitimate article from 1929.[20]
Content from External Source
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cuarto_milenio&diffonly=true

I'm not saying it's the equivalent of Secrets of Skinwalker Ranch or other Discovery network shows, but a TV program's prime motivation is viewership. To that end, it needs to be entertaining and mysteries are entertaining when they are not solved.
 
The fact that experts couldn't find definitive proof of tampering adds to the mystery. But considering the mixed test results and the inability to replicate the faces, it still leaves room for doubt. Personally, I lean towards thinking it might be a hoax, but it's one of those cases that keeps you wondering.
 
The fact that experts couldn't find definitive proof of tampering adds to the mystery.

Which experts and what does that mean? What would "definitive proof of tampering" look like? Paint blotches? Maybe, but as I noted above, I've stained a lot of concrete over the years and paint would not be my first choice. Even if we are talking about paint, what paint? Did people test for old oil-based paint, water based latex paint or high alkaloid paint?

Some suggested it was originally done with silver nitrate, which is clever, as a clear water like solution can be rubbed on the concrete and allowed to dry. The silver nitrate would later react to light, it's what's used in pre-digital film, so the faces would "appear" over time. Any darkroom photographer would have access to this stuff as well as chemicals that remove the silver nitrate so the whole thing can be repeated with a different face.

I often stained concrete with acid-based stains. I was using ones that are specifically engineered to produce different colors when they react with concrete, but any acid like lemon-juice can work. It can be a problem with concrete countertops, everyday food stuff can create a patina over time. And once the acid reacts with the salts in the concrete, there'd really be nothing to test for, it would just be discolored concrete at that point.

There are all kinds of options, many that don't result in something obvious like a paint blotch.

Lastly, it seems at least some experts were not allowed to study the faces in detail, from @John J. s post above:

1719967845743.png

But considering the mixed test results and the inability to replicate the faces, it still leaves room for doubt.

Test results are mixed, partially because they have been limited to people that can find "no definitive proof of tampering". I explained above why they can probably never be totally recreated. The faces began appearing in the '70s, so the house was at least that old, if not older. Before any replica can be produced, someone would need concrete from the same providers that furnished it to whoever built the house AND from that same time period.

Basic concrete is a mixture of Portland cement, sand/gravel, aggregate (rocks) and water and the ratios can vary considerably. Every slight change in ratios as well the source of material can affect how the finished concrete reacts to whatever staining product is applied. AND concrete cures and gets harder over time, not just days but years. This also affects any attempt to stain it.

So, unless one is given free access to the SAME floor these faces were made on and allowed to experiment with different techniques, an exact replica is very unlikely. One can show how various techniques might produce similar images as a "proof of concept" type experiment, but complete replicas are not going to happen.

Again, lack of an exact reproduction is not proof of anything, other than there may be a lot of variables involved.

but it's one of those cases that keeps you wondering

That's often the whole point, isn't it? ;)
 
The fact that experts couldn't find definitive proof of tampering adds to the mystery.
Note also the guys who could NOT reproduce the images, José Javier Gracenea and Luis Alamancos, were part of a TV show.

@NorCal Dave shows us the experts were part of a TV show that carries stories about the paranormal, but it isn't about scientific investigation of paranormal claims.

The men concerned- and most others allowed to "investigate" the claims of the Gómez family- didn't test for the materials which were perhaps used. Maybe Maria G. learned her lesson early on:

But what few remember, or at least few have wanted to remember these days, is how short the mystery lasted. Almost six months after the appearance of the first Face, the newspaper "Pueblo" published the results of an analysis according to which those faces had been painted with nitrate and silver chloride.
Content from External Source
"The Faces of Bélmez", article by Fernando L. Frías Sánchez for Sociedad para el Avance del Pensamiento Crítico.

A later investigation involving engineer Joaquín Abenza and paranormal investigator Francisco Máñez:
According to Abenza, an amateur of these topics and with professional experience in the field of concrete, "I went with the intention of doing some basic tests that could determine, without a doubt, if the alleged teleplasties had a paranormal origin. But despite having prior confirmation from the SEIP that experiments could be carried out, the reality was that the current owners of the house did not allow them to be carried out under the conditions that would have been necessary."
Content from External Source
Original authors' emphasis,
Javier Cavanilles, "The new faces of Bélmez were falsified by some 'ghostbusters' in complicity with the city council", El Mundo 28 November 2004 (hosted on Wayback Machine in Spanish, machine-translated into English).


And the comparison between the Faces of the seventies and those of the eighties and later leaves no room for doubt: the hand that painted them changed.
...Because the change in style of the Faces is remarkable. The first faces showed a more than acceptable workmanship, with great expressiveness and a technique that, although not perfect, was at least quite good. Those that emerged later, on the other hand, are much simpler, more childish.
Content from External Source
-Fernando L. Frías Sánchez, same link as above.

Frías Sánchez associates the change in style with the death of the village photographer, who would have had access to/ knowledge of the silver salts he believes were used to draw the faces.
The subsequent changes to the faces were seen by believers as more evidence of paranormal activity.
Reporter Javier Cavanilles strongly implies the changes, reduction in quality and new faces are the result of paranormal investigator Pedro Amorós (a man Cavanilles claims has faked parts of his CV) and Maria Gómez' younger relatives "touching up" the fading original faces and painting new ones with oil, in line with Frías Sánchez views.

The only difference is that if the first ones were made with silver nitrate, those discovered in mid-September by the self-baptized Alicante investigator Pedro Amorós, director of the Spanish Society of Paranormal Investigations (SEIP), were made using a more rudimentary procedure: water and oil.
Content from External Source
Javier Cavanilles, "The new faces of Bélmez were falsified by some 'ghostbusters' in complicity with the city council", El Mundo 28 November 2004 (hosted on Wayback Machine in Spanish, machine-translated into English).


Precisely, on the same floor where the new faces have appeared, Máñez explained a simple system for making faces by hand: it was enough to moisten the floor, look for some type of stain, and go over it with a finger soaked in oil so that the image would be fixed for a certain time.
As Máñez explained to EL MUNDO – and other witnesses have corroborated – "it is very strange that the faces appeared after my explanation". "I can't say who faked them," he says, "since I wasn't in front of him when the faces were made, but I do have more than suspicions."
Content from External Source
Cavanilles, link as above.

Must admit, on first reading I skipped over details about some of the people supposedly depicted by the Bélmez faces
(assuming they were generic, or maybe modelled on "traditional" depictions of saints etc.) but they might be relevant:

...not even the sensational appearances of well-known faces (such as Franco or Isabel Preysler) could rekindle the interest of an audience that was simply getting bored with it.
Content from External Source
The Faces of Bélmez, Fernando L. Frías Sánchez; my emphasis.

Isabel Preysler Arrastía is still with us. TV host and mother of singers Enrique Iglesias and Julio Iglesias Jr,
Preysler continues to be the national spokesmodel for... ...Porcelanosa tiles
Content from External Source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabel_Preysler
r.jpg :rolleyes:


General Franco might not make it into the top two of a list of repugnant Fascist/ Nazi national leaders.
But if the denizens of the afterlife or Dimension X who contact us through the Bélmez faces want to share his picture,
we can be sure they haven't got anything good to offer us.

Maybe, like with the "prophecies" of Billy Meier, some believers in the paranormal should reflect on why they might want to believe such tasteless and troubling "evidence" when more mundane explanations are almost certainly correct, or largely correct, and avoid unpleasant connotations.
 
Last edited:
from article Los caras de Bélmez (The Faces of Bélmez) by Fernando L. Frías Sánchez for the Sociedad para el Avance del Pensamiento Crítico (Society for the Advancement of Critical Thinking),
Just a nuance here:
"Los caras" is a pun. "La cara / las caras" (the face/s) is a femenine word. When using the masculine article "los caras" it has a meaning of somebody being cheeky, dishonest, untrustful... . "Los caras de Bélmez" would be something like "The 'gang' of Bélmez".

The whole thing about Bélmez is a well-known and documented hoax from the 70's. There is a book by journalist Javier Cavanilles gathering all the information, with the title (again) "Los caras de Bélmez"

https://www.amazon.es/Los-Caras-Bélmez-misterio-paranormal-ebook/dp/B00MC3RZTC

In the 90's and 2000's the "mystery" was recovered by people making a living from paranormal journalism, or paranormal shows.
 
"Los caras" is a pun. "La cara / las caras" (the face/s) is a femenine word. When using the masculine article "los caras" it has a meaning of somebody being cheeky, dishonest, untrustful...

Ah, that's useful. The last line of The Faces of Bélmez by Fernando L. Frías Sánchez reads (when machine translated into English)

Because that is what is not going to disappear: the Caras de Bélmez. Thus, in masculine. And if not, at the same time.
Content from External Source
-which, because I can't speak Spanish, I couldn't understand. Thank you for explaining the meaning!
 
Ah, that's useful. The last line of The Faces of Bélmez by Fernando L. Frías Sánchez reads (when machine translated into English)

Because that is what is not going to disappear: the Caras de Bélmez. Thus, in masculine. And if not, at the same time.
Content from External Source
-which, because I can't speak Spanish, I couldn't understand. Thank you for explaining the meaning!
A better translation (for me)
because that's what will remain: 'los caras' de Belmez . Like that, in masculine. Time will tell
Content from External Source
 
High school Spanish is a long (!) but wouldn't the masculine be "los caros?" "Los caras" seems to contradict itself -- or is that a layer of the pun?
 
'cara' is being used as an shortened form of an adjective ('caradura', lit. 'hard face' or someone who has a hard face', someone who is tricking you while keeping a straight face (dont know if it's an appropiate expresión in english?)

'El cara' means "the guy who is ...[put the equivalent english adjective here]"

The pun plays with both meanings, 'caradura' and face
 
Back
Top