Subscribe Sign in

Science / Western Australia

False claims about Aboriginal rock art and aliens were once fringe. Researchers fear AI could push them mainstream

4 min read Rewritten in plain language

Indigenous AustraliansIndigenous PeoplesRaceArchaeology

Show what we removed
  • Archeologists warn AI summaries can repeat false claims about 12,000-year-old rock art from Western Australia’s Kimberley region being painted by aliens
  • The ancient Gwion Gwion and Wandjina figures, found in the Kimberley in Western Australia, have long been used in false claims that they were created by aliens or vanished civilisations.
  • Social media accounts, some with tens of thousands of followers, falsely claim that the figures in Kimberley rock art were painted by a different or “superior” race, and possibly aliens.
  • Barunga is a Worrorra man and the Dambimangari Aboriginal Corporation director.
  • In 2015, then Liberal Democratic Party senator David Leyonhjelm cited the Gwion Gwion paintings when he said there might have been a “ previous culture ” before Aboriginal people occupied Australia.

5 sentences from our version of the report, chosen to cover it. Nothing here is written; every line is in the article below. How

Headline check

The one thing this headline claims is in the report.

Figures, names and quoted words in the headline, looked for in the report itself — not in the summary above. One claim in this headline could be checked, so this is a narrow pass and not a thorough one. How this is checked

Read the full reportHide the full report4 min

Archeologists warn AI summaries can repeat false claims about 12,000-year-old rock art from Western Australia’s Kimberley region being painted by aliens

Warning: This article contains historical records that use racist and offensive language, and descriptions of events that will be distressing to some readers

Traditional owner Warren Barunga says he is angry that people are misusing his people’s sacred rock paintings.

The ancient Gwion Gwion and Wandjina figures, found in the Kimberley in Western Australia, have long been used in false claims that they were created by aliens or vanished civilisations.

Now the old tropes about the sacred rock art, born in the 19th century, have been supercharged by social media.

In the latest issue of Australian Archaeology, researchers have analysed the “extent to which popularised fringe narratives are displacing science-based and Indigenous knowledge-informed archaeology online” and the further dangers posed by AI summaries absorbing those narratives.

Social media accounts, some with tens of thousands of followers, falsely claim that the figures in Kimberley rock art were painted by a different or “superior” race, and possibly aliens.

The researchers, from various Australian universities, looked at examples in the Pacific as well as the Gwion Gwion paintings.

These examples “have all been subject to fringe ideas about a ‘superior race’ that dissociates descendant Indigenous peoples from their pasts”, they wrote.

The Gwion Gwion paintings, which feature tall, thin people with intricate details such as headdresses, were introduced to Europeans by the pastoralist Joseph Bradshaw in the 1890s. They are about 12,000 years old, and are often flanked by Wandjina, which are up to 5,000 years old. Both are used in the false claims.

Barunga is a Worrorra man and the Dambimangari Aboriginal Corporation director.

Worrorra people are part of the Wanjina Wunggurr community, which includes the Wunambal, Gaambera and Ngarinyin people.

Barunga says the Wandjinas are the core of his people’s existence, from the Lalai or Dreaming.

“It is our kinship system … our cultural heritage … our way of life,” he says.

“We garden this country, we look after Wandjina.

“When I hear about these misinterpretations, it not only saddens but it angers me.”

Of the Gwion Gwion, he says they are “the first people, our ancestors. They were here; we are the children that belong to them.”

The use of “pseudoarchaeology” to make false claims about the paintings and other ancient artefacts has a long history.

The “‘lunatic fringe’ of prehistoric archaeology rose in Germany in the 1920s and 30s, as an “ideologically motivated misinformation scheme”, the researchers write.

“Pseudoarchaeology often favours white nationalist imaginings of the world and therefore disempowers Indigenous histories.”

The Swiss author Erich von Däniken’s 1968 bestseller Chariots of the Gods? Said we were all the descendants of aliens who visited Earth in the distant past. Cave paintings, Egypt’s pyramids and the Easter Island statues were proof of their visit, he wrote, arguing the people who lived there would not have been capable of creating them.

Speculation about a “non-Aboriginal origin” of the Kimberley figures started in the 19th century and re-emerged in the 1990s, in the context of Mabo and native title.

The myth was spurred by an amateur archaeologist Grahame Walsh, who said they were painted by a pre-Aboriginal group.

In 2015, then Liberal Democratic Party senator David Leyonhjelm cited the Gwion Gwion paintings when he said there might have been a “ previous culture ” before Aboriginal people occupied Australia.

He used that false claim to argue it was “not necessarily a good thing” to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the constitution.

Last year, online images circulating with posts claiming to feature the Gwion Gwion were debunked by experts. The same picture had been previously posted with the claim it was an ancient Indian cave painting depicting the “groundbreaking revelation of prehistoric extraterrestrial encounters”.

A search today of social media shows multiple accounts posting false claims about the origin of Kimberley paintings, often featuring Wandjina figures, alongside the Gwion Gwion, with speculation that with their large heads and eyes they might be alien “greys”.

The researchers say the rise of social media and AI as primary sources of information for many raises concerns about “how the outputs will influence how the past is written for mainstream audiences”.

The paper’s lead author, Dr Michelle Richards, a University of Melbourne archaeologist, says academic research struggles to get into the public realm and has to compete with “fringe narratives, pseudoscience, even just made up stories … they have that promise of mystery, dramatic revelations”.

The researchers found ChatGPT gave “largely non-harmful answers” when asked about the origin of the Gwion Gwion figures.

The OpenAI chat bot said they were painted by Aboriginal Australians and reflected a “long, continuous cultural tradition”.

But Richards says she is worried that could change, and it’s important to “keep on top of it”.

When Guardian Australia asked ChatGPT about them, it said they were “most likely” painted by the ancestors of Aboriginal people and that there had been “considerable debate about their origins”, but that answer varied when different variations of the question were asked.

Richards says: “I think we still have a chance to stay on top of it, but we do have to pay attention.”

You are reading our version, not theirs. This is The Guardian Australia's report with its verdicts and loaded words taken out. Plain description stays, and so do adjectives that carry a fact, such as "former" or "federal". The reporting, the facts and the quotations are theirs — quotations are never edited — and the indicators beside it measure this version. Hover or tap Adjectives to see every one left in the text.

How this outlet filed it, and how we rewrote it

No other newsroom we read has filed on this event, so there is nothing to compare it with yet.

Outlet Niral ScoreAdjectivesSourcingSentimentHappiness
The Guardian Australiaas they published this story 13.6 18 84 -0.4 48.6
Mundane Readneutralized from The Guardian Australia 11.3 16 84 -0.4 48.6

Sign in to react.

Comments

Nothing here yet.

Sign in to comment.

Questions

Readers can ask a question about this story here. Questions and answers are for subscribers. Sign in to read them.

Comments are read before they appear where anything in them needs a person to look. Nothing posted here is ever deleted; a comment taken down keeps its text and the reason, so the decision can be looked at again. How this works