Who were the main contractors, architects, and engineers on the Buga Sphere and their timelines?
Executive summary
Available reporting lists no firm, public roster of "main contractors, architects, and engineers" formally responsible for the Buga Sphere’s creation or handling; most coverage instead names investigators, presenters, and enthusiasts involved in publicity and analyses (e.g., Jaime Maussan events and investigators present at press conferences) rather than construction teams [1] [2]. Journalistic and blog accounts describe press conferences, laboratory examinations, and named figures like Jaime Maussan and Dr. Steven Greer attending events, but they do not establish an official contractor/architect/engineer timeline for the sphere’s origin or manufacture [1] [2] [3].
1. What the sources actually document — custody, publicity and investigation
Contemporary accounts focus on custody and public display: Jaime Maussan hosted a June 20, 2025 press conference in Mexico City where the sphere was displayed and attended by UFO researchers and at least one U.S. congressman, and journalists reported the object was transported to a university-affiliated research site in Mexico for study [1] [2]. Those reports document who publicized and examined the object, not who designed or built it [1] [2].
2. Named people and roles reported in coverage
Multiple outlets record the involvement of high-profile UFO researchers and presenters at the reveal and subsequent publicity: Jaime Maussan organized the major press event and custody in Mexico City [1] [4], and Dr. Steven Greer was reported present at the June event [2] [3]. Reports also reference investigators conducting X‑ray and materials analysis, such as “Dr. Velásquez” performing initial X‑ray scans in May 2025, but these accounts treat them as analysts rather than builders or formal contractors [5].
3. Technical investigators vs. constructors — sources conflate roles
Technical writeups describe radiography, metallurgical assays and complex internal structure — for example, X‑ray imaging revealing concentric layers and internal components — which journalists and specialist blogs interpreted as evidence of advanced engineering. Those descriptions name analysts (e.g., Velásquez) but do not say those analysts fabricated the object; reporting keeps analysis and alleged manufacture as separate matters [5] [3].
4. No construction timeline or contractor list in current reporting
Despite detailed discussion of the sphere’s internal makeup and sensational claims about its provenance, the available sources do not provide a construction timeline, company contracts, architectural plans, or a list of engineers who built the sphere. Claims about origin are speculative — some outlets argue extraterrestrial manufacture or seamless construction beyond current welding techniques, while others treat it as a possible hoax — but none cite a contractor or builder timeline [3] [6].
5. Competing perspectives in the record
Coverage divides between proponents emphasizing unexplained materials and seamless fabrication (arguing human technology cannot account for it) and critics calling the story a hoax or staged performance; proponents point to complex internal architecture and analyses presented at Maussan’s events, while skeptical pieces and later investigative commentary argue errors and staged evidence may undercut extraordinary claims. Both perspectives are present in the corpus but neither supplies contractor/architect credits [5] [3] [6].
6. What reporters and analysts did disclose chronologically
Key dates and activities reported: sightings and recovery in March 2025; initial X‑ray analysis reported in late May 2025; press conferences and public displays in mid‑June 2025 (20 June) at Maussan Television in Mexico City; subsequent continued analyses through July 2025 and later commentary through autumn 2025 [5] [1] [2]. These are custody-and-examination milestones, not construction milestones or contractor handovers [5] [1].
7. Limitations and what remains unreported
Available sources do not mention any formal contractors, architectural firms, or engineering companies that created the sphere, nor do they provide procurement records, manufacturing dates, or assembly timelines; those details are not found in current reporting (not found in current reporting). If your question seeks the manufacturing provenance or an accredited engineering roster, those records are not present in the provided sources (not found in current reporting).
8. How to pursue firm attribution next
To identify builders or contractors you will need documentary evidence the current reporting lacks: procurement documents, lab chain‑of‑custody reports, manufacturing serial numbers, formal lab reports listing who fabricated components, or investigative journalism that traces supply chains. None of the cited items supplies those records, so any claim about specific contractors or architects would be unsupported by these sources (not found in current reporting).
Source citations: press coverage and analyses summarized above appear in the June press‑conference and custody reports [1] [2], radiographic/material analysis reporting [5], and broader pro/con commentary [3] [6].