Showing posts with label Motives. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Motives. Show all posts

Sunday, November 4, 2012

UFOs & the Anti-ETH: Summation Arguments: Part Three

That the scientific communities and scientists in general (there are exceptions) dismiss the UFO ETH (extraterrestrial hypothesis) as pseudoscience and total bunk is understandable, but illogical. The scientists’ anti UFO ETH arguments don’t stand up to logical scrutiny. Here’s some more of their specific objections, and why they are in turn, objectionable. To adequately come to terms with the UFO ETH one needs to have a ‘deep time’ perspective; not just one of here and now or last week, month, year, decade or even centuries ago.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

Eyewitness cases are often backed up by a radar tracking or ground traces or physiological effects or (electromagnetic) EM effects or motion pictures or still photographs. Radar, ground traces, EM effects also exist by their lonesome. UFOs are a global phenomenon that cuts across all age, sex, racial, cultural etc. boundaries. If UFOs were just the province of one country or region, or only witnessed by those with an IQ less than 90, well that would be suspect. UFOs have been taken seriously enough to be an official part of government programs from around the world, unlike say poltergeist events which aren’t, and expert military and scientific analysis can not explain, depending on where and time, between five and ten percent of all UFO reports.

Now I am well aware that scientists like to focus on physical evidence as opposed to eyewitness testimony. They want the evidence that lies on the slab in the lab; the kind you can put under an electron microscope. That’s quite understandable and I have no problems with that whatever. What I do have a problem with is when scientists say there is no physical evidence without them having actually examined the physical evidence that is available. I refer to the physical evidence that actually exists that’s associated with the UFO phenomena.

Firstly, ground traces, depressions, discoloured areas, broken branches, electromagnetic imprints etc. associated with a UFO event. No, I’m not talking about crop circles here (that’s another issue separate and apart), but data that exists in the USAF Projects Sign, Grudge and Blue Book UFO archives. There are quite a few hardcore unknowns associated with UFO physical traces left behind on the environment and you’ll find several in the Condon Report on UFOs.

Secondly, there are unexplained UFO photographs and motion pictures, many from the late 40’s and 50’s (pre CGI). You’ll find five UFO photographic hardcore unknowns in the so-called ‘scientific study of UFOs’ conducted under government contract by the University of Colorado – the Condon Report.

Thirdly, there’s a vast number of unexplainable UFO radar related cases. That infamous Condon Study (University of Colorado) alone contains three unexplained UFO radar cases. I can’t help note the parallel between SETI and UFOs on radar. In both cases you have EM radiation impacting a receiver and a human that ultimately has to determine the cause – intelligent or natural; terrestrial or extraterrestrial.

So, ground traces; photographs; radar – that’s physical evidence.

So, perhaps until such time as scientists take the time and trouble to examine UFO cases that have associated physical evidence, they might want to soften the mantra that there is no physical evidence for hardcore UFOs.  

I make one defense however for the UFO ETH since scientists counter that each of the threads of ETI having been then or now on Earth are weak-in-the-knees when it comes to solid evidence. Roswell is weak; UFO abduction cases are weak; the UFO conspiracy or cover-up case is weak; UFO photographs and videos are weak; UFO radar cases are weak; the case for Erich von Daniken’s ancient astronauts is weak; the ghost rocket sightings (1946) are weak; contactee claims are especially weak; UFO eyewitness reports are unreliable (except when they solve a UFO sighting turning it into an IFO), etc. But, put them (and much more besides) all together and like all good detective stories combine/integrate all the clues into one composite whole (after separating out the wheat from the chaff and eliminating the red herrings) then the whole is more than the sum of the parts. You get a fairly consistent pattern that emerges; not the radio signal patter-of-little-dots-and-dashes the SETI scientist wants but a nuts-and-bolts and a here-and-now pattern.

Now admittedly any one of a hundred different and independent facets to the UFO phenomena might in itself be not all that convincing, but then all 100 or so threads are woven together – that’s a different duck of another color. It’s like if it looks like a duck – it may not be a duck. If it flies like a duck – it may not be a duck. If it walks like a duck – it may not be a duck. If it swims like a duck – it may not be a duck. If it quacks like a duck – it may not be a duck. But if it looks, flies, walks, swims and quacks like a duck – then it’s a duck!

Another point is what the UFO ETH debunkers are confusing here is the concept of ‘evidence’ vs. the concept of ‘proof’. There are massive amounts of evidence for the UFO ETH as noted immediately above. For example, I’d consider as part of legit evidence documents released under the Freedom of Information Act that show that in 1947, the then Army Air Force (AAF) requested the FBI to assist in investigating ‘flying disc’ reports all as part of the developing Cold War hysteria at the time. The FBI (Hoover) responded that they would cooperate only if they were granted access to the “crashed discs”, something the AAF refused. That’s evidence; it’s not proof.

In fact there’s more than enough eyewitness testimony and physical evidence that would satisfy any court of law; any judge; any jury in just about any other set of circumstances to render a verdict of guilty. But the UFO ETH can not yet be rendered guilty, because though there’s not yet to date a smoking gun. There’s no absolute under-the-microscope, on the lab’s slab, proof positive of the UFO ETH. If any UFO ETH buff says they have proof, tell them to ‘put up or shut up’. If however they say they have evidence in favor of the UFO ETH, ask them politely what it is.  

So, IMHO, this objection fails because there is quite some considerable amount of evidence, both eyewitness and physical suggestive of an UFO ETH, and also because scientists, being human, often employ the double standard.

Now if the UFO ETH is correct then obviously the ‘land on the White House lawn and a take-me-to-your-leader’ scenario would be the obvious course of action for ET. That hasn’t happened; therefore the UFO ETH is ridiculous.

However, an alien by definition would have to have an alien mind, and alien psychology, and alien motives. We can’t hold them to our standards, our motives, our behavior patterns. Half the time I can’t figure out why my cats do what they do!

According to hundreds (probably thousands) of sci-fi writers and of course Hollywood (and equivalents around the world), alien invasion is even more a viable scenario – as entertainment anyway. But that hasn’t happened either, but again that’s no argument to suggest that because there’s been no alien invasion that UFOs can’t be alien technology. The U.S.A. hasn’t invaded Canada anytime lately and America has appropriate technology to do so if it wanted.

That leaves other motives – scientific, economic, etc. Let’s examine human equivalents. Humans have explored ever since we had the ability to explore. We’ve boldly gone, in person or via machine surrogates, to the depths of the ocean, to Antarctica, to the Moon, and to all of the planets (actual, or in the case of Pluto, on route). All this exploration for all practical purposes has been for the sake of just science, pure science, and nothing but the science. Of course there’s usually an ulterior motive in the back of the mind – exploration leads to exploitation. We explore, we like what we see, we colonize, we exploit, we build resorts for R&R, we migrate to escape various forms of environmental/political pressures, we mine for resources, and we farm for food and do more besides. Today the Moon is for science; tomorrow we may exploit its resources. Why should the ET-Earth relationship be any different? 

How about the fact that every cubic inch of the sky is monitored from above and below 24/7/52 by highly sophisticated electronic surveillance equipment, always on the lookout for sneak attacks and to track satellites and space junk. The orbits of thousands of bits of space junk are known with high precision, even if that bit is no larger than a ham sandwich! Any alien spaceships that large or (obviously) larger that’s up there, well, we’d know about it.

However, advanced stealth technology rules; okay anyone? It’s a major and ever ongoing R&D into stealth technologies are of interest to the military, the intelligence community and law enforcement agencies on Earth. What might an advanced alien civilization 1000, 10,000 years in advance of our have in the way of such camouflage? They’d obvious use that technology to prevent being shot at by trigger-happy generals! In ‘Star Trek’ terminology, we’d call this sort of technology something akin to a ‘cloaking device’.

What about if ET is, or was here, there would be artifacts left behind, even if it’s just ET’s garbage and litter.

Unless we humans start launching our garbage into space, say the ultimate incineration in the solar furnace; well let’s just say that option is going to increase waste disposal rates several thousand fold and therefore isn’t a realistic option. Therefore, we have little option but to use Planet Earth as a garbage dump – much to the delight of archaeologists who base much of ancient human history on just such detritus. But of course time, natural forces and biological agents ultimately deal with most forms of human waste – solid, liquid and gaseous.

Those same natural forces and biological agents would also strut their natural recycling and breakdown stuff on ET’s waste. But, in addition, ET can and does have the option of removing their detritus off planet. Secondly, would we of necessity recognize and distinguish ET’s rubbish from all other forms of human rubbish especially without any obvious differences that would suggest such rubbish is somehow different and should be subject to complex analysis that would be required to confirm that this rubbish isn’t ordinary rubbish but extraordinary rubbish?  Lack of ET’s garbage is not evidence of a lack of ET.

There’s yet another solution. A technologically advanced ET is probably equally advanced in recycling technology. If you undertake interstellar voyages you’d better be damned efficient at recycling. Anyway, I don’t recall anyone in ‘Star Trek’ for example leaving behind their litter – an artifact, maybe like a book on Chicago’s gangsters yes, but not rubbish! But speaking of artifacts related to ET, there have been lots of authors, quite apart from Erich von Daniken, who have made careers out of pointing out archaeological evidence suggestive of ET. Now clearly much of that is embellishment and wishful thinking and often plain nonsense, but, as most of life’s little mysteries are, this isn’t an either/or situation. There are many shades of gray here and I’ve sen quite a few artifacts that are quite suggestive of an ET in our past, and of course if past tense, why not present tense? Now throw in some mythology…

An all to human final fallback objection is that the UFO ETH can’t be therefore it isn’t; alright it might be but it still isn’t; don’t bother me with facts, my mind is made up; and in any event it’s all pseudoscience and I just deal with real science. Trust me on this – I’m a scientist!

Once upon a time Galileo Galilei and Nicolaus Copernicus would have been considered pseudo-astronomers; Heinrich Schliemann (of Troy fame) someone who dabbled in pseudo-archaeology; Charles Darwin was a pseudo-naturalist; and Alfred Wegener, obviously put forth a theory (continental drift) that could only be described as pseudo-geology at the time. Even originally Albert Einstein was so far out in left field that his scientific seniors and superiors could easily have described his physics as pseudo-physics. Only time and history will be the judge whether or not the UFO ETH is or was pseudoscience or real science. The jury IMHO is still out on that issue. 

Conclusion: Scientists rally against the UFO ETH and perhaps they are right – or maybe not. Scientists aren’t all-knowing. They too are human with all the accompanying baggage that implies and they can, and do, make mistakes.

Thursday, November 1, 2012

UFOs & the ETH: Summation Arguments: Part Three

The Fermi Paradox postulates that extraterrestrials should be visiting Planet Earth. That’s the theoretical part of the equation. UFOs provide the counterpoint – the observational part of the equation.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

Those who have investigated UFOs with maximum time, energy and resources are of course those from government agencies, representing the government. Therein lays a problem. No government is ever going to admit – assuming an extraterrestrial intelligence behind UFOs – that is doesn’t have full control over its airspace. No government is ever going to admit it is near powerless against possible invaders, including a hypothetical extraterrestrial one. Any government that has insights into the artificial (extraterrestrial) nature of UFOs technology is certainly not going to share that information with other governments, however allied, far less their great unwashed Joe Doe public.

Now sceptics will argue that some countries with official UFO investigations programs have shut them down (or at last that’s the official line). There are two possible reasons for that, assuming everything is on the up and up. The obvious one, to sceptics, is that there’s nothing to the subject – time, money, manpower, resources have been wasted and it’s time to bail out and cut the losses. The quite less obvious one is that we now know what we needed to know and therefore there’s no point in carrying on. That means either a secret admission that we’re helpless no matter what, so no point, or there’s been a conclusion that UFOs pose no threat, so again no particular point in carrying out more studies. In fact, if you example the reasons governments (American and British immediately come to mind) have given for getting out of the UFO business is that phrase – ‘no threat’ - UFOs, whatever they are, or aren’t, pose ‘no threat’ Note that there’s never a definitive statement that absolutely no UFO has represent  extraterrestrial intelligence technology, that aliens aren’t here, it’s always that UFOs pose ‘no threat’ and therefore we’ve got better things to do – like dealing with things that are threatening! That ‘no threat’ phrase might represent a possibility that the powers-that-be know more than they’re telling – ‘no threat’ means different things to those in the know vis-à-vis the great unwashed who might not be quite as convinced if they knew what the powers-that-be knew. That’s a good reason for not confiding in the great unwashed!

UFOs pose ‘no threat’. That’s the real justification for bailing out. And while such statements usually have an additional proviso that no evidence of extraterrestrial activity has been uncovered, the government can not claim there’s no aliens about – absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence. Specifically, it’s difficult to draw the conclusion that no UFO sightings can be attributed to extraterrestrial activity with all investigations leave behind a statistically significant residue of unknowns; unsolved UFO sightings. I’m not talking here about cases ‘solved’ within categories of possible this, or probable that, or even insufficient data, but totally unknown, as in we haven’t a bloody clue in (or out) of this world as to what the sighting actually was even though we had apparently sufficient data to suss it all out.  It’s a case of your guess is as good as mine. Now if the sum total of all unknowns were countable on the fingers of one hand that result might be dismissible. However, the unknowns usually account for about 7% or thereabouts of officially investigated cases; cases investigated by government officials, usually the military, aided with civilian scientific expertise as required. In the case of the Condon Committee University of Colorado UFO study, if memory serves, reading the entire text reveals an unknowns rate of about 30%, but then they did select the best of the best of the previous unsolved cases to try their luck against.

The unknown cases residue provides an interesting challenge to science and scientists – those with an open mind anyway. There’s a scientific wealth of gold in them thar hills to be research and mined. There’s nothing less than the possible proof of the existence of extraterrestrial intelligent life at stake.

This wouldn’t be complete without reference to Roswell. I don’t wish to say too much about the Roswell, N.M. case (July 1947), other than to point out that the then US Army Air Force admitted publicly, in the media, in newspapers, on radio, that they had captured one of those mysterious (and only recently sighted – the modern UFO era was just weeks old) flying discs. No amount of back-pedalling can alter that now historical fact. It’s on the record. Look it up yourself!

I’m in a bit of a quandary about which UFO era is the best for mining. Ordinarily I’d say the earlier the better in that contamination is limited or reduced. Thus, the first (or close to the first) visual sighting or the first (or near first) physical trace case or the first (or second or third) this or that. Alas, that means going back to say the first five to ten years of the modern era – 1947-1957. Witnesses and associated evidence has been diminished over the interval between then and now, even if original documentation still exists. Latter eras are better, but recent cases have a greater chance of having been influenced by what has come before. All else being equal, I’d mine those first ten years, but that’s me.

Do I have the smoking gun? No, otherwise I’d be booking my flight to Stockholm to receive the Nobel Prize! Does the smoking gun exist in the raw unknowns’ data? I don’t know, but it doesn’t hurt for it to be combed through again.

So, why aren’t scientists jumping at the chance to prove the ETH? Why no serious academic study of the phenomena. I mean there’s probably a Nobel Prize at stake, just waiting for that scientist, or team of scientists, to boldly go and prove the ETH. Well, it’s basically because the entire subject of alien visitations, whether UFOs or ancient astronauts, have been hijacked by extreme elements – the lunatic fringe. Thus, the field has achieved a high ‘giggle’ or ‘silly season’ reputation. Newly minted academics, looking to establish themselves as bona-fide serious scientists, ingrain themselves with their peers (who largely control promotions, funding, etc.). That means, they tackle serious topics – not ‘giggle’ factor and ’silly season’ topics, unless they want their careers nipped in the proverbial bud. And so, in public at least, you tend to get attitudes along the lines of ‘everybody knows that it’s nonsense’, ‘it can’t be, therefore it isn’t’ or ‘don’t confuse me with facts, my superior’s mind is made up therefore my mind is made up’. And so it’s a vicious circle. Only serious scientific study will remove the ‘silly season’, ‘giggle’ factor; but the ‘silly season’, ‘giggle factor’ prevents serious scientific study.

Anyway, there are two sides to this situation! All the government secrecy – and secrecy has well and truly been documented - could come unstuck, could be immediately negated, if an extraterrestrial UFO lands in Central Park (or equivalent). So, why doesn’t said extraterrestrials so land with a ‘take me to your leader’?

Firstly, there is obvious danger in interpreting / comprehending / understanding an alien mind-set or psychology or behaviour. I mean intelligent human mind-sets / psychology / behaviour is hardly a rigorous science. If what makes us tick is problematical, what hope do we have understanding, even up to an equal degree, intelligent aliens?

All of which brings me to possible motives for an alien race(s) to come calling and stick around. There’s thousands of sci-fi stories, films, TV shows, even academic texts dealing with this. Perhaps one or more of the following makes sense.

Firstly, we have tourism. That’s quite comprehensible to us.

Secondly, and most likely IMHO, we have a scientific (experimentation, observation, curiosity, specimen gathering, etc.) rational. 

Thirdly, and probably most common in the sci-fi literature, Earth is ‘target earth’ for proposes of colonization, war, invasion. They want our resources, even if not our women!

There’s the possible motive central to diplomatic and foreign relations. They want us to come join their interstellar federation.

Fifthly, maybe it’s something we haven’t yet thought of – or can’t think of, alien psychology being totally outside our realm of comprehension.

So, in conclusion, where is everybody? IMHO, ‘They’re heeeere.’

And, I think we’re property!

Sunday, October 21, 2012

UFOs: Since Their Motives Are Illogical, They Don’t Exist: Part Two

An alien by definition would have to have an alien mind, and alien psychology, and alien motives. We can’t hold them to our standards, our motives, our behavior patterns. Half the time I can’t figure out why my cats do what they do! So, can we pass judgment on whether or not UFOs, if defined as being alien ships (the ETH - extraterrestrial hypothesis), are acting in what we would call a logical way? UFO skeptics would argue that UFOs if extraterrestrial behave illogically and therefore aren’t extraterrestrial - maybe yes – maybe no.

There are various motivations why E.T. might be interested in our little patch of real estate – Planet Earth. Scientists interested in that issue, not to mention vastly more sci-fi authors and Hollywood producers, have given quite some considerable though to the question.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

We Are Property - The Alien Abduction Scenario: Since the UFOs agenda is apparently neither an invasion nor a take-me-to-your-leader scenario, and since we haven’t found any extraterrestrial R&R resorts on our planet (we have explored Mount Olympus – no extraterrestrials to be had), that leaves rather more a scenario of scientific study but embellished including the concept inherent in the ‘Zoo Hypothesis’. We are ‘animals’ – they are the zoo keepers.

A slightly stronger alternative scenario has us as being actually owned by E.T. – at least as far as E.T. is concerned. They bought the property rights to Planet Earth eons ago, so we are their ‘slaves’; we are their property; they are the masters and the owners. But perhaps that’s too ‘invasion’ like, even though plausible.

So another argument against the UFO ETH is the absolute absurdity of UFO-related alleged abductions by alien beings.

Okay, we have this subset of the UFO phenomena called alien abductions – extraterrestrials (often called the ‘Greys’) have their wicked ways with their human property. Skeptics suggest that the question ‘what can it all mean?’ is none other than so-called UFO abductees are a bit touched in the head.

Apart from that, the sixty-four cent question is ‘why’. Why would aliens abduct humans? Certainly not for chit-chat or wild parties! And why have so many humans been taken for so long? Well, how long have humans studied rats, and how many hundreds of thousands have had to run the maze? That’s my answer. We’re just lab rats to the aliens. We’re not to be conquered, but we’re not going to be given the cure for cancer, the road to universal peace, and certainly not the “Encyclopaedia Galactica”. There will be no trade – their tribbles for our opals say. 

What was it that the compiler of all things anomalous, the late Charles Fort said? “I think we’re property”. But is that such a strange idea really? We own land and by extension the plants and animals on it. Does a colony of wild turkeys comprehend that they are owned because they live on something called private property? They could be left in the main quite alone and undisturbed, except for the occasional one which might be harvested (abducted) around Christmas time!

The UFO abduction phenomena makes sense in that it mirrors what wildlife biologists often do in the field – capture, study, tag and release. The UFO abduction ‘Greys’ seem to be interested in humans mainly with respect to areas or aspects surrounding reproduction and genetics. These are the same sorts of areas required for our creator ‘gods’ (ancient astronauts by another name) to have ‘created’ humans in the first place, so maybe their grand plan is still unfolding!

There’s an obvious parallel with aliens abducting humans. If humans are anything to be judged by, we abduct animals for all sorts of reasons, from the illegal trade in wildlife, to animals for zoos and safari parks, for medical research and biological research. With respect to the latter, wildlife biologists will often abduct, tag and release animals. Sound familiar? If animals communicate among themselves, their verbal history must be chockfull of abduction tales with humans the abductors.  

We might ask what right extraterrestrials have to own Planet Earth and by extension us. Our colony of wild turkeys could ask the same about us (or our domestic livestock or companion animals for that matter). Maybe it boils down to the Golden Rule – they who have the gold (or are the top of the food chain or have the biggest gun or the most advanced technology) make the rules. It does appear that, given the abduction (and perhaps the livestock/animal mutilation phenomena), Planet Earth and its contents are indeed alien property. Of course, as hinted above, it might have been the case that Planet Earth, as prime real estate, was obtained by extraterrestrials a billion years ago, way before the evolution of multi-cellular plants and animals, and of course humans.

Okay, we’re the property of the UFO ‘Greys’ and they feel they have every moral, ethical and legal right to have their wicked way with us.

The ‘we are property’ (whether in a zoo or as lab rats) hypothesis explains the Fermi Paradox (“where is everybody?” – they’re here); it explains the observations that UFOs are no threat to national security; it explains the lack of any alien invasion; it explains the lack of any alien’s “take me to your leader” scenario; it explains the general UFO abduction phenomena; it probably accounts for the overall animal mutilation phenomena. It doesn’t explain crop circles - unless one would equate them with the sort of diversions, toys, monkey bars, bird swings and other associated furniture you can find in any pet store that we give to amuse our own owned animals. Or, alternatively, perhaps crop circles are akin to the sort of symbols (pictograms) behavioural scientists have used in experiments in communicating with apes and monkeys – lab rats, albeit higher IQ lab rats.

The upshot is that UFOs, if extraterrestrial, have motives that UFO ETH skeptics find a bit suspect, therefore UFOs aren’t extraterrestrial. However, going beyond the obvious diplomatic, trade relations, invasion, and R&R scenarios which apparently aren’t, one can still find parallels between what our alleged aliens do, and what humans do. That alone makes the UFO ETH a plausible one IMHO.  

Saturday, October 20, 2012

UFOs: Since Their Motives Are Illogical, They Don’t Exist: Part One

An alien by definition would have to have an alien mind, and alien psychology, and alien motives. We can’t hold them to our standards, our motives, our behavior patterns. Half the time I can’t figure out why my cats do what they do! So, can we pass judgment on whether or not UFOs, if defined as being alien ships (the ETH - extraterrestrial hypothesis), are acting in what we would call a logical way? UFO skeptics would argue that UFOs if extraterrestrial behave illogically and therefore aren’t extraterrestrial - maybe yes – maybe no.

There are various motivations why E.T. might be interested in our little patch of real estate – Planet Earth. Scientists interested in that issue, not to mention vastly more sci-fi authors and Hollywood producers, have given quite some considerable though to the question.

Diplomatic - The “Take Me to Your Leader” Scenario: If the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) is correct then obviously the ‘land on the White House lawn with a take-me-to-your-leader’ scenario would be the obvious course of action for E.T. Translated, E.T. wants to not only establish diplomatic relations, but probably engage in interstellar trade as well. That hasn’t happened over six decades on; therefore the UFO ETH is ridiculous.

An obvious answer to that is we humans don’t come up to a flock of crows (rather intelligent birds by the way) or introduce ourselves to an octopus (invertebrate intelligences in their own right) with a wave and a handshake (wing-shake; tentacle-shake) along with a hi-ho “take me to your leader” or “let’s establish diplomatic and trade relations”.

By the way, why is the obvious landing site the White House lawn? Why not outside the walls of the Kremlin, or within the Forbidden City, or for that matter on Easter Island, the lawns outside of Australia’s Parliament House, or in nice sunny Bermuda?

Conquest – The ‘War of the Worlds’ Scenario: According to hundreds (probably thousands) of sci-fi writers and of course Hollywood (and Hollywood equivalents around the world), alien invasion is even a more viable and realistic scenario – as entertainment anyway. But that hasn’t happened either, but that’s no argument to suggest that because there’s been no alien invasion that UFOs can’t be alien technology. The U.S.A. hasn’t invaded Canada anytime lately and America has appropriate technology to do so if it wanted. Still, UFO skeptics who believe in the ‘Mars Wants Women’ scenario, say E.T. isn’t here because E.T. isn’t today our Imperial Leader Most High – our Global Head of State (Universal President, Master-of-the-World, Prime Minister Supreme for Life, or our Lord-on-High World Dictator; whatever).

The obvious answer to the lack of any invasion scenario is that E.T. could find whatever it wanted in terms of resources closer and far cheaper to home base. What can Earth offer that couldn’t be had closer to home at far less time and expense? - Certainly not water, or minerals or energy or real estate. If there is one end-of-the-world scenario that we don’t have to lose sleep over, it’s invasion and conquest by extraterrestrials. That’s unless one should suggest that E.T. will invade and conquer; rape and pillage just for the sake of invasion and conquest; rape and pillage. Maybe, but after six plus decades, E.T. is either rather unsure of itself or undecided about the merits of doing so. So, my guess is that if it hasn’t happened by now, it’s not likely to.

That leaves other motives – scientific, economic, etc. Let’s examine human equivalents. Humans have explored ever since we had the ability to explore. We’ve boldly gone, in person or via machine surrogates, to the depths of the ocean, to Antarctica, to the Moon, and to all of the planets (actual, or in the case of Pluto, on route). All this exploration for all practical purposes has been for the sake of just science, pure science, and nothing but the science.

Of course there’s usually an ulterior motive in the back of the mind – exploration leads to exploitation. We explore, we like what we see, we colonize, we exploit, we build resorts for R&R, we migrate to escape various forms of environmental/political pressures, we mine for resources, and we farm for food and do more besides. Today the Moon is for science; tomorrow we may exploit its resources. Why should the E.T.-Earth relationship be any different?  Well I’ve already noted that when it comes to resources and exploitation of those commodities, Earth has relatively little to offer when looked at from the point of view of cost effectiveness. I mean you don’t go clear across country to pick up a loaf of bread you can find at your local supermarket several blocks down the road. But, when it comes to holidays, humans don’t always take the cheapest option. When planning that round-the-world trip, cost effectiveness isn’t an issue, otherwise you could just surf the world via the Internet as virtual reality from the comfort of your living room.

Tourism – The R&R Scenario: Being a rather nice sort of planet, perhaps one or more of our cosmic visitors from the distant past decided to set up shop on Earth, either as a place for a brief R&R (maybe they thought Mount Olympus, Mount Meru or the high Andes might make a nice resort location) or a ‘permanent’ home-away-from-home. Perhaps Planet Earth was colonized by extraterrestrials long before humans were dreamt of in anyone’s philosophy.

Going with that flow, E.T. would have had no moral or ethical qualms about using Planet Earth as an R&R resort and/or base of operations way back then. There was no intelligent life and indigenous civilization already present – the Prime Directive (assuming such a concept is real as opposed to the fictional “Star Trek” concept) would not apply.

So our advanced extraterrestrials set up shop on Planet Earth as an R&R home-away-from-home, sort of taking dominion over this paradise / nature reserve / national park, perhaps with a view towards eventual long-term colonization.  Fast forward to today; once an R&R spot, always an R&R spot. And Mount Olympus certainly beats L.A. or Tokyo or Calcutta as a resort if your one of those extraterrestrial ‘gods’.

Science – The Curiosity Scenario: Visitations to Planet Earth whether they be 4.5 billion years ago; 450 million years ago, 45 million years ago, or 4.5 million years ago, probably were scientific expeditions – aliens exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new life forms and new civilizations. We’re cosmically interesting real estate because we have a biosphere, and presumably planets with biospheres are relative rare in cosmic real estate terms. So, alien biologists will be rubbing their tentacles in glee when they get to explore a new biosphere. So once they have explored our strange new world and our new (if still primitive) life forms, then what? I suggest that initial random visits (as calculated by professional astronomers and physicists within the ballpark of one per 10,000 to 100,000 years) will translate into ongoing and ever more frequent and routine examinations. Perhaps science eventually translates into more commercial areas. Science finds the resources; business exploits them. Perhaps we (Planet Earth) are exploitable, not in terms of commodities like minerals, but as biological commodities. Those won’t be closer to their home since terrestrial biology is presumably only found terrestrially. Terrestrial life might be purely interesting in the way an ant colony is to an entomologist; it might be practically interesting in that, as we have found, biological organisms contain all sorts of valuable pharmacological chemicals. Presumably if E.T. biochemistry is akin to ours, perhaps some drug obtained from one of our magic mushrooms might cure their cancer.

I’d like to think that their agenda, the alien’s motive for being here is science, at least in the first instance. As noted above, Planet Earth is really interesting real estate in the cosmos since we have a biosphere. And like our wildlife biologists and anthropologists, etc. go out of their way so as not to disturb the objects of their study in their natural environment, so too might any extraterrestrial intelligence associated with UFOs try to keep to a minimum disturbing the natives. The aliens are harmless by deliberate design. Of course even wildlife biologists have to occasionally capture, study (maybe dissect), tag and release their subject – perhaps a parallel with the abduction phenomena?

To be continued…