Showing posts with label SETI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SETI. Show all posts

Monday, June 3, 2013

Profound Events In Modern Science

Science has had many a profound impact on our lives since the turn of the 20th Century and not always a positive one – depending on who you talk to. There have been literally hundreds of significant scientific concepts, events, including inventions that have had a profound impact on our individual selves and our society. Any list doesn’t bring justice, and there will be howls of protest for omissions, but still, here’s a baker’s dozen that I feel are pretty profound.

Here are some reasonably profound events in science from 1900 to date that I feel are important in the broader historical, social and cultural context.

1) Sputnik (1957): Unless you lived through it, it’s hard to imagine the impact that the launch of the Soviet artificial satellite Sputnik had all of a sudden on the public awareness of outer space as an actual place where things could happen. The shock-horror to the American psyche was profound, resulting in a massive boost to American science and technological education, acerbating the Cold War, and of course resulting in the Space Race which culminated with the first landing on the Moon (1969). Without Sputnik, there still might not have been any human involvement in space and space exploration in general, and where would we be without artificial satellites in orbit today.

2) Humans in Orbit (1961 to date): It may be ho-hum now, but back in the era of Project Mercury people were glued to their TV screens for the coverage of ‘man into space’. Ditto of course the first voyage to the Moon (Apollo 8) and the first landing on the Moon (Apollo 11). When the two Space Shuttle disasters happened, both re-awakened interest in no uncertain terms. Equally, the Russians were rapped in the many early successes of their space program while America suffered early humiliation after humiliation. But in an era of the Vietnam conflict, civil rights riots in the streets, the Cold War, and of course terrorism, manned space flight gave people something positive to cheer about. Further, there have been massive technological spin-offs as well that have filtered down to the general public. 

3) Modern Communications (1900 to date): It’s hard to believe that not all that long ago, a mere six or seven generations back, it took months to correspond between say Europe and America, or across America, or from America to Australia. However did those poor tweens, teens and young adults cope without instant communication feedback via their Facebook, Twitter or emails way back in those dark ages (how sad: sob; sob; sob). But then along comes wired technologies like the telegraph and telephone cabling and wireless technologies like ham radio and telecommunication satellites, the airplane sped things up too and then finally comes along the Internet and everything that’s i-this-gadget or i-that-doohickie, or i-the-next-damned-gizmo that’s under the proverbial sun (that you have to upgrade every six months). Whether ultimately this entire instant “I just gotta be in touch with everybody everywhere 24/7” will prove its worth or not remains to be seen. Back six or seven generations ago, if you had something to say and it took months to reach the person intended, it probably was important. Can one conclude the same today?  Recall how the automobile revolutionized everything and not necessarily for the better.  

4) Quantum Physics (1920’s): Though the first inklings of what would become quantum mechanics surfaced at the very turn of the century, the subject bloomed into a scientific revolution in the 1920’s. It wasn’t very long before applications were found, and today quantum physics is ultimately responsible for contributions to over one-third of the global economy in various gizmos and gadgets and their applications, many of which are in the possession of you readers.

5) First Nuclear Chain Reaction (1942) & Trinity A-Bomb Test (1945): Collectively these two experimental events gave rise to all of the nuclear issues part and parcel of our world today. That first chain reaction demonstrated that nuclear fission was more than just a theoretical idea and that controlled fission would lead to a nearly unlimited energy supply; uncontrolled fission, as demonstrated at Trinity, goes ka-boom, as in the A-Bomb. When controlled, radioactivity has many applications today, nuclear power (which doesn’t give off greenhouse gas emissions but has other issues) being of course one; nuclear medicine another; and radioactive traces are employed in all sorts of environmental work. Nuclear weapons, nuclear arms control, nuclear terrorism, radioactive waste, and related issues are of course on the opposite side of the nuclear coin.

6) Radar (1940’s): RAdio Detection And Ranging (RADAR) was developed in secret just before and during World War Two. Quite apart from all those obvious military applications, radar is central to modern airline operations and safe flying; the same applies to maritime safety; it’s a common tool for police in keeping those with a tendency to put the pedal to the metal under control; its use is obvious in weather forecasting and warning systems; radar helps keep track of all those bits and pieces we’ve put into orbit, and it has applications in geology (ground penetrating radar) to map subsurface terrain, even in astronomy bouncing radio and microwaves off the surface of nearly moons and planets be it from the ground or from space probes. Unless you’ve been caught speeding, you’re probably quite appreciative of all that radar does for you.   

7) First SETI Experiment (Project Ozma – 1960): Let’s for once try to answer that age old question “are we alone in the cosmos”. Make it so, and so it came to pass where experimental time and money was put where only just before the theoretical mouth was. As we are all too aware, that first experiment, conducted by Dr. Frank Drake, failed to detect ET. In fact every SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) experimental effort to date has failed, but there has to be a first time for everything, and Project Ozma was the first SETI effort, and the significance lies in the fact that for the first time ever, and it’s our generation that’s making it so, exobiology (or astrobiology) has become an experimental instead of just a theoretical science, albeit on still in search of its subject. 

8) Flying Saucers (1947 to date): More books, articles, websites, and documentaries have been done about the subject of UFOs than any other aspect of science. Yes science, since there is a case to be answered even if it is a social one, but even the possible connection with extraterrestrial life makes the study a profound and of course interesting one. Alas, if 65 is considered normal retirement then UFOs should already be pensioned off. Despite that, they do keep on keeping on despite all the best debunking efforts by those self-appointed to act as ‘professional’ sceptics.

9) Chariots of the Gods (1950’s to date): It has been pointed out that it would be extraordinary in terms of probability that ET via those pesky UFOs would pick the last generation or two to show up. This is true. However, negating that little objection, there’s the concept of the ‘ancient astronaut’ – ET has been around for over 100 generations (minimum) with suggestive evidence (not proof) cobbled together from anthropology, archaeology, literature, religions and mythology. While author Erich Von Daniken has been the most visible of the ‘ancient astronaut’ proponents, he wasn’t the first to advocate the idea that ET played a role in the development of mankind. The central issue of profoundness is that any study that suggests that intelligent extraterrestrial life exists, and even more to the point, has had a cultural impact on human society, can’t be easily shrugged off.   

10) King Tutankhamen’s Tomb (1922): Ever since Napoleon’s invasion of Egypt, Egyptology has been big business for publishers, private collectors, museums, Egyptian tourism, etc. However, Egyptology really took off in the mainstream consciousness following the discovery of the Pharaoh known as Tutankhamen, or the Boy King’s tomb, by archaeologist and Egyptologist Howard Carter. The impact on archaeology in general and Egyptology in particular has been and remains profound. There’s hardly anyone who hasn’t heard about Pharaoh Tutankhamen, and worldwide exhibition tours of artefacts found in his tomb attract huge crowds. 

11) Discovery of Penicillin (1928): We all know about that wonder drug penicillin, discovered rather accidentally by Alexander Fleming, which has been responsible for saving more lives than you can shake a stick at. That gave rise to a whole potpourri of antibiotics, but it also gave rise to the Pandora’s Box of antibiotic resistance and the rise of the super-bug, an issue that is both current, ongoing, and of concern to anyone and everyone ever likely be suffer from an infection. 

12) The First Heart Transplant (1967): Anyone who was around at the time can remember the massive amount of press coverage that very first human heart transplant that took place, in Cape Town, South Africa, under the direction of Christiaan Barnard. Back then, this was Big News. Thousands of human heart transplants are now preformed annually and of course it is no longer Big News – unless you are one of those on the receiving end.   

13) Genetic Code (the Discovery of DNA in 1953) & Associated Human Genome Project (2000 to date): Hands up anyone who hasn’t heard about Watson and Crick and the discovery of the substance and structure of DNA in 1953. No hands up? Well that’s not surprising as it is one of the most famous of the famous of scientific achievements in relatively modern times. Ultimately that discovery (along with massive amounts of additional genetically relevant biochemistry since then) has morphed into the Human Genome Project, the importance of which has yet to reach full potential. But full understanding of our genetic makeup is an important tool in coming to terms with all those hundreds of genetic afflictions we can suffer from, and curing (or preventing) same. 

And there’s a dozen dozens more, like the Discovery of X-Rays (1895) so that date is eliminated from ‘modern’ science, though where would modern medicine and dentistry be without X-Rays as well as applications in materials testing, etc. Most of the applications took place in the 20th Century. Anyway, as I said, there are many more examples that could, probably should be included, but space is limited.

Honourable Mention: Where’s Einstein’s Special and General Relativity? Well, Einstein’s Relativity only rates an honourable mention since it has relatively little impact or application, apart from GPS, in modern society. When (and if) we start to boldly go, then horses will change their colour.

Friday, November 2, 2012

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

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.

Whether you’re a UFO ETH (extraterrestrial hypothesis) supporter, a UFO ETH debunker, or you don’t give a damn either way about the UFO ETH at all (so then why are you reading this?), you’d be aware that overall the professional scientific community, including for some odd reason SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) scientists – the very clan who profess an intense interest in ETI – pooh-pooh the very notion of the UFO ETH. Here’s some more of their specific objections, and why they are in turn, objectionable.

Some scientists will argue that we are the proverbial IT – there are no other advanced extraterrestrial civilizations, therefore UFOs can not have anything to with extraterrestrial intelligence.

However, with 13.7 billion years to play with since the origin of our Universe (the Big Bang event); with billions of stars in our own galaxy alone; with billions of galaxies scattered throughout the cosmos each with billions of stars therein, with extra-solar planets being discovered around many of those stars in our own galaxy (and by implication other galaxies as well); with the chemical elements required for life commonplace throughout the Universe; with the principles of Darwinian evolution given as universal, what odds that we are really the proverbial IT?

Of course when it comes down to the UFO ETH it’s only our galaxy we need concern ourselves with. Even I acknowledge that though extraterrestrial civilizations exist in other galaxies, travel times between galaxies quickly exceed logical transit times available. Interstellar travel however is quite another matter. Still, our own galaxy gives us some ten billion years to play around with; billions of stars and no doubt planets, those abundant chemical elements, and Darwinian principles. Again, it would be a very brave soul to suggest again those sorts of statistics that we are, even in our own galaxy, the proverbial IT; not just the new kid on the block, but the first and only kid on the block.

Not even a UFO ETH skeptic SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) scientist of my acquaintance would argue we’re the proverbial IT – it would make a mockery of his own chosen career path.

Some scientists suggest that while it’s highly probable that extraterrestrial life exists; extraterrestrial intelligence doesn’t. No alien intelligence means no-go to the UFO ETH.

Again, not even respectable SETI scientists would propose this an objection to the UFO ETH since that would undercut their own work. Clearly the evolution of intelligence, albeit being just one of many competing traits for biological survival of the fittest, does have ultimate survival value. The Earth provides a practical example of that as many species can be attributed a reasonable degree of an ability to figure things out, and that it is possible to evolve extremely high levels of intelligence is witnessed by ourselves. If Mother Nature can evolve one biological highly intelligent species, she can do it again, and again, and again on other worlds. 

Lots of arguments against the UFO ETH centre around the proposition that they (the aliens) can’t get from there (wherever there is) to here – interstellar space is the ultimate no-fly quarantine zone and since superluminal velocities (i.e. – Star Trek’s warp drive comes to mind here) are a violation of Einstein’s special theory of relativity (though there’s nothing theoretical about that inconvenience anymore) that takes care of that. ET exists but can’t get here; therefore UFOs can’t be the products of ET.

Now I can not believe this old and totally outdated chestnut is still bandied about. The idiotic assumption here is, in a very anthropological way, is that ET must have a lifespan equal to that of humans. Humans cannot travel to the stars because we can’t travel fast enough in our short life-spans to make the journey from start to finish, and I assume here that if you start the journey you want to be around to finish the journey. Now there is no law in biological science that says an intelligent flesh-and-blood entity must kick-the-bucket after roughly three score and ten years. If you recall from mythology, the cosmic and sky ‘gods’ were (at least from a human perspective) as close to immortal as makes no odds. Quasi-immortality makes interstellar travel quite feasible. Of course any alien intelligence that can visit us will have technologies far beyond our own. Genetic or other forms of bioengineering could artificially extend life-spans by many orders of magnitude. Perhaps flesh-and-blood has morphed into silicon and steel. There’s the standard sci-fi scenarios of the multi-generation starship or hibernation that passes the time away without much additional aging. Then too perhaps a super-civilization of the extraterrestrial type has been able to approach luminal velocities; perhaps have physics and engineering that can go superluminal. But one doesn’t need such extreme possibilities. All it takes is the first initial journey. Once here, our quasi-immortal ET (the ‘gods’ of mythology) sets up shop, say even a lunar outpost. No further interstellar journeys required.   

Obviously it’s unlikely in the extreme that we (humans) would just happen by chance be the lucky generation, after 4.5 billion years have passed Earth by in cosmic isolation, for us to now experience on-site cosmic company. If you were to throw a dart randomly at 4.5 billion balloons, what odds that it would hit a balloon that co-existed with humanity’s existence, even being generous and giving us (humanity) an existence of say two million balloon years, far less hitting the balloon labeled 1947 (the accepted start of the modern UFO era)?

This is IMHO actually the best anti UFO ETH argument going but when taken to its logical conclusion provides the very answer which makes the UFO ETH nearly inevitable. Indeed, it would be utterly extraordinary in the extreme if that tiny niche of terrestrial time, say 1947 to the present, were the first and only niche of terrestrial time to host a visit by extraterrestrial intelligence(s). The obvious answer is that there have been previous niches in time, intervals of time, probably lots and lots and lots of them, when ET paid a visit. ET had had billions of years to randomly (or selectively) explore the (our) galaxy. At 1% light speed it only takes 10,000,000 years to cross the galaxy edge to edge. But the galaxy is ten billion years old. If there’s lots of space-faring alien civilizations, or even if there is just one, they are probably a lot closer to us than the worst case scenario of edge-to-edge (obviously, since we’re not on the galactic edge). Those who have pondered this issue and crunched the numbers, suggest that 10,000 to 100,000 years is a rough estimate of time intervals between random visits from ET. Still, 1947 to date could easily and probably would on probability fall outside that range. Maybe the last random visit was 9,000 years ago, or 90,000 years ago. We’d still have a bit of a wait (one thousand to ten thousand years) for the next call. But, and there’s always a “but”…

To be continued…

Monday, October 29, 2012

UFOs & Aliens: I Want to Believe: Part Two

A vast majority of people think it’s a total waste of time to search for extraterrestrial life in space – throughout the entire cosmos – not because they’re convinced ET doesn’t exist, but rather that ET has been (ancient astronauts) and is now (UFOs) not only here but up close and personal with Planet Earth and humanity. 

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

What becomes of all those UFO eyewitness reports (sometimes backed up by physical evidence)? Well those qualified to do so, scientists, military personnel (because UFOs were once a national security issue) and others so qualified try to come up with a prosaic answer. They don’t come up with an acceptable answer in all the cases. So then there are the UFO unknowns – the actual hardcore, bona-fide unidentified flying objects. Even the most hardened of UFO sceptics acknowledges that between 5% and 10% of UFO reports turn into hardcore unidentified sightings. When translated over six plus decades, worldwide, that’s one hell of a lot of mysterious residue one has to come to terms with. Why science and scientists, presumably charged with the responsibility of exploring the unknown and figuring out how things work, choose to ignore this massive pile of hardcore unknowns is quite beyond me.  I mean if each and every UFO report that came in was quickly explained away, well everyone should and probably would be sceptical when yet another report hit the fan. But that’s not the case.

The fact, as noted above, what most sceptics readily acknowledge, is that between 5 and 10 percent of all reported UFO incidents remain unidentified after investigation by those qualified to do so. This fact apparently excites the scientific, astrobiology, and SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) communities not one jot. But, if SETI received out of all radio signals, 5% to 10% unexplained radio signals, (“WOW” signals), that of course would set the SETI community abuzz.

In a similar vein, if 5 to 10 percent of particle interactions were unexplainable by the current standard model of particle physics, that would set the physics community abuzz without question.

If the speed of light varied ever so slightly 5% to 10% of the times it were measured, the special relativity community would be agog, and extremely interested.

If 5 to 10 percent of galaxies showed a discrepancy between their red-shifts and their distances, that would set the cosmology community abuzz.  

So, why the big scientific yawn over the apparently bona fide UFO’s unidentified percentage? Perhaps it might take sociologists who study the sociology of science to pin that one down. There’s a mystery just begging for serious attention here that has the potential for massive ramifications, not just scientific ones.

Now the hardcore unknowns aren’t a ‘possible this’ or a ‘probable that’ or maybe yet some other thing(s) that acquaint yet again to something in terms of a prosaic explanation. The experts haven’t a clue what these 5% to 10% of UFOs are.

So, faced with these hardcore bona fide unknowns, the public focuses on the ETH. That’s understandable as how many other possible explanations for the hardcore can there be?

Okay, maybe it’s time travellers from our future as one alternative. But then hardcore UFO unknowns aren’t clustered around significant historical events that would be must sees – the bread-and-butter of that industry – to tourists and historians from our future.

An early UFO ETH theory was that UFOs were actual living organisms who lived in outer space but now and again would dip into our atmosphere. No biologist could actually explain how such creatures could survive, far less thrive, in the harsh conditions of outer space.

Some suggest that the hardcore represent some sort of totally new natural phenomena, except there’s no even theoretical underpinning for new natural phenomena, and after six decades, well that’s a total failure to come to terms with an easy way out of the hardcore mess. However, natural phenomena wouldn’t exhibit intelligent behaviour in any event, which the hardcore UFOs do. That’s why they often tend to be the hardcore.

Now one might argue that if nine out of ten UFO reports turn out to be prosaic, then the final tenth one will to. That point of view (POV) is seemingly logical, but really illogical. If your footie team wins nine grand finals on the trot, well that’s no reason another team won’t win the next one. Toss heads nine times in a row – the tenth toss is still 50/50, not 100% in favour of heads. Nine out of ten of anything tells you zip about the tenth occurrence.

The mention of eyewitness testimony of course brings to the fore visual images. An image (picture) is worth a thousand words as the saying goes. For visual images to really be effective, they have got to be captured in some form or other. Still photographs and motion pictures come to mind here. There are of course a fair few photographs; alas fewer motion pictures of UFOs – no bona fide examples of actual LGM (the “G” could stand for ‘Gray”) - are present and accounted for. However, films and photographs and fakery are too often associated. But even real motion pictures of ‘lights in the sky’, albeit unidentified ‘lights in the sky’ don’t have quite the same visual impact as some of those from our historical past – not film, but something more durable. It’s a lot harder to explain away images from ancient history – images often carved out of stone or carved into stone.

For example, there are the famous statues on Easter Island. Well, the representations are human, but not quite human enough. If they are a representation of ancestor worship (as is commonly cited) then either the ancestors were very strange or else the stone masons were rather poor carvers, or they were one of the first to have invented abstract art. There’s something screwy somewhere in attributing the Easter Island statues as representing a strictly human form. If not strictly human, what’s the alternative?

You have some of the ancient Egyptian ‘gods’ with jackal and falcon heads – how many humans do you see down at your local shopping mall with animal heads?

The Nazca Lines are world famous. They basically are etchings (representing various animals and other objects) made in the dry desert plains in Southern Peru that, much like crop circles, can only be really appreciated from the air. In fact they were only discovered in the 1930’s from aircraft flying overhead.   There’s no doubt humans constructed the lines, which took a lot of time, effort and energy, but to what purpose? Certainly they were not runways for flying saucers and astronomical alignments and associated explanations fail too. Since they were clearly meant to be seen from the air and since we’re talking about their construction some 400 to 650 years AD – sort of our pre-flight era – then the most logical explanation is that they were art works for the sky gods to see and appreciate. 

Tassili n’Ajjer is located in the Sahara Desert in southern Algeria. It’s famous for its prehistoric art rock paintings, many of which are really, really weird. One archaeologist dubbed one such art work the ‘Great Martian God’. Humans drew the various images of – well what exactly? Many of the images certainly don’t depict anything terrestrial that’s for sure. Just plug in the term ‘Tassili’ into Google Images for examples, and decide for yourself. 

Visoki Dečani is a major Serbian Orthodox Christian monastery located in Kosovo. Within are various murals. On the "The Crucifixion" fresco, painted in 1350, objects similar to UFOs can be found. They represent two comets that look like space ships, with two men inside of them, and are often cited by those interested in ‘ancient astronauts’. The images are certainly striking. You have to decide for yourself if these images are representing really real ‘ancient astronauts’ aerial craft. 

Cylinder Seals date from about 3500 BC in Mesopotamia and surrounding regions. They tell ‘picture stories’ and were engraved on cylinders that could be rolled onto a flat surface like wet clay. The interesting bit is that not only are some images clearly mythological, showing dragons and various gods, but some images are clearly astronomical. Celestial objects abound. No less a scientist than the late Dr. Carl Sagan, is on record (in his co-authored book “Intelligent Life in the Universe”) as noting that some cylinder seals clearly show various extra-solar planetary systems, often in association with specific deities.

There are many, many ancient figurines or statues showing beings something less than what we’d call ‘human’. Of the lot, I personally found some of the most striking to be male and female clay figurines dating from the archaeological period called the Obed time or Obed horizon in Mesopotamia, roughly fourth millennium BC, with insect-like heads or at least eyes. In fact the eyes are very striking, and certainly representing nothing terrestrial – they remind me of the modern depiction of the eyes of the UFO-related greys.  

Speaking of which, there was that immense psychological subconscious reaction to the face of the ‘Grey’ on the cover of Whitley Strieber’s book “Communion”.

The Piri Reis Map is another well known case of something that really shouldn’t be, but is. Piri Reis was a Turkish admiral and cartographer who strutted his stuff in the early 1500’s. The famous map in question shows in considerable detail the coastlines of the Americas, greater detail than exploration of that era would have been possible, plus the opposite side of the Atlantic (which, okay, was pretty well known), but most impressive, parts of coastal Antarctica, a continent which hadn’t yet been discovered (though highly speculated about). However, in fairness, there are enough errors that sceptics can easily dismiss this as evidence of ‘ancient astronauts’ – close, but no cigar.

Then there’s the popular literature.  There was the immense popularity of Erich Von Daniken’s ancient astronaut books – they really rang quite a responsive chord around the world. UFO books tend to sell well too, for example, as noted above Whitley Strieber’s “Communion” and sequels; also Budd Hopkins “Missing Time” and later works. For people to shell out their hard earned bucks for books that are on the fringe of science and acceptability – well, there’s got to be some sort of responsive chord driving this. 

In conclusion, I want to believe? Indeed I do – believe that is!

Sunday, October 28, 2012

UFOs & Aliens: I Want to Believe: Part One

A vast majority of people think it’s a total waste of time to search for extraterrestrial life in space – throughout the entire cosmos – not because they’re convinced ET doesn’t exist, but rather that ET has been (ancient astronauts) and is now (UFOs) not only here but up close and personal with Planet Earth and humanity. 

People tend to believe in a whole host of things because it brings them some sort of sense of identity or comfort. For example, you might believe in white supremacy because you’re Caucasian. You might believe the British are best, because you were born, raised and live in London. You believe in ghosts because that’s evidence that there’s a ‘life’ after death. You believe in God (or the gods) because that gives your life a meaningful purpose. You believe in astrology because you know what’s in store for you and can make your plans accordingly. You believe in the positive curing powers of alternative medicine when you’re diagnosed with a terminal illness and given just months to live.

But what does belief in aliens give you? - At best, absolutely nothing positive. Aliens here and now don’t really effect your world view – those set of beliefs or faiths that direct you in your every day-to-day affairs. There’s nothing to be psychologically or emotionally gained from belief that little grey men are walking amongst us, maybe abducting us, unlike say your belief that you had better get your bills paid on time. Now that’s important!

On the other hand, at worst, collectively there’s a case for not believing in aliens – if aliens, then humans aren’t the Big Cheese of the cosmos. If you believe in aliens you lower your own status (as well as the status of humanity as kingpins of the universe).

No one is born believing that ET has established an existence here, so that belief has got to have been acquired based on some sort of evidence.

Public opinion polls from the early to mid 1950’s onwards have shown that a reasonable minority of the public seriously believe that aliens have been and/or are here now. That this is the case despite all the denial that come from the scientific community and other officialdom (the government and the military) is not in any way disputed. It’s not usually a matter of “I want to believe” like Fox Mulder of “The X-Files” as rather ‘I do believe’. Why such belief for such a lengthy period of time? There’s not to be something suggestive that in this case officialdom is wrong – by intentional design or by incompetence.

UFOs vs. evidence for the ETH – there is no absolute smoking gun - yet. I’d be the first to acknowledge that. I’d suggest however that this is a case of where there’s smoke, there’s smoke. The fire has yet to be seen through the smoke. There however has got to be something suggestive about the nature of that smoke to drive lots of people, even some quite intelligent people, to accept the possibility of the UFO ETH. I mean the idea just didn’t pop out of the ether – out of thin air. Something very suggestive is driving it. Yet, as noted, there has been no ‘smoking gun’ proof.

No UFO has crashed in Central Park, NYC – an event which couldn’t be concealed or covered-up.

No ancient tomb or grave site has yielded or contained the remains of an obviously extraterrestrial entity.

No president or prime minister or equivalent has ever announced to the world that their country had alien technology in their possession. 

No Little Green Man (LGM) has landed on the White House lawn and said in traditional fashion “Take me to your leader”.

No exotic metallic alloys have ever been found incorporated in ancient structures like the Egyptian or the Mesoamerican pyramids.

ET can’t telephone home because no mobile phones have been found by archaeologists on their digs and put on display in any museum’s ancient history exhibits.

So belief in ET being here must stem not from one biggie piece of smoking gun evidence but from lots and lots and lots of little clues. That’s much like whodunit murder mysteries. The guilty party is revealed at the end by someone piecing together a lot of small clues that, when put together, when everything falls into place, finally point the finger at the murderer.

We probably innately realise they (ET) should be here – there’s nothing to prevent that from being the case, and lord knows that probability has been reinforced again, and again, and again in sci-fi books, short stories, movies and TV episodes, as well as documentaries of the written or visual kind. But just because they could be here, or should be here, doesn’t translate immediately into belief that they are here. So, why do we believe (well many of us anyway) that that’s the case?

Well for starters there are personal experiences – your own UFO sighting(s) or abduction(s). However, relatively few of us actually have such a personal interaction or close encounter, and in any event personal experiences are well, personal. But if you had one (or more), well a common phrase is “I know what I saw”. Therefore, I believe.

More likely as not it’s the sum total of all the eyewitnesses testimony of others, over six decades worth, worldwide, the sort that is commonplace not only in our daily conversations with others (“I saw Jane Doe and Joe Blow together at lunch last week”) but in legal proceedings in courtrooms – though apparently not allowable in the courtroom of science which demands a body on the slab in the lab.

For eyewitnesses to be convincing, they need to be credible observers, so we’re not talking here about alcoholic bums lying in the gutter; elementary school dropouts who couldn’t tell the difference between astrology and astronomy if their life depended on it; New Age hippies zonked out on the latest designer or party drug; and those, who through no fault of their own are mentally disabled in one way or another.

No, what the great unwashed know of credible UFO sightings come from pilots (military and civilian); astronauts, police officers, professionals like health professionals and medical doctors, lawyers, engineers and yes, even scientists; politicians (okay, maybe not pollies who can’t even lie straight in bed); as well as the average citizen whose word and credibility wouldn’t be under any strain under any other set of circumstance. Even used car salesmen and real estate agents usually qualify as credible observers, though most of all tend to be those people who spend a lot of time outdoors/outside and thus are quite aware or familiar with the sky and associated optical and atmospheric phenomena.

Now if each and every eyewitness to a UFO event were a lone witness, that would or should ring alarm bells and delight the sceptics. Of course that’s not even remotely the case. Not only do you often get a group of witnesses, but often two or more eyewitnesses in two or more separately placed locations – independent verification of events by multi-witnesses from multi-sites.

There’s another form of independent verification. The presence of physical evidence is often, not usually, but often, left behind. UFOs can and do have an impact on the environment. If UFOs are solid objects and some come close to ground level and even land, you’d expect broken tree branches perhaps and ground traces. That box is ticked. You’d expect UFOs, if they can be seen, to be photographed (still pictures) and filmed (motion pictures), evidence even more valuable in the pre CGI and Photoshop era. If UFOs don’t cloak all the time, you’d expect some radar cases – that’s another box ticked. There have been documented cases of people suffering ill effects after a UFO close encounter, sometimes extreme effects akin to radiation exposure. Electromagnetic (EM) effects, like automobile engines cutting out when in the near vicinity of a UFO have been documented more often than is necessary to establish the reality and credibility of the phenomenon. 

To be continued…

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

UFO Censorship and Cover-Ups: Part One

From nearly day one of the modern UFO era, the subject has been associated and clouded with all sorts of conspiracy theories – official censorship and deliberate cover-ups of information and releases of disinformation (red herrings). Roswell (1947) is often citied as an example, but since I’ve dealt with Roswell before, I’ll focus elsewhere. Still, Roswell was part of the beginning, and in the beginning there were definitely national security and defence issues associated that required security classifications. But once started, censorship and cover-ups, well it’s a slippery slope that’s hard to climb out of.

As the recent and ongoing WikiLeaks saga has demonstrated, as if any demonstration were really needed given such well known historical instances like ‘Watergate’ or ‘the Pentagon Papers’, governments and government officials, sometimes a whole succession of governments and government officials, not only can, but do try to keep secrets from the citizens and taxpayers that ultimately elected those governments and those officials and paid for all those activities now kept secret. And what leaks is probably the tip of the iceberg. There are probably more secrets than declassified or leaked secrets!

Now of course there are some things that need to be kept secret – at least for a time – things central to national defence and security are obvious examples. But some as yet undisclosed secrets of that nature have probably exceeded their usefulness use-by date, but it’s too much effort to release now – who, despite some stuffy academic historians of no consequence cares what was what from years gone by anyway? – and anyway who wants to take unwanted and unnecessary responsibility declassifying stuff? 

But, way too many secrets are secret just because they are, if made public, reveal an embarrassing skeleton in the closet or would reveal a black sheep in the ‘family’ or it’s just a plain diplomatic ‘oops’. I’m sure even ordinary families can relate to those sorts of issues. Once you dig yourself a non-disclosure hole, it’s not always easy to climb out again, but if you’re comfortable in your self-dug hole, why bother trying?

So, on to the issue of UFOs – are UFOs an ever ongoing necessary thing to censure; a classified topic that passed its use-by date a long time ago; or just one of those ‘black sheep’ skeletons-in-the-closet? 

I received an email from a SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) scientist along the line that cover-ups are the usual excuse for the claim there’s no obvious public evidence for the UFO ETH (ExtraTerrestrial Hypothesis), and that's an argument from ignorance, so it has no force.  It's also implausible that every government in the world is participating in a cover-up. I’m guessing here, but I’d wager that scientist hasn’t ever been in the military (I have) or worked for any defence, security or diplomatic related agencies.

Well, any time the powers-that-be classify, conceal, deny, cover-up things, you’re in the dark so obviously any debate or argument to the contrary by you is an argument or debate from your relative ignorance because you don’t have all of the facts.

1) Disclosures vs. Cover-Ups: There is intense interest in the question of whether or not we are alone in the cosmos. It has been one of the biggest philosophical, cum scientific questions ever. To date, all discussions revolving around the existence of life on other worlds, be it layman, academic, philosophical, political, etc. have remained if not idle speculation, at least educated speculation. The Big Question comes about when life on other worlds is actually discovered. What do those in the know tell those not in the know? To cover-up, or not to cover-up, that is the question.

#Microbial Life on Mars: Viking and/or the Mars Rock (ALH84001): No Cover-up. In fact, the powers that be, scientific and governmental, have been very open about presenting analysis from, for example, the 1976 Viking space probes that landed on the surface of Mars and initially give positives results for current microbial life on the Red Planet. Ditto the possible discovery of fossil microbes in a Martian meteorite than landed in the Antarctic – with the rather dull name of ALH84001. The jury may be still out on Viking and ALH84001, but it was all open and aboveboard. Maybe that’s because Martian microbes, past fossil, or alive in the present, however interesting, aren’t going to cause any revolutions, apart from scientific ones off course.

#ETI at A Distance: SETI: No Cover-up. Since positive SETI results can be verified across international boundaries, no one country can control disclosure that a radio (or optical or IR signal – leakage of beacon) has been detected. SETI scientists have various protocols in place regarding the announcement of discovering the existence of an ETI civilization that’s somewhere ‘out there’, millions if not trillions of miles away. It will be up to the scientists concerned to make the announcement. Replying however, will probably have to take in political realities and will be up to the United Nations.

#ETI Here but not Now: Ancient Astronauts: No Cover-up. The ‘Face on Mars’, spires photographed by the Lunar Orbiter spacecraft on the surface of the Moon, the avalanche of tomes and documentaries on ‘ancient astronauts’, while interesting, probably didn’t alter any voting patterns, effect the stock market, or increase the price of your shopping. Even if some prominent scholar proved the concept of ‘ancient astronauts’ to the satisfaction of, and with the full backing of, the entire academic community and scholarly society in general, it wouldn’t cause any change, even minor, in the day-to-day affairs of the world and her citizens. The powers-that-be would have little, if even that, control over the pronouncements of private academics in any event, at least in most countries.

#ETI Here and Now: UFOs: Cover-up. If alien beings land on the White House lawn with a traditional ‘take me to your leader’ spiel, or start zapping us with photon torpedoes, or if they’re forced to land, or crash-land, in a densely populated area where there are lots of witnesses and cameras, then the question of a cover-up, the need for the powers-that-be to reveal all, is moot and of only academic interest. Apart from that scenario, there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that some nations and their governments have actual physical evidence, hence knowledge of the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence(s) on Earth in the here and now. Roswell comes to mind as an obvious example. Why would a UFO cover-up exist? And why wouldn’t a UFO cover-up ever be negated at a later date? Okay, let’s assume that you are The Big Cheese, the one who knows that UFOs are here and are spacecraft from an advanced extraterrestrial civilization. It’s in your power to reveal or censor that information vis-à-vis the rest of the world. What would you do?

Perhaps incoming administrations aren’t ever briefed or told. The old ‘if they don’t ask, don’t tell’, what they don’t know won’t ever come back to haunt them philosophy, also translated as the less in the loop, the better, could be one reason.

Perhaps everyone in the know, including incoming administrations who are briefed and who have the power to show-and-tell and reveal all, have been convinced of the need for ongoing secrecy (i.e. a cover-up). What might such reasons be?  

Well, it’s hard to say you’re sorry for the past actions of others, and it’s hard to own up to having done something that has caused others injustice, and it’s hard to admit to lying and deceiving your citizens and doing things that just appear outright wrong. Why spoil your lilywhite image – and re-election chances – or your nation’s and predecessor’s reputation.

Well, no government is going to share that sort of knowledge with any other nation, for obvious national security and military advantage reasons. Thus, you don’t tell anyone, be they your allies or your citizens. As time goes by, it becomes even harder to admit to having done this.

No government is going to admit to its citizens (and thus to the rest of the world) that it has no control over its airspace and territory. They may know they don’t, but you’re not ever going to hear them broadcast that fact.

Any government admitting to its populace and the rest of the world that an advanced ETI civilization is in close proximity to ours with unknown motives is adding one hell of a knuckleball into a game situation that’s already close to the brink. There’s enough major political and economic uncertainty and trauma in the world without introducing another loose cannon such as extraterrestrials-in-our-backyard if this can be avoided.

2) The Official UFO Cover-Up: It might be somewhat possible for one country’s government to keep one or a few UFO incidents (crashes, etc.) that by chance fell into their laps first under wraps and hence keep their citizens in the dark as to the reality of ETI. And the motive, as hinted above, is with respect to the utilization of acquired alien technology. However, in the broader context, it staggers the imagination to suggest or believe that every government, and subsequent change of government, elected or otherwise, including every knowledgeable government official over 60 years, in every country in the world, would or could conspire collectively to do the same. The odds that every nation would pursue that same policy independently are so greatly against as to also stretch credibility.

Since it all boils down to individuals. Over the years one would have to believe that thousands to tens of thousands of those in-the-know wouldn’t blow the biggest story of the millennium, especially when on their death beds via death-bed confessions.  If just one current (or ex) prime minister/president/premier/king, etc. in just one country changed sides and spilled the beans…

In any event, no individual, no government, no country has any control over that ETI may, or may not, do. If Roswell had been Central Park in New York City in broad daylight, who could cover it up? If UFOs choose to hover over major inhabited locations, ala “Independence Day”, what official, government or country could prevent their citizens from knowing about it?

There are several solutions to the cover-up scenario. Firstly, there are no ETI; therefore no cover-ups were ever necessary. Secondly, ETI might be here, but there have been no UFO incidents, no acquired alien technology that have required the perceived need for an official cover-up. Thirdly, there have been UFO incidents, but so few and far between that a long term cover-up was possible. Lastly, there is a global conspiracy policy, a co-operation carried out by every nation in the world since day one to prevent the great unwashed from learning about the existence of ETI (for whatever reason – prevent panic, etc.), and there have been no deviations from that policy ever and no rouge individuals bucking the system for fame or fortune or because it was the right thing to do.

While one of the first two alternatives seems most probable, I think there is enough evidence to make the third alternative the most credible. Certainly the last one is so far out in left field that in fact it’s right out of the ball park.

Regarding the question of censorship and cover-ups over things alien in nature, as noted above, things like Martian microbes are too inconsequential to try to hide; ‘ancient astronauts’ are too old for a government to worry about; SETI aliens (if SETI succeeds) are too far away to worry about; but UFOs are a different kettle of fish. The possibility that highly advanced aliens with unknown motives might be present here and now – well can you imagine any government admitting to the great unwashed that they really have no control over their airspace! Any government that had, by accident, obtained alien technology would certainly not share that information with anyone, including allies, and thus wouldn’t admit same to their citizens.  Of course not all countries and their respective governments may even have the appropriate data which to cover-up. You can’t hide what you don’t know about in the first place.  

3) Freedom of Information (FOI): Why is it, if UFOs are total pseudoscience nonsense, that so many individuals have had to resort to Freedom of Information Act actions (in the United States in particular) in order to get official UFO related government documents, many of which, if released, have large portions and chunks blacked out? Further, not all FOI requests succeed. Why indeed if UFOs are just ‘silly season’ fodder claimed by the sceptics? 

To be continued…

Friday, October 12, 2012

UFOs vs. SETI

Radio (and other) astronomers who search for signs of extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI) in the cosmos appear to have little if any real interest in other avenues that have potential bearing on the issue, which makes we wonder about just how bona fide their overall interest in ETI really is. That’s because they tend not only to ignore those avenues, but often actively thumb their collective noses at, and ridicule subjects such as UFOs and ancient astronauts. I think they should have the academic courage to investigate these fields as well, as there is IMHO an ETI signal of wheat within the UFO (and ancient astronaut) chaffy noise.

The phrase ‘Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence’ (SETI) says nothing at all about how to search. Traditionally, the usual ways and means have centred on using the radio part of the electromagnetic spectrum, and the engineering techniques and technology tried and true to radio astronomy to seek out new or established radio communicating civilizations. That is, we position radio telescopes to either target various specific points in the sky at stellar objects that theory suggest E.T. might be located around and might be deliberately broadcasting from with a view towards interstellar communication, or just sweeping the sky willy-nilly in hopes of detecting general radio leaking from civilizations broadcasting, perhaps just for their own use (radio, TV, radar) somewhere out there.  SETI is based mainly on a theoretical premise that technologically advanced civilizations – advanced enough to have radio communications – exist and can have said technology detectable by us at a distance.

SETI has also searched the optical and infrared parts of the electromagnetic spectrum for signs of advanced extraterrestrial technology, as well as trying several other approaches as well, like looking for possible alien artefacts at various strategic locations in outer space – like the asteroid belt or the Earth-Moon Lagrangian points where objects so positioned tend to have long duration stability. 

But SETI, after five decades of scanning the heavens for intelligent messages, have managed to come up with only one ‘WOW’ signal; one unknown signal, one unidentified signal, that unfortunately never repeated itself and thus couldn’t ever be scientifically and properly verified.

For some strange reason however, SETI scientists exclude alien artefacts that have any potential connection with UFOs, and closely related the concept of ‘ancient astronauts’. That seems to be putting your SETI eggs in relatively fewer baskets than is necessary! I mean, SETI is trying to find extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI). If UFOs and/or ancient astronauts provide evidence or support for the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence, you’d think SETI scientists would include UFOs and/or ancient astronauts in their collective baskets.

Now I’m not claiming here that UFOs provide the ‘smoking gun’ establishing proof positive for the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence. I am suggesting however that there must be something highly suggestive in the collective evidence over more than six decades of the modern UFO era that point to extraterrestrial intelligence as a plausible answer.

So, what, to date, provides more plausible evidence or support for extraterrestrial intelligence – SETI or UFOs.

So sorry to have to say this, but UFOs have a lot more extraterrestrial intelligence runs on the board than SETI, despite SETI being legit, accredited and accepted science and UFOs anything but. Despite that, the track record for UFOs as a bona fide ETI subject is way better than the track record for SETI. As even UFO sceptics (like SETI scientists) have to acknowledge, some 5% to 10% of all UFO sightings or incidents, from around the world, remain hard core UFO sightings or incidents after proper analysis (and thus remain plausible or viable candidates for the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis or ETH) - the ‘unknowns’ category.

If 5% to 10% of all interesting-at-first-glance SETI signals also proved, after proper analysis, to be legitimate ‘unknowns’; ‘WOW’ signals after the one and only one such ‘unknown’ ever recorded, that would really set the SETI community abuzz. That one SETI ‘WOW’ signal has withstood the test of time – it remains a bona fide SETI unknown. My point is that each and every one of those 5 to 10% bona-fide unexplainable UFO incidents is, for all practical purposes, a ‘WOW’ event, equal in potential to the lone SETI ‘WOW’ signal. In the case of the UFO, the collective of ‘WOW’ events now number in the thousands to tens of thousands. As I said, UFOs have more ‘WOW’ runs on the board than SETI. 

As an example, one such ‘WOW’ UFO event happened on the evening of 13 March 1997 over the city of Phoenix, Arizona. Thousands of citizens, including the state’s Governor, Fife Symington III, witnessed (and several filmed) an aerial display of a silently gliding formation of lights in the sky of unknown origin, now dubbed, not surprisingly, ‘The Phoenix Lights’. Needless to say they remain unidentified, and you can get in-depth documentary coverage on YouTube. 

One other point, SETI scientists poo-poo the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) saying there’s no PHYSICAL evidence. Eye witness testimony counts for absolutely nothing. Well of course there is PHYSICAL evidence for the UFO ETH of the exact same nature as that would satisfy a SETI scientist of E.T. – after all SETI scientists look for a PHYSICAL signal which they can study at their leisure, not an actual E.T. in the flesh. Well, UFOs have produced PHYSICAL evidence because they too can, and have, produced a PHYSICAL signal – radar returns, and there exist a fair few bona-fide radar returns of UFO events that have, after due investigation, remained unidentified. Now the PHYSICAL evidence left behind by bona-fide UFO radar cases, those unexplained radar cases, deserve intense respect, or the operators that interpret those radar returns. If radar operators can be trusted to distinguish a flock of birds from an incoming ICBM or foreign miliary bomber intent on doing us a mischief, the reason the radar DEW line was established and manned during the Cold War; if radar operators can have entrusted to them the lives of military and commercial pilots, crew and passengers, then they must have the ability to tell an echo from a temperature inversion from a solid object – in this case the aircraft. If you fly, you entrust your very life to the ability of those radar operators to tell who’s who; distinguish what’s what. Sorry, but UFO radar returns are solid PHYSICAL evidence for the reality of unidentified flying objects.  

Contrasting SETI’s PHYSICAL evidence with PHYSICAL evidence for the UFO, consider that in each case we have an object – SETI has the E.T. radio telescope; UFOs the UFO itself. In each case we have an electromagnetic event – SETI has radio waves; the UFO event has radar. In each case we have receiving technology – SETI has the terrestrial radio telescope; the UFO event has a radar dish. In each case we have a visual display – SETI probably has some sort of monitor or oscilloscope; the UFO radar return some sort of cathode ray tube (CRT) or monitor. Both displays can be captured for later and fuller analysis. That’s the closest parallel regarding PHYSICAL evidence with SETI. Of course UFOs leave behind other PHYSICAL traces from films and photographs, to ground traces, electromagnetic effects, even physiological effects too.

Another point is that say there’s one extraterrestrial technologically advanced civilization reasonably close to by – say within 10 to 50 light-years. Say their radio transmission leakage window of (our) opportunity for (our) successful SETI is 100 to 200 years before all their transmission traffic is via fibre optical or other cable and the radio noise, their radio leakage, for all practical purpose ceases. So, our SETI has up to 200 years to point an antenna tuned at the right frequency and pointed in the right direction to log up a success story.

Now, what’s the duration of our extraterrestrial civilization’s attempts to boldly go – interstellar exploration? 100 years? 200 years? No, its way more than that because once started, even assuming the home planet goes kaput, exploration is ever ongoing. So the window of opportunity for us stay-at-home terrestrials to detect these boldly going, interstellar travelling extraterrestrials (and sooner of later we’d be accidentally stumbled over even if we hadn’t been detected before-the-fact due to our bio-signatures – technological or otherwise) is also pretty unlimited. If extraterrestrials are not here now (via UFOs), then maybe there’s some evidence they were here 200, 2000 or 20,000 years ago; or maybe there will be evidence tomorrow. The argument doesn’t really alter that much, if at all, no matter how many technologically advanced (capable of both radio and interstellar travel) civilizations there are. Radio leakage is short term; exploration is long term. Therefore, UFOs (exploration) are a better bet than SETI (radio leakage) in uncovering the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence. 

Now that’s not an attack on SETI. I like SETI; it’s good science. I wish SETI every success and if SETI captures THE signal tomorrow, I’d be delighted. It’s just that SETI isn’t the only game in town. UFO research is not a replacement for traditional SETI, but complementary – if the discovery of extraterrestrial intelligence is your goal.

SETI scientists & UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) hunters have something in common – they both need the deliberate or inadvertent cooperation of what they seek – aliens (if aliens they be). SETI scientists need that radio (or optical or infrared) transmission. UFO hunters need UFOs to just bloody well stand still, or at least have the decency to crash in a public location!

In conclusion, I again wish to make it clear that I totally support radio, optical, and infrared SETI to the hilt. It is bona fide science. Nothing ventured, nothing gained is applicable here. Repeating myself, traditional SETI isn’t the only game available, and I equally support and encourage any and all other search strategies. To support the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, there should be a scholarly examination of terrestrial mythology, especially religious mythology, for hints of ETI. For example, do all gods in all the worlds religious mythologies live in the sky (like Heaven, or Valhalla) and possess magical (technological) powers? Also, for once, there should be a serious scientific examination of the UFO data to determine once and for all if there is a case for some UFO events (like the Phoenix Lights) exhibiting ETI technology.    

Whatever investigation, including those into ancient astronauts and UFOs, that tells you that ETI exists, or once existed, or doesn’t exist at all (and a negative result is as important as a positive one) is a part of bona fide SETI.

Thursday, October 11, 2012

UFOs: The Stellar Rainbow Connection

It’s pretty much common knowledge that most scientists reject the reality of UFOs, at least in terms of UFOs being something ultimately anomalous, like extraterrestrial spaceships. Eyewitness testimony doesn’t cut their mustard. Photographs don’t hack it. What they demand is something nuts-and-bolts that they can study, put under a microscope, pound with a hammer, pour acid on, etc. No actual body on the lab’s slab equals no actual evidence one can study therefore there is no reality to the nonexistent body and no correspondence will be entered into on the matter. I smell a double-standard rat!

A senior SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) astronomer recently posted an essay on UFOs in the Huffington Post where he first stated:  “Allow me to first note that this is a phenomenon worthy of attention. If aliens are really hanging out in our 'hood, it's hard to imagine any other fact more worthy of study.” Then he concludes with: “The fact is, if you're certain that our planet is hosting alien visitors, the way to gain acceptance for your point of view is to prove it, not insist that the problem lies with third parties. The blame game is a cop-out.”

WTF is this guy saying? UFOs are important but it’s up to others to do all the hard yards and prove that UFOs and aliens are related. You can just about hear the writer scream out WE REQUIRE PROOF as long as the burden is on others to come up with the smoking gun!

WE REQUIRE PROOF! That’s all fine, well and good in theory, an in an ideal world, except the average member of the great unwashed doesn’t have the name-brand, academic bona-fides or resources required. No matter what ‘proof” the great unwashed offer up, the WE REQUIRE PROOF demands of the many (scientists) outweigh the abilities of the few (the great unwashed) to proved the required goods. If I ring up a top scientist at a top university and say I have a piece of an alien spaceship, do you honestly think they will listen to me or slam down the phone uttering “another bloody wacko wasting my time”! So the ‘blame game’ is perhaps more a plea for those with the scientific bona-fides, and the resources and the credibility and respected home institutions to take the great unwashed a tad more seriously when it comes to UFO experiences and get their hands dirty studying the subject.

I play the blame game. I put blame on those who could, but won’t get their hands dirty. It’s intellectual cowardice pure and simple. The fairly obvious if unstated message is I’m interested in ET, I’m a SETI scientist by profession, but I’m not interested in UFOs unless someone else provides the proof that there is an actual alien connection. I’m not interested in UFOs because I won’t get external funding to study them. That’s because I’ve got too much on my plate already. That’s because I’d rather sit on my ass and let the great unwashed do the dirty work. That’s because someone might make fun of me, like my professional colleagues. The sociology (office politics) of the science community usually runs something along the lines of don’t stray beyond the mainstream; don’t think out of the box; don’t rock the boat or you’ll end up like Jonah and tossed overboard without a whale in sight.

So holier than thou essays like that posted by ‘Mr. SETI’ aren’t really helpful; relevant scientists need to put up some legit science or shut up since if they are clearly not part of the solution, they are part of the problem standing in the way of a solution!

Let’s forget the great unwashed for the moment; let’s talk nerdy talk and deal with evidence, not proof, just evidence, that something strange is afoot via observations from astronomers,  professional colleagues of SETI scientists, and their reported anomalous observations that are in the scientific literature. Now albeit it’s ‘colleagues’ from several generations ago and way before modern SETI times, but that doesn’t alter their academic bona-fides nor what they reported in the professional literature.

I refer to the numerous historical sightings of Neith (reported satellite of Venus) and the intra-Mercurial planet Vulcan along with numerous other sightings of alleged planets inside the orbit of Mercury. Not one, or two but multi-dozens of reports are in the scientific literature for both. That’s in addition to those multi-dozens of sightings of unpredicted by uncharted and unknown objects that made unexpected transits of the Sun and Moon. So, professional astronomers are on record as having seen, for all practical purposes, unidentified ‘aerial’ phenomena. Now we know there is no Neith and there is no Vulcan, etc. so exactly what did scientists in the astronomical profession observe? A UFO by any other name is still a UFO. Okay, that’s just evidence, not proof. Still, UFO observations are not exclusively the property of the great unwashed.   

WE REQUIRE PROOF! Okay, even if scientists don’t want to actively participate, their demand WE REQUIRE PROOF (lay it on the slab in my lab) sounds reasonable, until you realise that those same scientists accept the reality of many other things that they equally can’t study on a slab in the lab, things that only can be seen or photographed.

An obvious case in point is those stars in the night sky. You see them; you can photograph them, but to date you can’t study the physical object in the laboratory! You can’t put a star on the slab. So, if stars are acceptable, why not UFOs? Well, stars can be therefore they are; UFOs can’t be therefore they aren’t*.

Scientists have a readymade excuse for not being able to verify the bona-fides of stars as laboratory specimens; they are out of reach – way too distant to grab hold of. But they still argue that stars aren’t illusions or misidentifications or all-in-the-mind or hoaxes because astrophysical theory supports stars being what scientists believe they are. Of course in a manner of speaking starlight can be ‘captured’ and analysed in the lab, and at least stars have the decency of making their appearance on schedule. Still, you cannot examine up close and personal the physical star itself.

So as a generality, in defence to an anti-UFO stance, scientists will say there are theoretical reasons for accepting the reality of things they can’t put their mitts on, implying that there are no theoretical reasons supporting the UFO ETH (ExtraTerrestrial Hypothesis). Alas and alack, as an additional counterattack, as stars (and rainbows - see below) are supported by astrophysics’ theory, there is also an actual theoretical scenario that nearly demands that there be UFOs and that UFOs be extraterrestrial spacecraft – it’s known as the Fermi Paradox. That just basically says that even if there is only one advanced technological civilization ‘out there’ with the ability to “boldly go”, then the time it would take to explore (even at low sub light velocities – say 1% to 10% the speed of light) and colonize end-to-end our galaxy is but a tiny, tiny fraction of the age of our galaxy. So where is everybody? They should, if they exist at all, by rights be here. Why would they pay special attention to the third rock from the Sun? While stars and planets are dimes-a-dozen, abodes with biospheres are probably as rare as hen’s teeth – that’s why. Planet Earth is a hen’s tooth! Alas, while astrophysical theory passes their muster, the Fermi Paradox doesn’t cut their mustard apparently. That’s rather odd seeing as how SETI scientists must accept the premise that there does indeed exist at least one advanced ET high-tech civilization out there in order to justify their own profession!

Okay, for terrestrial scientists, physical star-stuff can’t be placed on the lab’s slab. But there are parallels much closer to home where that excuse of extreme distance falls far short. Now here’s a parallel. The rainbow is the case in point. If scientists can play UFO skeptic, I can play the role of rainbow skeptic.

If you say you’ve seen a rainbow, you can’t prove that to me since you can’t bring the rainbow, or any part of it (like say the associated pot-of-gold), into my lab and place it on the slab for me to hammer away at or put under the microscope. You obviously believe in the reality of rainbows, yet you can’t put the one you see in the sky on your lab’s slab either. Okay, you know and I know that rainbows exist, but the critical point is that you cannot prove to me (or anyone) that you saw a rainbow. We all know eyewitness testimony, ain’t worth the price of spit in a bucket. As for photographs, being the grand skeptic I am, no doubt your photographs of rainbows are fakes, pure and simple. I REQUIRE PROOF of rainbows and you can’t provide it.

Can you capture and put an actual rainbow in the sky into a laboratory environment and subject it to cruel and unusual punishments?  You can artificially create one in the lab, but that’s not quite the same thing – it’s not the real McCoy. And what about that associated physical trace – the pot-of-gold at the end of the rainbow? I’ve yet to read of any laboratory analysis of that pot and that gold. How do we know it’s really gold without slab-in-the-lab analysis? Maybe its fool’s gold! And just like Pandora’s ‘box’ is really a jar and not a box, maybe the ‘pot’ is really a bowl! Of course the scientists can’t quite get at the pot-of-gold since it’s guarded by a leprechaun, and no scientist is going to admit being thwarted by a little green man (or abducted by a little grey one either for that matter).

Okay, I would be foolish not to believe your observation and to deny the reality of rainbows, yet its okay for scientific skeptics to ignore the rainbow parallel when it comes to UFOs. Eyewitness testimony regarding UFO sightings isn’t worth the cost of the paper it’s printed on; photographs of UFOs are indeed pure Photoshop fakery.

But in fact, UFOs offer up way more physical evidence than the rainbow. Despite that pot-of-gold at the end of a rainbow legend, rainbows leave behind no physical traces; no physiological effects, and no electromagnetic effects; they make no sounds, etc. UFOs are not so hampered. So, if crunch-comes-crunch, the reality of UFOs have a lot more going for them in terms of physical evidence than the reality of rainbows. Of course no scientist in their right mind would exhibit scepticism of the existence of rainbows even without any physical evidence backing them up, but when it comes to UFOs, that’s a different horse of another colour – but is it really a different horse, and is it really of a different hue?

Of course one reason physical scientists accept the reality of the rainbow is that they’ve seen one themselves (many most likely) and seeing is believing as long as it’s they who are doing the seeing. If they themselves had witnessed a UFO event they (and their colleagues) could not identify then I’m sure they would be much more open and inclined to accept another’s eyewitness testimony. A bit of a double standard there of course but that’s human nature and scientists aren’t exempt from that weakness. Unfortunately, UFOs tend to be a rarer commodity than rainbows and therefore witnessed way less often, including viewings by scientists. 

While UFOs have a higher physical evidence quota than rainbows, they also have a higher strangeness quota too, which is not to say that rainbows don’t have a strange mythological aura about them. I wonder if the scientist who accepts the reality of the rainbow also accepts that the rainbow is a bridge to heaven (Asgard) according to Norse mythology and made famous in the conclusion to Richard Wagner’s first “Ring Cycle” opera “Das Rheingold”. Christian mythology has the rainbow as a sign that at least the next time God lays waste to the world it won’t be via the Big Wet, though I doubt you’ll find that in any textbook on optical and atmospheric phenomena. And if you’re into cryptozoology, the Australian aborigines have a Rainbow Serpent (which doubles as a creator deity), but then again, scientists aren’t noted for their curiosity into the actual existence of unknown mega-fauna or polytheistic creator deities** either for that matter. In fact, you name the culture; you’ll find a rainbow mythology contained within. Rainbows are associated with spirits and demons and all manner of omens from the good, to the bad and the ugly that scientists will reject as part and parcel of their belief system.

So, where do scientists draw the line? Rainbows – yes; rainbow serpents and rainbow bridges – no. And this distinction is rightly so, IMHO. But when they reject out of hand a phenomenon that actually has more and better evidence than say rainbows (auroras and sprites would be other cases in point) then eyebrows must be raised and questions asked – like please explain your logic.

While on the subject of things mythological, let’s go harking back to the stars and planets and other celestial objects. There’s a massive mythology from many ancient cultures that usually goes hand-in-hand with how those celestial objects and night sky patterns came to be. Astronomers don’t support those tall tales either since they have other more scientific theories that explain the origins of stars and constellations. Still, its two competing theories of how to account for say, the Pleiades star cluster. Once upon a time it was Zeus. Today it’s astrophysics. Who’s to say since neither scenario can be subjected to a definitive WE REQUIRE PROOF slab-in-the-lab test.

By the way, as a final counterattack, I haven’t yet seen any SETI scientist come up with proof positive on ET, so IMHO it’s still a tied ball game. But rather than have two opposing teams, SETI scientists may as well study UFOs as well since SETI to date has a batting average of zero. Perhaps that’s what comes from scientists putting all their ET eggs in just the SETI basket. 

*And the Sun can’t have sunspots since we all know that the Sun is perfect; meteorites can’t exist since we all know stones can’t fall from the sky;

**Though faith in the reality of God is hardly unknown to exist in some physical scientists, though like stars and rainbows, they can’t put God on the slab in their lab either. Somehow the WE REQUIRE PROOF criteria don’t matter in this case.