UFOs: The Observational Reality Supporting Extraterrestrial Visitations: 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.

First I’d better define exactly what I mean by a UFO. To me, a bona-fide UFO is any UFO that remains a UFO after comprehensive investigation and analysis by qualified experts have failed to identify the object as any known natural or man-made phenomena. The tag ‘unidentified’ means that the conclusion was that it couldn’t have even been a possible or probable natural or man-made phenomena, but what exactly it was remains totally ‘unidentified’ and probably forever unidentifiable. Observational evidence is suggestive that these bona fide UFOs could be extraterrestrial visitations - the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH).

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!

Further readings: Unidentified Flying Objects

Adler, Bill (Editor); Letters to the Air Force on UFOs; Dell Publishing Company, N.Y.; 1967:

Evans, Hilary & Spencer, John (Editors); UFOs: 1947-1987: The 40-Year Search for an Explanation; Fortean Tomes, London; 1987:

Evans, Hilary & Stacy, Dennis (Editors); A World History of UFOs; Red Sparrow, Potts Point, NSW; 1997:

Fuller, John G. (Editor); Aliens in the Skies: The New UFO Battle of the Scientists: The Scientific Rebuttal to the Condon Committee Report: Testimony by Six Leading Scientists Before the House Committee on Science and Astronautics July 29, 1968; G.P. Putnam’s Sons, N.Y.; 1969:

Harkins, R. Roger & Saunders, David R; UFOs? Yes! Where the Condon Committee Went Wrong; Signet Books, N.Y.; 1968: [Saunders was a member of the University of Colorado UFO Study.]

Hynek, J. Allen; The Hynek UFO Report; Dell Publishing Company, N.Y.; 1977: [Dr. Hynek was a scientific consultant to the USAF UFO investigations.]

Hynek, J. Allen; The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry; Henry Regnery Company, Chicago; 1972: [Dr. Hynek was a scientific consultant to the USAF UFO investigations.]

Kean, Leslie; UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go On the Record; Harmony Books, New York; 2010:

Maccabee, Bruce; UFO-FBI Connection; Llewellyn Publications, St. Paul, Minnesota; 2000:

National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP); The UFO Evidence; NICAP, Washington, D.C.; 1964:

National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP); United States Air Force Projects Grudge and Bluebook Reports 1-12 (1951-1953); NICAP, Washington, D.C.; 1968:

Page, Thornton & Sagan, Carl (Editors); UFO’s: A Scientific Debate; Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.Y.; 1972:

Pope, Nick; Open Skies, Closed Minds: For the First Time A Government UFO Expert Speaks Out; Simon & Schuster, London; 1996: [Nick Pope was the former UK UFO investigations officer for the British Government.]

Pope, Nick; The Uninvited: An Expose of the Alien Abduction Phenomenon; Simon & Schuster, London; 1997: [Nick Pope was the former UK UFO investigations officer for the British Government.]

Randle, Kevin D.; Project Blue Book Exposed; Marlowe & Company, N.Y.; 1997:

Redfern, Nicholas; The FBI Files; Simon & Schuster, London; 1998:

Ruppelt, Edward J.; The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects; Ace Books, N.Y.; 1956:

[Ruppelt was a former head of the USAF Project Blue Book.]

Sachs, Margaret; The UFO Encyclopedia; Perigee Books, N.Y.; 1980:

Smith, Marcia S. & Havas, George D.; The UFO Enigma; Congressional Research Service; The Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.; 20 June 1983:

Spencer, John (Compiler/Editor); The UFO Encyclopedia; Headline Book Publishing, London; 1991:

Steiger, Brad (Editor); Project Blue Book: The Top UFO Findings Revealed!; Ballantine Books, N.Y.; 1976:

Story, Ronald D. (Editor); The Encyclopedia of UFOs; Dolphin Books, Garden City, N.Y.; 1980:

Tacker, Lt. Col. Lawrence J;  Flying Saucers and the U.S. Air Force: The Official Air Force Story; D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc.; Princeton, N.J.; 1960:

University of Colorado & Gillmor, Daniel S. (Editor); Final Report of the Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects Conducted by the University of Colorado Under Contract  to the United States Air Force; Bantam Books, N.Y.; 1969: [The Condon Committee Report.]