UFOs: If 19 Out of 20, Therefore 20 Out of 20!

The fact is, as most UFO sceptics readily acknowledge, 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 communities not one jot. Now I would maintain that a 5 to 10% level of hardcore UFO unknowns, over six decades on, worldwide, is a major scientific anomaly. It amounts to at least several thousand unexplained UFO incidents. I was under the impression that it was the role and duty of scientists to research the unknown, but apparently not when it comes to this subject.

On the 26^th and 27^th of December 1969, the American Association for the Advancement of Science held a symposium on UFOs. The papers were edited by Carl Sagan and Thorton Page and published by Cornell University Press. One of the contributors was the late James E. McDonald*, an atmospheric physicist at the University of Arizona. McDonald’s basic theme was to send a rocket up the proverbial butts of the overall scientific community for their near neglect of what he (and many laypeople) consider to be one of the top scientific anomalies of the 20^th Century (and now of the 21^st as well) – Unidentified Flying Objects.

Unfortunately, Dr. McDonald must surely be turning over in his grave because nothing has really changed since he presented that paper. Scientists and UFOs tend to party together in much the same way as oil and water mix.

Now any scientist with an open mind, albeit even a skeptical mind, has to acknowledge that between five and ten percent of all UFO reports remain bona fide UFO reports after investigation and analysis by those qualified to do so. Let’s make life simple and say the bona fide UFO unknown rate is 5% (or 19 out of 20). Let’s call these the hardcore UFOs – the residue that has been sifted out from the larger picture. Now is the hardcore UFO glass 95% empty and evaporating (if 19 out of 20 of UFOs are explainable, then 20 out of 20 are) or is the hardcore UFO glass 5% full (if 19 out of 20 are explainable, then it’s just 19 out of 20 that’s been explained, full stop)?

One of the main scientific arguments against UFOs being of any scientific interest is that if the substantial majority of UFO reports can be adequately explained (95%) then surely all could be if there was only sufficient information. Well, the USAF (as a typical government agency that was responsible for solving UFO sightings) had a category for ‘insufficient information’, as well as ‘possible’ this or ‘probable’ that. They also had a separate and apart category for ‘unknowns’. That is to say, they had sufficient information regarding a UFO sighting but hadn’t a clue as to what the object(s) were. That’s why they were tagged as ‘unknowns’. And that amounted to roughly five percent of all UFO sightings.

Okay, 19 out of 20 UFO reports prove to have prosaic explanations. Therefore the twentieth one has one as well. Sorry, the logic just isn’t there. The first and most obvious argument is that the 20^th UFO sighting has been singled out as being different because it is different. It’s like having one green apple in a basket of 19 red apples. If all you see on the surface are red apples, that don’t mean there’s not a green apple buried below, yet that’s what those who should know better conclude. Yet in reality you can’t conclude anything about the color of the apples out of sight in the apple basket until such time as you investigate and examine the color of all the apples present.

Other examples where 19 out of 20 don’t equate of necessity to 20 out of 20: If you recover from the flu nineteen times in a row, that doesn’t mean you’ll recover the twentieth time. If the N.Y. Yankees will nineteen baseball games in a row, that doesn’t mean they’ll win number twenty. If you toss a coin and it lands heads nineteen times in a row, that’s no reason to believe the twentieth toss will be heads. Taking an example from real science, if 193 species of primates have fur, surely the 194^th will have fur too. Alas, we’re the 194^th – “The Naked Ape”.

Here’s a bit of an experiment that helps demonstrate that the 20^th case can be the odd one out. Say you want to find out if relatively nonporous solid objects sink in fresh water. So you have a large bucket of fresh water, and into that bucket you toss an ordinary coin; a lump of glass; a lump of coal; a rock; a plastic comb; a brick; a lump of gold; a diamond; a china plate; a ball bearing; some copper wire; a piece of bone; a bit of cloth; a bowling ball; a CD; some lead shot; an aluminum ingot; a large salt crystal and a clam shell. That’s 19 items – they all sink, therefore you conclude that the next solid item you toss in will also sink – an ice cube. Oops; it’s back to the drawing board.

Of course the reluctance of scientists to come to terms with the bona fide UFO hardcore is really an issue central to the sociology of science. In particular, the negative findings of the University of Colorado (Condon Committee) report (1968) have been cited as a decisive factor in the generally low level of interest in UFO activity among academics since that time. That’s despite the fact that that report couldn’t adequately explain 30% of the UFO cases it investigated. Despite that historical anomaly, UFOs for better or worse acquaint to aliens and the ETH (extraterrestrial hypothesis). There’s something about aliens that translates into little green (or gray) men, fodder for the tabloids that has an overall aura as a ‘silly season’ filler when there’s no real news around. That’s not the sort of fodder scientists like to feed on.

But these UFO unknowns don’t have to be of necessity something that equates to alien intelligence therefore the UFO ETH.

Okay, maybe the hardcore UFOs are time travellers from our future – that’s 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 time travel industry – to tourists and historians from our future.

An early UFO ETH theory was that UFOs were actual living but non-intelligent organisms that 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. So, fluffy critters from outer space without benefit of a spaceship aren’t a likely option.

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. Yet, still there’s this observation about one UFO case studied by the University of Colorado under government contract to the USAF, headed by Dr. Edward Condon. The Condon Report, as it became known had this to say: “…this unusual sighting should therefore be assigned to the category of some almost certainly natural phenomenon, which is so rare that it apparently has never been reported before or since.” You’d think that would whet the appetite of any scientist eager to make a major discovery that leads to the road to Stockholm (and a Nobel Prize). Apparently that’s just not the case. Hardcore UFO sightings, even as an apparent natural phenomenon are taboo.

Regardless, ET, space critters, time travellers, unknown natural phenomena, whatever, scientists cannot claim the hardcore UFO issue settled while those unknowns remain. They are derelict in their duty by ignoring them, hoping they’ll just ‘go away’. It’s not good enough for scientists to say ‘if 19 out of 20, therefore 20 out of 20, and go on their merry way washing their hands of the otherwise reality that that logic is faulty. They need to prove that assertion, not ignore it. Translated, they’ve got to put up or shut up. 

Some might claim that it’s the alleged nature of the unknowns as claimed by the believers that puts the onus on them to prove their case. That would be so if they claimed the hardcore UFO unknowns were proof that UFOs were piloted by ET. However, while a few sprout that line (and if they do they should put up or shut up), a majority of pro-UFO people, believers if you will, just point to the unknowns as evidence (not proof – evidence and proof are two different things) that supports the UFO ETH. Unfortunately, if the UFO ETH is really true, proof of that tends to be out of the hands of the believers since if ET doesn’t want to be caught out, he/she/it won’t be – that’s the advantage of having advanced intelligence. You outsmart lesser intelligence. So the lesser intelligence needs the cooperation (or an unintended slipup – Roswell?) of the greater alien intelligence, and we’re not getting it. Of course if there is really no ET associated with the hardcore UFO residue, then that explains that. 

But nearly all UFO believers just really believe that there’s a case to be answered for that lone 20^th hardcore UFO event, regardless of what the explanation turns out to be. And the best people to find out that explanation(s) are scientists, yet scientists ignore the challenge as they did in Dr. McDonald’s day; as they continue to do well into the 21^st Century. 

*McDonald, James E.; Science in default: twenty-two years of inadequate UFO investigations; (in) Page, Thornton & Sagan, Carl (Editors); UFO’s: A Scientific Debate; Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York; 1972; pages 52-122.

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 now 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!

Exobiology: UFOS: Case Studies: Earlier Is Better

Exobiology was the original term given to the sciences central to the question of life-in-the-Universe. It’s now been largely replaced by Astrobiology, but I’ll stick with the original. Assuming one or more extraterrestrial civilizations with advanced, interstellar spaceflight capability exists; then they know about Planet Earth. Say ‘hi’ to those pesky UFOs. If UFOs are any sort of evidence that extraterrestrial intelligences exist in our Universe, then that best evidence will be early evidence – before the rot set in.

The UFO phenomenon is now well over 60 years old. The public in this 21^st Century has been well and truly saturated with UFO stories, mythology and lore. Thus, if Mr. or Mrs. Joe Blow Public reports anything UFO related today, well they have had a lot of previous bits and pieces to draw on – assuming they are making things up. However, if Mr. or Mrs. Joe Blow Public reported something from 1947, say through 1952, then that public saturation with all things ufological must have been quite a deal less. Thus, earlier reports seem to me to be more, all else being equal, credible – far less media, Hollywood, etc. coverage that could have had influence on the public mind.

Further, for the first couple of years of the modern UFO era or perhaps I should say ‘flying saucer’ era since UFO wasn’t a term yet in vogue or used, the public did not acquaint these flying discs with extraterrestrial spaceships. Early thoughts ran to advanced secret Russian aircraft, or maybe they were American or something that originated out of research done in Nazi Germany. They were terrestrial, and if not nuts-and-bolts, the psychological creations of Cold War fever. So, early ‘flying saucer’ reports weren’t tainted with the word ‘alien’, unlike something seen after the early 1950’s when explanations started swinging away from terrestrial to extraterrestrial.

That’s of course not to say that everything post 1952 is bunk and junk. There have been many substantial solid cases over the most recent five decades. It’s just the percentage of those types of cases, relative to the total, was probably higher and slightly more credible before the mythology solidified.

Abductions are an exception as the typical UFO abduction case didn’t exist in the 40’s and 50’s; ditto astronaut sightings. But on balance, I’d place greater reliability and credibility in those earlier cases. One other reason for doing so is that today’s CGI digital processing and manipulation of images can provide mind-boggling (but fake) UFO film and photographic ‘evidence’. It was much harder to fake images in the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s.

Exobiology: UFOs: The UFO Smoking Gun(s)

Exobiology was the original term given to the sciences central to the question of life-in-the-Universe. It’s now been largely replaced by Astrobiology, but I’ll stick with the original. Assuming one or more extraterrestrial civilizations with advanced, interstellar spaceflight capability exists; then they know about Planet Earth. Say ‘hi’ to those pesky UFOs. The bona fide UFOs are UFOs that remain UFOs even after the experts have finished their analysis. That residue still amounts to a heck of a lot of unknowns. What we want of course is the best of that lot – the smoking gun(s).

The often used phrase by UFO sceptics such as Carl Sagan (and others) tends to be along the lines that ‘extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence’. Hogwash! Extraordinary claims require no more, or no less, evidence than any other type of claim. If I say I have a doghouse in my backyard with a dog standing in front of it, you may not believe me. But, if you go in the backyard, and see, photograph, even scientifically measure said doghouse and dog, my claim is validated. If I say there’s a flying saucer in my backyard with a being that clearly doesn’t resemble any terrestrial creature standing besides it, you may really, Really, REALLY not believe me. But if you go into the backyard and see, photograph, even scientifically measure said flying saucer and alien, my claim is again validated. There’s nothing different in principle between the two claims and the evidence needed to back them up.

Further, what is perceived as being ‘extraordinary’ lies solely in the mind of the individual. What is extraordinary to me might be mundane to you. Perhaps that’s why legislation and courts of law don’t make distinctions between extraordinary claims and ordinary claims. Proof is required for any claim, at least beyond reasonable doubt. In science, do extraordinary claims require say three or four times as many observations, and/or experiments, and/or predictions, and/or collaborators and peer-reviewers as less extraordinary or routine claims before peer-reviewed articles are allowed to be published in the scientific literature? Of course not - there’s nothing in the rulebook of peer-reviewed scientific journals that require any such thing.

In the case of the ordinary or extraordinary (take your pick) claim that UFOs = ETI (extraterrestrial intelligence), that evidence tends to be more elusive, but no more or less so than other phenomena that is unpredictable, doesn’t stand still, and we can’t bring to the laboratory and put under a microscope. But, as there have been ‘smoking guns’ for those sorts of natural phenomena, so to might there be a smoking gun(s) that provide evidence for the claim that (at least one or more) UFOs = ETI.

So what is the best UFO = ETI case ever? Well, the answer is in the eye of the beholder. In other words, if you quizzed 100 ufologists, you’d probably get 80 (or more) different answers. There would be little agreement. That suggests that in fact there are a lot of good documented UFO case studies that remain unidentified. In fact, you don’t need to quiz ufologists. The University of Colorado (Condon) Scientific Study into UFOs (1968) is full of marvellous unsolved UFO cases!

One needs some sort of criteria to winnow out the wheat from the chaff. I would suggest that firstly you must have a multi-witness sighting, witnesses who are independent of each other, from two or more vantage points, and who have no obvious reason to lie, axe to grind or profit motive. Secondly, at least one of those witnesses should be knowledgeable about the sky and atmospheric/astronomical phenomena (such as a pilot, physical scientist, or a person who spends lots of time outdoors). Thirdly, the duration of the sighting should be long enough to rule out the element of surprise and thus snap judgments, and of course the closer the better. Fourthly, there should be at least one independent physical record – motion picture, ground imprint, radar return, etc. Fifthly, the object(s) ideally should have exhibited some degree of artificial manoeuvrability and intelligent control (changes in speed, direction, evasive actions, etc.). Sixthly, an earlier case is better than a latter case as earlier cases have less probability of having a psychological, social, cultural witness bias, even if unintentional. [It could be argued therefore that perhaps the best modern UFO case is the June 1947 Kenneth Arnold one – no contamination was possible from whatever went on before.] Lastly, the case should have been investigated by those qualified to do so – responsible, unbiased and professional scientists and/or military officers – and found to be unidentifiable to a high degree of probability. 

So, what’s my favourite ‘smoking gun’? Faced with a choice of hundreds I’ve read extensively about, I’m partial to the dual July, 1952 Washington, D.C. sightings. The only criterion I listed above that was not met was that there was in fact a ‘solution’ found. The answer was apparently temperature inversions.  Based on all I’ve read about the case, I don’t think any serious investigator, atmospheric physicist, etc. believes that for a moment! This was one case where it was politically mandatory that a natural ‘solution’ be found and provided to the public in quick-smart fashion, seeing as how the air space over the American capitol is highly restricted. It just wouldn’t do to have extraterrestrials flying over and buzzing the White House. In any event, it certainly was an example of “credible observers of relatively incredible things” – a phrase used by a high ranking military officer, USAF Major-General John A. Samford, at a Pentagon press conference called because of the intense press interest and public pressure over the sightings. 

Exobiology: UFOs: Those Unknowns

Exobiology was the original term given to the sciences central to the question of life-in-the-Universe. It’s now been largely replaced by Astrobiology, but I’ll stick with the original. Assuming one or more extraterrestrial civilizations with advanced, interstellar spaceflight capability exists; then they know about Planet Earth. Say ‘hi’ to those pesky UFOs. The bona fide UFOs are UFOs that remain UFOs even after the experts have finished their analysis. That residue still amounts to a heck of a lot of unknowns.

The fact, as 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. Since the number of reported and investigated UFO events now number in the many tens of thousands (100,000 worldwide wouldn’t be an out of the ballpark figure), even restricting events to those investigated by official government and/or military agencies, that’s still 5,000 to 10,000 bona-fide unknowns. It only takes one of those unknowns to clinch the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis.

This fact apparently excites the scientific, astrobiology, and SETI communities not one jot. But, as noted in a separate essay, 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 would be an understatement.

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

If the medical profession didn’t have a clue what 5% to 10% of their patient’s ailments were, there would be hell to pay over the training of MDs.

If your prescription or over-the-counter medicine didn’t work 5% to 10% of the time, you’d want a refund.

If 5% to 10% of the time your plumber, electrician, TV/laundry/dishwasher repairman couldn’t figure out what the problem was, you’d be a mighty unhappy customer.

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.

Ancient UFOs: The Enigma That Is Tunguska (1908)

UFOs aren’t anything new. In fact, if my premise is correct, that the polytheistic gods (including the monotheistic God) were not deities but extraterrestrials (‘ancient astronauts’) then their aerial and sometimes fiery chariots so often referred to in mythology were nothing but shuttlecraft out of their mother-ships or star-ships – what we might now term UFOs. We’re all familiar with the ‘Wheels of Ezekiel’ story, but mythology coughs up several more possibilities, Biblical and otherwise. I’ll continue the story with an event certainly not mythical, one not even all that ancient, just puzzling, Tunguska, June 1908.

Assuming one or more extraterrestrial civilizations with advanced, interstellar spaceflight capability exists; then they know about Planet Earth. Say ‘hi’ to those pesky UFOs. If UFOs aren’t mystery enough, there’s that enigmatic 30 June 1908 explosion of ‘something’ over the Tunguska region of Siberia. Might the two anomalies be connected? Something that came from outer space crashed into, or exploded above, the Tunguska, Siberia forest in late June of 1908, of that there is no question. Whodunit or whatdunit is the $64,000 question.

Something that came from outer space crashed into, or exploded above, the Tunguska, Siberia forest in late June of 1908, of that there is no question. It was heard up to 1,200 kilometres away; witnessed up to 700 kilometres away. The after-effects, from air pressure waves, ground shockwaves to unusual bright skies at night (quasi-auroras in the sky) viewed throughout Europe in the days (or nights) that followed are well documented. From that, and the evidence as observed from on-site scientific expeditions at ground zero (the epicentre) and the 1908 eyewitness reports, strongly suggest that something several tens of meters across exploded, and totally vaporized some 8 to 8.5 kilometres above ground level with a minimum force of 5 megatons, an accepted average force of between 12.5 to 15 megatons, at the other extreme perhaps up to 30 megatons (1000 times the force unleashed on Hiroshima). 

Because of the political turmoil’s Russia and the world were experiencing (WW I; the Russian Revolution), but mainly because the affected region was just about inaccessible due to the harsh climate, distance from civilization and wilderness terrain, it was many years before an actual scientific investigation was launched and travelled into the region to investigate into what actually happened – what impacted this vast forested region of Siberia where (fortunately) there were few inhabitants and witnesses. The main and initial scientific investigator was a Russian scientist, Leonid Kulik. His first expedition in 1921 didn’t actually reach ground zero; but later expeditions of his in 1927 (the first to reach the epicentre), with follow-ups in 1928 and 1929 and finally in 1939 got the scientific ball rolling. Of course everyone expected that eye-witnesses would be irrelevant because the object was obviously a natural celestial object, a meteor or a small comet, and there would be a crater. Samples of the extraterrestrial object would be collected, analysed back in civilization, fragments put on display in museums – mystery solved. That’s what everyone expected, but at times Mother Nature can be a real bitch!

Well, to make a long story shorter, initial and subsequent on-site teams of researchers (there were further Russian expeditions in 1958 and 1961 with the first post Cold War international teams hitting the ground in 1989 and 1991) found no crater; no chunks of extraterrestrial debris. Whatever ‘hit’ the Tunguska region of Siberia in June 1908 didn’t really apparently impact, but exploded high up in the atmosphere, a resulting blast wave flattening the trees in a radial pattern out from ground zero, ultimately covering an area associated with a large city. Even that wouldn’t have been all that anomalous were it not for some witnesses who claimed that the object as it descended, changed direction. You wouldn’t have expected that from a natural object. And thus was born the idea that the object wasn’t natural, but artificial, probably, well certainly, since terrestrial technology had no equivalents, extraterrestrial – an alien spaceship.

Seeing as how there’s evidence that UFOs, or ‘flying discs’ as they were called in the late 1940’, could run into difficulty and crash, as in Roswell (July 1947) for example, well that lent additional credibility that in 1908, a ‘flying disc’ also ran into technical difficulty, but exploded, probably a nuclear-type explosion,  relative to actually crash-landing.

Well, whatever it was, it was vaporized to the extent that there wasn’t enough solid residue left behind to establish once and for all that the object actually was. And so other exotic, though natural, theories were spawned to account for the overall Tunguska event anomalies.

So, some scientists have suggested that what hit Tunguska was a mini Black Hole that just kept right on keeping on and passed through the entire Earth, exiting out the opposite side (commonly postulated to be the North Atlantic). There are good theoretical reasons to suspect that mini Black Holes exist in space – ‘theoretical’ needs to be stressed however.

Even more far out, it was a tiny piece of antimatter. Antimatter, when impacting Earth’s atmosphere composed of normal matter, well its ka-boom time as there will be an annihilation of equal parts of our atmospheric matter and whatever the amount of antimatter was – gram for gram; ounce for ounce. When matter meets antimatter, stuff is turned into pure energy, and thus no solid residue left behind at the ‘crime’ scene.  

Even more far out there’s been speculations that the Tunguska Event was caused by a concentration of methane (natural) gas released naturally into the atmosphere which exploded; an extraterrestrial laser beam attack or scientific test on a relatively uninhabited region; giant ball lightning; even a terrestrial death ray or early nuclear experiment that went very wrong. Those make the alien spaceship / UFO blowing up theories seem mundane and commonplace. 

The disturbing bit about the Tunguska Event was that if the explosion / impact had happened slightly earlier or later, it could just as easily have exploded / impacted over a far more densely inhabited region. Hitting the ocean might have generated a tsunami, and we know the sort of havoc they can cause. More frightening, if it had happened, right out of the proverbial blue, no warning at all, in say 1958 instead of 1908, what would Russia’s immediate reaction have been? Maybe an assumption that there had been a nuclear strike, the first of many pre-emptive or unprovoked nuclear strikes on Russian soil. Their reaction, and response, could easily have been, in that Cold War, high tension era, shoot back now and ask questions later – assuming a later after all out nuclear war.

Back to 1908, maybe the Tunguska Event was a comet, or meteor, or a mini black hole, or a bit of anti-matter. Experts remain uncertain and undecided to this very day. Or, maybe it was a spaceship – obviously not of terrestrial origin. Lots of authors have written tomes advocating that explanation (and others even more exotic as we’ve seen). And in fact, although scoffed at by the experts, I’m not quite ready to write off the spaceship theory quite yet. If Roswell, why not Tunguska? However, I’d be being unrealistic if I didn’t admit that theory is a long shot. At the least, it’s still a marvellous scientific mystery. 

So, here are your options: 1) Tunguska was a totally natural, albeit rare event; 2) Tunguska was not a totally natural, albeit rare event.

Further readings on the Tunguska Incident:

Atkins, Thomas & Baxter, John; The Fire Came By: The Riddle of the Great Siberian Explosion; Doubleday & Company, Inc., New York; 1976: 

Furneaux, Rupert; The Tungus Event: The Great Siberian Catastrophe of 1908; Panther Books, Frogmore, St Albans, Herts; 1977:

Rubtsov, Vladimir; The Tunguska Mystery; Springer, New York; 2009:

Stoneley, Jack; Tunguska: Cauldron of Hell; Star Book, London; 1977:

Verma, Surendra; The Tunguska Fireball: Solving One of the Great Mysteries of the 20^th Century; Allen & Unwin Pty Ltd., Crows Nest, NSW; 2005:

The UFO ETH: Pro and Con: 19 Out of 20 Therefore 20 Out of 20

With both the existence of pure theory and applied evidence supporting the plausibility of the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) – where the UFO remains a UFO after appropriate expert analysis has failed to find a more terrestrial explanation – lets look at a few snippets of the phenomena, this time the endless stalemate between those supporting the UFO ETH, and those sceptical debunkers of the UFO ETH starting with the most basic of all arguments, UFOs can not be extraterrestrial because if 95% of UFOs are explained to the satisfaction of all, UFOs turned into IFOs, it stands to reason that 100% should be and would be if the data were just a little bit better.  

OBJECTION #11: If 19 out of 20 UFO events are explainable as prosaic happenings, then obviously 20 out of 20 UFO events are explainable as prosaic happenings, if only just a bit more data were available.

ANSWER: The fact is, as most UFO sceptics readily acknowledge, 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 communities not one jot. Now I would maintain that a 5 to 10% level of hardcore UFO unknowns, over six decades on, worldwide, is a major scientific anomaly. It amounts to at least several thousand unexplained UFO incidents. I was under the impression that it was the role and duty of scientists to research the unknown, but apparently not when it comes to this subject.

Now any scientist with an open mind, albeit even a skeptical mind, has to acknowledge that between five and ten percent of all UFO reports remain bona fide UFO reports after investigation and analysis by those qualified to do so. Let’s make life simple and say the bona fide UFO unknown rate is 5% (or 19 out of 20). Let’s call these the hardcore UFOs – the residue that has been sifted out from the larger picture. Now is the hardcore UFO glass 95% empty and evaporating (if 19 out of 20 of UFOs are explainable, then 20 out of 20 are) or is the hardcore UFO glass 5% full (if 19 out of 20 are explainable, then it’s just 19 out of 20 that’s been explained, full stop)?

One of the main scientific arguments against UFOs being of any scientific interest is that if the substantial majority of UFO reports can be adequately explained (95%) then surely all could be if there was only sufficient information. Well, the USAF (as a typical government agency that was responsible for solving UFO sightings) had a category for ‘insufficient information’, as well as ‘possible’ this or ‘probable’ that. They also had a separate and apart category for ‘unknowns’. That is to say, they had sufficient information regarding a UFO sighting but hadn’t a clue as to what the object(s) were. That’s why they were tagged as ‘unknowns’. And that amounted to roughly five percent of all UFO sightings.

Okay, 19 out of 20 UFO reports prove to have prosaic explanations. Therefore the twentieth one has one as well. Sorry, the logic just isn’t there. The first and most obvious argument is that the 20^th UFO sighting has been singled out as being different because it is different. It’s like having one green apple in a basket of 19 red apples. If all you see on the surface are red apples, that don’t mean there’s not a green apple buried below, yet that’s what those who should know better conclude. Yet in reality you can’t conclude anything about the color of the apples out of sight in the apple basket until such time as you investigate and examine the color of all the apples present.

Other examples where 19 out of 20 don’t equate of necessity to 20 out of 20: If you recover from the flu nineteen times in a row, that doesn’t mean you’ll recover the twentieth time. If the N.Y. Yankees will nineteen baseball games in a row, that doesn’t mean they’ll win number twenty. If you toss a coin and it lands heads nineteen times in a row, that’s no reason to believe the twentieth toss will be heads. Taking an example from real science, if 193 species of primates have fur, surely the 194^th will have fur too. Alas, we’re the 194^th – “The Naked Ape”.

Here’s a bit of an experiment that helps demonstrate that the 20^th case can be the odd one out. Say you want to find out if relatively nonporous solid objects sink in fresh water. So you have a large bucket of fresh water, and into that bucket you toss an ordinary coin; a lump of glass; a lump of coal; a rock; a plastic comb; a brick; a lump of gold; a diamond; a china plate; a ball bearing; some copper wire; a piece of bone; a bit of cloth; a bowling ball; a CD; some lead shot; an aluminum ingot; a large salt crystal and a clam shell. That’s 19 items – they all sink, therefore you conclude that the next solid item you toss in will also sink – an ice cube. Oops; it’s back to the drawing board.

Of course the reluctance of scientists to come to terms with the bona fide UFO hardcore is really an issue central to the sociology of science. In particular, the negative findings of the University of Colorado (Condon Committee) report (1968) have been cited as a decisive factor in the generally low level of interest in UFO activity among academics since that time. That’s despite the fact that that report couldn’t adequately explain 30% of the UFO cases it investigated. Despite that historical anomaly, UFOs for better or worse acquaint to aliens and the ETH (extraterrestrial hypothesis). There’s something about aliens that translates into little green (or gray) men, fodder for the tabloids that has an overall aura as a ‘silly season’ filler when there’s no real news around. That’s not the sort of fodder scientists like to feed on.

But these UFO unknowns don’t have to be of necessity something that equates to alien intelligence therefore the UFO ETH.

Okay, maybe the hardcore UFOs are time travellers from our future – that’s 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 time travel industry – to tourists and historians from our future.

An early UFO ETH theory was that UFOs were actual living but non-intelligent organisms that 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. So, fluffy critters from outer space without benefit of a spaceship aren’t a likely option.

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. Yet, still there’s this observation about one UFO case studied by the University of Colorado under government contract to the USAF, headed by Dr. Edward Condon. The Condon Report, as it became known had this to say: “…this unusual sighting should therefore be assigned to the category of some almost certainly natural phenomenon, which is so rare that it apparently has never been reported before or since.” You’d think that would whet the appetite of any scientist eager to make a major discovery that leads to the road to Stockholm (and a Nobel Prize). Apparently that’s just not the case. Hardcore UFO sightings, even as an apparent natural phenomenon are taboo.

Regardless, ET, space critters, time travellers, unknown natural phenomena, whatever, scientists cannot claim the hardcore UFO issue settled while those unknowns remain. They are derelict in their duty by ignoring them, hoping they’ll just ‘go away’. It’s not good enough for scientists to say ‘if 19 out of 20, therefore 20 out of 20, and go on their merry way washing their hands of the otherwise reality that that logic is faulty. They need to prove that assertion, not ignore it. Translated, they’ve got to put up or shut up. 

Some might claim that it’s the alleged nature of the unknowns as claimed by the believers that puts the onus on them to prove their case. That would be so if they claimed the hardcore UFO unknowns were proof that UFOs were piloted by ET. However, while a few sprout that line (and if they do they should put up or shut up), a majority of pro-UFO people, believers if you will, just point to the unknowns as evidence (not proof – evidence and proof are two different things) that supports the UFO ETH. Unfortunately, if the UFO ETH is really true, proof of that tends to be out of the hands of the believers since if ET doesn’t want to be caught out, he/she/it won’t be – that’s the advantage of having advanced intelligence. You outsmart lesser intelligence. So the lesser intelligence needs the cooperation (or an unintended slipup – Roswell?) of the greater alien intelligence, and we’re not getting it. Of course if there is really no ET associated with the hardcore UFO residue, then that explains that. 

But nearly all UFO believers just really believe that there’s a case to be answered for that lone 20^th hardcore UFO event, regardless of what the explanation turns out to be. And the best people to find out that explanation(s) are scientists, yet scientists ignore the challenge now well into the 21^st Century. 

So, IMHO, the eleventh objection fails because one can not logically extrapolate a string of 19 UFO events that share a common factor (prosaically solved), and conclude that the 20^th UFO event must of necessity also share in that common factor (that there is a prosaic explanation).

The UFO ETH: Pro and Con: Surveillance Rules, OK?

With both the existence of pure theory and applied evidence supporting the plausibility of the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) – where the UFO remains a UFO after appropriate expert analysis has failed to find a more terrestrial explanation – lets look at a few snippets of the phenomena, this time the endless stalemate between those supporting the UFO ETH, and those sceptical debunkers of the UFO ETH starting with the most basic of all arguments, UFOs can not be extraterrestrial because our sophisticated ability to spy everywhere and anywhere all of the time hasn’t found them.

OBJECTION #9: If some orbiting piece of space junk threatens to intersect the orbit of the International Space Station, the powers-that-be know about it. If a piece of space junk reenters our atmosphere, we know about it. If a foreign power launches missiles or aircraft against another country, we know that too, and in real time. If a commercial airliner goes off-course, we also know about that. So, if alien spaceships were near or in Earth’s atmosphere, the powers-that-be would know that too – right? It’s obvious. It’s obvious they don’t know, therefore there aren’t any alien spaceships (UFOs) – right? 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.

ANSWER: I had an interesting exchange with a SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) scientist who gave the thumbs down to the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) on the grounds that if solid alien craft were flying around our neck of the cosmic woods the powers-that-be would know about it. 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. We don’t know about it, so there are no alien spaceships.

On the surface this seems to be a pretty ironclad argument that slams the lid on the UFO ETH. It’s hard to miss the elephant in the room when there are eyeballs and cameras covering every nook, cranny and corner of the room. However, the argument is riddled with false assumptions and other flaws.

The first assumption, hardly proved, is how do we, the public, really know that the powers-that-be really know there are no UFOs that are alien spaceships? Just because they say there aren’t any alien spaceship because their state-of-the-art surveillance would have detected them doesn’t mean they are telling the truth. The powers-that-be tell all sorts of little white fibs for all sorts of reasons. However, let’s give those powers-that-be the benefit of the doubt. They tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

Now a lot of countries don’t have spy satellites and probably not even total radar coverage of their territory. But let’s assume the Superpowers more than make up for that and that between them they do indeed supply 24/7/52 surveillance of the entire planet, its airspace and nearby outer space.

The next assumption is a real and immediate fly in the ointment that can be easily refuted. That assumption is that surveillance equipment hasn’t detected bona-fide UFOs. Surveillance equipment has indeed detected UFOs that have remained unidentified after proper and intensive analysis. We call that equipment radar, and the official powers-that-be literature (such as the USAF’s now terminated Project Blue Book archives, which can be accessed via the WWW) is full of unexplained UFO radar cases. The so-called ‘scientific’ study of UFOs by the Condon Committee of the University of Colorado, a study commissioned by the USAF in order to get out of the UFO business, couldn’t adequately explain roughly 30% of the cases they tried to come to terms with. Three of those unexplained UFO cases involved radar. So actually the study was scientific, it was only Condon’s conclusions that there was no case to be answered for the UFO ETH that wasn’t scientific. But that’s another story. 

In short, it doesn’t take a great deal of time and effort for UFO ETH skeptics to confirm that there are many official cases where radar has detected UFOs which defy prosaic explanation and thus remain as bona-fide hardcore unknowns to this day. Of course in fairness, that’s hardcore evidence for the UFO ETH, not proof of the UFO ETH. 

The next assumption is that our surveillance equipment can detect anything in the air or in nearby space. Maybe that’s the case with terrestrial stuff in the air or in nearby space, but we’re talking about extraterrestrial here.

In fact, it’s even a pretty big assumption that all terrestrial technology can be detected by our surveillance equipment.

Advanced stealth technology rules; okay anyone? Stealth technology is a major and ever ongoing R&D exercise that is 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 obviously 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’.

My bit about UFOs and stealth technology or ‘cloaking’ devices’ is nothing more than drawing a parallel between with we humans (the military in particular) do R&D on, and have adopted, and will continue to do R&D on and continue to adopt for obvious reasons. If stealth technologies exist, and some certainly exist, then it would surprise me that extraterrestrial intelligences wouldn’t have discovered this as well and adopted same, if for no other reason, assuming UFOs are the products of E.T., than it would be useful for them to often cloak themselves from human observation. E.T. is here on a scientific mission, IMHO, and like say wildlife biologists hide in the bushes so as not to disturb the objects of their study; or why a hunter uses camouflage in the woods so that their prey doesn’t spot them. Equally valid, the military has equipped their soldiers with combat uniforms that match background terrain, and ditto camouflage nets. I mean we’ve all seen footage of military camouflage.  If humans, why not E.T.?

So, IMHO, the ninth objection fails because stealth technology exists; an advanced extraterrestrial civilization with the technological smarts to get from there to here would have mastered the sorts of stealth technology physics and engineering that would enable them to elude us human primitives. In any event, government files are full of hardcore UFO radar cases – unsolved radar cases.  

UFOs: Bits and Pieces: Washington, D.C., July 1952

With both the existence of pure theory and applied evidence supporting the plausibility of the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) – where the UFO remains a UFO after appropriate expert analysis has failed to find a more terrestrial explanation – lets look at a few snippets of the phenomena, this time one of the most famous of all UFO events – dateline, Washington, D.C., July 1952.

In July 1952, on two separate occasions, separated by one week, UFOs buzzed America’s National Capitol, making long term incursions over restricted air space. They were tracked, independently, by various civilian and military radars. Military jet fighters were scrambled to intercept and identify the UFOs, but were outmatched and didn’t succeed, although they were witnessed by the pilots. The objects were also witnessed from the ground. USAF Major-General John A. Samford, at the largest Pentagon press conference ever held since WWII, in late July 1952, made the statement with respect to the recent Washington D.C. UFO flap that these sightings were made by “credible observers of relatively incredible things”. It’s on the public record.

Now of course these sightings had to be explained by any means necessary since you just cannot admit to having unknown aerial objects fly over restricted air space. So the idea of ‘temperature inversions’ explained all - hogwash. It’s amazing that the common occurrence of ‘temperature inversions’ had never before, and never since, caused such commotion.

Further reading regarding Washington, D.C. (July 1952):

Randle, Kevin D.; Invasion Washington: UFOs Over the Capitol; HarperCollins Publishers, New York; 2001:

Ruppelt, Edward J.; The Washington Merry-Go-Round (in); The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects; Ace Books, inc, New York; 1956; pages 207-227:

UFOs: Bits and Pieces: Valentich: The Missing Pilot

With both the existence of pure theory and applied evidence supporting the plausibility of the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) – where the UFO remains a UFO after appropriate expert analysis has failed to find a more terrestrial explanation – lets look at a few snippets of the phenomena, this time the curious case surrounding the disappearance of private pilot Frederick Valentich while reporting a UFO event.

One of many, many highly unexplained UFO cases, is the events surrounding Frederick Valentich on 21 October 1978. It’s more a case of where there’s smoke, there’s smoke, but smoke there certainly is, and lots of it.

In a nutshell, on the evening of that date, Mr. Valentich piloted a private plane from Melbourne, intended destination, King Island in Bass Strait. He took off only to shortly thereafter radio in that there was this UFO hovering over him. The UFO was spotted by several independent witnesses. While radioing his observations, all contact ceased; all communications abruptly ended. Mr. Valentich, plane and all, vanished without trace. An extensive air and sea search failed to find any sign of Mr. Valentich, or his plane. No oil slick, no floating wreckage, no body – nothing, zip, bugger-all. No trace has ever been found of pilot or plane – not then, not since, not ever. The weather had been perfect for night flying.

One obvious explanation was that Mr. Valentich staged his own disappearance, although friends and family could offer no reason why he would do so. Of course many people voluntarily disappear themselves for various reasons; many eventually are found, are caught or reappear voluntarily. But keep in mind; it wasn’t just Mr. Valentich who disappeared. One entire aircraft vanished as well, never to be seen again. Surely if Mr. Valentich wanted to ‘drop out’, there were easier and less conspicuous ways of doing so.  If he had deliberately gone walkabout, in these decades since of security cameras and computer facial software recognition technology, it would be hard to remain an unknown walkabout in any populated area.

Was suicide a motive? Again, no wreckage or body was ever found, and who would go to all the bother of reporting a non-existent UFO overhead – a non-existent UFO that happened to be independently reported by others.

And what of the plane since no wreckage was ever found floating on the surface of Bass Strait; washed up on beaches, or found on the ocean bottom – Bass Strait isn’t that deep.

It’s a mystery, and while it doesn’t prove aliens nicked off with Mr. Valentich and plane, there’s not that much wriggle room. Now multiply this sort of unexplained case by the thousands worldwide, and you do have the ETH as a plausible hypothesis.

Interestingly, despite my asking for a copy of the Valentich ‘accident’ case report in an official capacity related to my employment at the time, the Department of Transport (Air Safety Investigations Branch) refused. To this day, to the best of my knowledge, that report has never been publicly released.

Further reading regarding Valentich:

Haines, Richard F.; Melbourne Episode: Case Study of A Missing Pilot; L.D.A. Press, Los Altos, California; 1987: [Dr. Haines was at the time a research scientist for NASA and an accredited air safety investigations officer.]

UFOs: Bits and Pieces: Those Unknowns

With both the existence of pure theory and applied evidence supporting the plausibility of the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) – where the UFO remains a UFO after appropriate expert analysis has failed to find a more terrestrial explanation – lets look at a few snippets of the phenomena, this time a focus on the unknowns and why they are important as a counter to sceptics of the UFO ETH.

The fact is, as most UFO sceptics readily acknowledge, 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 communities not one jot. Now I would maintain that a 5 to 10% level of hardcore UFO unknowns, over six decades on, worldwide, is a major scientific anomaly. It amounts to at least several thousand unexplained UFO incidents. I was under the impression that it was the role and duty of scientists to research the unknown, but apparently not when it comes to this subject.

One of the main scientific arguments against UFOs being of any scientific interest is that if the substantial majority of UFO reports can be adequately explained (95%) then surely all could be if there was only sufficient information. Well, the USAF (as a typical government agency that was responsible for solving UFO sightings) had a category for ‘insufficient information’, as well as ‘possible’ this or ‘probable’ that. They also had a separate and apart category for ‘unknowns’. That is to say, they had sufficient information regarding a UFO sighting but hadn’t a clue as to what the object(s) were. That’s why they were tagged as ‘unknowns’. And that amounted to roughly five percent of all UFO sightings.

Okay, 19 out of 20 UFO reports prove to have prosaic explanations. Therefore the twentieth one has one as well. Sorry, the logic just isn’t there. The first and most obvious argument is that the 20^th UFO sighting has been singled out as being different because it is different. It’s like having one green apple in a basket of 19 red apples. If all you see on the surface are red apples, that don’t mean there’s not a green apple buried below, yet that’s what those who should know better conclude. Yet in reality you can’t conclude anything about the color of the apples out of sight in the apple basket until such time as you investigate and examine the color of all the apples present.

Of course the reluctance of scientists to come to terms with the bona fide UFO hardcore is really an issue central to the sociology of science. In particular, the negative findings of the University of Colorado (Condon Committee) report (1968) have been cited as a decisive factor in the generally low level of interest in UFO activity among academics since that time. That’s despite the fact that that report couldn’t adequately explain 30% of the UFO cases it investigated. Despite that historical anomaly, UFOs for better or worse acquaint to aliens and the ETH (extraterrestrial hypothesis). There’s something about aliens that translates into little green (or gray) men, fodder for the tabloids that has an overall aura as a ‘silly season’ filler when there’s no real news around. That’s not the sort of fodder scientists like to feed on.

SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) scientists tend to be vocal against the UFO ETH. They suggest that if the majority of UFO events are explainable in prosaic terms, all are ultimately explainable in prosaic terms. Therefore, the UFO ETH is boring and a non-event. But, I’d wager that if SETI received out of all artificial radio signals, 5% to 10% unexplained artificial 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? Again, 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.