Why Science Should Investigate the Evidence for ET Visitation

By Rosemary Ellen Guiley

c. Visionary Living, Inc.

Item: More than 100 exoplanets have been discovered in our own part of the galaxy in recent years, raising the likelihood of extraterrestrial life in our neighborhood.

Item: If ET life exists, at least some of them – the more technologically advanced – have the capability of visiting Earth in accordance with modern physics, via parallel universes, wormholes and warp drives that are faster than the speed of light. Or, they may have far more advanced means of travel than we can identify at present.

Item: A substantial body of high-quality eyewitness reports of UFOs and ETs has accumulated since 1947, indicating that we are indeed being visited by extraterrestrial beings.

Question: Okay, so where are they?

That question, known as “Fermi’s paradox,” has had no adequate answer for more than 50 years. Now four respected physicists say it’s now time for a serious scientific reexamination of the presence of ETs. Old arguments dismissing the possibility of ET visitations no longer hold their water.

Drs. James Deardorff, Bernard Haisch, Bruce Maccabee and Hal E. Puthoff are co-authors of “Inflation-Theory Implications for Extraterrestrial Visitation,” published recently in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society. The scientists say that “open scientific research” on the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (ETH) is needed, with special attention paid to high-quality UFO reports from eyewitnesses.

Fermi’s paradox originated in 1950. One day over lunch in Los Alamos, Enrico Fermi posed the “Where are they?” question to colleagues. The question is still being asked more than 50 years later. Science has generally been dismissive of the ETH, thanks in part to the lack of conclusive hard evidence and the routine discrediting of eyewitness reports.

The authors of the JBIS article note that recent discoveries by Australian astronomers of the number of sun-like stars in Earth’s vicinity point to the likelihood of a significant habitable zone in our Milky Way. Furthermore, the Earth is comparatively young. Thus, civilizations on older planets probably would have found us by now.

In Fermi’s day, arguments against visitation were based on estimations of space travel at 5 to 10 percent of the speed of light. The galactic distances are so vast that ET arrivals here would be unlikely, according to proponents of the “we are alone” theory.

But current physics and astrophysics theories posit that visitation may not be so unlikely after all. Wormholes or “cosmic subways” could create shortcuts through space-time. Faster than light travel is part of inflation theory – the Big Bang – and also could contract space-time. And, ETs might exist in parallel dimensions or universes, where speed of light might be different than in our universe.

The authors of the paper devote considerable attention to the history of eyewitness sightings and close encounters since 1947. (However, most of the references to specific UFO cases were deleted by the journal editor, with the exception of articles Maccabee had published in the scientific literature more than two decades ago.) Of significance is the Condon Report in 1968, directed by Professor Edward U. Condon, which probably reflected his own admitted personal bias against evidence in favor of ET visitations.

Remarkable sightings have continued into the present, and governments around the world have released information. Many eyewitnesses are highly credible individuals, contrary to debunking efforts that attempt to portray them as unreliable. “This ridicule factor has prevented many serious investigators from even attempting to report their findings within journals preferred by most scientists,” the authors say.

While eyewitness events convince some individuals and UFO analysts, the authors say that there has been no sustained event of sufficient magnitude to convince the world media or many scientists. However, the authors say, “We suspect that this chary behavior may be no accident.”

The authors consider hypotheses that have been put forward to explain why ET visitors may prefer contained or covert contact. Called the zoo, nursery, embargo and quarantine hypotheses, these arguments posit that Earth may be under observation (zoo); may be too young to handle the explosive effects of contact (nursery); or may be off-limits according to galactic codes or laws (embargo and quarantine).

Asking scientists to take ET visitation seriously is no small matter, however. As anyone interested in ufology well knows, it’s a topic often relegated to the fringes of the fringe. Will this article placed in a peer-reviewed scientific journal make a difference? The answer may well be yes, judging from the initial responses the authors have received.

Three of the authors – Deardorff, Puthoff and Maccabee – gave FATE some post-publication feedback:

FATE: Why is this article important to scientists and ufologists?

Deardorff: We hope that it will give them motivation to try to get their own analyses into publications that mainstream science reads and is comfortable with. It might be, however, that some scientists who are stuck on the “We are the Crown of Creation” syndrome will instead try to denigrate JBIS – the messenger journal in this case – to a non-scientific status as a result of our article therein.

Puthoff: One of the issues faced by scientists with regard to consideration of ET visitation is the taboo nature of the subject, at least with regard to the possibility that some UFO sightings might be a signature of such visitation. Therefore, the publication of our article in a well-respected scientific journal make it a little safer for other to follow up with serious scientific investigation of their own. The “ridicule curtain” has been breached to some extent.

Maccabee: Previous articles have generally argued that UFO sighting reports are either misidentifications, mental aberrations or hoaxes. So far as we know, this is the first article in a refereed, mainstream journal to propose that UFO sightings be studied to find out if any of them are evidence of ET visitation.

FATE: What response have you gotten from both camps – science and ufology?

Deardorff: Just the expected polarized opinions. Fortunately, the favorable responses have outnumbered the angry, derisive responses.

Puthoff: The responses from scientists, and from the scientific press, has been quite positive. Publication of the article has been treated in a very straightforward and informative manner. Requests for interviews came in from all over the globe, and several serious stories were written and published in the general press. Publication of the article also generated a positive response from those devoting their efforts to investigating UFO reports, as it brought some well-deserved legitimacy to their efforts to see scientists take the subject seriously.

Maccabee: Some congratulations from ufologists on having a paper published and faint criticism by open-minded skeptics. No direct attempt at debunking – yet. I expect it, however, eventually.

FATE: How can serious scientific inquiry on the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (ETH) be initiated?

Deardorff: By breaking the hold on the “ridicule factor,” which our paper attempts to do in its own small way.

Puthoff: First of all the SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) community has gained scientific credibility over the past few decades, given that the search for electromagnetic or other signals from hypothesized ET civilizations is now generally regarded by the scientific community as a serious scientific enterprise. In addition, another step in the right direction was seen in the commissioning of the Rockefeller-funded Sturrock Panel in which brought together scientists to examine claimed UFO data in an impassioned way. This resulted in publication of the book UFO Enigma.

Also, a number of other countries, such as France, have initiated serious government investigation of UFO sightings by their gendarmerie, with the results being made available to the public in the form of detailed reports. And of course the ongoing NASA effort to investigate the possibility of life on other planets constitutes yet another effort in this direction. As a result, such explorations of the possibility of ETH-related scientific issues is already underway.

Maccabee: Serious inquiry already goes on, and some of it is even scientific, albeit at a very low level of support – ufologists fund their own investigations.

Scientific research requires funds and data. Obtaining money for serious research in ufology is an ongoing issue. One significance source of grant money came from Laurance S. Rockefeller, who in 1996 approached physicist Peter A. Sturrock, president of the Society for Scientific Exploration (SSE), about examining the UFO evidence. The result was the Sturrock Panel referenced by Puthoff above, which included nine scientists, and was headed by Sturrock. The panel was the first independent review of UFO phenomena in more than 30 years. In 1997 the panel held an informal workshop with UFO investigators to examine physical evidence. In 1998, the panel released its findings the physical evidence linked to some sightings warranted more scientific study. UFO Enigma: A New Review of the Physical Evidence, Sturrock’s report and analysis of the panel’s work, was published in 1999. The report is posted on the SSE website, www.scientificexploration.org. Information about the Sturrock Panel, and the text of the JBIS article, are available on the UFOEvidence website, www.ufoevidence.org.

If enough scientific interest in UFOs builds, will other major sources of funding will become available?

A continuing stream of data depends on experiencers who report sightings and contact. Thus, experiencers need also to overcome the “ridicule factor.” Data is collected by UFOEvidence (see above) and by major ufology organizations, among them the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON), www.mufon.com; the National UFO Reporting Center (NUFORC), www.nuforc.org; and the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS), www.cufos.org.

###

First published in FATE magazine, April 2005. For information about FATE, visit www.fatemag.com.