It has become apparent that an internal war has begun regarding the state of modern Ufology. Nothing really new, but the players are changing so rapidly, that common sense seems to have become a casualty. How is Ufology supposed to be defined? I cannot speak for others, but I think it is a field of study involving manufactured craft, that transcends our current technological development. Thus, cryptoaeronautics, or aircraft of unknown origin. Ufology began as a fortean subject, but now stands on its own and separate in relation to crop circles, ghosts, animal mutilation, sky falls, etc.

By Wendy Connors The UFO Chronicles Originally Published 7-18-05

What, then, is a Ufologist? Again, I cannot speak for others, but I think a Ufologist is a person who has studied the phenomena and its history, then proceeds one step further by actually doing field research regarding specific cases or the subject in general to keep the knowledge base current. Thus, there are a few researchers who make up the core of ufological study. The vast majority of people use the research from the few to bring the subject to public forums. Some people do well in bringing the subject to public forums, but the majority do not, due to wild speculation and belief systems.

What do we really know about UFOs? A massive amount actually, but no real answers that contribute to a consensus. The subject itself provides for wild speculation and theories by those interested in the subject, but the real Ufologist knows the following to be accurate:

1. Origin of UFOs remain, at this time, unknown. Everything regarding possible origin is speculative at this point and no definitive answer is yet available.

2. How such objects are propelled is unknown and speculative.

3. There is no definitive proof that such devices carry sentient alien beings. However, research indicate that these objects appear to be intelligently controlled.

4. Some of these objects leave behind traces of their existence and interact with people of all ages, incomes, educational attainment, professions, etc. The proposition that all people who see UFOs are mentally impaired is factually incorrect.

5. Of the thousands of worldwide reports of UFO sightings, only a small percentage appear to be of manufactured origin that exceed our current technological development. These objects, thoughout recorded history, have shown that the technology of these devices change in relation to our technological development.

6. Ufology, by its very nature, lends to scientific investigation by developing new techniques.

Is it possible for Ufology to overcome the riddle factor and become a science unto itself? Yes. But only to a core group of researchers at this point because Ufology has reached the level it needs to be taught and specialities formed. If Ufology is not taught, continuation of rampant misinformation will continue to apply and Ufology will remain a chaotic field of study. Anyone who studies Ufology critically, takes no theory as an absolute.

So, who are the best Ufologists researching today? Those who maintain the databases, uncovers new documentation, gathers unbiased reports, maintains trace evidence and brings the history of the subject to the public arenas. There are hundreds of competent Ufologists working today. Unfortunately, they are outnumbered by the tens of thousands of people who don't have a clue to what they are doing, but bring their dog and pony shows (belief systems) for permanent public display.
Read more »

"[T]here didn't seem to be an official reason for the CIA to pay any attention to UFO research. Then, in 1990, Ron [Pandolfi] told me the official reason: the possibility of espionage. He said that in the 1970's, the CIA had obtained 'firm evidence' that the KGB had devised a plan to use US citizens, including UFOlogists, to penetrate the US defense program." - Bruce Maccabee, PhD, The FBI-CIA-UFO Connection: The Hidden UFO Activities of USA Intelligence Agencies (p. 354)

By Jack Brewer ufotrail.blogspot.com 5-8-17

The late Boyd Bushman and a photo of suspect origin

Bushman also stated, "The intelligent ones... and me believe that a great deal of information should be lifted up from those dark recesses of Area 51 and moved over so people can see it."


Please understand when people holding security clearances start whispering around water coolers about classified information they think should be published, it tends to attract attention. More on that shortly, but first let's take a look courtesy of The Black Vault at an investigation launched by the FBI into the activities of Boyd Bushman.

A 1999 FBI memo established Bushman was indeed employed at Lockheed Martin (LM). The man's claims of holding Top Secret clearance while working as a Senior Specialist were also verified. Please note, however, LM expressed concerns to the Bureau of what "may be an ongoing attempt to elicit LM proprietary or USG classified information" surrounding Bushman:
Read more »



var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Recently a person who calls himself “Concerned Earthling” wrote a fan letter (1) to Jacques Vallee (2), a noted computer scientist, venture capitalist, and UFO investigator to inquire why he was withdrawing from the field of UFO research. Vallee wrote back(3), reassuring the fan that he was not entirely separating himself from UFO studies, but plans to continue delving into the phenomenon.

By Mark Whittington Top secret Writers 1-30-17

As a computer scientist, Vallee started to notice common patterns in not only UFOs but also religious visitations, sightings of cryptids, and psychic phenomenon going back throughout history. He believes that every one of these events, once one accounts for events caused by natural phenomenon, is the result of a nonhuman consciousness, likely from another dimension, attempting to manipulate the consciousness of human beings to effect social change.
Read more »

var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

"...corporate media blew its most promising opportunity — ever — for instigating a policy-level discussion of The Great Taboo..."

Two tantalizing developments in late October, just days shy of the most demoralizing U.S. presidential campaign in the history of the world: 1) Using NASA data, a journal called Proceedings of the National Academy of Science announced it had calculated that more than 8.8 billion Earth-like planets inhabit the Milky Way galaxy alone. Which is depressing enough. But also: 2) Another journal, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, identified 234 stars amid a survey of 2.5 million in which light-pulse signatures were consistent with

By Billy Cox De Void 11-10-16

theoretical models predicting extraterrestrial intelligence. The second item is far more speculative and controversial than the first, but the confirmation of either would turn our conceits upside down. Or at least we wouldn’t have to resign ourselves to the idea that the way we do things in this joint is as good as it’s ever going to get.

Nope, unfortunately, UFOs haven’t destroyed Capitol Hill or the Kremlin, and De Void is not back. But after seeing how corporate media blew its most promising opportunity — ever — for instigating a policy-level discussion of The Great Taboo, it’s difficult to sit back and pretend we’re not in very deep trouble, and on such a fundamental level. Market-tested and auto-programmed for parroting trivia, fear and anger, the Fourth Estate appears to have also severed its links to those things that can evoke the best of who we are or hope to be.

I used to follow crowds of visitors onto the banks of the Indian River Lagoon and the beaches of Cape Canaveral, where they converged for the countdown to shuttle launches and planetary missions, most of which rarely made their deadlines. But no matter. Taking expensive chances with the weather and the inevitable hardware glitches, they rolled in from everywhere, from around the world, pickup trucks, RVs, lawn chairs, binoculars, bug spray, SPF50, coolers, Coleman grills, lanterns, campfires, tripods, radios, you name it, they packed it. And it wasn’t just to watch — they could’ve tuned into network coverage for that, and with a lot less aggravation. They came to participate, to be a part of something that reduced to irrelevance whatever affiliations that divided them, even if they weren’t aware of it. And they were united by storylines that generated parades of firsts:

First woman astronaut, first black astronaut, first teacher, first Saudi, first Israeli, first American in orbit giving it another shot to see if his 77-year-old bones could withstand, 35 years later, the rigors of space flight. There were multi-ethnic multi-racial shuttle crews fulfilling Gene Rodenberry’s “Star Trek” prophecy. There were astronauts pushing back against skittish administrators, demanding a chance to risk their lives to fix a failing telescope renowned for peering into the edge of time. There was the 96-year-old widow of the astronomer who discovered Pluto, on hand to watch an unmanned craft programmed to deliver, among other things, her husband’s ashes to that unimaginably distant world.

These stories fueled pilgrimages. And the entire planet joined the learning curve, sometimes in horror, learning to exhale only after solid-rocket boosters cleared the fuel tank 90 seconds out. On the high frontier, death is the ultimate price of knowledge; yet, the waiting list to engage that voyage swells. And it has been this way since the first crazy people hopped into hollowed-out logs and splashed off for nothing more than invisible hunches and theories on treasures their faith said lay waiting beyond the horizon.

Walter Cronkite once said history will look back on America’s Apollo moon program as the 20th century’s crowning achievement; indeed, 50 years later, the study of the neurological shading that occurs when space travelers gaze upon Earth — called the “Overview Effect” — is only beginning. But Cronkite’s sensibilities were nowhere in evidence during the presidential debates. There were 27 national stage-managed auditions during the campaign of 2015-16, and unless I missed something, not a single journalist bothered to solicit a candidate’s vision for space, the arena in which the U.S. and Russia are indispensable partners. Not a one. In fact, after securing their party’s nominations, neither Trump nor Clinton could find room for a website blurb on NASA policy. But you can bet your ass those two would’ve dashed off something, no matter how cynical or meaningless, had a single member of the press stepped up to ask about it in a public forum.

Which brings us to journalism’s great lost moment. Let’s do this again:

For the first time ever, a monopoly-party candidate attempted to post UFOs on the Beltway talkboard. With persistent nudges from campaign director John Podesta, Hillary Clinton on three separate occasions showcased not only a conversational grasp of the phenomenon but also a rhetorical willingness to pursue the issue wherever it led. All three statements rated dutiful cut ‘n’ paste coverage worldwide. But not a single major daily or network or public radio station had the guts, or the foundational knowledge, to ask HRC why — exactly — she was so interested in broaching such a politically radioactive topic. It made no sense, tactically or strategically. It was a baffling non sequitur, with no moneyed momentum to propel it. Where were the payoffs? Who was the audience? It was intended to be a counterweight to — what?

Well, given how no news division or editorial board saw fit to mention our once-bejeweled space program, their failure to confront Clinton with her counterintuitive UFO remarks was at least consistent. And as a final kick out the door, Esquire magazine’s snark over the Podesta/Clinton gamble, published two weeks ago, mirrored the prevailing media tone over the last 11 months: “Cracking the Crackpot Vote — How do you win over true believers (in extraterrestrials) in an election this crazy?” If you were too stupid to get it, the editors punched it up with an illustration of HRC sitting on a flying saucer shooting a laser beam from its belly.

Someday, these presentations will be compared with what “Reefer Madness” did for marijuana laws. For now, what is truly unforgivable is journalism’s demonstrated inability to revitalize rigorous inquiry into whatever may be waiting for us out there, conventional angles or otherwise. Even as the universe grows more crowded, more vivid and more complex with each flip of the calendar.

Like an amoeba, our species assumes its definition not at its middle, but at its leading edges, at the margins, where it decides to go next. If we’re losing our capacity for awe — not to mention an appreciation for the human ingenuity required for translation — let’s start calling out the usual media suspects. Clinton-Trump ’16 flagged an opportunity for institutional journalism to explore documentation it has never properly addressed, to make a different kind of history, no matter who won. And like a streak of summer lightning, that moment flickered and vanished. It’s already almost like it never existed.
Read more »

MEXICO CITY - Former president and current presidential candidate Alejandro Toledo shook his country's news media in a press conference when he confessed to discussing UFOs with the international media.

By Inexplicata 4-4-16

"I was interviewed by CNN on a subject that would be considered outlandish, seemingly proper of the realm of science fiction, but it isn't: extraterrestrials."

As of the end of this edition, this interview has not been made public, and some have described it as an attention-getter in the midst of the country's political season.

When UFO researchers in Peru were asked about these statements, they admitted to not having more information on the subject, but are certain that a number of UFO sightings took place during the term of President Alberto Fujimori from 1990 to 2000.

One of the most memorable ones took place on 7 December 1991 at 21:00 hours, when the presence of a UFO was reported over Laguna de Charo, located in the city of Iquitos in the Peruvian Amazon. The military staff accompanying the president looked on in bemusement.

"Fujimori as well as the military watched as an enormous object flew over the lagoon before fleeing the area, passing over the witnesses' heads," according to Julio Chamorro, former commander of the Peruvian Air Force.

The retired military man said that following the sighting, Fujimori asked his officers to keep quiet about it, telling them that what they had just seen had never happened.

It was nevertheless a source of much conversation within the Peruvian armed forces, and led to the creation of the first phase of OIFA, the Anomalous Aerial Phenomena Research Office attached to the Peruvian Air Force, which has currently been elevated to departmental status with a well-defined structure, featuring both military and civilian advisors.

Several Latin American presidents have discussed their sightings. It should be remembered that Mexican presidents Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, Luis Echeverría and Miguel de la Madrid were very aware of the activities of these strange unidentified flying objects.

It seems that this secret, kept by the political class, is slowly coming to light, giving way to a new era of general openness.

* Source:www.informador.mx.co and Planeta UFO

* [Translation (c) 2016 S. Corrales, IHU with thanks to Guillermo Gimenez)
Read more »

!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');

var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

A few years ago, analysts with the National Bureau of Economic Research decided to try to quantify the headlock that “elite scientists” exert on their chosen disciplines. They wanted to know if Nobel laureate Max Planck’s lamentation on ego could be statistically proven: “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

By Billy Cox De Void 4-2-16

Targeting the life sciences, NBER formed a database of 12,935 scientists whose publication performance, patents, funding levels and peer pedigrees – i.e., membership in the National Academies of Science or the Institute of Medicine – satisfied baseline criteria. From there, NBER whittled the field down to 452 names. All were considered the rock stars of their generation, circa 1975-2003. More significantly, every one died before they retired.

The results of the study – published in December under the headline “Does Science Advance One Funeral at a Time?” – showed how subsequent publication activity by the deceased stars’ colleagues tapered off precipitously, by 40 percent, following the deaths of the luminaries. Into that vacuum surged the work of non-collaborators. It went up 8 percent within a year. Within five years, papers by the non-collaborators “fully offset the productivity decline of collaborators.”

NBER summed up what had been happening this way: “The idiosyncratic stances of individual scientists can do much to alter, or at least delay, the course of scientific advance.” Conclusion: “While co-authors suffer after the passing of a superstar, it is not simply the case that star scientists in a competing lab assume leadership mantle. Rather, the boost comes largely from outsiders who appear to tackle the mainstream questions within the field but by leveraging newer ideas that arise in other domains.”

Uh-oh. Outsiders.

Which brings us to the latest paint-by-numbers whimsy from astronomer Seth Shostak, 72.

Champion of the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence via the exclusive mode of radiotelescopes, author of four books, plus 60-some peer-reviewed research papers, not to mention 300 or so popular articles ranging from astronomy to technology, Shostak is so inside-the-box he even co-authored a college-level textbook on astrobiology. Plus he’s made a multitude of appearances on documentaries and TV series. Smart guy, clearly. Elite. He was rewarded for those efforts in December when he received the Carl Sagan Prize for Science Popularization. And as a fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, he never misses a chance to remind Americans that UFOs are a waste of time. Thus:

Sensing a potential affront to mainstream groupthink with Hillary Clinton’s recent advocacy for transparent federal UFO documents, Shostak felt the need to translate her avowed interest into language Huffington Post readers could understand. From his opening sentence – “If you’re worried about little gray guys with no hair and amygdaloid eyes, Hillary Clinton wants to help” – it’s eminently clear that the senior astronomer with the SETI Institute has disqualified himself from any meaningful discussion on The Great Taboo.

Shostak does what he always does. He falls back on the veracity of the USAF’s dreadfully bollixed Project Blue Book, and he characterizes “those whose psyches are invested in the alien visitation story” as delusional thinkers. No allowance, of course, for people who make no such claims, people who think radar tracks of weird *&! in the sky are interesting, and for people who wish that authority figures like Shostak would quit proselytizing and actually investigate events occurring in the 21st century. Or, failing that, at least quit misrepresenting things, like the British Ministry of Defence’s position on UFOs.

“The MOD said that after more than a half-century of taking hotline tips, they had learned nothing of either military or scientific value,” writes Shostak, who doesn’t even have to Google UFOs anymore because he’s riding Yuri Milner’s $100M SETI gravy train. “They also released tens of thousands of related government documents.”

Well, no, sorry man, you’re totally wrong on that first point. According to an MOD study declassified in 2006, referred to as Project Condign, the Brits are definitely interested in pursuing what it prefers to call Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. That’s the same term Clinton used last week in her Jimmy Kimmel interview. Struggling to make sense of the evidence they considered from 1997-2000, UK analysts agreed to describe UAP as “buoyant plasma formations.” Under the MoD’s definition, UAP is a meteorological phenomenon so bizarre, so intense, that it can subject observers to radiation exposure, hallucinations, “lost time” episodes, and even cause pilots to make evasive maneuvers.

“The relevance of plasma and magnetic fields to UAP was an unexpected feature of the study. It is recommended,” declared the authors, “that further investigation should be (undertaken) into the applicability of various characteristics in various novel military applications.”

Whoa, hey, crazy “weather,” huh? With defense implications to boot. Mmmm . . . smells like $$$. Still, 10 years after the declassification of Condign, and no followup to speak of. That could mean one of two things: 1) Classified research is ongoing or, more likely, 2) a more informed generation of scientists is waiting for speed bumps like Shostak to get out of the way so a less doctrinaire era of inquiry can begin.
Read more »

!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');

var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

This is a presidential election year, so let’s discuss UFO sightings and politics. Currently, former White House chief of staff John Podesta has been advocating that Hillary Clinton get to the bottom of the UFO disclosure story if she’s elected.

By Cheryl Costa www.syracusenewtimes.com 3-18-16

But from this reporter’s perspective, the politics problem is a whole lot bigger than just a new president burning political capital to get the long-asked UFO disclosure story answered.

This issue really boils down to research money, and in our system of government analysis, the purse strings are held by Congress. The truth is, getting any kind of serious research done, like the kind that is done by the National Academy of Science, requires congressional support in the form of funding.

If we’re talking about Congress, then we have to talk about voter numbers. [...]
Read more »

Let's start with qualifying that I don't consider myself an expert on UFOs and the state of ufology. Like many, I developed an interest in the subject matter and came to know much more about it than the average individual. Of the things I learned, a lot of it is probably not worth knowing. Just ask the people that tolerate me. My descent into ufology resulted in my book, "The Greys Have Been Framed: Exploitation in the UFO Community,"which contains a lot of the things I think are relevant about the genre. I'm very pleased with the reviews it has received, and I'm grateful for the websites, radio shows and podcasts which have interviewed me about it. Thank you!

By Jack Brewer ufotrail.blogspot.com 3-17-16

Those interviews and related circumstances have provided me opportunities to reflect. Following are a few points that typically come up and I've recently been giving particular consideration:


I think there are essentially three kinds of information when we're discussing UFOs, aliens and the related claims and research:

1) That which can be verified to be correct and accepted

2) That which can be confirmed to be incorrect and rejected

3) That which cannot be conclusively confirmed one way or the other, requiring suspension of judgment

While we can often take a pretty good guess at which category a claim or researcher's thesis might fall in, there is no substitute for verification. We then have responsibilities (if we are going to purport to be conducting professional research or scientific investigation) to follow protocols, and particularly the recognition of standards of evidence, as established by the professional research community and academia. We also have responsibilities to recognize those standards of evidence if we purport to be advocates of professional research when promoting various investigators and their work as credible. Which brings us to:

I think, therefore I recognize standards of evidence

We're entitled to believe pretty much anything we choose, but if we desire others to share and embrace our beliefs, we have responsibilities to present those people with factual information to sway their perspectives. To expect or demand the agreement of others while providing no credible information, as described above, is unreasonable. The reasonable and intelligent person is not convinced by anecdotes, repetition and volume, but by facts and verifiable evidence.

We have responsibilities to accurately differentiate between beliefs and facts when arguing our points. We are allowed to believe as we choose, as well as disagree with one another and debate with passion, but if we neglect to respect professional standards of evidence, we promote confusion rather than clarification.


I find it rather insulting that hypnosis as a memory retrieval tool even continues to be an issue at this point - and is a glaring example of disregard for the points made in the above paragraphs. Here's the bottom line, guys: If a researcher or organization claims to promote scientific investigation and conducts hypnosis, they are incorrect; the two stances are mutually exclusive of one another. That's not my opinion, but the platform of the current scientific paradigm. I just cite it.

What's more, work conducted by professionally qualified researchers concludes that not only are memory enhancing techniques unreliable, but their use may be detrimental. It has additionally been conclusively demonstrated - repeatedly - that the manners questions are asked greatly alters the responses. See the work, which includes clinical trials and peer review, of Shaw, Loftus, French, Lilienfeld, Morgan, etc., etc., etc. All of this and much more is addressed in my book and references are thoroughly provided.

The cow is long out of the gate on this one. Let's move on and recognize unsubstantiated assertions for what they are.


The big MC. I find the topic of interest and I try to write about it responsibly. I think that can be defined as clarifying my opinions, citing facts as to how I form my opinions and suspicions, and differentiating between those and facts.

Director of Project MKULTRA, Dr. Sidney Gottlieb

It is my opinion that unethical activities conducted by intelligence agencies, such as now declassified documents confirm about the CIA, may have become enmeshed with the UFO subculture and resulted in reports of alleged alien abduction. I form this supposition, pending further information, based on the fact the mind control projects existed, combined with the fact the involved agencies were manipulating the topic and public perception of UFOs during the same era. Given such profiles that can be made of CIA, additional intel agencies, and their activities, I am of the opinion that further research is justified into the possibilities. I suspect some of the targets of behavior modification projects misinterpreted the circumstances as alien abduction, particularly with the encouragement of so-called and often overeager ufologists.

There are a number of additional possible scenarios which could be relevant to the UFO community. I think that angle of research deserves more attention than it typically receives, and I find it interesting. Much more about this is offered in 'The Greys Have Been Framed'.


First of all, I'm not sure anything should be done. I'm a rather big advocate of allowing people to find their own ways and their own solutions. People usually don't want suggestions until they become convinced they need them, so "alien abduction" might not be much different.

That stated, if I were to make recommendations, based on my own observations and in my admittedly professionally unqualified opinion, I'd say the first thing to do would be to encourage treatment for trauma. Alleged abductees, as well as a number of UFO witnesses, describe the circumstances as traumatic. It therefore stands to reason that professional treatment for trauma would be appropriate regardless of the possible origin of the perception.

Next, I'd say that witnesses, as well as investigators and their organizations, should consciously identify the kind of support they are seeking and providing. Emotional support, therapeutic treatments, and objective investigation are different activities, require different areas of expertise, and should not be intermingled haphazardly for many reasons. All too often, fragmented simulations of such activities are provided by groups and individuals who are qualified at none of them, mix them all together without even realizing it, and the quality suffers of both the life of the witness and the investigation.

So-called "UFO investigation" appears to me, based on years of observations and the work I conducted while writing my book, to frequently become some bastardization of mental health therapy, particularly in the alien abduction genre. However, the investigators typically are neither therapists nor any kind of mental health professional. It would therefore be very beneficial to the community and the well-being of the witnesses if all involved made intentional decisions as to what type of support, be it emotional, therapeutic or investigative, was being sought and offered, and conducted themselves accordingly.
Read more »

“I have thought all the known quantities over in the case of these objects and arrive at a not too unreasonable answer. The answer is that these objects are unknown, definitely and positively.”

Julie Beck www.theatlantic.com 2-18-16

So said a U.S. Air Force sergeant in 1953, trying to explain to investigators (and, I suspect, to himself), what he had seen, standing on a roof on an August night, watching three well-lit, color-changing objects fly by. His statement, which can be read on Project Blue Book Archive, a site devoted to supporting “serious UFO research,” gets at a fundamental misunderstanding of the people who believe in UFOs—that they are anti-science.

In a recent paper published in Public Understanding of Science, Greg Eghigian, an associate professor of modern history at Penn State University, traces the history of ufology and its relationship with mainstream science, arguing that the mistrust between the two was not because ufologists were ignorant about science.

Read more »

The obsession in the United States with unidentified flying saucers from the 1940s up until the end of the Cold War may help explain how science communication is tied to current denials and conspiracy theories about climate change and immunizations.

Matthew Swayne Penn State 2-15-16 CC 4.0

Scientists, military officials, and amateur unidentified flying object investigators—often called ufologists—have clashed almost since the start of the modern flying saucer era, which began in 1947 when aviator Kenneth Arnold spotted what he claimed were nine silver flying discs in the Cascade Mountains of Washington.

“From that event, this very quickly explodes and becomes a focus of media attention, but the question for me as a historian is why haven’t historians been more curious about what took place and what has been going on for some time now,” says Greg Eghigian, associate professor of modern history at Penn State and author of a study published in the journal Public Understanding of Science.

“It’s had clear impact on the way people think about science, the way people think about technology, and the way they think about government and authority.”

The UFO phenomenon has ebbed and flowed since the late 1940s, but has recently died down from its height, something Eghigian attributes to the end of the Cold War.

“I think there is evidence that it’s not the same phenomenon that it once was, at least as a mass movement that people are mesmerized by,” he says. “It was Cold War anxieties—but also Cold War enthusiasms and passions—that had a direct impact on this.”

In a sample of 25 newspapers, the number of headlines mentioning UFOs or flying saucers has fallen to less than 20 headlines each year in the post-Cold War era. Prior to the 1990s, there tended to be more than 40 headlines about the phenomena annually.

“The United States is coming out of World War II, so the country is concerned about national security and still has a war-like mentality,” Eghigian says. “It’s a world that is rife with secrecy and preserving secrecy, so this helps inform both how governments and militaries deal with evidence.”

Mainstream scientists were almost immediately dismissive of the UFO movement, and the ufologists’ response to that dismissal, in many ways, mimics current debates on climate change and vaccination.


“One of the things that marks the long history of this movement is the question of mistrust, and I see this as part and parcel of some of the skepticism we see out there today,” Eghigian says. “Although there are some differences, the UFO debate was kind of the granddaddy of them all and could be a model for looking at some of these other controversies.”

Scholars and scientists tend to believe that when lay people disagree with scientific findings, they are either biased or that they are ignorant about science. However, ufology does not easily fit that framework.

“My experience with the UFO phenomena and the history of ufology is that these amateur investigators have not at all been ignorant of science,” Eghigian says. “This goes with other theories that it’s less that people distrust science than that they distrust scientists and scientific institutions—that is the disconnect that needs to be explained.”


In many cases, after being shut out of mainstream scientific research, amateur UFO investigators formed separate groups that emulated scientific method and tried to copy it in their own studies.

“Ufologists didn’t try to take over scientific fields or institutions,” Eghigian says. “What they did was to create parallel institutions and mimic what academics did, create organizations, hold conferences and do research and investigations.”

The over-reliance on the UFO community’s own research, however, only further bolstered academics’ mistrust in the research results of these enthusiasts.

“The study really isn’t meant to weigh in on the question of whether UFOs are possibly extraterrestrial in origin,” Eghigian says. “I think the bigger point is how scientists, officials, and ufologists have attempted to understand each other.”

The American Philosophical Society supported this work.
Read more »

     One thing that strikes me about claims of alien visitation is that so much of the evidence is musty and fusty.

Every day, I get stories and articles from people around the world who aggregate UFO news. But much of it is not news -- it's olds. The folks who think there's good proof that Earth is a stomping ground for extraterrestrials are still hung up on the Roswell incident of 1947 or its British opposite number, the Rendlesham Forest event of 1980. They're still citing the testimony of aging politicians, defense establishment types and Apollo astronauts who "know something."

The few alternatives to this vintage archive are contemporary photos and videos of vague lights in the sky, low-resolution and low-confidence material that isn't likely to sway many scientists. The good stuff seems to be the old stuff.

To better judge if this is really true, I trawled the web for listings of "the best UFO cases." I quickly collected nearly 100 events that were considered worthy, of which 60 were unique, in the sense of not being repeats [...] .
Read more »