Star Trek, Star Wars and UFOlogy

With it being pretty nasty outside north of the 45th parallel in the northern hemisphere right now - and being stuck inside due to The Vid - I found myself binge watching season 1 of Star Trek: Discovery.
I’m a lifelong Trek fan. I’ve seen every episode of every series at least once with TNG being my all-time fave.

While watching Discovery (worth watching if you haven’t) I thought to myself... do we get a “Star Trek” future or a “Star Wars” future? Are we going to turn into the United Federation of Planets or the Rebels vs. The Empire?

And to the point of this thread, do Star Trek or Star Wars influence general engagement with UFOlogy or UAP sightings over time?

Perhaps.

The crux of my thinking is that Star Wars won out in the battle with Trek for sci-fi franchise supremacy. So much so that Disney poured billions of dollars into the movies and an entire land at Disneyland. Shelves are lined with Star Wars gear for kids at stores. This is the future that’s being pushed on us.

However, flash back to the 80’s and 90’s and Trek - be it TNG or DS9 - were hugely popular shows on TV. TNG goes down as one of the greatest TV shows of all time. Original Trek, too. Here’s the Wiki link for the timeline of Trek series:

en.m.wikipedia.org...

So how did shows that captivated millions around the world die off in favor of a warring, violent, dystopian future in Star Wars?

Simpleton answer is that Trek didn’t sell anymore. Ok... but why? Why the sea change? Or maybe Trek just didn’t “evolve” and got tired.. also a possibility. But Star Wars was coming off of years of really really crappy movies, no TV series and hugely declining relevance with fan’s stuck watching the original trilogy for 30 years when we got the “reboot”. And it won - and it also pulled Trek in a more action-packed, violent direction than more-less all series that predated the new films and now Discovery and Picard (Picard is excellent, BTW).

Star Trek more less faded off in the very early 2000s. This is the same time we had Gary McKinnon, Greer’s press club event, Phoenix Lights in the 90s, Lazar, Phil Schneider and numerous other UFOlogy legends coming forward throughout the 90s and the sharing of information increasing dramatically due to the Internet. We also got 9/11 and the massive, massive expansion of the surveillance state - right as Trek was fading away and completely gone from TV in terms of new shows by ~2005.

As we removed the somewhat relatable, largely peaceful and “exploring” view of the future from TV sets via Star Trek and thus had little to no highly thought out sci FI on TV - UFOlogy seemed to go by the wayside as well. We’re left with some big names and not a lot of new information until TTSA brought this all back to the mainstream (love or hate TSA, interest broadly in UFOlogy is good if you like the subject - more eyeballs the better).

Taken together, it makes me consider that the decline in UFOlogy could be somewhat related to the decline in Trek. Why? Trek was more “realistic” sci FI (headquarters in San Fran, “USS” on ships) whereas Star Wars is more of a story/entertainment. When you pair that with Disney’s massive investment in the Star Wars franchise and their history of helping produce and distribute information on behalf of the government, I find it a worthwhile thought exercise to consider the impact that has on UFOlogy, the broader public’s perception of space/UAPs/ETs and their engagement with UFOlogy and how seriously we take the notion of going to space/space exploration collectively.

Maybe the proof of concept here will be new Trek series (or multiple series) that will be coming to mainstream TV again in the near future (or at least that are slated to) and seeing a subsequent uptick in UFO interest.

What say y’all? Any correlation between a decline in Trek and a drop off in new evidence on the UFOlogy front?

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

I would say our future is going to be much more similar to the expanse (books are way better than show). As far as them having an effect on ufology, I'm not sure there is a correlation there.

Never been a huge fan of Trekky TV shows, LOVED the new movies though. But after watching The Expanse I doubt I'll ever Trek again. The Expanse is what I've always wanted Trek to be.

Star wars is on another level imo, although I'm from the original SW era. It's come a long way with a lot of spin offs, would be pretty cool if I was still a kid I reckon.

Cool thread 👍🏼

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

Star Wars was about a hero, every kid wanted to be a Jedi or Han Solo so they could date a cute alien princess and fly the Millennium falcon.

Star Trek was never like that, yes kid's used to want to be Kirk at one time but when BSG came out a little over a decade after Star Trek it beat Star Trek into the ground until the next generation was created which then won many former Trek fan's back to the franchise, Battlestar Galactica though was also a bit like Star Trek, it was team work, yes there were heroic characters but nothing on a par with Star Wars.

The Idea that an ordinary farm boy could save the Galaxy was a superman moment that won over so many fan's and even the classic Flash Gordon could not really beat it though you know Star Wars owes a lot to that much older franchise.

For me despite Disney mauling it under Kathleen Kennedy's woeful and disastrous control Star Wars still has the edge.

Discovery is not REALLY Star Trek, it is such a radical reimagining of the Star Trek universe it has to be set in an alternative time line BUT once you get over the hallucinogenic space ship and other serious crap fest problems of the series it is in it's own right actually good science fiction, albeit only because they threw lots of money at it.

I still can't forgive what they did to the Klingon's though.

But I find myself still waiting for each new episode, not perhaps because it is so good because it is actually middling at best but because there is frankly nothing else on TV I want to watch except the likes of the Mandalorian which is as close to true Star Wars as you can get even though they are having to stick to the new timeline, probably against the shows director and writers own wishes.

Though you know speaking of classic science fiction there are a number of possible new story's in the work's.

There is of course the DUNE remake, I think the source material was not that good on that one but of course Herbert fan's would lynch me for that then there is a rumoured remake of Flash Gordon or a Sequel to the 1980's movie (actually a vastly under rated costume science fiction jaunt if there ever was one) and there are still rumours that space 1999 will eventually get a remake as something called space 2099.

For me though the Mandalorian is the bright spot in an overcast sky of poor science fiction offerings and perhaps the best of the decade, certainly far superior despite being a show and not a movie to the likes of the Disney sequel trilogy which was awful AND there are rumours of more shows set in the star wars universe if it's success keeps up.

The link between science fiction and phenomena like UFO is a known one, it is actually a very strong one but does that invalidate real UFO phenomena, no I personally don't think it does.

It may even affect how society interprets unexplained phenomena, in the past a UFO may have been interpreted as a sign, an angelic chariot or even a God, then they became thought of as Airships and finally as alien visitors from some other world.

(Actually for my money the best science fiction series of the 1980's was V the mini series - the follow up was a vast disappointment and an Outsider for a cult science fiction movies not the best that would have to go to blade runner was a movie called John Carpenters THEY LIVE which could really do with being remade today though the original actors were brilliant and would be very hard to equal).

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

Neither.

We are well on our way to a Battlestar Galactica future.

When TNG, DS9, Voyager series etc were ongoing, these series were not aired where i lived. I did not know much of Star Trek except for the movies at that time. But a couple of years ago i started watching the original series and really loved it and since then i have watched TNG and currently watching season 4 of Voyager for the first time of my life.
What i loved about the original series was that although there was no CGI, you were drawn in by the story, the characters and their acting. It made you think and appreciate the dilemnas they were facing and awed how they got themselves out of trouble by using their wits and humanity. I also loved the fact that contrary to the newer series like discovery and picard, each episode would start with a new plotline and got wrapped up by the end of that episode. The stories, the aliens, the encounters, the issues were diverse and the writers did a good job getting into as much detail as was necessary.
Stars Wars on the other hand was a trilogy at the beginning revolving more or less around the same plotline and had only a few main characters and most of the aliens were just there to illustrate diversity.
To me Star Trek is miles ahead of Star Wars and more believable and more likely to be how our future will unfold.
While watching The Mandalorian now, it reminded me how useles soldiers the storm troopers are but do notice how kids laugh at their clumsiness.
But i do understand the appeal that Star Wars has as they had great marketing and merchandising that had a lasting impression on kids. (Think about all the Lego toys licenced by Star Wars)
The comedic angle as well brought more smiles to those kids and definitely more light entertainment.
When humans will start exploring space with light speed, they will surely be more inspired by Star Trek as diplomacy and doing the right thing will be of upmost importance. We don't know what we will come across out there but as long as the prime directive can be unquestionably upheld and shields are holding everything should be fine.

originally posted by: UnManifested
When TNG, DS9, Voyager series etc were ongoing, these series were not aired where i lived. I did not know much of Star Trek except for the movies at that time. But a couple of years ago i started watching the original series and really loved it and since then i have watched TNG and currently watching season 4 of Voyager for the first time of my life.
What i loved about the original series was that although there was no CGI, you were drawn in by the story, the characters and their acting. It made you think and appreciate the dilemnas they were facing and awed how they got themselves out of trouble by using their wits and humanity. I also loved the fact that contrary to the newer series like discovery and picard, each episode would start with a new plotline and got wrapped up by the end of that episode. The stories, the aliens, the encounters, the issues were diverse and the writers did a good job getting into as much detail as was necessary.
Stars Wars on the other hand was a trilogy at the beginning revolving more or less around the same plotline and had only a few main characters and most of the aliens were just there to illustrate diversity.
To me Star Trek is miles ahead of Star Wars and more believable and more likely to be how our future will unfold.
While watching The Mandalorian now, it reminded me how useles soldiers the storm troopers are but do notice how kids laugh at their clumsiness.
But i do understand the appeal that Star Wars has as they had great marketing and merchandising that had a lasting impression on kids. (Think about all the Lego toys licenced by Star Wars)
The comedic angle as well brought more smiles to those kids and definitely more light entertainment.
When humans will start exploring space with light speed, they will surely be more inspired by Star Trek as diplomacy and doing the right thing will be of upmost importance. We don't know what we will come across out there but as long as the prime directive can be unquestionably upheld and shields are holding everything should be fine.

Interesting perspective and I’m glad you’re enjoying the various Trek series!

My only contrary statement here is I’m not “sure” we’ll favor diplomacy.

I hope so, to be clear, but current state of affairs and most of human history says we’re a warring, conquering, resource-motivated and aggressive species.

My thought is that, do to what I wrote above, we’ll probably never get to the stars as our species won’t make it - we’ll kill each other off or destroy our planet before that happens if we stay on this course.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Thanks for the commentary here, Lab.

I agree that the new Star Trek series aren’t really “Star Trek” in the same way that TNG, DS9, etc. were. Very different vibe but I still like them for the entertainment - and they are pretty well done.

My thought as it pertains to UFOlogy though isn’t so much about validity but rather general interest or acceptance of the subject. There will always be people who say it’s real and those who won’t. My thought is that pumping the TV full of a sci-fi future that’s highly unified and teeming with life is a very different narrative than Star Wars and one that seems less fanciful to an extent. Or said differently if we think about society in the 80s and really through the 90s there was a fair amount of unity in America and the internet was a very exciting new thing. When all of that gets put together suddenly Trek seems like a bit of a natural evolution.

Plus, if the ETs are watching our shows and see Trek they’d probably be a lot more interested in talking to us than if they only watched Star Wars 🙂

I agree that the new Star Trek series aren’t really “Star Trek” in the same way that TNG, DS9, etc. were. Very different vibe but I still like them for the entertainment - and they are pretty well done.

STD is absolute garbage written by people who hate everything Star Trek is and an embaressment to the franchise.

Anyway, IMO Star Trek has always been the more "realistic" outlook on the future simply because the scale of Star Wars is literally an entire galaxy with more humans than one can count. Star Trek one can imagine in hundreds of years while Star Wars is thousands of years away - yes even when the apparent technology isnt so advanced as Star Trek if you compare ship to ship. I mean what we have today was magic like 50 years ago.

But before that we'll basicly have subs in space shooting nuclear space torpedoes at each other anyway.

Star Wars was an unexpected movie hit with all the elements, space and the battle of good versus evil. If Star Trek was introduced as a big budget blockbuster movie instead of a TV show, things might be different.

I honestly prefer Star Trek's approach over Star Wars to all of this. SW is a good outer space soap opera, Trek is more cerebral

Discovery's fine, the whining is ridiculous at best. As far as I'm concerned, TOS era Kirk-Trek is junk acting & writing with far too much prostrating at the feet of it. It sucked, people, and Shatner never really learned to act any better.

As to Discovery, it's the third season, it finally grew it's beard after all the director and writer infighting was solved (i.e via quits or firings) So we do have a supremely #ty first and second season because Too Many Cooks Who Couldn't Get Along In The Kitchen. Mind you, #ty first & second seasons are par for the course -- TNG's first season was garbage, Season Two needed Pulaski to stay afloat (bad dice roll, shoulda kept McFadden, IMO) Also, might I add everything from Code of Honor to Up The Long Ladder (both TNG) to Threshold (VOY) to Space Jesus (entire 7th/final season of DS9) as examples of plotlines that were more like "potlines" than believable Trek.


As to which future the OP asked about, who knows. A few years ago, a Trek future looked the likely route. Now Firefly might have a chance to prove itself as a possible future timeline. Or Battelstar, or Star Wars, who knows.

So, when pondering the future and how things will look in 200 years, it might be easiest to take out the space question. Chances are almost 100% that we won't be outside of our own solar system anyhow, so outside of mabe a martian colony and some space stations scattered around, we will still be dealing with E1 as the only planet we got.

Also keep in mind globally there will be places like Star Trek with great technological advancements, no worries about food and such...and other areas of the globe that is closer to Mad Max

So....cyberpunk basically. corpo heavy....Aliens franchise but without the aliens or interplanetary stuff (change different planets to perhaps different moons around various planets and maybe)

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser
So how did shows that captivated millions around the world die off in favor of a warring, violent, dystopian future in Star Wars?

Simpleton answer is that Trek didn’t sell anymore. Ok... but why?

I don't have all the answers, but I can tell you one thing I learned from watching the "extras" on the star trek discs. In the star trek future, people got along and it was somewhat of a utopian future, which might be a nice future for us to have, but the writers said it's an absolute nightmare for writing entertainment. Writers need conflict to make the media entertaining, not harmony. You fall asleep while everyone is sitting around the campfire singing kumbaya, which doesn't make for good movie sales, but you're sitting at the edge of your seat while battles are going on, which does make for good movie sales. So maybe the utopian future, while nice, could be a little too boring for engaging entertainment.

And as someone already inferred, to the extent that Star Trek has deviated from the utopian future and added more conflict into a more dystopian future to make Star Trek more exciting, they have deviated from Roddenberry's vision (he was the "creator" of Star Trek.

What say y’all? Any correlation between a decline in Trek and a drop off in new evidence on the UFOlogy front?

The only comment I can make on that is some people have noticed that when blockbuster movies about aliens came out, they observed a corresponding increase in UFO sightings. I never saw anyone publish a correlation like that about TV series but I didn't really search for it either.

originally posted by: FauxMulder
a reply to: EnigmaChaser

I would say our future is going to be much more similar to the expanse (books are way better than show). As far as them having an effect on ufology, I'm not sure there is a correlation there.

I hope Earth and Mars don't go to war, but I agree there was a plausibility to the writing in that series, for how our future might evolve. The science fiction was also closer to today's real science than the more futuristic Star Trek and Star Wars with their faster-than-light travel which may or may not ever be possible.

It was rumoured that Gene Rodenberry did actually attend channelling sessions where "The Nine" were contacted. The group that some aspects of Ufology have spoken about...some of "The Nine" did bleed into different forms of Star Trek too.

Star Trek itself is quite interesting if you peel back a few layers and one has to remember the time in which both Star Wars and Star Trek were created, especially Trek; especially around the time of the Cold War etc.

This theme did seem to be continued onwards even with TNG; especially the Borg. A literal collective is deemed to be a "bad thing" and will destroy not only the Enterprise but earth and humanity itself! Viewed through that lens you could say that TNG has an almost individualism approach to things in a weird utopian future which I find interesting to dissect and think about.

Its also interesting to see "technology" from the Trek that is now more advanced than it was in the TV shows; Mobile phones, touch screens etc. As sad as I am that we don't have interstellar travel - I am pretty glad we aren't all walking around wearing Jumpsuit pyjamas!

You could also argue that there are quite a lot of religious tropes and themes throughout Star Wars too. The good vs the bad, Light Vs Dark, Messianic figures who have powers and of course the "Jedi/Sith" which are essentially warring religious factions when you boil it down.

I also found it quite funny in one of the most recent Star Wars films - I cant recall the title because they were all awful - where Luke "Remote Views" across the galaxy lol.

Trivia slightly related to the OP.

I remember reading that one of the Star Trek story line writers (can't recall which series) often came up with ideas from dreams they had that they believed were projected into their mind.

Trivia not even slightly related to the OP.

I live round the corner from Patrick Stewart.

The Physics of Star Trek was originally published in 1994/95


Direct Link to PDF book tafoaj2btk.pdcdn1.top...

From Stephen Hawking’s Forward:

.....”Nevertheless, today’s science fiction is often tomorrow’s science fact. The physics that underlies Star Trek is surely worth investigating. To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.”......


Below is what I believe is a fundamental necessity for space travel to be feasible.....and that is .... “Gravity!”

Where are we with that, here in 2020?



Some would say....well you can simulate gravity by rotating using centripetal and or centrifugal forces etc. (In the context of a rotating space station it is the normal force provided by the spacecraft's hull that acts as centripetal force. Thus, the "gravity" force felt by an object the centrifugal force perceived in the rotating frame of reference as pointing "downwards" towards the hull.) Somewhere, which escapes me now, is a study as to why, even artificial gravity through rotating motion, is not good in the long run for the human body physiology.

Think of this.... if gravity was achievable by rotation.... would not the ISS be rotating... would not the astronauts in the ISS be standing, walking, nothing floating, be evident?

Where is the invention for a Gravity Field Generator? (hypothetical)

Imagine, now we are expected to travel to mars for months in a tube with no gravity, jammed packed (much like shown in the ISS now) with everybody’s pet project to test now for long term travel.

I also highly doubt that all the electronics in a environment like that, will be EMF shielded. Most all electronics put out some measure of EMF from manufacturers. A laptop here, a science project there, etc..... I believe EMF, even in small quantities...is additive. This cannot be good in tight environments.

But back to Gravity..... we need it, if we are to make fantasy in space as shown in movies, books, etc..... a reality!

Listen Up! NASA, Elon, Jeff, Robert.....GET THAT DAMN GRAVITY INVENTED!!!

Or get the knowledge from EBE’s... whatever..

Otherwise you are wasting time and money...... and fooling yourselves and the general public.....Your long termed manned ventures into space are doomed to fail.


Of course, Gravity is on the list of many problems to overcome....

IMO

Btw... Magnetic (simulated Gravity) boots or Velcro (simulated Gravity) boots won’t be a solution.... plus you’ll have that noisy clanking or ripping sound to drive you even more crazier

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

For me the subject is based on very real encounters, witness experiences and even historical account's.

UFO is a modern terminology but a very ancient subject, once they were seen as angel's, omen's and other supernatural forces but these days we tend to assume technological though some do still hold that some phenomena in our sky's may very well have a spiritual or other dimensional element to it.

I have seen at least one (Disc or Spherical I could not say it was highly reflective, extremely fast and making no noise as it flew against high wind's dipping in and out of the cloud layer) that I know of, more if you take into account childhood experience but of course how reliable are childhood memories, but there was some debate that since some of these objects can apparently change shape or rather what they seem to be from the ground looking up that perhaps many of those airplanes we see flying over could even be disguised UFO's.

Historic account's range from possible cave paintings of objects we would call flying saucers and aliens to classical period account's such as Alexander's flying shields (Disc shaped objects) right up to modern witness account's from very reputable people, we could say that the modern UFO witness period actually began back in the 1800's with such event's as the Air-Ship flap's (We would call them cigar shaped craft in today's terminology) and the famous Aurora incident in 1897 which once again fit the description of a small cigar shaped object.

Then in slightly more middle times back in 1561 we had the famous battle in the sky over the German city of Nuremburg, strange that the NAZI's were supposedly also reverse engineering something that they had come into possession of possibly the Bell - Die Glock -- possibly the kecksburg UFO (I don't believe it time travelled but it did closely match the description of some of the objects seen fighting over Nuremburg in 1561 and of course the NAZI's built a huge stadia there for there parades which gave them ample room for the Ahnenerb to manage and hide any excavation on a huge scale), I do not believe it was related to a supposed UFO crash in 1936 however as I think that is most probably just a story made up by a German Author but then again what if they had two or more objects, at there contemporary level of science and technology however I seriously doubt they could have reverse engineered much from such alien technology be it actually alien or just very ancient.

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser
What say y’all? Any correlation between a decline in Trek and a drop off in new evidence on the UFOlogy front?

I don't think so.

First of all, UFOlogy appears to be on a global decline, while most people today don't even know what Star Trek is or, if they know, don't watch it (that's my case, I was never a fan of Star Trek's original series and have ignored all the new ones) or couldn't care less about it.

To me, UFOlogy's decline is connected to the "my opinion is the only one that counts" that many people appear to have today, as they are used to get "likes" (or stars and flags), and having only positive feedback to their opinions (they can remove what they do not like) makes them think too much of themselves.
UFOlogy suffered from this because it seriously needs (and has always needed) to be a group effort to find out what is happening, not each one trying to prove their theory/idea over other people's theories/idea.

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
I also highly doubt that all the electronics in a environment like that, will be EMF shielded.

Electronics created specifically for space missions are already "radiation hardened", so EMF is not much of a problem.
Using a common laptop in space could get it fried, so they cannot be used on mission critical work.