A Physicist Explains Why Scientists Won't Discuss UFOs

I just WISH the scientific method were applied to UFOs!
Instead we have people offering a result even BEFORE they do any research.
That is guaranteed to provide false conclusions.

A couple of examples:

Introduction. May thousands of people around the world firmly believe that they have been abducted by alien beings and taken on board spaceships where they have been subjected to painful medical examination.
Method. Given that such accounts are almost certainly untrue, four areas of neuroscience are considered with respect to possible clues that may lead towards a fuller understanding of the alien abduction experience.
(Emphasis added.)

- Holden, Katharine J, and French, Christopher C. (2002). Alien abduction experiences: Some clues from neuropsychology and neuropsychology. University of London, UK.
-

McNally investigated people who had memories that were clearly fake – namely, memories of alien abductions.
Mary Beckman (2003). Memories of Space Alien Abduction. Science Now, 2/17/2003.
-

The most likely explanation for alien abductions is sleep paralysis and hypnopompic hallucinations.
Shermer, Michael (2005). Abducted! Scientific American, February, 2005.

A couple of examples:

- Holden, Katharine J, and French, Christopher C. (2002). Alien abduction experiences: Some clues from neuropsychology and neuropsychology. University of London, UK.
-

McNally investigated people who had memories that were clearly fake – namely, memories of alien abductions.
Mary Beckman (2003). Memories of Space Alien Abduction. Science Now, 2/17/2003.
-

The most likely explanation for alien abductions is sleep paralysis and hypnopompic hallucinations.
Shermer, Michael (2005). Abducted! Scientific American, February, 2005.

Now I am not here to defend abduction stories by any means, but I agree in that these studies you correctly cite are not fully exemplary of the scientific method in their application.

1. They are predictive in nature only, and rather than constitute falsification protocols, only serve as 'promotification' protocols which are a dead end loop of self reinforcement inside the scientific method.

2. The data employed in these studies (I have read two of these) is selective and not vetted by sufficiently representative confidence interval analytics.

3. The hypotheses involved ignore any data to the contrary and have corollary features and surreptitious assumptions which are employed to screen contrary data in advance of any comprehensive field collection.

4. Peer review cannot be tendered because there is no means provided for falsification studies of the data or the constructs therein.

5. These individuals have published in books and editorials, rather than journals - an effort to prejudice the zeitgeist in advance of legitimate use of periodicals, or requests for critical review.

6. The objectivity of the promoters is in high question. Failure of their hypothesis - equals invalidation of their field. This is not a suitable risk/neutrality model for a peer review scenario, unless no other alternative means is available. Yet here, we do have the opportunity to employ dispassionate third parties, yet we do not. Why?

7. The proponents employ one-liners rather than a set of disclosures which then frame and support deductive claims as their outcomes. One-liners with examples, are not science, ...the latter is science.

8. The proponents rely upon the likelihood of a conforming explanation to bolster the conclusion (see Shermer's conclusion). This is a precept which could have been used before the study, and if that still resides as the BEST argument AFTER the study, then of what good was the study?

Were this type of circular club reenforced one liner promotification set of study flaws released by the UFO community, it would be justifiably, and is indeed regularly, crucified by sskepticism. But here, since the persons are blessed in advance ...we pretend that it is science. Wink wink

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
reply to post by 1questioner

 

Let's hope so because for too long this subject has been openly ignored by scientists

My basic understanding is that they wont discuss it because they need the "evidence" right there in front of them, and the fact that thousands have witnessed UFOs (some at close proximity) doesn't even constitute as "evidence". To me, that is utterly stupid and with the law of averages, it's a pretty safe bet that they exist (as in something that isn't mundane and explainable).

I'm sure some scientists won't accept UFOs until one lands and an alien emerges and sh*ts on their lab desk, but to ignore the subject and what is currently known is ignorant.

All reasonable and logical...
I think 'UFO' and 'Extraterrestrial' become thought of as one in the same by the masses, thus the disparity of looking into and studying the sources of the objects. Theres a lot of difference between the two as the the title suggests ...ie Unidentified.... which is not necessarily other worldly.

On an open thought as well, I wonder how many mainstream scientists have been told to deliberately ignore the phenomenon by TPTB? I believe this to be a real scenario.

edit on 21-7-2013 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by Plotus

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
reply to post by 1questioner

 

Let's hope so because for too long this subject has been openly ignored by scientists

My basic understanding is that they wont discuss it because they need the "evidence" right there in front of them, and the fact that thousands have witnessed UFOs (some at close proximity) doesn't even constitute as "evidence". To me, that is utterly stupid and with the law of averages, it's a pretty safe bet that they exist (as in something that isn't mundane and explainable).

I'm sure some scientists won't accept UFOs until one lands and an alien emerges and sh*ts on their lab desk, but to ignore the subject and what is currently known is ignorant.
**********************************************
All reasonable and logical...
I think 'UFO' and 'Extraterrestrial' become thought of as one in the same by the masses, thus the disparity of looking into and studying the sources of the objects. Theres a lot of difference between the two as the the title suggests ...ie Unidentified.... which is not necessarily other worldly.

edit on 23-7-2013 by Plotus because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by UncleVinnys
I just WISH the scientific method were applied to UFOs!
Instead we have people offering a result even BEFORE they do any research.
That is guaranteed to provide false conclusions.

A couple of examples:

Introduction. May thousands of people around the world firmly believe that they have been abducted by alien beings and taken on board spaceships where they have been subjected to painful medical examination.
Method. Given that such accounts are almost certainly untrue, four areas of neuroscience are considered with respect to possible clues that may lead towards a fuller understanding of the alien abduction experience.
(Emphasis added.)

- Holden, Katharine J, and French, Christopher C. (2002). Alien abduction experiences: Some clues from neuropsychology and neuropsychology. University of London, UK.
-

McNally investigated people who had memories that were clearly fake – namely, memories of alien abductions.
Mary Beckman (2003). Memories of Space Alien Abduction. Science Now, 2/17/2003.
-

The most likely explanation for alien abductions is sleep paralysis and hypnopompic hallucinations.
Shermer, Michael (2005). Abducted! Scientific American, February, 2005.

I agree with you on using the scientific method. Any serious scientist/researcher probably does employ stricter research/investigative methods than your average joe. Regardless, until they're published/taken seriously, we'll never truly know how many scientists types have thoroughly done this type of research and their methods. It is a shame, really. I bet many are worried that they'll be labeled as a loon, etc., and their reputations and jobs will be on the line. I mean, look what happens just on ATS. People's posts get ripped to shreds by members (albeit, seems to be the same members, over and over again) and then they rarely post again. I used to get irritated by these hard core know-it-alls, but not anymore.

I am pretty convinced that there is "something" out there. Now whether that "something" is related to technology our military types is not interested in sharing/disclosing, or it is something else. I know what I saw, what made me delve into this subject, and it wasn't a weather balloon, a lantern, a candle, or any of that nonsense. Prior to this incident, I didn't give two poops about any thing related to this subject, never even thought about it!

I have never seen anything like it before or since. I was so awe struck I didn't even think to get my phone to take a photo (I was driving home from work and this sighting took place on the expressway, several others also seen it and it was reported by someone). I bet a lot of great sightings are missed this way, I mean I am a photographer and I didn't think to take a photo? Makes no sense, right? I was completely and totally dumbfounded, one of the only times in my I ever felt like that.

Originally posted by IamAbeliever

2. When, and if, we finally do figure out the science beyond their propulsion systems and their impossible
maneuvers, it will blow so many of our theories out of the water, that many of these scientists will be out of work.

so you think we would need less scientist when we discover that our theories are wrong?

Science discover more and more about how the universe work all the time. thats what its all about. if we would somehow find out that the laws of newton has som mayor flaws to them, then that would be HUGE news, and scientist would have more to do then they ever had. They would NOT lose their job because of it

I think the problem a lot of the time is that you get herded whether you like it or not into the 'believers' or 'non-believers' before you are even able to state that you are just investigating.

On the one hand I believe it's completely plausible that hundreds of reported sightings involving pilots and so on could be real, but on the other hand, I believe that if it happened as regularly as we are led to believe by some 'alternative' sources, I think we would have had some clearer video footage by now than just some random dots in the sky.

Of course, no one believes anything out of the ordinary anymore anyway I guess because of how easy CGI graphics are now.

Originally posted by IamAbeliever
I believe they won't discuss it for two reasons:

1. The technology that "the others" have is way beyond the comprehension of many scientists.

2. When, and if, we finally do figure out the science beyond their propulsion systems and their impossible
maneuvers, it will blow so many of our theories out of the water, that many of these scientists will be out of work.

You are absolutely right, UFOs and their technology will destroy all accepted laws and theories, ha!

Originally posted by jheated5
Even if UFO's "alien spacecraft" exist, who is going to give scientists the authority to study them and make that information public? Sure you can come up with all the hypothesis's you want but until you actually physically study one yourself, you're just taking guesses.

To be honest, I don't think anyone can question the idea of alien spaceship existing. I mean we would have to be the most advanced life in the universe, the only species capable of reaching space for there not to be spacecraft out there. In my mind alien spacecrafts must exist, it is whether they visit Earth which is the real question.

Originally posted by katyehh

Originally posted by IamAbeliever
I believe they won't discuss it for two reasons:

1. The technology that "the others" have is way beyond the comprehension of many scientists.

2. When, and if, we finally do figure out the science beyond their propulsion systems and their impossible
maneuvers, it will blow so many of our theories out of the water, that many of these scientists will be out of work.

You are absolutely right, UFOs and their technology will destroy all accepted laws and theories, ha!

So what? That would actually be a very happy thing for most theorists and experimentalists.
It would give them lots and lots of work, and a whole new science would gain billions if not trillions in funding.

You guys are, however, missing a step: show us these "others".

You'ld think if people were getting abducted and there was nothing they could do to prevent it from happening, and these abduction events were repeat experiences, abductees would make good trap bait.
We've yet to see any abduction events confirm ... well, confirm on anything the claimants claim is occurring.

It was encouraging to see this. Early on, due to growing up on hard-core sci-fi and a STRONG paranormal experience at a young age, I became interested in UFO's and ETs in general. It has been disheartening over the years to watch those of us who know them to be real laughed at and disrespected because of our knowledge. Maybe in twenty or thirty years we will be studying them openly. Hell, maybe we will have official and open contact! We can keep our hopes up right?

reply to post by Ectoplasm8


This shows just how little you know about the UFO events. Do some research before you spout off again, ok?

reply to post by bjarneorn


Actually, these objects have been both shot down, captured on radar, photographed and touched. We have found bodies, but they kept vanishing to government agencies. So now, when one is found, it is closely guarded. There is a LOT of physical evidence.

While you seem more logical than some, your comments show just how little you actually know of the phenomina.

Originally posted by Jaellma
reply to post by ATSZOMBIE

 

The following link was a thread attributed to the psychology behind alien abduction. A lot of psychologists like to pigeonhole alien encounters as "mind tricks" as opposed to real physical or metaphysical encounters.

The great Dr. Mack was one of the few who pioneered a different thought process in identifying and categorizing alien abduction/encounters as actual real episodes, much to the chagrin of his Harvard educated colleagues.

Alien Abductions: The Real Deal?

Here's also a rare video of the incomparable Dr. Jacques Valee, Dr. John Mack, Terrence Mckenna and Bud Hopkins on the topic of the alien abduction phenomena.

To anyone interested in this subject the video link above is a must see. It takes about 1.4 hours to watch but you
will find the time goes quickly. Here you well see how some of our best minds, including a psychiatrist and a
compute scientist view our hypothetical/real alien/UFOs.

Originally posted by PunkRockRacoon
reply to post by Ectoplasm8

 

This shows just how little you know about the UFO events. Do some research before you spout off again, ok?

Okay, show me this undeniable tangible evidence. I'll be waiting. Just as the scientific community has for 65+ years. Spout forth...

Originally posted by PunkRockRacoon
reply to post by bjarneorn

 

Actually, these objects have been both shot down, captured on radar, photographed and touched. We have found bodies, but they kept vanishing to government agencies. So now, when one is found, it is closely guarded. There is a LOT of physical evidence.

While you seem more logical than some, your comments show just how little you actually know of the phenomina.

Ahhh... So you just can't show it because it's hidden by the "government agencies". But it's there right. You just have to believeeeeee.....

Try a less defensive, angry approach to your posts. You might be surprised how much more serious people will take you.

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
reply to post by 1questioner

 

My basic understanding is that they wont discuss it because they need the "evidence" right there in front of them, and the fact that thousands have witnessed UFOs (some at close proximity) doesn't even constitute as "evidence". To me, that is utterly stupid and with the law of averages, it's a pretty safe bet that they exist (as in something that isn't mundane and explainable).

I find that statement interesting since scientist are used to convict many non-law abiding persons to prison based on circumstantial evidence. Moreover, I would think that many have a since of arrogance, admitting to such anomalies could damage their ego as well as their philosophy. There is always a method to the madness - in science their is an answer to everything, right?

reply to post by mcsandy

My basic understanding is that they wont discuss it because they need the "evidence" right there in front of them, and the fact that thousands have witnessed UFOs (some at close proximity) doesn't even constitute as "evidence". To me, that is utterly stupid and with the law of averages, it's a pretty safe bet that they exist (as in something that isn't mundane and explainable).

Its evidence that people have seen something and interpreted it as something. its not a safe bet by any stretch. Show the math please.

Its evidence that people have seen something and interpreted it as something. its not a safe bet by any stretch. Show the math please.

reply to post by ZetaRediculian

How very, very true. A tremendous amount of unexplained UFO/Alien phenomena. Always good to hypothesize on it and venture opinions - but science can not be based upon opinions. And if you hypothesize that there must be other worlds with life on them because of the vastness of the universe many will agree including some scientists and we know there are scientists who have so hypothesized. But there is still not enough verifiable and consistent data of events to prove anything. So while I am always fascinated by those scientists such as Jacques Vallee who do delve into the phenomena and even write books on the subject, I still see why most scientists and physicists stay away from it - the phenomena still remains beyond the current limits of science as we use it. And I hypothesize this is the way those enigmatic aliens want it to be - Man is still not ready for the advanced science they possess.

French scientist Charles Richet (1850-1935), wrote in his "Traite de Metapsychique", in 1922, "Do we have any right to claim, just because of our limited senses and our mistaken intelligence, that man is the only intelligent being in this immense cosmos?...That other intellectual forces, different from us, exist is not only possible but extremely probable. It is even certain...It is absurd to claim that we are the only intelligence in nature. The existence of these beings has not yet been proven, but the probability of their existence is evident."

"It is my thesis that flying saucers are real and that they are space ships from another solar system.There is no doubt in my mind that these objects are interplanetary craft of some sort. I and my colleagues are confident that they do not originate in our solar system."

-Dr. Herman Oberth (The father of modern rocketry)

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
reply to post by TheEthicalSkeptic

 

I believe you are correct, however, there is definitely a level of ignorance around anything related to psychology, perception, biochemistry, neurology, etc...when discussing this phenomenon. This in itself makes this topic impossible to talk about rationally. Understanding the pitfalls and weaknesses of psychology help with understanding the phenomenon. Not understanding how things are perceived and interpreted makes for good alien stories.

edit on 23-7-2013 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)

There is really nothing in the psychological field as a discipline that qualifies it as something that could be applied to every UFO case study. You want to bring in a shrink and have a look at Barney Hill well fine. But any number of air force pilots over the years......psychology is going to be about useless in those cases.

Psychology thinks it can show up on any occasion. It doesn't really want to lend so much anymore as it has come to love its position as interpreter of all things.