Lord Martin Rees: Aliens Fascinate Everyone, But Only Kooks See UFOs

While Rees said he hopes real extraterrestrials will be detected within the next 40 years, he's completely and "utterly unconvinced" that any ETs have been visiting Earth.

"I think most astronomers would dismiss these," Rees said. "I dismiss them because if aliens had made the great effort to traverse interstellar distances to come here, they wouldn't just meet a few well-known cranks, make a few circles in corn fields and go away again."

SMH


Here is what James McGaha, UFO debunker, had to say.

Another astronomer, James McGaha, said he agrees with Rees' contention that UFO reports should be dismissed.

"I totally agree with that. Rees is making what I call an elegant argument," McGaha, a retired Air Force pilot and director of the Grasslands Observatory in Tucson, Ariz., told HuffPost.

McGaha gives no credence to any of the tens of thousands of UFO sightings or encounters that reliable people have reported.

"I don't think there's a single observation or report that I'm aware of that indicates an alien spacecraft -- not one," he said. "And I've looked at all of the important cases.

Really?

But in any case, I can' totally disregard what these debunkers are saying. It's one thing to say ETs are not visiting earth but at the same time, none of us have any proof aliens are actually visiting earth. We may have evidence, however tainted or covered up it is but proof would actually mean forcing the government to admit it has happened.

We all know that is not going to happen any time soon.

So, until the government gives in, we have to live with debunkers claiming aliens are not here.

The question I have for these men are "if the crafts flying in the skies we see are not alien technology, by nature, then what are they? If they are ALL man made, where is the PROOF these crafts exist and where can we find them and examine them?

Until someone, anyone, can clearly and intelligently answer these questions, the notion that these extraordinary moving aerial vehicles are non-human design will always persist.

So help us out Rees and McGaha.

Aliens fascinate everyone, but only kooks see UFOs

Color me a kook then. I saw one in 1998 here in Pennsylvania. Perhaps they are just jealous that they haven't. They make some reasonable remarks, but they I believe are talking from a common sense view point. To have seen a ufo, challenged my common sense reasoning.

Exactly the attitude I would expect from astronomers , they're scientists and anyone who doesn't see the Universe as they do are wrong .... Typical arrogant attitude from the all knowing .

The law of non intervention.
5 words to beat the pics with ehem, great poses. We catch and release fish and these guys expect the UFO to land and have a chat about Ahmadinejad ?

Unless we open our eyes about what races means, the intervention law still rule.
The need for NWO is clear.

reply to post by gortex
I guess I am more concerned that their influential standing in society may cloud the good judgement of people who are really trying to understand what is out there.

Sure, common sense eventually prevails but I believe it is disingenuous and irresponsible for them to take such a biased stance without absolute proof.

I wouldn't call those who have seen UFOs and aliens to be kooks. However, other than that, I agree with them. Has it occurred to any of you that perhaps they have been made privy to information that what people assume are UFOs are actually man made?

reply to post by Jaellma

Sure, common sense eventually prevails but I believe it is disingenuous and irresponsible for them to take such a biased stance without absolute proof.

I totally agree ,but that attitude is endemic in the sciences in my view .
Not all but most of the scientists I know of with a public profile have an elitist "believe what I say because I'm cleverer than you" attitude and look down on people who believe stuff they don't believe in may be possible , they seem to only see things from the confines of their particular discipline and discount what they don't know .

I understand being a skeptic and all, but just because certain segments of the population have never seen one, does not mean other people haven't seen them, people like me.
It is, or is it not that he is partially or completely right, I am in fact a kook and I have seen a UFO (1989).

I can find the same UFO on the internet, and when I see it, I at least know that the pic may be legit, if not, i know that type of UFO exists.

Sometimes I wish they would just show up already and show these jerks that we are not kooks, but of course at the same time I wish god would show up to prove that the religious folks are not delusional.
At least aliens are plausible.
Ridiculous to say that all UFO reports should be dismissed, like claims that the Earth is round should be dismissed back when you could be burned at the stake (or something like that) is just plain ridiculous. I don't believe it, so lets not even bother to investigate.
Kooks, Kooks I tell ya'.

Take a second and click this, this is the exact UFO I have seen in 1989.
UFO

Originally posted by Rubicant13
Color me a kook then. I saw one in 1998 here in Pennsylvania.

Sylvania, DuPont.....you got lots of DOD Research places in PA. An old coal mine would make a nice launch facility.

I believe most everyone who says they saw a UFO actually saw a UFO. Your integrity is not at question with me. I believe you.

It's just that when you take a giant leap and claim, "They are aliens from another planet." that I have to say: Wait a minute. You can't possible know that for sure.

And when you say, "I met this alien gal from the Pleiades whose name is Semjase" and I subsequently discover the picture is from someone who appeared on the Donna Reed show in the fifties, please forgive me my arrogance in proclaiming that it is nonsense.

I'm sure it was Sir Patrick Moore who said that ufos and aliens are seen by drunks and bored housewives. I'm not convinced he meant that though, and he's still a legend in my eyes. Cheeky auld besom.

The thing with astronomers & scientists is they're looking through glass at little bits of the sky (or their petri dish) while the motherships are hovering behind them. But I'm not convinced it's just that either. I think they all discuss the mysteries of the universe the same way we do, and in the boredom of their long nights outside in the dark, when the clouds are obscuring Mars or wherever, I'll bet they sit and discuss the weirdest of events and know the folk they're talking about too. Whether it's a neighbour's alien encounter or the ghost of Uncle Bob's, cousin's, daughter's, recently departed dog. Sceptics on the outside, on the inside a lot of them are secretly on the other side of the fence.

reply to post by LeSigh
That may be true, for the most part but they need to explain:
1) simultaneous multiple radar and visual reports of objects in the atmosphere apparently miles-long in length that remain unidentified (ask yourself objectively where can objects as large as these can possibly be stored and maintained on earth, if they are ALL man-made, as you said).

2) If UFOs are strictly man-made invention then explain sighting, paintings, sculptures and references dating back thousands of years.

3) The Air Force 1952 "Intelligence report" report which categorically stated "some UFOs appear to be interplanetary spaceships".

4) why NORAD continually tracks "fastwalkers", unexplained objects from deep space that don't fit any description they have such as satellites, meteors, space junk, etc. Some zoom into our atmosphere, make 90 degree turns and zoom out.

5) Can man-made objects fly silently at radar-confirmed 100,000 mph + and make 50g+ right-angle turns in our atmosphere? Some go from start to these ridiculous speeds in mere seconds minus the hypersonic boom.

etc...

If they were ALL man made, we need some proof and please do not invoke poor Tesla.

So the people at UFO bases are kooks.
Thanks for side stepping Tesla and his devices.
Attention UFO base people listening we are saying you are kooks to save our jobs.

reply to post by Jaellma


I'll have to say that there are such a large degree of 'nuisance' reports; reports of known phenomena mistaken for something more extraordinary than they are, coupled with deliberate hoaxing, as well as the human penchant for seemingly subconsciously embroidering the details of anything they relate as eye witnesses, it's a difficult and frustrating subject to plumb.

This isn't to say that every sighting or report is nothing of consequence.

There are, however, only so many accounts of ball lightning, missile tests, Chinese Sky Lanterns, people acting disproportionately excited over Venus, Jupiter, a Bolide, or some atmospheric meteorological phenomenon, and other reports, especially where the cause is obvious but the witness continues to insist on adding details, before one begins to suspect the very same thing as described in the OP.

It's a fascinating subject; a concept certainly embedded into the global collective unconscious such that it seems most people will more readily accept an explanation of "UFO" than they will of what most often is known phenomena.

Another problem in examining the subject we so often come into contact with is the problem of the prevalence of proper nutters.
The subject attracts a whole menagerie of imaginative fantasies detailing Galactic Councils, Federations, and other fairy tales.

Since we don't really know what the small percentage of unknowns are, however, all we can do is keep looking, and perhaps even attempt new tests for measuring the phenomena.

As new concepts in science develop where discoveries are made allowing us to see, and detect more, where more sophisticated engineering advancements are made that allow us to travel further and faster, perhaps, if only as byproducts of new discoveries and advancements on the terrestrial scale, we may come closer to understanding these unknowns.

For now, we're stuck with an ocean of muddy water opaqued with mistaken reports of known phenomenon reported erroneously, deliberate hoaxes, and proper nutter feedback that examination of this subject is akin to searching for a single needle in a whole field full of needle-stacks.

Hopefully, one day, we'll have concrete answers.
In some instances, unknowns may be found to be new unexplained natural phenomenon.
In some instances we may very well finally get verification on ETH.
For now, however, it's wait, and watch, and wait.

reply to post by Druscilla

Since we don't really know what the small percentage of unknowns are, however, all we can do is keep looking, and perhaps even attempt new tests for measuring the phenomena.

I believe you and I are on the same page as it pertains to the 95%ers.

However, as it pertains to the unknown, as you indicated, or the 5%, we as an enlightened community, need to stick to educating others and doing as much measurement as feasible.

It just irks me when influential people dismiss all claims without even entertaining the idea that a small percentage of this phenomenon is worthy of further investigation.

I think it is pretty unprofessional coming from a supposed trusted source to straight up insult the opposing party and call them kooks. Especially since there are many UFO reports reported by military personal, radars, and other people who are trained for attention to detail.

Professor Rees, as eminent as he is, is forgetting another logical possibility.

1) Aliens are coming here, and are responsible for a small minority of the UFO reports.
2) Aliens are NOT talking to psychics or making pictures in crops, and people who think they have been are kooks.
3) Aliens are NOT talking to astrophysicists either.

Originally posted by Jaellma
[
5) Can man-made objects fly silently at radar-confirmed 100,000 mph + and make 50g+ right-angle turns in our atmosphere? Some go from start to these ridiculous speeds in mere seconds minus the hypersonic boom.

What if I told you that radar receivers, especially civilian ones, can be fooled with earthly techonlogy?

And though making something appear to be going at 100,000 mph on a radar receiver is within feasible technology, making a hypersonic boom is not. And it is not observed.

reply to post by mbkennel
What if I told you MULTIPLE radar receivers reported the SAME results almost simultaneously in several instances, would you still feel to hold onto that theory?

And please, don't tell me they are all being spoofed.

Lord Martin Rees has it all wrong. It's not "kooks" that see UFOs. According to Stephen Hawking, it's "cranks and weirdos".