UFO Conjecture(s)

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

SETI Zero / UFOs One


This statement appears on a SETI blog (http://setiradio.blogspot.com):

…we haven’t heard from ET (either via visits or via a signal)…

It’s part of an argument “in response to the article in MIT's Technology Review magazine by Nick Bostrom.”

A discussion has ensued from SETI proponents and others.

SETI is an interesting scientific endeavor, funded privately, hurting no one, and hoping to find other technological civilizations extant in the Universe.

We support SETI, but ufologists get rankled by one premise of the organization, and that’s the idea that ET (extraterrestrials) hasn’t visited the Earth.

SETI hasn’t received a signal from space – we discount the WOW signal – but it has only parsed a small part of galaxy and none of the Universe beyond, so the SETI search isn’t exactly a failure, so far.

But to deny that extraterrestrial visitations haven’t taken place is a statement of hubris, not scientific objectivity.

In the UFO field, there is, among all the possible explanations for the UFO phenomenon, Stanton Friedman’s alien space craft scenario.

(Yes, others posit ETs from outer space but Mr. Friedman is the face of the hypothesis for most UFO aficionados and everyone else.)

SETI hasn’t received a signal from an advanced (or any other kind of) civilization but it holds out hope for that to happen.

Ufologists have mountains of circumstantial and tangible evidence for UFOs, showing the things to be real.

We, and others, pose alternate possibilities for the origin of “flying saucers” and/or UFOs, and one of those alternate possibilities is that the phenomenon is primarily space craft from other worlds, other planets, and other civilizations.

Of all the explanations for UFOs, the alien space craft explanation is the most sensible when the reported sightings, landings, and perceived occupants are taken into account.

(That the sightings may be chimeras from other agencies, supernatural and otherwise, can be allowed, but visitations from other planets is the easiest explanation to swallow.)

SETI disallows the possibility, but ufologists have a lot going for them whereas SETI has nothing going for it, so far anyway.

So the condescending attitude of SETI devotees is really out of place and off-putting to an objective mind.

SETI should not be anathema to UFO confreres, but it is, and only because SETI is so smug.

While we give SETI props for its efforts, we join hands with the UFO community in eschewing the SETI stance about UFOs, even while we explore a slew of other explanations for the elusive enigma that is real, and sometimes touchable.

SETI would do well to try and score a real point. Ufologists have already done so.