Unidentified flying object

:UFO redirects here. For other uses, see UFO (disambiguation).

Science and UFOs

Ufology is the study of UFO reports and associated evidence.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

While most academics prefer to ignore the subject, others, including mostly amateur and some professional scientific researchers, continue to investigate. Unfortunately, quality of investigations by amateur researchers can vary enormously.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

It is a common error to assume that the only question of interest provided by the subject is whether UFOs represent alien intelligence (Peter Sturrock has argued that this emphasis on the extraterrestrial hypothesis has narrowed the field and restricted debate). Putting aside the question of physical reality of UFOs, there have been studies of UFOs and UFO enthusiast subcultures from a folklore or anthropological perspective, and some feel the subject, at the very least, may provide new insights in the fields of psychology (both individual and social), sociology, and communications.

Related Topics:
Extraterrestrial hypothesis - Subculture - Folklore - Anthropological - Sociology

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Since the late 1940s, people throughout the world have become familiar with UFO reports. These reports have been attributed to a wide range of causes including planets, stars, meteors, cloud formations, ball lightning, deliberate hoaxes, experimental military aircraft, hallucinations, and extraterrestrial spacecraft. Despite the large number of reports and great public interest, the scientific community has shown little interest in UFOs. This may be due in part to the fact that there are no public or government funds to support UFO research. Many scientists also assume that the 1969 Condon Report settled the issue, hence UFO data is no longer worth examining. It has also been contended that the CIA's 1953 Robertson Panel recommendations of official public ridicule through the mass media has made the subject scientifically and politically taboo. Each of these may have had some impact in dampening the interest of the scientific community in regards to UFO research.

Related Topics:
Condon Report - CIA - Robertson Panel

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

UFOs have been subject to various investigations over the years, varying widely in scope and scientific rigor. Governments or military agencies of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Sweden, Brazil, Mexico, Spain, and the Soviet Union, are known to have carried out the investigation of UFO reports at various times. Despite a strong residue of extremely puzzling cases, no national government has ever publicly suggested that UFOs represent any form of alien intelligence. Perhaps the best known study was Project Blue Book, conducted by the United States Air Force from 1952.

Related Topics:
Project Blue Book - United States Air Force

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Despite unexplained cases, the general opinion of the mainstream scientific community is probably that all UFO sightings ultimately result from ordinary misidentification of natural and man-made phenomena, deliberate hoaxes, or psychological phenomena such as optical illusions or lucid dreaming/sleep paralysis (often given as an explanation for purported alien abductions). Statistics compiled by U.S. Air Force studies found that the strong preponderance of identified sightings were due to misidentifications, with hoaxes and psychological aberrations accounting for only a few percent of all cases. Still many academics feel that the subject is a waste of time, due to a number of factors. Unreliability of witness testimony is often cited.

Related Topics:
Hoax - Optical illusions - Lucid dreaming - Sleep paralysis - Alien abductions

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

It has been suggested, however, that rather few academics have actually researched the topic themselves or become personally familiar with the literature. As the Sturrock poll results below suggest, absence of study of the subject increases skepticism and strongly affects willingness to investigate. Some academics have argued that this constitutes unacceptable bias, and that while current evidence may be lacking, new evidence should be evaluated objectively as it arises. Some in the scientific community feel there is enough evidence to warrant further investigation efforts, comparing it to the period in the history of meteorite research or atmospheric electrical phenomena such as sprites or ball lightning when there was only witness testimony available. In such examples, the eyewitness accounts of such phenomena eventually proved correct despite initial skepticism, denial, and sometimes hostility from many scientists. Others point out that it is erroneous to claim the evidence is only observational and that a number of recorded physical effects also exist that are amenable to research by the physical sciences. These include simultaneous radar contact, photographs/movies/videos, radiation increases, electromagnetic interference, and physiological/biological effects. (See Physical Evidence section below)

Related Topics:
Academic - Bias - Evidence - Meteorite - Sprites - Ball lightning - Physical sciences

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Probably the most favored theory among advocates is the more conventional extraterrestrial hypothesis, though the Interdimensional hypothesis and the Paranormal/Occult Hypothesis for UFOs are sometimes given as possibilities by some.

Related Topics:
Extraterrestrial hypothesis - Interdimensional hypothesis - Paranormal/Occult Hypothesis

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Other reasons often cited for the disdain shown by many scientists for the subject are:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• Arguments that aliens could not be here because of the distances and energies required for interstellar travel in a reasonable period of time, according to present-day understanding of physical law
• Lack of indisputable physical evidence
• The unreliability or scientific inadequacy of many reports
• The many circumstances that can lead to misidentification of ordinary objects seen at a distance in the sky--a scientific, skeptical approach can cast reasonable doubt on the "strangeness" of cases that appear at first glance to be very impressive.
• The general sensationalization surrounding the subject, including the perception that many amateur researchers lack proper scientific training and instead have a "readiness to believe"

While many scientists would agree that the sighting of a genuine extraterrestrial craft is not an impossibility, some also argue that that the patterns of reported UFO behavior do not personally strike them as rational. Why, for example, would sightings occur with great frequency for decades without any attempt by the alien intelligence to communicate its presence unambiguously? Or if an extraterrestrial civilization was engaged in mapping or otherwise investigating the earth, as some have hypothesized, why would it take so long, when present-day terrestrial technology, such as satellites, can do the job so quickly?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Proponents, however, note that there are counterarguments to all of these objections. Some of these are:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• Many of the skeptical arguments rest on hidden or presumed assumptions about alien intentions and technology. Why would aliens necessarily make their presence unambiguously known? Why would alien interests necessarily be restricted to simple physical surveys? Why assume interstellar travel to be nearly impossible, basically an assumption that alien science and technology would not be that much more advanced than that of present-day humans?
• Some arguments show a lack of knowledge of the available evidence. Many sightings, for example, are not of distant "lights in the sky," which might easily be simple misidentifications, but are of structured objects at close range, often with associated physical effects and evidence (see below).
• Why focus on only poor cases when there are also many high-quality, unexplainable ones, even when investigated by trained scientists, such as those involved with the Battelle Institute investigation for the U.S. Air Force in the 1950's or the 1960's Condon Commission?

The Condon Report's negative conclusions seem to have been particularly damaging to the likelihood of large numbers of scientists involving themselves seriously in the investigation of UFOs. However, the conclusions section of the report was written by Condon, who expressed public disdain for the subject long before the investigation was concluded. Subsequent reviews by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, and more recently by a scientific panel organized by Dr. Peter A. Sturrock http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc535.htm, have shown that the conclusions section was badly at variance with the report's actual contents, where about 30% of the cases examined could not be explained. When the report came out in late 1969, atmospheric physicist Dr. James E. McDonald wrote a paper called "Science in Default," criticizing the Condon Report for bad science, and furthermore criticising mainstream science for its failure to deal with the subject. http://www.cufon.org/cufon/mcdon2.htm Nonetheless, the positive evidence presented by Sturrock and others in support of UFO reality has seen little attention or support from other scientists.

Related Topics:
Condon Report - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics - Peter A. Sturrock - James E. McDonald

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Recently, hopes that this theme might be about to become respectable again were raised when a peer reviewed article on UFOs and SETI appeared in JBIS, the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society. A good introduction to this aspect of the subject is given by one of the authors, astronomer Bernard Haisch, in his website http://www.ufoskeptic.org, an introduction to the area for scientists, which has a link to the JBIS article.

Related Topics:
Peer review - SETI - JBIS

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

This alleged widespread negative feeling among the scientific community regarding UFOs as outlined above has been challenged as inaccurate. Following a formal 1977 survey of the American Astronomical Society, Sturrock learned that a majority of those who responded to the survey (1356 responded; over half of the AAS membership) thought that UFOs deserved scientific study, and were willing to contribute their time and expertise to such studies. His results were: http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc604.htm

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• 53% felt UFOs were definitely or probably a topic worthy of further scientific study vs. only 20% who felt they definitely or probably were not.
• 80% expressed a willingness to contribute to the resolution of the UFO question, though only 13% of these could think of a way to do so.
• Lack of knowledge strongly contributed to skepticism and lack of willingness to investigate. Only 29% of those having spent less than an hour reading about the subject felt further investigation was warranted vs. 68% who had spent over 300 hours.
• Younger scientists were more willing to investigate than older ones.
• Skepticism against the extraterrestrial hypothesis ran high. Probabilities of conventional explanations such as hoax or familiar/unfamiliar craft or natural phenomena were rated at 13% to 23% vs. only 3% for UFOs being actual alien craft.
• 5% of respondents admitted to puzzling sightings; only 10% of these said they had reported their sightings.

Sturrock did another survey of over 400 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics members in 1973. About two-thirds thought UFOs were possibly, probably, or certainly a scientifically significant problem. 5% said they had had UFO sightings. 10% thought UFOs were from space. http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc592.htmhttp://www.mufon.com/znews_publicopinion.html

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Sturrock noted in summarizing his surveys that guaranteed anonymity was important in getting high rates of response. Possibly fear of ridicule by colleagues or fear of professional repercussions may figure in suppressing open expression of interest in the subject within the scientific community. Dr. Jacques Vallee claims many scientists are interested in investigating UFOs but prefer to work quietly in the background because of the attached "ridicule factor." Vallee refers to these scientists as the "invisible college."

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Other surveys of scientific/technical and well-educated groups also show clear interest in UFOs or belief that they are real or extraterrestrial. A 1971 survey of Industrial Research/Development magazine, based on 90,000 readers, found that 76% felt the government wasn't revealing all it knew about UFOs. 54% thought UFOs definitely or probably existed and 32% thought they came from outer space. A 1978 survey of Optical Spectra readers found 42% felt it "quite conceivable" that UFOs were space ships from other civilizations. Two 1970's surveys of MENSA members revealed over 50% thought they were from space. Opinion polls of the general public have also consistently shown that the higher the education the more likely people are to believe UFOs are real. For example, a 1978 Gallup poll found 66% of college graduates thought UFOs real vs. 57% for high school graduates and 36% for those with only grade school education. http://www.mufon.com/znews_publicopinion.html

Related Topics:
MENSA - Gallup poll

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Still, some claim the general perception in the scientific community remains that, if UFO reports pose a scientific problem at all, it has more to do with psychology and the science of perception than with physical science. Indeed, most reports simply comprise narrative accounts of what someone saw or thought he saw in the sky. However, it is also pointed out that trying to reduce UFO sightings to mere psychological misperceptions of individuals is often inadequate. A large fraction of reports involve more than one witness, and sometimes an event is witnessed from two or more different locations. There have also been mass sightings, sometimes involving hundreds or even thousands of witnesses. Sightings may also be accompanied by corroborating information such as radar tracking, movies, or physical effects on individuals or the environment.

Related Topics:
Psychology - Physical science

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Others feel that physical scientists cannot get involved in the UFO problem unless there is associated physical evidence. If there is no physical evidence, then it is contended there is no way that physical scientists can contribute to the resolution of this problem.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

One objection to this argument is that even eyewitness accounts can be treated with scientific methods to obtain important information. Witnesses to meteor fireballs, for example, can be interviewed to reconstruct trajectories, and this often leads to recovery of meteorite fragments. Accuracy and reliability of individual accounts is not essential if large numbers of sightings are analyzed, because statistical analysis can reveal important trends. One example of applying such techniques in researching UFO reports occurred during investigations of the mysterious Green Fireballs that suddenly appeared over sensitive military and research installations in New Mexico in the late 1940s. Hundreds of witnesses were interviewed to determine object characteristics and also to try to recover fragments through determination of trajectories.

Related Topics:
Meteor - Meteorite - Green Fireballs - New Mexico

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A massive statistical analysis of UFO cases, called Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14, was commissioned by the USAF and carried out from 1952 to 1954 by the Battelle Memorial Institute (see United States government studies above). Statistician Dr. David Saunders, a member of the Condon Commission, recommended compiling a statistical data base of cases to determine trends, which eventually resulted in a catalog of over 10,000 cases compiled by Saunders and others. http://www.cufos.org/UFOCAT.html Various other researchers have also compiled such databases, such as Dr. Jacques Vallee, http://ufoinfo.com/magonia/index.shtml or Larry Hatch, who maintains a public database of thousands of cases with online statistical analyses. http://www.larryhatch.net

Related Topics:
Project Blue Book - Battelle Memorial Institute - Jacques Vallee

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

It has also been argued by various people, such as physicist Dr. Michio Kaku, that the demand for hard physical evidence (the fabled "alien hubcap") is an unreasonably restrictive one. Kaku and others have noted that much of physical science consists of indirect physical evidence, such as spectrograms of stars to determine composition. Nobody, for example, demands an actual piece of a neutron star for analysis.

Related Topics:
Michio Kaku - Physical science - Neutron star

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Physical Evidence

There have, in fact been many UFO reports accompanied by physical evidence of various kinds, both direct and indirect. Hynek's close encounter scale would define indirect physical evidence as data obtained from "close encounters of the first kind," i.e. data obtained from afar, such as radar contacts or photographs. More direct physical evidence comes from "close encounters of the second kind," interactions occurring at close range, which include so-called "landing traces," and physiological effects.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A small fraction of these cases have been shown to be deliberate hoaxes. A larger fraction, including those researched by governmental and military authorities, have been labeled unidentified or unexplainable. Analyses of most cases have results that are ambiguous or inconclusive. However, even the ambiguous physical cases should be amenable to statistical analysis to reveal possible underlying trends across cases.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A list of various physical evidence cases includes:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• Radar contact and tracking, sometimes from multiple sites. These are often considered among the best cases since they usually involve trained military personnel, simultaneous visual sightings, and aircraft intercepts. One such recent example were the mass sightings of large, silent, low-flying black triangles in 1989 and 1990 over Belgium.
• Photograpic evidence, including still photos, movie film, and video, including some in infrared spectrum (rare).
• Recorded visual spectrograms (extremely rare)--(see Spectrometer)
• Recorded gravimetric and magnetic disturbances (extremely rare)
• Landing physical trace evidence, including ground impressions, burned and/or dessicated soil, burned and broken foliage, metallic and other traces (see e.g. Height 611 UFO Incident), magnetic anomalies, and increased radiation levels. A well-known example from 1980 was the USAF Rendlesham Forest Incident in England. Another from 1964 occurred at Socorro, N.M. and was considered one of the most inexplicable of the USAF Project Blue Book cases. Catalogs of several thousand such cases have been compiled, particularly by researcher Ted Phillips.http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/physicaltracecases.htmhttp://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc201.htm
• Physiological effects on people and animals including temporary paralysis, skin burns and rashes, corneal burns, and symptoms resembling radiation poisoning, such as the Cash-Landrum incident in 1980. One such case dates back to 1886, a Venezuelan incident reported in Scientific American magazine. http://www.nuforc.org/GNSciAm.html
• So-called Animal/Cattle Mutilation cases, that some feel are also part of the UFO phenomenon. Such cases can and have been analyzed using forensic science techniques.
• Biological effects on plants such as increased or decreased growth, germination effects on seeds, and blown-out stem nodes (usually associated with physical trace cases or crop circles)
• Electromagnetic interference effects, including stalled cars, power black-outs, radio/TV interference, magnetic compass deflections, and aircraft navigation, communication, and engine disruption.http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/emeffects.htm
• Remote radiation detection, some noted in FBI and CIA documents occurring over government nuclear installations at Los Alamos National Laboratory and Oak Ridge National Laboratory in 1950, also reported by Project Blue Book director Ed Ruppelt in his book. http://ufologie.net/books/ruppeltbook15.htm
• Actual hard physical evidence cases, such as 1957, Ubatuba, Brazil, magnesium fragments analyzed in the Condon Report and by others. The 1964 Socorro incident also left metal traces, analyzed by NASA.
• Misc: Recorded electromagnetic emissions, such as microwaves detected in the well-known 1957 RB-47 surveillance aircraft case, which was also a visual and radar case; http://ufologie.net/htm/rb47.htm polarization rings observed around a UFO by a scientist, theorized by Dr. James Harder as intense magnetic fields from the UFO causing the Faraday effect. http://ncas.sawco.com/ufosymposium/harder.html

Despite the low opinion of the subject matter possibly held by many scientists, many reported physical effects would seem to be ripe for scientific analysis. A comprehensive scientific review of physical evidence cases was carried out by the 1997 Sturrock UFO panel.http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/ufo_reports/sturrock/toc.html

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Some scientists and engineers have attempted to "back-engineer" the possible physics behind UFOs through analysis of both eyewitness reports and the physical evidence. Examples are former NASA engineer James McCampbell in his book Ufology online and NACA/NASA engineer Paul Hill in his book Unconventional Flying Objects. Among subjects tackled by both McCampbell and Hill was the question of how UFOs can fly at supersonic speeds without creating a sonic boom. McCampbell's solution of a microwave plasma parting the air in front of the craft is currently being researched by Dr. Leik Myrabo, Professor of Engineering Physics at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute as a possible advance in hypersonic flight.http://www.rpi.edu/dept/mane/deptweb/faculty/member/myrabo.html

Related Topics:
Physics - NASA - NACA - Supersonic - Sonic boom - Microwave plasma - Leik Myrabo - Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute - Hypersonic

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Some recently reported developments in electronic warfare mimic electromagnetic interference and physiologic effects described in UFO cases dating back to the 1940s and 1950s, and may conceivably be examples of military back-engineering efforts. In 1997, the U.S. Air Force Scientific Advisory Board issued a report on 21st Century Air Force weaponry, in which they described microwave directed energy weapons that could be used to stall vehicles, making them easy targets for bombing. The same weapon is also reported capable of disrupting aircraft navigation and communication systems, as well as ground electronics and power grids. http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/nov03/features/airpow/airpow.html A microwave crowd control weapon causing heating and intense pain was announced in 2001. http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1470 Other microwave weapons have been proposed that would cause loss of bodily functions. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000CBC91-B6FD-1E51-A98A809EC5880105 (See also wonder weapons)

Related Topics:
Electronic warfare - Air Force Scientific Advisory Board - Microwave - Directed energy weapons - Wonder weapons

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Identified Flying Objects (IFOs)

It has been estimated that up to 90% of all reported UFO sightings are eventually identified. While a small percentage of UFO reports are deliberate hoaxes, most are misidentifications of natural and man-made phenomena.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

However, the actual percentages of IFOs vs. UFOs depends on who is doing the study and can vary widely depending on criteria. For example, scientists for the Battelle Memorial Institute, who did a study for the USAF of 3201 UFO cases in the 1950's, ended up with 22% being unidentified, using the stringent criteria that all four analysts had to agree that the case had no prosaic explanation, whereas agreement of only two analysts was needed to list the case as explained.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In contrast, much more conservative numbers for the percentage of UFOs were arrived at individually by Allen Hendry, who was the chief investigator for the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS). CUFOS was founded by Dr. Allen Hynek (who had been a consultant for the Air Force’s Project Blue Book) to provide a serious scientific investigation into UFOs. Hendry spent 15 months personally investigating 1,307 UFO reports. In 1979, Hendry published his conclusions in The UFO Handbook: A Guide to Investigating, Evaluating, and Reporting UFO Sightings. Hendry admitted that he would like to find evidence for extraterrestrials but noted that the vast majority of cases had prosiac explanations. Hendry’s conclusions were:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• "Out of 1,307 cases: 1,194 (91.4%) had clear prosaic (non-extraterrestrial) explanations; 93 (7.1%) had possible prosaic explanations; and 20 (1.5%) were unexplained.
• Statistics: 28% of the UFO reports were bright stars or planets; 1.7% were the tip of the crescent moon; 18% were advertising plane banners (usually seen edge-on rather than the face-on); and 9% were fireballs and reentering space debris.
• Distortions in the atmosphere can cause celestial bodies to appear to “dart up and down,” “execute loops and figure eights,” “meander in a square pattern,” or even “zigzag.” This helps explain why celestial bodies can so easily fool observers.
• In 49 of the UFO reports caused by celestial bodies, the witness’ estimated distance to the UFO ranged from 200 feet to 125 miles! Similarly, some witnesses believed that the UFO was “following them” even though the celestial body was actually stationary. Even police and other reliable witnesses can easily be fooled by sightings of stars and planets.
• Reentering space debris or meteors may appear as a string of lights, which can be misinterpreted as lights coming from windows of a spacecraft. The human brain then creates the illusion of a spacecraft based on this misinterpretation, which then fools the observer."

Common misidentifications of man-made phenomena include:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• Balloons (meteorological or passenger).
• Military aircraft.
• Flashing landing lights of conventional aircraft.
• Unconventional aircraft or advanced technology (i.e., the SR-71 Blackbird or the B-2 Stealth bomber).
• Advertising planes.
• Artificial earth satellites.
• Hovering aircraft (such as helicopters).
• Blimps.
• Rockets and rocket launches.
• Kites.
• Model aircraft.
• Hang-gliders.
• Fireworks.
• Lasers aimed at the clouds.
• Searchlights.
• Deliberate hoaxes.
• Jiffy Fire Starters.

Common misidentifications of natural objects include:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• The moon, stars, and planets (for example, the cusps of the rising crescent moon in the tropics, and Venus at maximum brightness)
• Unusual weather conditions (such as lenticular cloud formations, noctilucent clouds, rainbow effects, and high-altitude ice crystals).
• Comets.
• Meteor Swarms.
• Near or large meteors.
• Flocks of birds.
• Swarms of flying insects.
• Reflections from atmospheric inversion layers.
• Hot ionized gas (natural or man-made).
• Earth lights (luminous electrical events from low-level earthquakes and tectonic-geological phenomena.)
• Ball lightning.
• Atmospheric inversion layers.
• Reflected light (especially through broken clouds).
• Aurora borealis (northern lights).