From what I know of the presidents of the 20th Century, I wouldn’t say that any of them were particularly good judges of the UFO phenomenon. I, too, have seen odd things in the sky for which I have no solid explanation (although not like the spectacular reports that some people make). That makes them UFOs, but it really says NOTHING about what they really are (or were).

I am always especially skeptical of the really big reports. There should be abundant physica evidence but there is not. People tend to exagerrate, whether deliberately or not; while others make completely unjustified extrapolations from things they saw; some perpetrate deliberate hoaxes; and frankly, some are simply deluded. Just a couple of weeks ago, “Jesus” dropped into my office and started giving me his rather bizarre theory of the interior of the Sun and the interior of the Earth and how they are related. He said he was a “scientist” trained at Stanford and he was trying to teach his son about science. He drew me an elaborate if quite sloppy diagram on a piece paper , and covered it with science jargon and mumbo jumbo. His ideas were completely wacky, baseless and yet for all appearances he was completely convinced that he was right. This self-appointed “Jesus” was obviously mentally disturbed. I can’t help but believe that some UFO reporters are in the same boat.

Of course, many are perfectly sane and normal folks, but they still can make mistakes. Even a former president can see something completely normal in the sky and for lack of all the facts, make a baseless assumption about what it might be. This does not say that all UFO reports are explanable through known phenomena, but it does make it difficult to separate the genuinely credible reports (”credible” in the sense that they are made without unjustified assumptions) from the large majority that are scientifically worthless. That is why I am saying that without physical evidence, any claims about the physical nature of UFOs are unfounded.

I hope that someday we can come to a definitive solution to this problem, and frankly I hope that they *do* turn out to be from other worlds (friendly, I hope). But the lack of good evidence today puts the more outrageous claims in the same category of claims about ghosts, extant African dinosaurs or that a “face of God” in the clouds is a true sign from Heaven. ( For a neat photo, see: “Face of God cloud”:http://www.cloudappreciationsociety.org/gallery/index.php?showimage=1191 )

They may all be true, but at least for now my mantra will be: “Show me the evidence.”

Thanks for the link. I would add the English page as well: “CNES”:http://www.cnes.fr/web/455-cnes-en.php

Larry S.

P.S. I am not a PhD, but I have taught introductory astronomy at college level in some form or another for 30 years.

Interesting debate! I had lunch with a President one day and asked him directly if he believed in UFO’s. Who would know better than a previous President? He became a little kid, “Yes! I’ve seen one in my back yard!” and went on to describe it, until his family shut him up and called him a looney.

This might be of great interest: France launched an official Website dedicated to UFO research:

http://www.cnes.fr/

One section is an archive dedicated to the “History of our Conquest of Space.” Another about humans leaving TRASH in space, “Space Pollution.” I encourage all of you to learn the Beautiful Language, read the Website, and come back here with your thoughts.

Since I am not in the UK, I am not familiar with local UFO groups. However, I suggest that you go to the following website and then contact them with your report:

http://www.uform.org/main.htm

Good luck.

Larry Sessions
Denver

Since the goal of Earth & Sky is to be a “clear voice for science,” this is probably not the place to continue this. I would suggest, if you know of a good one, that you start a thread on a blog or site for religion and science. If you want, post that address here, but pelase not a personal email address. I, however, prefer to get back to the science and nature aspects.

LS

But in order to know something from a scientific perspective, you have to have reasonable evidence. Otherwise we can claim or believe anything we want. As charlatans and politicians (need I make the distinction?) have shown through the ages, if you can make someone feel stupid if they don’t believe what you are saying — or you can simply convince them of your way of thinking without evidence — you will probably get them to come around to your side or get them to buy your idea or product. Hitler was a master at this. It is a profitable concept, both politically and monetarily and in the sense of power and control, to the purveyor of such ideas. It also is often to the detriment of the person who accepts the idea or argument without any proof — that is, on “faith.” As for myself, I prefer to do my own thinking, and to decide for myself what makes sense and is profitable to my purpose as a human being.

LS

1. “Who can reproduce observations like my own or like hundreds (thousands?) of other similar occurrences.”

NASA, and anyone who has a camera (video/picture, even a cell phone-but that would be terrible quality). I would love to see actual video footage. Even though I think that an ET encounter is a very long time away, that would be so great to actually have it happen in my generation. I’m sure when it eventually does happen (or if it’s actually already happened as you say, which makes this sentence hold even more truth) the people of earth before that moment will have been very skeptic and think the same thing, that it won’t happen for a long time.

2. “Science does not allow for the perception of God; yet, there is much solid evidence, not just mystical musings, that He exists”.

I as a Christian understand that there is no scientific evidence of God, that is why it is called faith. You believe what you can not prove because you know it in your heart to be true.

3. “Are Christians and Jews wrong because we believe in what cannot be proven? I don’t think so.”

You seem to be saying that Christians and Jews are both right. If you think in terms of right and wrong (which I don’t), this statement can not be true because it contradicts itself due to the fact that Jews and Christians have different beliefs. I really wish I could have an experience such as yours to make myself so strongly convinced that ET’s have visited us. You have to understand from someone else’s perspective (think back to before your experience/s) that it is very hard to believe unless you actually see it. I think there are a number of things that make me believe something to be true, and they are 3 of the 5 senses. If I can see it, touch it, or hear it (the other 2 may not really apply) I will believe it much more than simply seeing someone write about it.

In fact, science really has nothing to say about God or paranormal phenomena, or anything for which there is no indisputable evidence. It neither denies nor confirms these things. At least until undisputable evidence comes along, true science remains neutral on these things, and anyone who tells you that true science is atheistic either does not know whereof he speaks, or he is a liar. True science is agnostic, which means in the absence of good evidence, any true scientist must maintain neutral, admitting to his or her own ignorance on the matter.

Whether I believe in God or not (or in aliens, etc.) is irrelevant to science, at least in the purist sense. It is my personal belief that you cannot be a true “scientist” and a true believer at the same time — in the absense of evidence. I also admit that I could be wrong in this or anything else.

I am not sure who first said it, but my personal belief — my credo — is that you should be open minded, but not so open minded that your brains fall out. I call this idea, Positive Skepticism, which I outlined in the blog, “Mars as big as the full moon”:
http://blogs.earthsky.org/larrysessions/space/071734/mars-as-big-as-the-moon/

No one can be completely scientific. I don’t think any race that ever operates solely on logic (such as the mythical Vulcans) will survive. We need both heart and mind. Science is far from perfect, but it has a method and a process and to my way of thinking it works. As far as I can tell, it is valid. I am not very good at it personally, but it seems quite competent in dealing with the world.

If aliens exist and UFOs are from other planets, I will welcome the evidence of it. Until then I will remain skeptical, as clear thinking demands. There is room — indeed a need — for both rational thought and emotional feeling, but you should not (in *my* opinion) rely solely on either. ["Logic is the beginning of wisdom... not the end" -- Spock from "Star Trek VI"]. The day that I give in to purely emotional, uncritical belief untempered by rational thought, is the day I hope I die, because my value to human progress will have ended.

LS