Collège Air and Staff
Darrell L. Stanley, FR 66348,1931- Captain, USAF
Une thèse soumise au Air Command and Staff College de l'Université de l'Air in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for Graduation
Juin 1968
Thèse dirigée par le lieutenant-colonel Dale E. Downing
Université de l'Air
Base aérienne de Maxwell, Alabama
| Home |
|---|
Au fil des années, les éléments en faveur des ovnis ont continués à monter. De nombreuses observations finissent par être expliquées, mais un nombre impressionnant ne l'est pas. Cette étude examine les éléments, montrant que leur crédibilité s'est accrue à mesure que les "inconnus" se sont accumulés. L'étude examine également la possibilité de vie extraterrestre, et les tentatives pour tirer des inférences sur les accomplissements technologiques sur d'autres mondes. Elle conclut qu'il existe une question grandissante de la réalité des ovnis, et que la vie extraterrestre intelligente existe presque certainement. Des recommandations impliquent des moyens étendus et plus aggressifs d'obtention de preuves liées aux ovnis ? including thoughts on physical seizure.
Les Objets Volants Non Identifiés (OVNIs) pourraient constituer un des mystères les plus particulier, si ce n'est le plus, parmi tous dans l'histoire connue. Le mystère est particulier parce que ses incidents sont à la fois actuel et répétitifs. Pour sûr, il existe d'autres grands mystères du monde, comme la manière dont les Pyramides d'Egypte ont été construites, ou pourquoi les dinosaures ont péri au temps préhistorique, ou la manière dont l'homme lui-même a émergé sur cette planète. Mais ceux-ci comme de nombreuses autres énigmes déroutantes sont sont obscurcis par temps. Le mystère des ovnis, d'un autre côté, règne en tant que question actuelle, bien que des observations puisse remonter presque indéfiniment.
A la base du mystère, bien sûr, se trouve la question de savoir si les ovnis sont un fait ou une fiction, réels ou imaginaires, des objets matériels ou des effets d'illusions. Tout aussi intriguante est la variété dans la nature des observations et les circonstances entourant les observations. Ceci débouche sur une difficulté lorsqu'il s'agit de généraliser sur les phénomènes. Une difficulté encore plus grande est apparemment soulevée lorsque l'on tente de classer de manière ordonnée les objets observés comme étant réels mais inexplicables, réels mais inexplicables, des apparitions, ou des fruits de l'imagination. Cette difficulté émane non pas d'un manque de travaux rédigés sur le sujet ; au contraire, la grande abondance de matériel tend à embrumer la question, approfondir le mystère, et élargir des points de vue divergents. Au milieu du matériel volumineux sur le sujet, un élément distrayant ou le sensationalisme apparaît également souvent. D'autres publications, certaines avec un air de sérieux, appartiennent tout à fait au domaine de la science-fiction, ce qui contribue peu à la recherche sérieuse sur le sujet.
En dépit des difficultés de recherche, la question de la crédibilité des éléments sur les ovnis est une question valide qui demande certainement une réponse opportune. Parce qu'il existe des éléments crédibles suffisants pour indiquer l'existence matérielle des ovnis, un problème nouveau et peut-être plus dérangeant émerge : quelle est l'origine des mysterieux objets ? Oui, ils pourraient être quelque développement secret d'origine terrestre. L'autre alternative est que les ovnis soient extraterrestres. Si la question peut être posée de manière censée pour cette dernière, nous devrions en tant que nation en être préoccupés. Pas à cause d'une quelconque menace ou attaque directe, bien que cela ne doive peut-être pas être complètement écarté, mais parce que des véhicules extraterrestres sur ou près de notre planète signifie certainement que le produit d'une technologie avancée est en notre présence. Aussi développée que notre technologie puisse sembler, elle n'a pas encore progressé au point d'envoyer des véhicules spatiaux pilotés dans notre propre système solaire, sans parler ceux d'autres étoiles. En conséquence, les ovnis pourraient détenir des secrets de grande signification technologique, en particulier qui pourraient s'appliquer à la propulsion d'appareils ou de vaisseaux spatiaux et avoir une valeur potentielle propre dans le secteur de la défense nationale. La révélation de tels secrets, peut-on raisonner, pourrait bien représenter la percée technologique la plus importante de ce siècle. Il s'ensuit qu'il existe un besoin certain d'examiner et d'évaluer le nombre toujours croissant d'observations d'ovnis. Le problème doit abordé de front s'il existe des éléments suffisants pour montrer que les ovnis sont admissibles, et si leurs origines peuvent être établies de manière crédible comme étrangères à ce monde.
Le principal objectif de cette thèse est de déterminer si la quantité en augmentation d'éléments signifie un niveau croissant de crédibilité du fait que les ovnis soient plus qu'une légende, plus que de l'imagination, plus que des intérprétations incorrectes ou des choses courantes. L'entreprise de cet objectif implique l'exploration et l'analyse de nombreux récits publiés sur ces éléments, ainsi qu'un examen des points d'origine les plus logiques. Un objectif supplémentaire est d'évaluer les possibilités et probabilités de vie intelligente dans l'environnement extraterrestre. Un autre objectif, lié de manière étroite au précédent, est de spéculer sur le niveau de technologie que des sociétés extraterrestres pourraient atteindre. Dans le cours du développement de la thèse, le raisonnement vise à impliquer que la réalité des ovnis est plutôt compatible avec les théories d'intelligence extraterrestre abondantes.
Plusieurs suppositions sont faites dans l'entreprise de cette étude. D'abord, pour éclaircir une technicité, il est supposé que les ovnis sont réels, qu'ils sont expédiés ou contrôlés par une forme d'intelligence. Par réel, on entend que les objets sont matériels, artificiels, et pas des phénomènes naturels tels que des météores. Ensuite, il est supposé que l'origine des ovnis ne sera pas divulguée indiscutablement que ce soit par une forme de communication cohérente ou une observation captive. En d'autres mots, toute confirmation absolue que les ovnis sont réels et extraterrestres obvierait largement l'objectif de certains des raisonnements théoriques présentés dans ce document. De plus, il est supposé qu'aucune action nouvelle et vigoureuse ne sera entreprise par le Gouvernement U. S. pour initier des méthodes plus aggressives d'obtentions d'éléments sur les ovnis. Toute action de la sorte tendrait à anticiper les recommandations et les conclusions mises en avant plus tard dans cette étude.
Au premier abord, le terme d'ovni pourrait ne pas sembler d'autre définition. Cependant, dans certains articles une
contradiction apparaît dans son usage. Considérez cette déclaration hypothétique : De nombreux ovnis sont en fait
des avions, ballons météo...
Le problème ici est que, une fois
identifié, l'objet ne peut plus être qualifié d'ovni de manière adéquate, mais devrait plutôt être appelé plus
correctement objet volant identifié
(IFO). Le terme d'ovni tel qu'utilisé ici signifie un objet volant qui
n'a pas été ou ne peut être identifié comme un appareil aérien/spatial ou phénomène naturel de ce monde. Le terme Soucoupe
Volante
est parfois utilisé comme synonyme de ovni, bien qu'il y ait une distinction apparente. Les ovnis, par
exemple, n'ont pas toujours la configuration de la forme d'une soucoupe.
La recherche sera limitée aux sources disponibles à la Base Aérienne de Maxwell et de la région de Montgomery, en Alabama. En tant qu'autre facteur limitatif, la recherche sera concentrée plus fortement sur des publications récentes, en particulier sur des sujets comme les statistiques accumulées. De plus, aucune analyse historique complète ne sera tentée, en raison du grand volume de matériel disponible sur le sujet.
Le chapitre suivant dégagera la nature des éléments, sa crédibilité croissante, et évaluera la réaction dans la communauté scientifique et les cercles gouvernementaux. Le chapitre 3 inclut une discussion de la probabiltié que les ovnis soient des appareils secrets venant bien de la terre. D'autres discussions raisonneront sur la proposition que les ovnis viennent d'autres planètes de notre système solaire. Le chapitre 4 traite des possibilités de vie sociale avancée sur d'autres planètes. Le chapitre 5 dégage une discussion des inférences qui peuvent être faites sur la technologie des sociétés extraterrestres. Le dernier chapitre présentera les conclusions et recommandations qui peuvent être tirées du texte.
Le phénomène des ovnis ne semble pas être quelque chose de très nouveau. Des signalements ou indices d'observations d'ovnis pourraient remonter aussi loin que l'histoire de l'homme elle-même. L'Ancien Testament de la Bible, par exemple, inclut des passages sur l'atterrissage d'un appareil étrange, qui pourraient être interprétés comme une observation d'ovni, en l'année 597 avant J.-C. . A travers le moyen-âge se trouvent aussi des rapports de phénomènes observés dans le ciel. Durant la 2nde guerre mondiale des pilotes alliés observèrent des objets étranges et non-identifiés lors de missions ariennes ; ces phénomènes étaient désignés sous le nom de "foo-fighters." En toute éventualité, les observations aériennes mystérieuses ne sont pas limitées à un cadre historique particulier. Pas plus qu'ils ne sont limités à une zone particulière quelconque. Il semble plutôt que le phénomène ait été de nature internationale . With due respect to la diversité dans le temps comme dans l'espace, les premières traces historiques de ces incidents montrent un caractère vague. Peut-être comme de nombreux autres premiers événements historiques, the sheer passage or time has caused obscurity. Then too, there is the matter of provincial perception and later interpretation. Before the eighteenth century, such phenomena were probably viewed strongly from the religious or superstitious standpoint. As a matter of illustration, strange observations could have earlier been attributed to comets, meteors or even an eclipse of the moon might then have drawn the same attention as a modern UFO sighting.
Aujourd'hui, bien sûr, on comprend bien mieux ce qui concerne les phénomènes aériens naturels. Les météores, as a case in point, sont compris et acceptés pour ce qu'ils sont, as a matter or elementary science. Par contraste, les astronomes et autres scientifiques du 19ème siècle n'acceptèrent pas l'idée de "pierres" tombant du ciel. Ce ne fut qu'après un siège énorme inhabituel de météores au-dessus de la France en 1802 que le point de vue scientifique changea . Mais avec tout le progrès de la science moderne, les ovnis restent inexpliqués et jusqu'à récemment n'étaient pas pris très au sérieux. Néanmoins, des signalements intriguants ont continué de s'accumuler dans les époques récentes. Bien que le nombre d'observations varie d'année en année, le rythme, s'il en est, semblent s'être accru au cours de l'ère moderne des ovnis.
In approaching some or the evidence on UFOs, it may be well to first define what might be called the modern UFO era, as this is largely the time span to be considered. This period started in 1947 after a sighting of nine UFOs near Mount Rainier in Washington State, Incidentally, the term "Flying Saucers" was coined as a result of press coverage of that incident. More importantly, this particular sighting marked the beginning of an official tabulation of UFOs. Since that time, the U.S. Air Force has been charged with the responsibility of evaluating and recording UFO or alleged UFO reports [4]. These of course are limited to those occurring in or near the United States. Yet, after two decades of accumulating data, the tabulations and attendant evidence hardly settle the issue ? whether or not UFOs are real.
While the issue remains unsettled in the minds or many and controversial among others, the situation has changed somewhat since 1947, and other changing outlooks may be in the offing. For one thing, there is now the considerable accumulation of evidence in the reports of visual observations. Additionally, as of late there is a certain recognition of the riddle as a matter for serious scientific inquiry [5]. With all the evidence and apparently some tendency toward a changing scientific attitude, where does the case for UFOs rest today? Is there now sufficient evidence from which to draw conclusions, or at least tentative conclusions?
Although early historical reports of sightings cannot be totally ignored, the most credible and persuasive evidence has surely evolved and has been accumulated in the modern era. During this period, in the United States alone, there have been over 11,000 sightings of mysterious aerial objects. Of those, about 650 are on the record as UFOs -- according to Project Blue Book, the U.S. Air Force agency concerned with UFO affairs [6]. At first glance these often cited statistics might appear to be rather straight forward, but as often is the case with statistics they can be misleading. In the first place, the objects which can be identified, or IFOs, should have little to do with the UFOs, in the sense that a comparison of the figures for each would reveal anything worthwhile. Any serious and logical treatment should surely exclude identified objects, for these are no longer a puzzle -- assuming the evaluation was correct. It could also be argued that the motive of the statistics was to cast doubt on the UFO case simply by the ratio involved. The whole point here is that there have been over 650 reported UFO sightings in the past twenty years. Also, there is every indication that if any case could have been explained it would have been. For this reason, and because of some erroneous explanations of UFOs, the figure of 650 should be taken as minimal. Understandably, the matter or faulty explanations has represented a sizable share of the overall controversy. Casting still greater doubt on certain sightings cataloged as IFOs is the allegation that the Air Force has been the most persistent and consistent debunker of the UFO, not an entirely ill-founded charge [7].
While caution and prudence are necessary in such inquiries or evaluations, some or the Air Force's explanations discounting UFO sightings turned out to be wrong, as mentioned earlier, which suggests more than bad statistics. There is for example, the UFO sighting which was "explained" -- and registered as an IFO -- as certain stars in the constellation Orion. Later it was discovered that Orion was below the horizon in that season at the latitude of the sighting. There are also cases that were dismissed and attributed to military refueling aircraft, when none were actually near the particular area [8]. These errors or hasty judgments have not only cast doubt on the categorical tabulations but have also allowed for the inference to be drawn that information is being withheld or distorted. As a possible consequence, some of the more recent incidents which were discredited officially as UFOs could be and have been viewed with suspicion. Consider the puzzling observation of lights near Dexter, Michigan, in the spring of 1966. Despite the overwhelming amount of testimony from eye witnesses -- including many such as police officers, who were completely reliable, the phenomenon was attributed to marsh gas. Oddly enough, at one point in time the explanation involved military aircraft; then later it was determined that no such aircraft were in the area during the majority of reported observations [9]. Thus as the evidence has mounted, so apparently has the criticism of the official findings and classifications. While a good deal of the criticism appears justified, it is not the intent here to make disparaging remarks about the agency making the evaluations -- whether incorrect unintentionally or otherwise. Rather, these inconsistencies are pointed out to show the number or solid UFO cases may be considerably greater than the figure of 659.
There are several other aspects in the area of statistics that should be considered from the stand point of inferential data. It is not often mentioned, but surely not all UFO sightings, or what people thought were UFOs, are reported. Prenez le cas de 4 chasseurs qui auraient vu un ovni atterrir dans une région montagneuse éloignée de l'Utah, il y a 7 ans. Par accord mutuel, aucun d'entre eux ne rapporta la mystérieuse affaire avant que l'Air Force n'annonce que l'Université du Colorado entreprendrait un projet indépendant, financé par le gouvernement pour enquêter sur les ovnis . Ceci pourrait apparemment signaler un changement dans la réticence antérieure de nombreuses personnes à signaler des observations par peur du ridicule ou simplement d'éviter toute publicité, parfois défavorable. Cependant, this hardly changes the UFO count which is probably low for this reason as well as those mentioned above. Dr. Edward Condon who heads the scientific investigation at the University of Colorado, has said that he expects for every reported sighting there are ten to twenty that have not been reported . His opinion, although alone worthy of considerable weight, does not lack support. Un sondage Gallup, par exemple, indique que 5 000 000 d'adultes aux Etats-Unis ont vu un ovni, or what they believed was a UFO [12]. Furthermore, according to the same poll, 46 per cent of the adult Americans believe that UFOs are something real.
Le nombre de cas d'ovnis ou observations inexpliquées solides est alors sûrement plus grand que le chiffre officiel de 659, en lui-même significatif. With some so called "explained" cases belonging in the UFO category, plus the proposition ten or more times that many have gone unreported, the statistics take on a more impressive scope than might otherwise be noted by the casual reader. Extrapolating the implied data further to include all land area on the earth is more impressive, even surprising. Using this line or reasoning the number of UFO sightings is incredibly high.
In contrast to the rather abundant evidence in the form of testimony by first hand witnesses -- whether or not the "low" official figure is used, physical evidence or hardware is another matter. Such evidence in the narrowest sense would involve either a part of a UFO or a UFO itself. Some "non-believers" it seems would settle for nothing short of the latter, in the laboratory for authentication and capable or many remarkable demonstrations. This would no doubt settle the issue, but for now there is no such material evidence; if there are pieces or parts or UFOs, such evidence has either been suppressed, undiscovered, or not reported. Granted, the most significant shortcoming in solving the mystery is the lack of physical evidence. However, maybe our rules of scientific evidence simply do fit the phenomenon of the UFO. If that is possible, it would be logical to fit the investigations to the phenomenon. This means for the time being that any assessments can only be made from the type evidence on hand.
What type of evidence is there? There is more than just the voluminous array of first-hand witness accounts; but first, a discussion of these accounts is in order. Specifically, the quality and worth of these will be considered. Witness reports are good evidence, although circumstantial in nature; prominent scientists concede that there is an abundance of good circumstantial evidence indicating UFOs are real [13]. There are problems, however, in handling such evidence, i.e., witness reports. The greatest of these would appear to be in determining the veracity of the witness or witnesses. More simply it is the degree of credibility which could be attributed to an observation or to collective observations. In dealing with one or only a few cases, there would remain the possibility that a witness was lying, was mistaken in what he thought he saw, or had seen something that existed only in his mind. But when considering the immense number of well corroborated and documented reports by many credible witnesses, the evidence becomes very convincing. The caliber of many witnesses, perhaps as much as the sheer number, lends the greatest credence to the total evidence. There have been hoaxes, and the crackpot element along with publicity seekers. On the other hand, as the observations increase, so does the cross section of population of witnesses. Numerous sighting, for example, have been reported by respected, intelligent people with technical training -- astronomers, control-tower operators, physicians, meteorologists and pilots [14].
Besides the eye witness reports, there are other forms of evidence, although these are scarcely any more scientific. These include photographs, radar confirmation of UFOs viewed separately by other observers, and ground marking supposedly left by a UFO. Since most UFO sightings are aerial in nature, ground marks of scorched vegetation corresponding to observation are fairly rare, but their worth would seem to add heavily as suggestive evidence, although not conclusive. Likewise, radar sighting which corroborate visual observation surely lend a high degree of credence.
La photographie, aussi prometteuse qu'elle pourrait sembler, pourrait créer plus de problèmes qu'elle n'en résoud. For one thing, authentication or photographs -- especially prints -- is most difficult, Flaws in the film or lens can create spots; unless there is some background other than the sky, little can be judged as to the size and distance of a UFO. And no doubt, the general knowledge of trick photography impedes the acceptance of photographs otherwise very convincing. One way around this or course is to have a witness of the picture taking process. This gets back to the matter of credibility. Accordingly, photographs remain generally at least as controversial as witness reports, and the motives of the photographer might be questioned unduly, for a film is a quick means to publicity, Yet, there are hundreds or photographs, several of which constitute quite persuasive evidence. Some of the clearest negatives or a UFO ever obtained were taken by a farmer in Oregon in 1950. These photographs are similar to UFO pictures taken in France in 1954. The likeness of the objects in both sets or pictures is the most striking and suggestive aspect, although rough similarities are not uncommon in other photographs. One of the most convincing set of photographs was taken in daylight from an airliner over Brazil. The pictures, taken from above the UFO, show the ground below as well as a shadow of the UFO. The geometry of the situation stands up under scrutiny; this plus the presence of witnesses in the plane is surely as near to scientific evidence as is available. This case is to be studied further by the team from the University of Colorado [15].
Although the evidence available is empirical and circumstantial, it certainly appears to point overwhelmingly to the
reality and materialistic nature of UFOs. Even though hardware is not available to satisfy the rigid rules of
scientific evidence -- such as reproducibility -- there are certain indications of acceptance of the evidence in the
scientific community. For one thing, UFO articles now appear in scientific journals. Another significant vote of
confidence on the evidence so far accumulated is the government financed project by the University of Colorado to
conduct a scientific investigation. Le coût : 313 000 $. Probablement plus impressionnant est le changement d'attitude
de scientifiques. Not a few in prominent positions now apparently regard it
as cause for serious inquiry. En particulier, le docteur Allen
Hynek, Directeur de l'Observatoire Dearborn de l'Université Northwestern, et consultant de longue date de l'Air Force sur les ovnis, défend aujourd'hui un point de vue sérieux et ouvert
auprès de collègues scientifiques. Pourtant, lors de ses premiers jours comme
consultant, le Dr. Hynek admet avoir pensé que les ovnis were sheer
nonsense . In light of the evidence, many other scientists favor investigation; a few
others have boldly suggested that UFOs are purposefully dispatched vehicles from outer space, a conclusion which
presupposes the reality of UFOs. James E. McDonald, University of
Arizona atmospheric physicist, after studying the evidence concluded: "The amount of evidence is overwhelmingly
real..the evidence points to no other acceptable hypothesis than the extraterrestrial
" .
In the face of such evidence, and its growing credibility, the next logical question involves origin. As will be pointed out in the next chapter, the reality or UFOs does not necessarily solve the entire riddle, although proof that they were fabricated devices of extraterrestrial origin would rather definitely settle the question of reality.
Unless there is some degree of acceptance that UFOs are real, the question of origin is hardly deserving of discussion. For if UFOs could be written off as figments of the human imagination or some natural phenomenon of the earth's atmosphere, such conclusions would forego the necessity of any further examination. As it is however, the evidence has grown and gained enough credence to suggest that the matter or origin should be addressed seriously.
The very question of origin has probably been a stumbling block to an objective view of the evidence. This is true because even any tentative acceptance about the material existence or UFOs raises the equally difficult tasks of facing the alternatives of origin. Some of these, as the later discussions will show, are amenable in the scientific world while others are quite controversial.
With contrast to the general acceptability regarding origin, the categorical placement or definition of alternatives is somewhat more straight forward. Alternatives in the simplest terms are that UFOs originate either from this planet or elsewhere (terrestrial or extraterrestrial, respectively). However, the latter category is infinitely larger than the first; thus for the purpose of this thesis, the classification of extraterrestrial is subdivided into interplanetary and extrasolar sources.
The possibility that UFOs originate right on our own planet will be considered first. This classification probably
has the widest and most immediate degree of acceptance. When even the severest critic is impressed by the evidence and
tends to concede the reality of UFOs, the first reaction is apt to be that the objects are some secret but earthly
hardware development [1]. It is surely evident that space activities have generated reports that were later shown to
be missile tests, satellite reentry after orbit decay, advanced conventional aircraft and so on. Yet, there are
several arguments against the theory that UFOs are secret devices from our own planet. First, it would seem that the
lengthy record of UFO sightings would cast doubt on such a theory. Whatever country or countries making such a
mysterious and impressive development should hardly test it for so long, with out some practical applications which
would remove the shroud of secrecy. But the strongest argument against earthly origin involves the broad scattering of
UFO reports [2]. As mentioned in Chapter I, the phenomenon of UFOs is worldwide, although certain parts of the world
have had the so called flying saucer waves which come and go. If the UFOs were an advanced technological development
of some country, testing would not logically include so many areas of the globe; rather, testing -- or any operation
for that matter -- would most likely be confined to the country itself, in a specific area. Global operations as
represented by UFO sightings would be a careless gesture, regardless of the basic intentions. While the UFO may well
represent a quantum jump in technology, there would be some risk in operating such craft in foreign air space. The
device could malfunction or fall victim to disabling attacks from conventional weapons, allowing capture. The most
likely candidates for developing an advanced vehicle resembling UFOs are the Soviet Union and the United States. Yet
it seems highly unlikely that either country could for so long possess an advanced and superior flight system without
some reflection of it in the terms or national policy. From a somewhat prejudiced point of view, this would seem
especially true when speaking of the Soviet Union, for it has not been their practice to withhold or play down the
potential of hardware developments that might offer a military advantage. To the contrary, such things as Soviet
ICBMs, for example, were seemingly well advertised by that nation. Of greater importance perhaps is the Russian view
of the UFO situation as of late. There are persuasive clues to indicate that the Soviets have recently undertaken a
serious scientific study of UFOs [3]. (This may or may not be a simple coincidence to the U.S. Government's greater
UFO interest manifested by the study by the University of Colorado.) Such studies, along with other inferences, very
sharply diminish the likelihood that the U.S.S.R. is the point of origin. The same reasoning more or less applies to
the United States. To believe that UFOs are the products of U.S. technology, stretches the imagination more than a
little. If so, never before has there been a secret so well kept for so long. Most convincing perhaps is the interest
stressed by members of Congress. Some members long ago demanded repeatedly that formal UFO investigations were in
order [4]. It seems unlikely then that Congressmen along with other high officials in government would be unaware or
any advanced craft which could account for UFO activity. Finally, the most telling argument against terrestrial origin
is rather well expressed in a statement by Major Donald E. Kehoe, USMC (Retired), Director of NICAP, and author or
several books about UFOs: "If the Soviet Union or the United States had 'these things' they would scarcely be
fooling around with the crude objects they are now putting into space
."
If UFOs are not from this world, what about the possibility of interplanetary origin, i.e., from other planets in our solar system? "Solar system," used here in the traditional sense, refers to the earth, the eight other planets, the sun -- around which the planets orbit -- and the natural satellites orbiting the planets. The discussion here obviously excludes our own planet as a point of origin, because that has already been discussed.
In many ways, the proposition of interplanetary origin has certain appeal. For one thing the distances from earth are
plausible for space travel as we understand it, For another, our own programs in space lend reality to the whole idea:
The U,S. has sent space probes to both Mars and Venus. This surely sharpens the receptivity or the idea that the other
planets could reciprocate, not only with probes but eventually with manned interplanetary vehicles. The current U.S.
technology certainly envisions such interplanetary travel, if not something more ambitious. As early as 1962, the
mission or the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was formally revised to include "the
search for extraterrestrial life
" [6]. Note that extrasolar searches are not excluded although the "state or the
art" on Earth almost surely excludes for the time being any ventures outside the planets around our own sun.
As promising as our technology may be for exploration of the solar system, the knowledge already accumulated is somewhat discouraging about the existence of life on neighboring planets, particularly intelligent life capable of launching interplanetary vehicles to the earth. Mars and Venus are generally considered as the only likely candidates on which some forms of life could exist. Since these are the closest planets to the earth, their observation by astronomers has allowed fairly persuasive predictions as to their ability to support life.
While Venus is the closer of the two, its surface is shrouded by what appears to be clouds. Compounding the difficulty in viewing Venus is its orbit inside that of the earth. In other words, when it is closest to Earth we see the dark side; only when it is quite far away in orbit does the planet appear "full." Despite these difficulties in making observations, scientists for some time had postulated that Vénus était une planète inhospitalière chaude (autour de 500 °F), enveloppée par une atmosphère dense de dioxide de carbone. A la mi-october 1967, the earlier determinations were confirmed when the U.S's Mariner 5 space probe transmitting data back to Earth passed within 2,500 miles of the planet's surface [7]. While such data would certainly diminish the likelihood of any past or present life on Venus, detection of hydrogen and some nitrogen brought up new speculation. The atmospheric mixtures are hauntingly similar to that of the earth several billion years ago [8]. Does this mean that Venus is evolving more slowly but otherwise the same as the earth did? Whatever Venus might become someday is outside the discussion here, but the implications are relevant to discussions later about life on extrasolar planets.
Although farther away than Venus, slightly smaller Mars is a better subject for observation. With an orbit outside the earth's, it never obscures its illuminated side; thus when Mars is in the closest approach to the earth, it appears full. Equally important, the tenuous atmosphere of Mars can hardly obscure the surface from observation by earthbound astronomers. But with all the advantages in observing Mars, the basic question of life will probably remain doubtful until man personally explores the surface. Photographs taken of Mars, in July 1965 and transmitted back to Earth by the U.S.'s Mariner 4 probe have created doubt about the existence of "canals" on the surface;[9] of course, only a small fraction of the surface was photographed. The so-called "canals" as reported by astronomers in the late 1800's could serve as a strong argument supporting the theory of intelligent life. Even earlier, several essential features were discovered; white caps appearing on either pole depending on the season, and alterations in color from season to season [10]. The Martian atmosphere is believed to be only a fraction as dense as the earth's and contains very small quantities of water vapor. The reasoning followed that the "canals" necessarily provided water from the polar regions of Mars to the arid, desert-like areas in the lower latitudes.
Furthermore, it could be contended that the geometric design of the "canals" meant massive construction by an advanced civilization. But as astronomers gained increasing knowledge of the planet and of the likely requirements for life, they became increasingly more skeptical of the proposition of "canals"; besides, only a few notable astronomers persisted in observing the canals clearly [11]. Thus today, many astronomers hold little hope of finding intelligent life on Mars. Many feel that simple forms of plant life may well prevail; [12] others have not entirely ruled out the existence of intelligent life.
If UFOs were from Mars or Venus -- despite the discouraging surface conditions -- there would be advantageous times, or locations in their respective orbits, to launch space probes or manned interplanetary vehicles. These optimum times correspond to planetary positions where a spacecraft can be launched so that it will travel along a minimum-energy path. The U. S. Mariner launches were obviously planned to take place during favorable times. Likewise it would be logical to predict that vehicles from either Mars or Venus would be launched according to this principle, although the calendar dates would be different from optimum launch periods for objects from Earth to those planets. In any case, the favorable launch times from the two planets can be and have been computed, arrival time at Earth estimated, and the results compared with UFO activity. The findings revealed that there was a poor correlation, adding to the other discouraging evidence [13].
In summary, the possible points or UFO origin were categorized. These, in the broadest sense are intersolar or extrasolar; the former is subdivided into terrestrial and interplanetary, and both were discussed in this chapter. The case for terrestrial origin of UFOs, while maybe the easiest to accept, is confronted by several obstacles: the wide scattering of UFO sightings, the longevity or the phenomena, and the indication that both the U. S. and the Soviet Union -- the countries most likely to achieve a scientific breakthrough -- have undertaken government financed UFO investigations.
Examination of whether UFOs originate from other planets in the solar system was approached by assessing the features or the planets. In turn, these features were discussed in view or the probability of certain planets being able to sustain the higher forms of life. As was shown, Mars is the only other planet with conditions reasonably conducive to life as we know it. However, further discussions indicated a greatly diminishing likelihood of any life except that of simple plants. Additionally, UFO sighting trends relate poorly to predictable arrival on Earth of any interplanetary trips from either planet. Thus the prospect that UFOs, if real, originate in our Solar System is quite discouraging, although it cannot be definitely excluded. What about points of origin outside the solar system? This will be dealt with next.
The question which arises next has to do with probable origination of UFOs from outside the solar system. It might be contended, on the basis of data in earlier chapters, that UFOs "had to be" extrasolar; however, all possibilities of closer points of origin were not by any means eliminated. Along with those earlier discussions, that surely tend to indicate extrasolar origin, the intent here is to assess such a hypothesis from another viewpoint. Specifically, this viewpoint deals with the likelihood of the development and existence of intelligent life on planets of other stars in our own galaxy, the Milky Way. For if highly developed beings are fairly commonplace in the galaxy, it could be reasoned that their technology could be greatly in advance of anything on Earth, and capable of staggering achievements, space travel notwithstanding.
Attempting to predict the occurrence of an intelligent life in the galaxy, or for that matter the existence of suitable planets, is quite speculative for several reasons. First, man has had no opportunity to study first hand any forms of life that may exist on other worlds, including those which may exist in our own solar system; hence, our understanding of biological life may be rather constrained. Secondly, given that such life may well exist, estimation or the eventual technological capabilities seems impossibly difficult, and bounded only by the imagination. Nevertheless, from using known data, some fairly well reasoned conclusions will be attempted.
Considering our own galaxy first, it would not seem to be anything out of the ordinary. Of the 100 odd billion galaxies detectable in the universe, the Milky Way -- our own galaxy -- certainly does not seem unique in any way [1]. Rather, it is a typical spiral type galaxy, and these fall into several common classes. The Milky Way consists of somewhere between 150 and 200 billion stars, one of which is the sun. Many of these apparently would be suitable for life while others would not. The latter category would include stars not in the main sequence; these should be excluded because either the life span or the star is judged insufficient for life to develop or because the luminosity is so low that planets, if any would have to orbit in a very restrictive band around the star. Further, not all stars in the main sequence should be considered as suitable places for planets with life to evolve. Double star systems, for example while individually suitable, probably would cause unacceptable extremes of temperature on any planets. After these exclusions and certain others, the remaining independent main sequence stars which are likely abodes of higher forms of life, number about six billion; the sun incidentally, is rather typical of this special group of stars in our galaxy [2]. Perhaps it should be emphasized that the six billion figure is just for our galaxy, one of about a hundred billion.
Regardless of suitability, however, this approach depends on the existence of planets around these stars. While the preceding paragraph dealt with observable data about stars, there is scant information regarding extrasolar planets, as even fairly large ones could not be seen if they in fact did orbit the nearest star. The meager information available involves the solar system, i.e., the sun with nine orbiting planets. This admittedly is a small sample when addressing the probability of planets around six billion stars; but there is additional data about stars which implies that planetary systems are the rule rather than the exception. Billions of stars, for example, show an unexplained slow angular motion; unexplained, that is unless such motion is accounted for by the presence or planets (the sun has slow angular motion [3]). Still another theory has evolved which may indicate that planets indeed are very common. This involves the observed wavering of many stars from a more or less straight line path through the sky. This motion according to astronomers can only be accounted for by dark companions orbiting around such stars [4]. Thus in addition to the great number of suitable stars, there would appear to be a tremendous quantity of planets. Many astronomers assume that the fraction of suitable stars with planet systems is close to one [5]. In other words, practically all suitable stars of the main sequence variety have planets.
The next question is how many suitable stars with planetary systems contain one or more ideal planets (development of higher forms or life). We know that the sun has one such planet, the earth, and Mars may be just on the outside or the fringe. Again, this is a small sample and extrapolations from it would seem to produce an optimistically high figure. Many astronomers would accept a probability for such an ideal planet at around 0.5, although this is based on quite limited empirical evidence. Using this figure, remembering that the suitable stars numbered six billion and most all probably had Planetary systems, the results show a figure approaching three billion stars with an ideal abode for life in the Milky Way alone. For sake of illustration, suppose the probability was 0.1 instead or 0.5; the result would still be a staggering 600 million. To say the least, conditions for life elsewhere in the universe seem quite abundant. The extent to which life evolves and inhabits these is obviously an open subject.
Leading scientists and astronomers generally ridiculed the notion that life as we know it could exist elsewhere in the universe and they stubbornly adhered to this belief until the early 195O's when a gradual change in thinking began to occur. In the 1960's, scientists -- some who had earlier scoffed at the thought -- have subscribed seriously to the concept of extraterrestrial life. Many recently published works, as manifested by titles in the Bibliography hereto, treat the subject as almost a self-evident truth, and dwell instead on the extent, characteristics and capability of such extraterrestrial life; as mentioned earlier NASA long ago incorporated the "search for extraterrestrial life" into its mission, an official U.S. action which apparently presupposes the existence of extraterrestrial life.
In summary, this chapter has dealt with the probability associated with the occurrence of intelligent life outside or our own solar system. In the last chapter, it was reasoned that there was little prospect of even lower forms of life on other planets around the sun. The reasoning for such a judgment is based on observations and generally accepted data. Attempting to predict the occurrence of intelligent life on planets of other stars is a far more difficult task [8]. This is because of a much smaller amount of observable scientific data, in lieu of which theory must be substituted.
Based on the limited data and theories, this chapter -- in contrast to the preceding, points persuasively to a great abundance of life in the galaxy. In short, the Milky Way consists of 150 billion stars, six billion of which are suitable for life bearing planets. The sun is the only one which we are certain has a life bearing satellite. But there is evidence of planets around other stars. Using modest figures for computation, the planets ideally suited for life may number as high as 3 billion. Thus, if life evolves only in a few places where favorable conditions prevail, intelligent life in the galaxy may be unbelievably commonplace.
Further, it was shown that the idea of other intelligent life was not long ago heatedly rejected. Today, many noted scientists as well as other professional disciplines face the theory openly. Last year at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, discussions indicated that life elsewhere in the universe almost certainly exists [9].
With persuasive prospects for countless abodes for advanced forms of life, can any assessment be made of intelligence that would emerge? Specifically, could their technology be greatly advanced, accounting for UFOs? These questions will be assessed in the final chapter.
The purpose of this chapter is to discuss and ponder the technology that extraterrestrial societies might attain. It stands to reason that if UFOs are in fact vehicles from outer space worlds, the technology of the beings sending them is superior to our own. But the fallacy here is that we do not have any such certain information. Nevertheless, by extending the reasoning of the foregoing chapter, some better perspective of the possibilities of extraterrestrial technologies may be visualized.
Earlier, it was shown that the probability of life on planets around other stars was rather good. So good in fact,
that many scientists accept extraterrestrial life as almost a certainty. Bearing this in mind and remembering other
points of origin are excluded by persuasive argument, there is a subtle connection between intelligent life elsewhere
and the UFO. For certain, the former hypothesis is quite compatible with the UFO evidence. Putting it another way, the
connection is amply illustrated in a statement by Dr. Allen Hynek,
accepting the possibility that UFOs are extraterrestrial: "As long as there are 'unidentifieds', the question must
obviously remain open
" [2].
Conceding that extrasolar life may abound, could their eventual technological achievements be so far superior to that on Earth, that it would scarcely be understood here? One way to judge this is to look at the age of the earth and its expected longevity. The solar system is about 4.5 billion years old; the sun's total life expectancy, similar to other main sequence stars, is about 10 million years. With a presumed wide distribution of age among the suitable main sequence stars, the odds are that the majority of these would indeed be farther advanced societies than on Earth. The extent to which their technology would excel is difficult even to ponder; however, perhaps it is no more difficult than predicting what our earthly technology might represent, say 4 billion years from now. Five hundred years from now boggles the imagination, especially when realizing that a scant hundred years ago most of our current technology would probably have seemed fanciful. For example, had scientists even fifty years ago been exposed to disciplines of modern nuclear physics, there would probably have been pessimists and "doubters". Looking a little farther back might also improve perspective. Souvenez-vous qu'il y a moins de 500 ans des hommes furent brûlés sur le bûcher pour avoir proclamé que la Terre tournait autour du Soleil, comme cela avait été proposé avant par Copernic. La vision populaire à cette époque maintenait que la Terre n'était pas seulement plate mais aussi le centre de l'univers.
There is another way of approaching the technological aspect, although it contains an obvious assumption. Nevertheless, some authors have expressed the idea that clues of the originating technology could be found in the behavior of UFOs. The curious pendulum motion, or oscillation reported in some UFO sightings is most often used to discount observation as natural phenomenon. However, this trait may suggest a propulsion system far beyond our earthly understanding. The apparent acceleration capability gives further rise to questions on what type of power plant might propel UFOs, although speed and acceleration traits are elusive because it would seem that these could not be accurately judged without knowing the size of the object and its distance -- a common shortcoming even when witnesses are reliable. Hovering is another trait, which appears to suggest some extraordinary means or propulsion. A popular view, although quite speculative, proposes that UFOs are not aerodynamic but are propelled by a gravity force (G-field) [5]. Such a theory could indeed account for the UFOs maneuverability and other traits which apparently defy what we recognize as basic laws of physics. One subscriber to this theory overcomes the inherent difficulties in two ways.
The first is by way of an analogy, about the so called universal laws or forces. Newton's laws of motion were not proven inaccurate by Einstein's theories; rather the latter's merely extended the application of Newtonian principles [6]. Following this logic, it could be reasoned that Einstein's theories do not represent the ultimate in the disciplines of physics. Additionally, to quiet the pessimists, history often reveals poor judgment of what technology may attain. Not so many years ago authoritative people claimed the airplane could never fly across the Atlantic Ocean. The error stemmed from their use of calculations based on the known and accepted efficiencies then in existence [7]. The deeper and common fallacy, which has repeatedly been ignored, is attempting to interpret the unknown based on scientific knowledge possessed at the time.
Chapter III dealt with the prospect of UFOs being either terrestrial or interplanetary, concluding that these points of origin were unlikely. Using a different approach, the possibilities of extrasolar origin were assessed in Chapter IV. In this chapter an attempt was made to assess the chances for highly advanced technologies. First, if life emerges in the galaxy as often as the conditions prevail, intelligent life may be unbelievably commonplace. Following this premise, it is most likely that there are literally millions of societies with technological achievements beyond those known or even understood on Earth. To illustrate the problems of extrasolar technological assessments, one can ponder what these might amount to on Earth in the year 4,000,001,968 AD. As further illustrations, previous resistance to new scientific concepts was cited. Further, using some of the UFO traits as a basis of discussion, some of the technological implications were presented. The reasoning was aimed at showing that propulsion as we on Earth know it, may be quite inferior to what propels the UFO, or what might be achieved by extraterrestrial civilizations. It was also shown that estimates of our own technology have frequently been too pessimistic. In short, we may be too quick to assume that all basic principles of knowledge have been attained; and therefore imprudently degrade possible achievements of extraterrestrial societies -- which surely exist in great numbers. Dr. Allen Hynek, longtime adviser to the Air Force and previous UFO skeptic, summarized the foregoing idea quite appropriately in this statement:
I have begun to feel that there is a tendency in the 20th century to forget that there will be a 21st century science, and indeed a 30th century science, from which vantage points our knowledge of the universe may appear quite different, We suffer perhaps, from temporal provincialism, a form of arrogance that has always irritated posterity [8].
Having discussed the evidence on UFOs, the aspects of their origin, and the likelihood of extraterrestrial intelligence, it is now time to look for conclusions which may be drawn. This will be undertaken in the next and final chapter, along with a presentation of recommendations.
....recent discussions of scientists at the annual meeting or the American Association for the Advancement or Science indicated that life almost certainly exists elsewhere in the universe....
| Home |
|---|