4.5 Recommended Scientific Community Actions

4.5 Recommended Scientific Community Actions

As observations of the UFO phenomena reported by many thousands of witnesses worldwide (see sections 3.8 and 7.0 for some documented examples) are validated, a new set of scientific paradigms will need to be researched to explain what is being observed. Twentieth century scientific theories have barely touched the surface in explaining what numerous scientific, military and civilian witnesses have observed and reported. However, in some cases, covert military research programs appear to have advanced much further in understanding the observed phenomena and technologies (based on witness testimonies, section 3.8) than have our academic and public scientists. Recent findings, such as the demonstration of possible faster than speed of light phenomenon 35, suggest that indeed there will be a whole new class of scientific phenomena that 21st century scientists will investigate to explain what has been declared as “impossible” by scientists of the last century.

There is still a major acceptance problem about UFO/ET issues with most scientists. Dr. Peter Sturrock, a highly respected solar physicist and now an emeritus professor at Stanford University, summarized the problem as follows: “The definite resolution of the UFO enigma will not come about unless and until the problem is subjected to open and extensive scientific study by the normal procedures of established science. This requires a change in attitude primarily on the part of scientists and administrators in universities.”36

A further view by Dr. Sturrock on the role of scientists and scientific journals is quoted in section 3.2.1. Surprising though it may seem to the layperson, scientists often have trouble changing their understanding of processes and natural phenomena when faced with evidence that their theories may not be correct. The history of science is replete with examples of scientists proclaiming such and such is impossible, only to be shown later that their assumptions were incorrect. This normal human tendency is certainly not limited to scientists. (For example, for a number of years after the Wright brother’s planes had been observed flying by thousands of people, there were still popular articles proclaiming that flying is impossible.) Furthermore, most scientific research in the United States, especially in colleges and universities, is colleague-driven through the peer review process for promotion and tenure as well as for grants and journal publications. Stepping outside the bounds of peer accepted research often spells difficulty for the scientist, even if they are well established in more conventionally accepted scientific areas. Consequently, the vast majority of academics are not willing to take such a risk, since it is safer to remain with the accepted views of the day.

35 Wang, L. J., A. Kuzmich, and A. Dogariu. 2000. Fain-assisted superluminal light propagation. Nature. 406:277-279

36 Sturrock, P.A., Report on a Survey of American Astronomical Society concerning the UFO Phenomenon, Stanford University Report SUIPR 68IR, 1977

Over the last century, scientists have played both an active and passive role, often unknowingly, in shaping the attitudes of the “trusting” public on the UFO issue through promulgation of misinformation and disinformation. Since the 1950s, scientists have been used to persuade the public that there is “no scientific evidence” of UFO phenomena. High profile scientists are still playing that role today, as did one of the leaders in the SETI program who stated in a recent public guest lecture at Harvard University that “there is no scientific evidence of the existence of UFOs.” There are several possible explanations for this statement. Either she was unaware of the depth of evidence on the subject, in which case she could have qualified her authoritative pronouncement, or she knew that the subject was real but there were motivations which inadvertently mislead the public in order to gain more support to expand SETI research. Either way, scientists need to be more honest with the public, who for the most part still trust them and their pronouncements.

In summary, without investigation and research, there can be no intelligent informed statement on the phenomena. This need was also recommended by a panel of scientists in the Sturrock/Rockefeller report and by scientists and military personnel in the French COMETA report summarized in section 8.0.

We recommend scientists take the following actions:

1. Scientists must open their minds to the possibility of the UFO/ET phenomenon and stop prejudging others who are researching this area. This will require each to do their own

“research” into the matter; 2. Scientists who know the UFO/ET issues are real (such as those who participate in covert research projects) should share the reality and their understanding with scientific colleagues to start to bring them up to speed. There will be a lot of catching up to do and it will be difficult because of reputations and funding issues; 3. Academic scientists should share this knowledge with their students and the public, for it is the next generation of students and graduate students that will help make the breakthroughs in research to explain what has been observed for several generations; 4. It is critical that scientists help make the study of UFO/ET issues a supported and encouraged area of scientific investigation for these future graduate students and young professional scientists; 5. Scientist/managers who run our federally funded academic research programs should set aside a small percentage of their budgets for ‘outside-the-box’ research into the UFO/ET arena, helping to make it a legitimate area of research. 6. Finally, scientists should realize that advances in science and technology that could come from an understanding of the UFO/ET phenomenon will have far ranging effects on the future of the people and the environment of our planet. The opportunities for new

‘breakthrough’ research have never been better (as well as the opportunity to rewrite many textbooks).