There is an irrefutable fact that no scientist can counter. Not one person on Earth has actually physically examined alien life first hand.
Yes, Science can call on its knowledge of Earth based life but even here it is stumped when it comes to certain life forms such as Tardigrades -there are often called water bears or moss piglets and are near-microscopic animals with long, plump bodies and scrunched-up heads: these tiny animals are almost indestructible and can even survive in outer space. So we can learn a lot about tardigrades however, they are still from Earth and not another planet -even if some jumped onto the theory that they might have arrived on Earth from space.
The fact is that we need what is called a flat -basic- data base to work from and so our current knowledge forms that. Where things go wrong is when those involved in science claim that life elsewhere must conform to life on Earth and to have been started the same way and so on and so forth -even if others argue against this.
At one time if someone reported a UFOB (a seemingly constructed non-terrestrial craft) and humanoid figures emerging from it then immediately the scientists would screech out "No! Impossible! Any extraterrestrial life must be completely difference in appearance to humans!" In articles they had written, as well as in person, several astronomers made it clear that the UFOB reports that would have more credibility would be those featuring non-humanoid entities.
From 1975 -2018 I searched and scoured every possible non-humanoid report I could find and as I pointed out in UFO Contact? one after another fell in the wake of the mildest scrutiny.
The Flying Saucer Review and its later publications including the book The Humanoids (previously an FSR Special Issue) listed the November, 1958, Braemar, Tayside case in which two young members of the Territorial Army encountered strange, shambling creatures as factual. It was cited, despite the lack of any original source or names as "the British Flatwoods". After decades of searching I can confirm that this was a hoax and the likeliest culprits in this hoax were the Flying Saucer Review and its editor. Not a single newspaper report and even local historians (most keep a ghosts and mysteries file) had never heard of such an event. And FSR editorial correspondence on file now has no reference to the report. Hoax.
FSR, along with some very dubious UFO book authors, such as Brad Steiger, promoted the Gustafsson and Rydberg encounter as genuine. As it happens, Steiger probably based his account on FSRs since it was the only English language source. On 20th December, 1958, Hans Gustafsson and Stig Rydberg claimed that “jellylike creatures” attempted to drag them toward a craft in the early morning whilst driving to Helsingborg, Sweden. The case was quickly identified as a hoax (see Some Things Strange and Sinister) by official and unofficial Swedish investigators -FSR was informed of this at the time but seemed unwilling to correct the record (rejecting a fully reference article I sent it as (according to Gordon Creighton) "of no relevance".
These two cases are continually re-used in print and online and even my own internet posting on non humanoid entity cases has been constantly used along with its illustrations -no one points out that the cases were also proven by myself to be hoaxes (a number by Spanish ufologists aimed to discredit other ufologoists). In fact I rarely get a mention as the originator of the material used.
I did my research. I short-listed cases, went into them in more depth and found that ufologists knew some were hoaxes or even practical jokes but had never bothered to correct the record publicly as it was "of no relevance" -they knew and that is all that mattered.
The only case that seems -I use the word seems because ufologists didn't drop the ball on it...they just could not be bothered turning up to the playing field to even pick it up- was Euporia, Mississippi in 1973.
After decades I started questioning what evidence there actually was but at some undefinable point in the 2000's astronomers and scientists began to state that inhabitants from other worlds would conform to the humanoid form in appearance. This was based on what they knew about life on Earth of course and ruled out other forms of life including non humanoid. But scientists are always doing this and my favourite quote on an astronomical anomaly can be paraphrased: "We think we can now explain this if our theory is correct and if this other phenomenon exists as we think it does"
To explain this even more clearly what they are saying is that they they have seen an object (planet, sun or whatever) A do something they cannot explain but they have theorised that A and what they have observed can be possibly explained if object B and their theories about its behaviour can be linked to object C. Being silly one might say "I have a duck feather in this hand. In front of me on the table is a cannonball and the feather flutters to the floor slowly while the cannonball shoots out at high speed. It is possible that these two combined, in theory, might explain why clouds some times move slowly and at other times move quickly. Wind does not come into it because they never observed it.
The sudden dimming of an otherwise unremarkable star 1300 light-years away in the constellation Cygnus. KIC 8462852 (Tabby's Star) has prompted some researchers to suggest that the megastructures of an advanced alien civilization might be blocking its light. Astronomers will always tell you "It is anything but alien" in almost every instance. It is a new mantra of dogma but is correct in that every other possibility needs to be ruled out first. And every possibility was thrown in including waves of comets causing the blinking. Oh, the latest is that a nearby planet/moon may be evaporating and its vapourisation is creating the dimming.
Oumuamua science dropped the ball on in a way but signal emissions etc were checked for. The famous images of Oumuamua as a long, torpedo like body was used constantly. Even astronomers were using it as a illustrated reference while stamping their feet and shouting "It does not look like that!" It was quite funny reading all the conspiracy and other comments over the Oumuamua image in which some stated that there were clearly some form on antenna or antenna array visible "in the photo" (no one checked the "artist impression of what Oumuamua looks like" caption beneath the image.
NASA/ESA the world famous artists impression
How "we" actually saw Oumuamua NASA/ESA
Final Oumuamua shape decided on by scientists NASA/ESA
"Earth like exo planet discovered!" declare the headlines on a regular basis. And the images all look wonderful -clouds, mountain ranges, seas are all visible. Similar for other planets. However, in reality these planets are observed as tiny dots on a photo that moves its position or is seen as it crosses in front of its star. No one from this planet has ever taken a clear photograph of a planet beyond our own solar system and even in our own the minor planets beyond Pluto are not clearly photographed. Planet 9 (before demotion of Pluto it was Planet 10) the evidence has existed for over many decades and even some astronomers have proposed a Planet 9 and they have faced name calling and ridicule from colleagues over this. Now we are told that Planet 9 is huge and it effects other planets in the system with its gravity. Basically, Science ruined and ran out the pioneers of planetary study and research because of scientific dogma. Now they try to brush over how they behaved in a disgusting and unscientific manner with a "back then we never had the data".
If you spend any time in Science you will see this behaviour. Remember that at one point we had no idea that there were other galaxies -we thought ours was all there was and even those who suggested there were other galaxies got ridiculed. We now know, Science will tell you, about Dark Matter. Well, it is theorised to exist but, you know, no one has seen it "but it makes sense on a scientific basis" well then, people observing UFOBs and entities fits like-wise. But "NO!" because even in what has been termed the "most enlightened age of Man" dogma rules.
MACS0647-JD. MACS0647-JD ( J-band Dropout) is the second farthest known galaxy from the Earth based on the photometric redshift. It has a redshift of about z = 10.7, equivalent to a light travel distance of 13.26 billion light-years (4 billion parsecs). It contains an estimated (guessed at) 1 billion (1×109) stars.
NASA/ESA
Interesting but what about our own galaxy? Some will state, and it is justified, that we should be expanding our knowledge of the universe
The small common star UDF 2457 may be one of the farthest known stars inside the main body of the Milky Way. Globular clusters.
UDF 2457 NASA/ESA
According to Space.com the closest stars to the Sol system are three stars in the Alpha Centauri system. The two main stars are Alpha Centauri A and Alpha Centauri B, which form a binary pair. They are an average of 4.3 light-years from Earth. The third star is Proxima Centauri. It is about 4.22 light-years from Earth and is the closest star other than the sun.
Astronomers announced in August 2016 that they had detected an Earth-size planet orbiting Proxima Centauri. The newfound world, known as Proxima b, is about 1.3 times more massive than Earth, which suggests that the exoplanet is a rocky world, researchers said.
The planet is also in the star's habitable zone, that just-right range of distances where liquid water can exist. Proxima b lies just 4.7 million miles (7.5 million kilometers) from its host star and completes one orbit every 11.2 Earth-days. As a result, it's likely that the exoplanet is tidally locked, meaning it always shows the same face to its host star, just as the moon shows only one face (the near side) to Earth.
It is possible to detect whether a planet might have water, etc, but again it is important to understand that no human being has actually seen one of these planets up close or are ever likely to. All the beautiful artist interpretations of these planets are just that.
We know that no human, let alone human scientist, has ever visited a world outside of our system. We know definitely that no one has ever spoken to or studied an example of extraterrestrial life/life form.
Ufologists have appeared incapable of dealing with reported encounters, classified as Close Encounters of the Third Kind/Alien Entity incidents. Even in 2019 there are many who shun the reports. Most just quote "Alien Greys Abduction Event" and cite the very flawed work of Hopkins and fantastical work of Jacobs. There is even an outright objection -some times intermixed with insults- to look into old cases that were never investigated. Multi-witness cases in which, due to probability, some of those witnesses are now dead and making it even more important to contact those still alive.
Both Science and those calling themselves ufologists all carry their dogma into their work which should be carried out with an open mind and to look at the facts and assess observers fairly. Ufology is a joke. At times Science, with all of ots pomposity and cockalorum is also a joke. We have to remember that whether ufology or Science those involved are human beings with all of the flaws that go with that.
The statement "We think that it might be if we are right about this as yet only theory then we could possibly offer an explanation with stipulations" = "we are full of gas". You have to have the data base and then work from that and I find that acceptable but it always needs to be made clear "it's only a theory and it may change". That is how Science works and the days when noted members of the community were ridiculed should be long gone (unless it is fear talking).
Europeans returning home talking of hairy man apes were ridiculed -until they started killing the gorillas at which point they became fact (Berenger proved they existed by getting his native Askari to machine gun them). The Okapi -pure native myth and any European saying it was not was "a loon" -Okapi proved to be real and on and on it goes Strange "sea monster" sightings ridiculed by the armchair experts but one after another proved to be real and so might the "sea serpent" the seeming migration path of which was known by even the gutter press who suspected any account not "within the season traditionally noted for sea serpent reports" -naturalists noting this, as they might note recognise what migration routes, were ridiculed.
Trains going faster that 10 miles per hour would result in the deaths of those on board. There is a very large catalogue of things ridiculed by established Science and even things accepted by it but which even at the time must have seemed a little "odd" but it was dogma and dogma had it as fact.
"Life on other planets based on what we know would have to follow the same lines of creation as on Earth. The humanoid form would be the best developed and so we look for Earth-like planets in an habitable zone". I hear this over and over again. There is absolutely no established universal scientific law that says any life in this or any other solar system or galaxy must follow Earths example. Life develops as life develops based on -please, Science, excuse me for throwing Science at you- evolutionary and environmental conditions. Any astronomer or scientist who throws that line at you needs to move to a janitorial job or go back to college for an updated education. Remember, again, that some of the top names of their times in Science mocked and black-listed Darwin and his theory of evolution which today is accepted (except in some very dim Creationist areas). Evolution -NO! Old beardy guy sitting on a fluffy cloud -yes!
Possibly the biggest identifying statement from someone claiming to be a scientist or astronomer is "Well, we haven't detected any radio signals from other civilisations so it looks like Earth has the only form of intelligent life".
This is planetary jingoism at its worst. It is tantamount to stating "We own the universe as there is 'no one' else out there" The question has always been whether other advanced civilisations actually use technology sending out radio signals or anything we recognise as signals. Space is a very noisy place you know. People often counter that there "are so many stars out there" and, thus, there might or must be other intelligent life. People state this with no idea of just how many stars there are in the universe.
According to Space.com in October 2016, an article in Science (based on deep-field images from the Hubble Space Telescope) suggested that there are about 2 trillion galaxies in the observable universe, or about 10 times more galaxies than previously suggested. In an email with Live Science, lead author Christopher Conselice, a professor of astrophysics at the University of Nottingham in the United Kingdom, said there were about 100 million stars in the average galaxy.
You then have to ask how big the universe itself is. David Kornreich, an assistant professor at Ithaca College in New York State, the founder of the "Ask An Astronomer" service at Cornell University stated, regarding this question "I don't know because I don't know if the universe is infinitely large or not," The observable universe appears to go back in time by about 13.8 billion years, but beyond what we could see there could be much, much more. And there are some astronomers who also think that we may live in a "multiverse" where there would be other universes like ours contained in some sort of larger entity.
We do not know how big the "universe" is or even how many galaxies exist beyond MACS0647-JD at 13.26 billion light-years (4 billion parsecs). Two trillion stars which is hard to even conceive and my favourite explanation of a trillion is: a trillion is 1,000,000,000,000, also known as 10 to the 12th power, or one million million. It's such a large number it's hard to get your head around it, so sometimes trillion just means “wow, a lot.”
"Humans are likely the only intelligent life form in the universe" is therefore a nonsensical statement from someone who needs a hard kick in the pants. I note some say "in the (Milky Way) galaxy" which consists of, by guesstimate some 250 billion ± 150 billion. Still a quote to deserve that kick in the pants.
Astronomers are now looking at which galaxies might be right to support systems that could support intelligent life. This is all theoretical because they are trying to find stars similar to our own and then guess at whether they might be in habitable zones -but that does not mean there would be intelligent life. There is even argument as to whether the shape of a galaxy has anything to do with intelligent life developing.
Sending signals that might be intercepted at its target in thousands of years if there is intelligent life and if it uses radio systems is utter futility. The point, as scientists and astronomers point out, the irony does not seem to get through to them, is "to let whoever might be there know that there used to be intelligent life but it probably died out by the time they get the signal". The other point is that IF there was another civilisation and they wanted to say "Hello" then that signal would take thousands more years to get back to....a dead planet so why bother?
If Science and astronomers were really interested in finding any intelligent form of life you wonder why they do not concentrate all effort on nearby stars? Why do they not broadcast random signals in all directions around our solar system? If there is life closer to us then it is far more likely to get a response sooner than thousands of years and if -if- there were exploring non terrestrial craft or even craft on regular routes of travel then they might be in the right place at the right time. That makes logical sense.
I think that the answer is fear. For all of the astronomers and scientists who want to discover intelligent alien life there are very loud astronomers and scientists who do not want to find or establish contact with alien life. Some will state where they are looking -again, millions of light years away- because the distance is non threatening to them: "No craft could travel faster than light so it would take them hundreds or thousands of years to get here" -safe. Others, not hiding behind excuses will state outright that "When a technologically superior civilisation discovers an inferior one...the inferior civilisation soon ceases to exist". Fear.
If ufologists cannot simply gather the reports and the information in a way the French and Canadian police services did and then put it forwrd for analysis then they need to move aside.
If astronomers and scientists only want to ridicule -without viewing the actual data or talking to the percipients/witnesses involved- then they are not real scientists with enquiring minds. You look at what you are told is ridiculous or impossible and you assess the data for yourself. Scared the "boys in the club" might laugh at you? Leave science and astronomy alone then until you are mature enough. Scared your boss might get angry with you so you will be quiet and join in the ridiculing? Either go ask mummy to stand up for you or, again, go away and come back when you are mature enough.
Yes, ufology is full of crooks, frauds, hoaxers and even people with mental health issues -with "Ruth Syndrome" as outlined in UFO Contact? we are not talking about mental illness. However, get past all the Grey Abduction Agenda stuff to the core of sightings and incidents then you wqill find the reports worth looking at.
As it stands I am probably more of an exobiologist than any of those with high paid salaries and free lunches for life.
