The primary scientific arguments against ETH were summarized by Astronomer and UFO researcher J. Allen Hynek during a presentation at the 1983 MUFON Symposium. During which time he outlined seven key reasons why he could not accept the ETH.[31]
1."Failure of Sophisticated Surveillance Systems to Detect Incoming or Outgoing UFOs"
2."Gravitational and Atmospheric Considerations"
3."Statistical Considerations"
4."Elusive, Evasive and Absurd Behavior of UFOs and Their Occupants"
5."Isolation of the UFO Phenomenon in Time and Space: The Cheshire Cat Effect"
6."The Space Unworthiness of UFOs"
7."The Problem of Astronomical Distances"
Hynek argued that:
1.Despite worldwide radar systems and Earth-orbiting satellites, UFOs are alleged to flit in and out of the atmosphere, leaving little to no evidence.
2.Space aliens are alleged to be overwhelmingly humanoid, and are allegedly able to exist on Earth without much difficulty (often lacking "space suits", even though extra-solar planets would likely have different atmospheres, biospheres, gravity and other factors, and extraterrestrial life would likely be very different from Earthly life.)
3.The number of reported UFOs and of purported encounters with UFO-inhabitants outstrips the number of expeditions that an alien civilization (or civilizations) could statistically be expected to mount.
4.The behavior of extraterrestrials reported during alleged abductions is often inconsistent and irrational.
5.UFOs are isolated in time and space: like the Cheshire Cat, they seem to appear and disappear at will, leaving only vague, ambiguous and mocking evidence of their presence
6.Reported UFOs are often far too small to support a crew traveling through space, and their reported flight behavior is often not representative of a craft under intelligent control (erratic flight patterns, sudden course changes).
7.The distance between planets makes interstellar travel impractical, particularly because of the amount of energy that would be required for interstellar travel using conventional means, (According to a NASA estimate, it would take 7×1019 Joules of energy to send the current space shuttle on a one-way, 50 year, journey to the nearest star, an enormous amount of energy[32]) and because of the level of technology that would be required to circumvent conventional energy/fuel/speed limitations using exotic means such as Einstein Rosen Bridges as ways to shorten distances from point A to point B.(see Faster than light travel).[33]
According to Hynek, points 1 through 6 could be argued, but point 7 represented an insurmountable barrier to the validity of the ETH.[33]
More recently, Professor Stephen Hawking argued that because most UFOs turn out to have prosaic explanations, it was reasonable to presume that the "unidentified" UFOs also had prosaic origins.[34]
[edit] NASA
NASA frequently fields questions in regard to the ETH and UFOs. As of 2006, its official standpoint was that ETH has a lack of empirical evidence.
"no one has ever found a single artifact, or any other convincing evidence for such alien visits". David Morrison.[35] "As far as I know, no claims of UFOs as being alien craft have any validity -- the claims are without substance, and certainly not proved". David Morrison[36]
Despite public interest, NASA considers the study of ETH to be irrelevant to its work because of the number of false leads that a study would provide, and the limited amount of usable scientific data that it would yield.
"That whole subject is really irrelevant to our own human quest to travel to space ... if someone in the previous century saw a film of a 747 flying past, it would not tell them how to build a jet engine, what fuel to use, or what materials to make it out of. Yes, the wings are a clue, but just that, a clue." NASA.[37] |
