The Interstellar Housewife: UFO Pudding (and Terrestrial Crackers)

By The Interstellar Housewife

The word "proof" has been popping up more than usual lately. In discussion and through the results of my Google Alerts. It's no wonder, in respect to the topic at hand, which is of course UFOs and extra-terrestrial visitation. It is not as common as say, results discussing the new upcoming film "The Fourth Kind", results of which are so numerous that even the late Carl Sagan would find them unfathomable. but I digress.

This really began a few weeks ago when someone made a request on another blog I follow. This particular person was asking why us "UFO people never have real evidence." Outwardly it seems a fair enough question, albeit a tired one. The problem with this question and the UFO phenomenon in general, is that we do have real evidence. It is often conveniently dismissed, however.

What real evidence is there, you ask? Well, what kind of evidence are you looking for? Physical evidence? We don't really have that at our disposal. This would be the so-called smoking gun that would seem to please most skeptics. But would physical evidence really prove anything?

If we (and when I say we, I am speaking of the UFO Community in general) had, say, a hunk of metal from an alien craft and presented it to the skeptics, they would logically and most certainly have it tested. And would those test results change their opinion? Perhaps, but I am doubtful. If the test results came back Inconclusive, this would be perceived as insufficient evidence. But inconclusive results are not really a limitation of the metal, but of our ability to accurately test an extra-terrestrial artifact.

Lets say that the results came up Unknown. Unknown means it's a material we have not encountered. Is this something that would knock Joe Debunk out of his socks? Nope! Unknown tells nothing. Actually, this is probably less appealing than Inconclusive results - so that one goes right out the door. Bye!

And as a 3rd option, what if the results stated that the metal was not of Earthly origin? Ah. We have a few turned heads now, though unfortunately not enough. I have no doubt that either the test's legitimacy or the expertise of those performing the tests would come under fire as the defiant scrambled to protect their collective mind from assimilating to the concept. It may convert a few, or at least set some on a different path, but I think the majority would still dispute the evidence, and the whole discussion would be buried next to Davy Jones' Locker.

Some of you are saying "But wait! It is an actual piece of metal form an alien craft!" Whether it is or isn't is dependant upon the people in charge and what their professional analysis suggests it is. And thus, I think we can knock physical evidence out, (with possible exceptions being the acquisition of an actual craft, machinery or a corpse -- and come on, the likelihood that Stanton Friedman or Richard Dolan is going to happen on any of these items outside tours of hush-hush military installations, is pretty fucking slim.

The fact is, there are a large number of photos and video that have been analyzed (even before the age of digital manipulation) that display craft of unknown origin (hence unidentified), performing feats that would appear to operate outside the laws of known physics. To be clear, in these instances experimental craft have been ruled out. So we are left with a few theories, none of which are sufficient by common skeptical standards. These craft, if not experimental machines of a military nature, are either:

a.) Highly secret military craft utilizing a propulsion and maneuverability most physicists consider impossible or at least well beyond our technological capabilities
b.) Terrestrial crafts by an unknown intelligence
c.) Hyper-dimensional crafts, or
d.) Extra-terrestrial crafts

None of which are popular among deniers.

I'm definitely open to the possibility that these crafts are not extra-terrestrial. But if they are, in fact not, they are made by other beings of non-human origin, or they are human-made and the government is keeping a form of energy that could probably end the need for non-renewable resources -- not to mention deceiving us by hiding a whole area of physics that children are not being taught in school. Science that could greatly benefit us and our planet. So, in the case of the latter, radical skeptics would certainly need to admit that we are way more technologically advanced than we are being told, or there is an intelligence beyond our own, from... from Wherethefuckever.

As it stands now, people resistant to these ideas do not and will not admit this. Instead they say the witnesses didn't see what they thought they saw -- even in highly detailed, mass-sighting situations. Or they call them liars. Maybe they really think that swamp-gas looks like metallic vessels and flies in formation. Perhaps they are flying Gummi Bears. Anyway, there seems an unhealthy resistance to the possibility of being visited, which makes little sense to me:

We are on the verge of planetary exploration. Actually, we are already there as far as robots and satellites go. But, indeed we are on the verge of human exploration of the solar system and beyond. We are actively searching for extrasolar planets (which, as of this article, there are around 400 we have found since 1996 and more are found each month). We will have people on Mars in the not-so-distant future, on the moons of other planets like Saturn and Jupiter, and so on. So, if we are exploring and visiting, why the Hell wouldn't another civilization be doing the exact same thing?

While the percentage of people who believe we are being visited is still in the minority (so was FireFox once, so keep that in mind), the percentage of people who believe we are not alone is the majority. So why is it so bloody difficult to conceive of another civilization who had a significant head start on us, where evolution is concerned? It's a no-brainer why they'd visit us, because its probably the same reason we are looking for them. If you don't believe we are, then consider SETI (which I believe is a lot of wasted money on something we already know, and probably a BS cover for something else). For those unaware, SETI is a government-funded outfit looking for radio signals from intelligence outside our solar system.

So, what proof or evidence would really suffice for the hard-liners? We only needed the opinion of a few generals and some photography to convince us that WMDs existed -- which they did not, but you get what I mean. We have plenty of hi-level military personnel and astronauts telling us we are being visited. We have a number of legit photos, footage, and radar data. And we have many, many, many mass-sightings, such as the famous Phoenix Lights sighting, which was seen by around - I think it was, 10,000 people for approximately 3 hours, over a distance of 300 miles.

For the love of Christ, what incredible proof is going to sway you into giving credence to the idea of non-human visitation?

*I use the term skeptic in this article, but I wanted to state that I do not think skepticism is inherently bad. I only think irrational skepticism is. In this field I consider myself (and have been accused of being) a skeptic. Not because I disbelieve in extra-terrestrial visitation, but because I have a hard time with a lot of the bullshit claims floating around the UFO Community. I encourage other individuals to be wary as well. There's a lot of snake-oil sliding about out there, so watch your step.