UFOs AND ALIEN HYPOTHESIS: A LOGICAL REFLECTION
Valley of Tranquility Moon. Two selenite ufologists investigate a UFO case on the Moon. “We have the perfect case,” enthuses Lueluk Eclizondo, “look, the Tranquility Valley military radar detected an unidentified echo, and a Selenite shepherd took this photo.”
Christopher Que Melón observes the photograph in which an elongated object is seen, surrounded by four circles, and with two four-legged appendages, and two horns, in the front …
-I don’t know Lueluk -replies- this photo is very blurry, it is not definitive, and the radar echo could be something else …
-Don’t be so skeptical, look at these footprints on the ground … Two perfect parallel grooves, surrounded by four bands of deep horseshoe-shaped footprints, imprinted on the ground …
Que Melón continues to doubt, and thereby fuels the anger of his passionate colleague. -I don’t know … there’s something wrong …
Lueluk Eclizondo he insists irritated.
-But what more do you want? We have analyzed these biological samples discovered at the landing site, and that foul smell, and the analysis of the dung does not correspond to any species existing on the Moon. It is irrefutable that this unknown object did not belong to our world …
Would these “evidences” show that it is possible to travel to the Moon in a cow cart …?
This paragraph corresponds to a reflection of what is perhaps the best researcher that we currently have in Spain. (I have substituted the names of the ufologists to make it more in line with the English language)
Manuel Carballal, who witnessed together with Javier Sierra an extraordinary UFO observation on the mountain of Montserrat, makes this reflection that I transcribe below and that was published in EOC (THE CRITICAL EYE) Nº 71
The only critical publication in the Spanish language on anomalies, science and pseudoscience.
In August 1992, and during my participation in the Summer Course on UFOs organized by the Complutense University of Madrid, I publicly offered a million pesetas to anyone who could provide a single proof that an extraterrestrial spacecraft had ever visited Earth. The offer still stands …
However, the concept of “proof” should be qualified. Today, UFOs, and other aspects of the world of mystery (magic, mystery, occult, parapsychology, etc.) have become an overwhelming fad. Daily we are assaulted by headlines, or radio and television programs that confront, in a scandalously superficial way, the UFO phenomenon. Those of us who are interviewed with some frequency in these programs have to bear for the umpteenth time the inevitable question: And is there really proof that UFOs exist? Once this question is thrown, the interviewee tends to hurry to use as an argument the thousands of photographs and footage, the landing tracks, the radar detections, the encounters with humanoids, the UFOs in the Bible, etc.
Old Collection of the University of Seville
All those interested in the UFO phenomenon sincere with ourselves know that a high percentage of the cases reported to the investigator have a conventional explanation. We all know that airplanes, meteorites, thermal inversions or the like are often UFOs to inexperienced witnesses (and note that I say “they are UFOs” and not “they are confused with UFOs”).
On the other hand, we all know equally that there is a stronghold of cases, solidly documented, of reputed witnesses, physically confirmed, that escape almost any easy explanation. These cases, which are the main beam of the UFO phenomenon, usually provide as the “proof” that aliens exist. And I say “aliens” and not UFOs because, luckily or unfortunately, discussions about ufology limit the great intellectual and philosophical richness of the phenomenon to the HET (Extraterrestrial Hypothesis).
It is true, we all know, that some UFOs have been detected on radar and sonar screens. It is also true that some UFO landings have left traces of scorched grass, marks on their landing gear, or even a radioactive increase; there are even documented cases of the sighting of anthropomorphic crew members associated with UFOs. Those “ufonauts” have apparently even had contact with some lucky and unfortunate witnesses. Some abductees have unpleasant scars and wounds on their bodies as evidence of the “medical tests” to which they have been subjected inside the aircraft. Sometimes families, towns and entire cities have witnessed a macro-sighting. And even in the Bible or other similar “holy books” incidents of this type are recorded: the vision of Ezekiel, the destruction of Sodom, and so on. There are even authors who refer to archaeological remains such as the “Nazca tracks” or the skulls with prehistoric “bullet holes” to demonstrate the presence of aliens. Well, in my opinion, all these evidences of the indisputable reality of UFOs (radars, tracks, scars, etc.) point precisely to the opposite; that no UFO is an alien ship …
For years I have expressed my regret for the lack of “thinkers” that ufology suffers from, as well as for the saturation of “case collectors”. It is of little use to pile up files and observations of UFOs in cataloged files if we do not reflect and issue conclusions about such cases.
New York 27. The popular magazine True says that according to “well-informed authorities” the flying saucers that were seen long ago in Scandinavia are interplanetary vehicles run by men of a civilization different and more advanced than that of Earth . — Efe.
@galanvazquez Archive ABC Seville December 28, 1949
In my humble opinion, the observation of the UFO casuistry should have concluded some time ago with the classic HET (Extraterrestrial Hypothesis) that has been defended so much by traditional ufologists and that has been used so much by skeptics to combat the UFO phenomenon in general. The logical reflection on these ufological tests, in my opinion, should lead us to the conclusion that an extraterrestrial spacecraft never visited Earth. In principle, if the origin of the UFOs were extraterrestrial, they would not be spaceships. And if they were aircrafts (this would be the correct thing since, except in the cases of astronauts, they are sighted inside the atmosphere) they would not be extraterrestrials …
If we accept the interstellar or intergalactic origin of UFOs (unless we suppose some planet in our solar system has been inhabited) we have to stop and meditate on what this implies. The distances between stars (let alone galaxies) are so enormous that it is difficult to conceive that it takes light a year to travel them. A spacecraft could hardly develop a cruising speed that would allow it to travel from Alpha Centaurus (the neighboring star to our Sun that, on the other hand, does not meet the minimum environmental conditions for organic life) in the course of a generation. We all know that a higher speed increases proportionally to acceleration, the mass of the aircraft. Physically, it is impossible for a solid, metallic body, a spacecraft, to come even close to the speed of light. How then to imagine a flying saucer that travels 8.7 light-years between Sirius and Earth? A displacement from those remote places of the Cosmos would imply a technology that would border on the sublime. The extraterrestrial intelligences should neutralize the mass of their objects, perhaps disintegrate and re-integrate; perhaps becoming photons that travel in the same light, perhaps “folds of space”, other dimensions … In short: the displacement would have to be much more fantastic and “etheric” than a metallic machine, and of course, nothing that has remote resemblance to our astronautical technology.
It is true that UFOs leave burned grasses on some landings. But if there is a burnt, scorched grass, it is because there is combustion, and do we pretend that UFO engines are combustion engines? Does the ufologist try to argue that UFOs are gasoline-powered spaceships? If so, no wonder they hit the ground in Roswell …
How can such fantastic technology leak radioactively? Do UFOs Use Atomic Batteries? Perhaps those contacted, with ecological affinities, should rethink their opinions on the matter.
And the footprints, ladders or landing gear? I imagine that if they have a hydraulic system to deploy the landing gear that effectively leaves traces, maybe they also have a clutch, gear changes and even some kind of starter battery.
Accepting for a moment the most documented cases of abduction, how can an alien examination of a human leave scars? How can we even consider that a technology capable of the miracle of making a trip to light-years, will use hypodermic syringes, scissors or needles? Already in our modern hospitals surgical technology far exceeds the descriptions of Betty and Barney Hill, Walton, Zanfretta or Charles Hickson and Calvin Parker.
All these facts lead me to a question; Would it be reasonable that after the Apollo XI moon landing, Armstrong would get off the module in a bullock cart to take samples with a wooden rake and a wicker basket? Well, just as incoherent is the UFO phenomenon for the conventional ETH (Extraterrestrial Hypothesis).
UFOs detected on radars? Let’s reflect for a moment. If the Stealth radar invisibility projects have been effective for 25 years (probably more), how is it possible that the inconceivable technology that we have to suppose to an extraterrestrial spacecraft does not know how to absorb radar emissions? On the contrary, I am of the opinion that if a UFO appears on a primary radar (not to mention secondary radars), it is obviously not extraterrestrial. Except for meteorites in the atmosphere, of course.
Unless, of course, the entire UFO phenomenon is a vast theater in which the witnesses and investigators are puppets of a “daemonic” intelligence. But that possibility implies terrible philosophical approaches that terrify the “scientific” ufologist.
But let’s continue. For the human being to present this anthropomorphic appearance, millions of years of biological evolution have been needed adapting to the Earth’s environment. Environment conditioned by millions of factors — atmospheric pressure and density, distance from the Sun, air composition, etc. — If only one of these factors had changed, for example, the distance from the Sun, we would not be as we are. We wouldn’t even exist. Why then are ufonauts usually so suspiciously similar to men? How can we suppose that the “lottery” that we hit on Earth, to synchronize an infinity of biological factors, is repeated with such joy throughout the universe? In my humble opinion, it is aberrant to pose UFOs as extraterrestrial metal machines. If they are metallic machines (and many are like airplanes, helicopters, satellites or secret prototypes) I doubt that they are extraterrestrial; and if their origin is extraterrestrial (or ultra terrestrial) I doubt that they are metallic machines.
And what about the UFOs of the past? The defenders of the Extra-Terrestrial Hypothesis often argue when I make these statements. A minimal logical reflection on some “astro archaeological classics”, throws too many questions incompatible with the classic Extra-Terrestrial Hypothesis. The “runways” of Nazca, alien airport? Personally, I am very clear that elusive UFOs do not require runways. Their astonishing aeronautical capabilities make it undeniable that they land and take off wherever they want.
The Broken Hill skull and other “prehistoric bullet holes.” No comment. I doubt that an alien capable of traveling through “wormholes”, neutralizing the increase in their mass or traversing parallel worlds, will reach Earth with a cartridge shotgun. And what about the “biblical UFOs”? Any of the exposed subjects would deserve a long reflection, but the one of the UFOs in the sacred books more than any. So far, all the authors that I know who have dealt with the subject of UFOs in the Bible, the Koran or the Vedas have suffered from it, in my opinion, error; accept the texts as literal. Until 1943 there was no Spanish Bible translated directly from the Hebrew and Greek texts, and it was not until 1920 that a Spanish Bible was published (by Don Carmelo), translated from the Vulgate of San Jerónimo (translation from the Latin and not from the original languages). Until that moment, the texts have suffered in 2,000 years all kinds of manipulations, additions, mutilations, cultural adaptations, etc. Only exegetes, authentic experts in the biblical text, its social and cultural context and the origin of each story, understand the enormous complexity of each episode, which of course does not have any literal transcription of a fact. The mythical “New Jerusalem descending from heaven” (Revelation 21: 2), to cite just one quite popular example of a “biblical UFO”.
“It will come to the end of time that the mountain of the House of the Lord will be established on the top of the mountains and will rise above the hills. Peoples will stream toward it and numerous nations will come, saying: ‘Come, let us go up! to the Mountain of the Lord and to the House of the God of Jacob! He will instruct us in his ways and we will walk in his paths. “For the Law will go out from Zion and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.” Miq 4, 1–2
But any exegete, even any theologian, knows that the allegorical concept “Jerusalem” or “New Jerusalem” is used countless times in the Old and New Testaments with very different meanings; same as “gehenna”, “family”, and so on. Probably, if the astro-archaeologists had a greater exegetical or at least theological training, they would know how to discern with greater veracity the allegorical, prophetic, eschatological and pseudo-historical texts of the revealed books.
Another classic example is Ezekiel’s vision. The American engineer J.F. Blumrich even went so far as to perform a technological recreation of the prophet’s mystical vision that has become a classic example (with the assurance of a NASA technician) of alien technology in the Old Testament. But all of us who are familiar with Blumrich’s design, which turns Ezekiel’s “four living creatures” into a 4-propeller aircraft, hydraulics landing gear and wheels, etc., should stop to reflect. How is it possible that aliens, traveling through the universe, still used gyrocopter? Certainly incomprehensible. Of course, to speculate on all these enigmas of the past, we always have Atlantis …
With all of the above, I want to share with the reader my profound bewilderment. After years of intense research, I am fully aware that the UFO phenomenon is an unquestionable fact. With tormented bewilderment I observe the facts, but logical reflection prevents me from accepting the classical extraterrestrial hypothesis as unfeasible to explain UFOs. But ATTENTION !; All these reflections are not detrimental to the UFO enigma, quite the opposite. What could appear to be arguments against the phenomenon are nothing but endorsements to its reality.
Usually the “professional skeptics” attack ufology basing all their arguments on that extraterrestrials cannot come to Earth. And minimizing the UFO enigma (much deeper and more complex) by limiting it to the HET (Extraterrestrial Hypothesis), they state: “UFOs are either ET spaceships, or they are not. Therefore, they are not.” In my opinion, UFOs are not alien spaceships, but it is unquestionable that they ARE. From this point on, endless fantastic possibilities open up, each more incredible: unknown manifestations of natural phenomena, intelligences of parallel worlds, mystical phenomena, earthly manipulations …
These fantastic possibilities do not influence the manifestation of the UFO phenomenon (which persists regardless of the ufologist), but it would escape the usual skeptical arguments that, through the strategy of making UFO-extraterrestrial aircraft synonymous. Pretending to nullify the enigma by arguing something logically obvious; that the Unidentified have nothing of alien spaceships.
Perhaps if instead of so many “case collectors” there were more thinkers, architects of a meaningless “philosophy of ufology” like the classical Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (understandable as a deductive process in the 40s — 50s, but not now) they would have left to hinder UFO study and research years ago. My challenge of the Complutense continues …
