Alien Intrusion Page 3

  I believe that these extraterrestrial vehicles and their crews are visiting the planet from other planets that are a little more technically advanced than we are on earth. I feel that we need to have a top-level coordinated program to scientifically collect and analyze data from all over the earth concerning any type of encounter and to determine how best to interfere with these visitors in a friendly fashion… .[19]

  Gordon Cooper

  Other UFOlogists attending Cooper’s address included Dr. J. Allen Hynek, by now one of the best-known and most respected UFO investigators in the world. A former skeptic who once dismissed sightings as being made up by “kooks and crackpots,” Hynek formed the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) along with a young Jacques Vallée (mentioned earlier). Originally, Hynek worked as a consultant astronomer on Project Blue Book, and also invented the term “close encounters” as part of his Hynek Classification System.[20] A “close encounter of the third kind” refers to a UFO with visible occupants, and this was also the title of Steven Spielberg’s hugely successful 1977 movie. It is generally believed that the movie’s character of French expert UFOlogist Claude Lacombe was based on Vallée. Hynek also served as the film’s technical advisor, and appeared briefly in the movie in a small cameo role. The “element of truth” — just enough to inspire all sorts of theories — captivated moviegoers, just as it has with Independence Day and its allusions to Roswell and secret government installations.

  {see Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) — CE-III}

  However, despite the involvement of heavyweights like Hynek and others, the U.N. was not convinced. This may have had something to do with Cooper’s alliance with Gairy, who was a corrupt and brutal despot in his own country. Strange bedfellows indeed!

  One of the 20th century’s most enduring heroes was also a “believer.” General Douglas MacArthur, who valiantly led the Allied forces in the Pacific region during World War II, was reported in the New York Times in 1955 as saying:

  Because of the developments of science, all the countries on earth will have to unite to survive and to make a common front against attack by people from other planets. The politics of the future will be cosmic, or interplanetary.[21]

  Another credible witness, whose beliefs had a major impact, is former Marine Corps Major Donald Keyhoe. In the late 1940s, he was one of the first to allege that the U.S. Air Force was withholding information about UFOs. Keyhoe even claimed to possess many files and photographs of UFO sightings by pilots — his contemporaries in the military establishment. His book, The Flying Saucers Are Real (1950), set off a firestorm of controversy all over the world. An online promotion of his book aptly states:

  Virtually single-handedly Major Keyhoe prompted a quantum shift in our collective consciousness when he successfully shifted the credibility issue from UFO witnesses to the U.S. government and military.[22]

  Although meant as an advertisement, it accurately describes how the burden of proof shifted, once again adding to the conspiracy theories that abound. The absence of proof is not an obstacle, it seems. All you need is a “credible” witness who has had an experience, and then you dare someone else — like the government — to “prove it didn’t happen.” Unfortunately, this sort of mindset permeates UFOlogy culture, making it very difficult to get a straight story. With so many hoaxers, too, seeking their five minutes of fame, it is a taxing task to wade through the information, the more so because the reports are based on experience rather than physical evidence. A typical comment is that “UFOs must be real because of the weight of evidence.” But it is not any weight of empirical evidence, rather a proliferation of “let me tell you what I saw” experiences. This does not deny that these experiences may have actually occurred, but we’ve all heard fishing stories of how a six-inch minnow became a three-foot “whopper” in the retelling. Add to this normal human failing a potentially spectacular UFO claim, with eager media and UFOlogists beating down your door, and often the truth is lost along the way — either in the recounting by the witness or in the telling of the tale by the media. This gives you some idea of how difficult the process of determining the truth can be. But, nonetheless, we shall try to determine the true nature of the phenomenon.

  The Capital dome, Washington, D.C.

  Unlike mere hearsay, many experiences (and, in particular, abduction encounters) are sometimes recalled during hypnosis, adding weight to the idea that there was no deliberate fabrication. Abduction experiences are a complex topic, which have a complete chapter devoted to them.

  Some sightings have stood the test of time due to multiple witnesses observing the event. One such sighting occurred in July 19, 1952, when several fast-moving objects “buzzed” the White House — home of the U.S. president in America’s capital. These objects were seen on three separate radar installations, including Washington’s National Airport and Andrews Air Force Base. There were similar occurrences a week later, resulting in the dispatch of F-94 interceptor jets. A subsequent press conference resulted in the largest attendance of the media since World War II, and a Disney video called Alien Encounters even has footage of the incident, with the narrator stating:

  This is not swamp gas. It is not a flock of birds. This is an actual spacecraft piloted by alien intelligence — one sighting from tens of thousands made over the last 50 years on virtually every continent on the globe.[23]

  Of course, there is no way to substantiate the fantastic claims about the “alien pilots.” But Disney is correct on one thing — there are countless sightings all over the world, and we have only mentioned a fraction of the famous people who claim to have seen a UFO.

  Surely NASA would know?

  On sheer size alone, NASA (America’s National Aeronautics and Space Administration) is the world’s premier space exploration agency. In the Cold War climate of the 1960s and 1970s, the United States (through NASA) and the Soviet Union engaged in the “space race.” These countries spurred each other on in a game of one-upmanship to show off the success of their respective countries’ political ideologies.

  Such was the pace of technology that, just 12 years after the Soviets launched the first object, Sputnik (Russian for “companion” or “satellite”), into space on October 4, 1957, a manned spacecraft landed on the moon and returned its occupants safely to Earth. In most people’s eyes, NASA had won the race. But they would never again reach the giddy heights of popularity that they did when astronaut Neil Armstrong first set foot upon the lunar surface during the Apollo 11 mission on July 20, 1969.

  This was one of the most enduring and most watched events in human history, and arguably one of America’s finest moments. The political agenda was realized courtesy of NASA and an open checkbook. By the time of the Apollo 14 and 15 missions, manned visits to the moon were already being regarded as “run of the mill” and something of an anticlimax. Many now started to question the exorbitant cost of the missions, particularly as there was no sign of life on the moon.

  With Apollo 17, although many more missions had been planned, one of the greatest chapters in mankind’s history came to a close. In the 1970s, the oil sheiks had initiated an energy crisis and people felt the pain and shock of rising prices. In a knee-jerk reaction, the perceived “fat” of NASA was trimmed. If the public had to watch its pennies, then so should NASA.

  With the budget cuts, a reusable vehicle, the space shuttle, was developed. This policy of belt-tightening would continue for many years. Even in the 1990s, NASA’s administrator, Daniel S. Goldin, echoed this policy when he initiated his “faster, better, cheaper” program.

  However, after an initial flurry of enthusiasm for the shuttle, public interest waned once more. Conducting lab experiments in space is not an attention grabber. Unfortunately, a disaster set back space exploration even more when the shuttle Challenger exploded shortly after lift-off, killing all on board, including the first-ever civilian astronaut — teacher Christa McAuliffe. This rekindled the public’s attention, but for all the wrong reasons, an
d the space shuttle program was grounded until answers were forthcoming. Many felt that NASA would be fighting for its very existence as annual budget cuts continued. The space shuttle was also carrying commercial cargo, so “why should the taxpayer’s money be used?” NASA appeared to be increasingly irrelevant.

  The “savior”

  The NASA website says about Goldin, whose tenure ran from 1992 to 2001:

  In naming him one of the 100 most influential men and women in government, the National Journal observed that “most space watchers say that Goldin is a brilliant visionary who brought NASA back from the brink of a black hole.” Nowhere has Goldin’s vision been more evident than in his comprehensive strategy for space exploration. He initiated the Origins Program to understand how the Universe has evolved, to learn how life began on Earth and to see if life exists elsewhere.[24]

  Under the auspices of the Origins Program, Goldin had redirected the major focus of NASA into the search for extraterrestrial life. In one respect, this had always been one of the agendas during trips to the moon and in the planning of visits to Mars. A manned mission to Mars was actually scheduled for the 1980s, but after probes had visited the Martian surface and found it lifeless like the moon, there seemed to be insufficient justification for a visit, particularly in a climate of belt tightening. Because Apollo was cut short, NASA was left without any major projects or real direction.

  Through Goldin’s aggressive management reforms, annual budgets were reduced, producing a $40 billion reduction from prior budget plans.[25]

  Goldin had become NASA’s savior. Through a clever perceived change of policy, the public thought that NASA was now interested in looking for alien life. In a climate where science fiction “rules,” the government agency had become relevant again — more than relevant, as it was now transforming the public imagination rather than lagging behind it.

  The power of the idea of alien life was substantially demonstrated when in 1996 media reports proclaimed, “Conclusive evidence for Martian life.”[26] NASA’s trump card was not ET in the flesh, but came from a little piece of rock found in the Antarctic (discussed in detail later in this book), which reportedly contained fossilized bacteria from Mars. Its discovery had suddenly ignited interest in the activities of NASA once again. Front pages of newspapers all over the world shouted, “Evidence of Life on Mars!” The implication was obvious: “There is life elsewhere in the universe.” The event even sparked a presidential announcement, Bill Clinton declaring:

  If this discovery is confirmed, it would surely be one of the most stunning insights into our universe that science has discovered.[27]

  This was tremendous publicity for NASA, and just at a time when the U.S. Congress was discussing funding cuts once again. NASA had apparently realized that the U.S. Congress does not fund unpopular projects. Shrewdly, it seems, they had learned to play the political game and had jumped on the ET bandwagon. The Martian rock made number one on the hit parade, with commentators noting:

  If asked what was the hot media topic of 1996, many would reply, “The sensational claim that scientists have discovered life from Mars.”[28]

  In what was either a fortunate coincidence in timing or a brilliantly orchestrated ploy, the Mars rock announcement came hot on the heels of the number-one box-office movie, Independence Day.

  {See Independence Day (1996)}

  Many observers now felt that the time was right for a manned mission to Mars. Claims of water on Mars, as well as the interest generated by the Martian rock, indicated that the public mood was ready. During the Mars Pathfinder mission in 1997 (launched in 1998), live photographs of the Martian surface were beamed back to Earth and posted on the NASA website, which recorded over three quarters of a billion hits — a barometer of public interest. The news broadcaster CNN also helped the ETH/alien agenda, as its cameras kept intermittently flashing to Roswell to cover another event — the 50th anniversary of the “Roswell incident” of 1947. Tens of thousands of UFO enthusiasts descended on the town. Among the activities was a flying saucer soapbox derby.[29]

  The dream appeared to come closer in 2003, when President George W. Bush was expected to announce plans for a manned mission to Mars under the mission name Prometheus, during his annual State of the Union address on January 28, 2003. This mission included the Nuclear Space Initiative — to develop the first nuclear-powered spacecraft that could reach Mars in as little as two months. U.S. public interest shifted to an impending war with Iraq, however, so the president delayed the announcement.[30] NASA’s plans were disrupted once again, on February 1, 2003, when the space shuttle Columbia disintegrated upon re-entry, killing all seven occupants. The specter of more budget cuts hung over the space agency.

  But NASA’s prospects did not turn out to be so grim, and this perceived negative event was used to ask for an increase in funding to develop better and safer space vehicles. Early in 2004, President Bush announced that NASA was going to receive a massive boost to its budget as part of U.S. plans to have a permanently manned base on the moon, which, in turn, would serve as a steppingstone for manned flights to Mars. It suggests that the allure of finding ET life can overcome even the most difficult of situations. The “glory days” may be returning for NASA.

  NASA and the “meaning of life”

  It is clear how the drama has unfolded for NASA. From the brink of becoming an “also ran” government agency, they have cleverly used popular culture to market their own extraterrestrial searches in spite of recent disasters. This, in turn, helps to engender belief in alien life, making the idea stronger than ever. The direction was established back on January 17, 1996, in a speech to the American Astronomical Society, when NASA’s Goldin listed the goals of his administration. He said:

  The fourth goal is to search for Earth-like planets that may be habitable or inhabited through direct detection and spectroscopic measurement.[31]

  One certainly gains the impression that they are looking for, and perhaps expecting to find, alien civilizations (note the use of the word “inhabited”). The public imagination can literally run wild with such provocative announcements, spelling out the message: “If we meet them and they are more advanced, more evolved, and more ancient, then perhaps they can provide humanity with the answers it’s looking for. Perhaps those receiving religious messages from our extraterrestrial ‘space brothers’ are onto something. There might be something out there after all.”

  Although this fueling of the imagination is partly based on science fantasy rather than fact, the potential to solve such mysteries is a mouth-watering proposition to the public, and NASA certainly does not openly negate such ideas. They actually seem to be propagating quasi-religious notions of their own. Their Origins website states:

  NASA’s Origins Program seeks to answer two enduring human questions that we once considered around ancient campfires, yet still keep alive in today’s classrooms: “Where do we come from? Are we alone?” [emphasis in original][32]

  This is reminiscent of the deeper philosophical questions that we suggested earlier, and once again demonstrates one of the reasons for the popularity of the whole extraterrestrial hypothesis — mankind is looking for meaning, and science is our society’s god. The idea that there is something bigger than ourselves is driving exploration of space in search of a rendezvous with aliens who will be able to answer our questions for us. Human beings are enamored with mystery.

  Astrobiology

  The story goes that in 1998 an unknown NASA official coined a new marketing term to replace the uninteresting moniker “planetary sciences.” The new term “astrobiology” emerged. The following is a quote from NASA’s Origins website:

  Astrobiology is the study of life in the universe. It’s a new field of research that covers the origin, evolution, distribution, and destiny of life — wherever it might exist.[33]

  Note that this is “the study of life wherever it might exist.” Bruce Runnegar, head of the NASA Astrobiology Institute (NAI) simplifies the re
al motivation behind the name change:

  It’s a mission that the taxpayers can understand and support… . Everybody wants to know where we came from and whether or not we are alone in the universe.[34]

  Once again this is a populist approach that fuels the fires of imagination — and brings in the funding. The NASA website goes on to state that astrobiology draws upon a wide-ranging field of sciences, such as biology, chemistry, and geology, and that universities are now starting to add “this exciting new field as a degree in which people can major.” [35]Astrobiology is all-encompassing, in that it not only includes the study of life on Earth, but beyond it as well. But it includes another more well-defined field that is supposed to study actual life beyond the earth. It is a specialist field called exobiology.

  The notion that “objective” scientists are specializing in this area gives the impression that something must exist. But one may logically ask — how can you actually study something that, to date, has not been observed to exist? One could be cynical and suggest that an exobiologist is drawing his wages under false pretences.