WHAT IS A REAL UFO?
Posted by anthonynorth on June 17, 2007
I research most mysteries but none involve such emotion as the UFO. In no other area are views so entrenched. We talk about fundamental politics, fundamental religion, but they are insignificant compared to a fundamental stance in Ufology.
Why is this? I think the answer lies in the contemporary nature of the phenomenon. A UFO can be seen in the sky now, and it will appear so real, so immediate, that it is impossible to consider it as anything other than existent.
A BROAD CHURCH
This reality lies uncomfortably with Ufology, for the discipline is a broad church. Various researchers cover a host of aspects of the phenomenon. A short list will suffice to explain what I mean.
Ufologists can specialize in the paranormality of the subject, in the psychology, the sociology, the physics, meteorology or mythology. The subject branches out into conspiracy theory and cults. Researchers can be skeptics or ‘nuts and bolts’ believers.
And never the twain shall meet. There are some exceptions, but rarely does the discipline have the foresight to realistically pose the possibility of all these areas being intertwined and essential to the understanding of what is really going on.
DIFFERENT REALITIES
Some strange phenomenon is occurring in the skies above us, and it has been going on throughout history. Personally, I don’t think it is caused by extraterrestrial visitations, but the following is true whether it is ET visiting us or not.
Reality is not a stable construct. Whilst we can argue for a ‘real’ world ‘out there’, how that world is viewed is coloured by our own prejudices and views. This is believed in from eastern philosophy to quantum physics, where the observer is essential to what is viewed.
This is vital for placing the UFO in perspective. If we look at the subject in the historical perspective, sky phenomena has been seen as everything from gods in chariots to flying saucers, from sailing ships to ghost rockets. And in each case, the nature of what is seen is coloured by how it was reported.
PREJUDICED VIEWS
So what is a ‘real’ UFO? Well, first of all it is highly likely that all the various interpretations of what is seen are wrong. They have all been coloured by prejudiced views inherent in human nature.
This said, if we remove the ‘cultural’ aspect of what is seen, we could argue that the phenomenon has been constant throughout history – though, admittedly, with certain periods where sightings seem to be greater.
Whether this suggests ET is visiting us, or some other aerial phenomena, is irrelevant. For whichever is true, we will still get distinct, psychical, cultural, psychological, meteorological, physical and sociological phenomena arising from it.
SO WHAT ARE THEY?
It is the task of the Ufologist to study these areas open-mindedly. A proviso must, of course, be placed on this. If ET is real we will arguably never know unless he says ‘hello’, so real research in this area can do nothing but uphold a belief.
This is not to degrade belief. I’m simply saying that belief can stunt research in other areas of the phenomenon. For above all, the subject is also useful for studying mankind, and how his culture, beliefs, hopes and fears are formed.
In the light of this, I view the UFO phenomenon as the result of a ‘syndrome’ – i.e. a multi-causal phenomenon involving interplay between the physical world and how this is viewed by the psychological and sociological aspects of man.
© Anthony North, June 2007
Click Tony On for my current affairs blog.
While you’re here, why not have a look around? Check out the pages – you’ll also find sub-domains on the Blogroll. Beyond the Blog is the site that has everything.
BEYOND THE BLOG 
Anita Marie said
Hi Tony
They could be anything, which is what makes this entire debate so interesting to me.
I’m in it for the stories, people have wonderful stories and theories and experiences tied to this subject and I could listen to them all day.
In fact sometimes I do.
It’s time well spent.
amm
anthonynorth said
Hi Anita Marie,
I wished more people thought like you regarding the UFO. Most researchers admit that 95% of UFOs become IFOs, or identified flying objects. This leaves room for all kind of theorising.
michael parry said
UFOs to me are IFOs as i have had two of them hover above me,(each one at different times) and i have identified them as not being from this planet. Everything living on this planet, must surely have been created by aliens. You just dont pop up out of the ground and start living. The old saying, “what came first, the chicken or the egg”. Obvious the chicken, she has to lay the egg. If people think that we are the only living creatures in the universe, then they are being very, very naive.
anthonynorth said
I am not saying we are alone in the universe. I think the odds are we are definitely not alone. But does that automatically mean we are being visited by aliens at this moment?
Maybe we are, maybe we’re not. But I think we should also look at the possibility of other explanations for the phenomena we so often take to be extraterrestrial.
That is all I’m saying.
John Sawyer said
Michael Parry says: “Everything living on this planet, must surely have been created by aliens. You just dont pop up out of the ground and start living.”
Come on–it’s quite a leap to say that. After all, what would have created the aliens? Somewhere along the line, somewhere, some form of simple life had to come into being (“pop up out of the ground” or out of the sea), and then evolve. Why not on Earth? It’s pretty well suited to it. Why grant that event to only “someplace else”? Why not both “there” and here?
Michael also says: “The old saying, “what came first, the chicken or the egg”. Obvious the chicken, she has to lay the egg.”
Science has now proclaimed it was the egg:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/05/26/chicken.egg/
Of course, this CNN article does also state at the end:
“The debate, which may come as a relief to those with argumentative relatives, was organized by Disney to promote the release of the film “Chicken Little” on DVD.”
David Johnson said
What is a “real” ufo? It’s something flying that you can’t identify.
That’s it. That’s the total definition for “UFO”. Oh, you all think it means “flying saucer” or “alien spacecraft” or “Nazi flying disc from the Earth’s core” but it doesn’. It means anything flying that you can’t identify. Which – for most people – it a whole heck of a lot of things.
BTW, there are no aliens here.
michael parry said
Hello to you all and thanks for your opinions on this subject. If anybody wants proof of UFOs, look on the web for , THE SECRET NASA TRANSMISSIONS–THE SMOKING GUN. It shows you footage of hundreds of UFOs captured by our Astronauts in space buzzing around a Russian satellite. One of the UFOs has measured to be about 5 MILES across. They are all tha same shape, just different in sizes. NASA CONTROL tried to put it off as being SPACE DEBRIS. Trust me, the footage is not a hoax. If any of you do take a look at this footage, please give me your thoughts on it. You can find a few clips at, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3549726214027568885
anthonynorth said
Hi Michael,
Maybe ET really is out there. I don’t know. What I’m asking is, is there any indisputable evidence? As you say, it is not a hoax. But maybe it is. Maybe it is space debris.
I’ve seen so many examples of ‘definite’ ET visitations, and always there is an alternative. Maybe they are ‘real’, whatever that means, but all I’m asking is for a bit of open-mindedness to other possibilities.
The term, ‘trust me’ is unscientific. It is the last refuge of a belief. Which is fine. If you’re in the business of belief, which I’m not.
michael parry said
Hi Anthony, take a look at the video, then give me your thoughts. Look at the one by Martin Stubbs, it is on for 90 minutes.
anthonynorth said
I’ve viewed some of the clips on your link. Yes, there may be a mystery. I’m not an expert on video interpretation. It might just as easily be a hoax to me. Do you have links to expert analysis of the video? What do they think?
I’ve seen similar footage before, and again, there could be a mystery, which could mean alien visitation, but could easily not be.
I say it over and over again: there is rarely a single answer to anything. Is it just possible that it is something other than aliens?
It’s a yes/no answer.
red pill junkie said
Well, it is definitely an open question, and the phenomenon has always stubbornly (almost playfully) remained as inconclusive.
Maybe that’s the whole point of it: to exert a subtle pressure on mankind’s belief systems and slowly but surely help modify them.
But I definitely agree with you that, if anything, UFO’s are a useful tool because they are a mirror into which societies reflect their fears, their dreams and wishes. In the 50’s with the advent of the space race, when the UFOs were seen all over America, people were so influenced and fearful of soviet invasion, that undoubtedly they concluded these could be hostile visitor from the deep reaches of space.
Ancient mexicas (aztecs) had a god named Tezcatlipoca: Lord of the Smoky Mirror. When you look upon a misty mirror is very difficult to discern your reflection, there’s nothing scarier in this whole world that UNCERTAINTY, therefore we are always on a constant interpretation of the world around us, but when something falls out of our normal preconception of what the world is supposed to be, it creates havoc. Maybe that’s why some people oppose so much to accept the reality of UFOs, because they fear they’ll lose their grasp on what’s “real” and what’s not. They fear to look upon the mirror and not being able to recognize the blurred reflection cast out by it.
david jackson said
who ever they are.whatever they are they have always been here looking over us. and i don’t think they have traveled that few. this was there home before it was ower’s
Phanton said
What is a real UFO? For me, it means something unidentified messing around in our sky that doesn’t necessarily have to be Alien, but could be.
rihard marlin said
Many years ago i became a BUDDIST it is written in our teaching plan is day. About being from orther places study about pure land and you will read about many things…
Carol_Noble said
It is true that a the word UFO means something that is flying which can’t be identified. But so many people have placed these objects as meaning alien spaceships the meaning of the word itself has changed.
I have personally had two different accounts in which the craft I saw are unidentified. My husband saw one other which was different again, and my mother also saw one which was different to any of the craft in the other events.
Yet, the first incident for me is a strange one, and I believe that whatever is in the sky is unrecognisable to us so we find the nearest image we have in our head which matches what we see. It may not be accurate but it helps us categorise the event which then becomes a permanent memory.
In 1961 I remember seeing/hearing a programme in which an announcer said that the Russians were going to put a spaceship into orbit the following day, and it would be visible over the UK around 12 noon. The next day I hurried out of the school yard and was by myself in a small side street when I looked up at the sky. There was blue covering most of the sky with one white cloud on the left and another on the right. In between was a clear blue. I waited and I saw something move slowly from out of the right cloud across the blue and into the left cloud never to be seen again. I assumed it was Yuri Gargarin’s space ship, and despite other incidents in later years, including a different UFO sighting, I never changed that view until 1990 when I read Tim Good’s book, Above Top Secret. Whilst the book itself was very enlightening, it was the appendices and in particular one drawing which drew my mind back to the 1961 incident. I mentioned it to my husband who said that what I had seen could not be the russian space craft because it was the wrong shape, size, and would only have been a point of light in the sky, not the huge craft I saw. I looked at some books of man’s space exploration which had a picture of the russian space module and had to agree, what I had seen was not Gargarin’s space ship!
So what did I see? I saw a very large bullet shaped craft move slowly, silently across the sky. It had no windows, doors, or markings on it. All I saw was grey metal. No flames were visible, or sound, just the craft moving across the sky.
On reflection I think that I saw something that was unrecognisable under normal space knowledge so my mind looked to images given in films and tv programmes, of a bullet shaped rocket. The silence and lack of engine exhaust has always worried me but I took this to be part of the natural space ship format. The massive size also worried me a little but then I was not mentally programmed to expect it to be no more than a point of light. At the time we knew little of satellites and how they can be followed with the naked eye. I admit I was ignorant and so my vision of the object fitted with that novice mentality.
What has worried more in recent years has been the revelation given in a documentary programme of that first officially acknowledged manned flight into space, that the Russians did not tell anyone publicly that the trip would take place until AFTER the ship had taken off. If this is true then how did I hear about it the day before???? Are the Russians telling the truth about the publicity of the event or did something else happen to enlighten me of the event? Or were they lying and there was some form of publicity prior to the event? I don’t know the answer.
What does make me wonder is how it was that I gave my sighting an IDENTIFIED label, when the reality is that it was UNIDENTIFIED! I must have seen images later, or heard details about the craft, in the intervening years, but somehow my memory was so ingrained it never registered that there was a discrepancy with what I saw and what people say happened that day!
Perhaps the truth is nearer to the idea of our brains finding something close in our memories to label the new image with if there is no exact image to latch onto?
Nothing is what it seems!
anthonynorth said
Hi Carol,
I think one of main elements in our mis-identifications is enculturation. We don’t see what we want so see, but what cultural influence expects us to see.