Claim: UFO's May Be Stealth Aliens Living in Caves, on the Dark Side of the Moon or Alaska

Man apparently attempting Bigfoot hoax killed on Montana highway​

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE87R1B7/
Just a reminder that the folks trying to scam everyone
are willing to go to great lengths.

While I'm sure many will (understandably) make light of this low-hanging fruit,
I can't help but be concerned for the 15 & 17 year-old girls,
who will likely be traumatized by this idiotic stunt for decades...
 
In another thread we had a discussion about pareidolia and the role it played in explaining anomalous things like The Face on Mars. That discussion was generated by a paper that claimed among other things, pareidolia was bias, or at least the use of it can be. The author's suggested something like, just because the Face on Mars can be explained by pareidolia, maybe it shouldn't be. Using pareidolia as an explanation might hide the fact that there really is a Face on Mars and if there is a Face on Mars someone/thing must have built it. So, using pareidolia as an explanation keeps us from seeing the evidence for UFO/aliens. I think.

Thread found here: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/claim-pareidolia-is-bias.13498/page-2#post-317168

That claim was part of a larger claim from the paper:

The cryptoterrestrial hypothesis: A case for scientific openness to a concealed earthly explanation for Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena

https://www.researchgate.net/public...lanation_for_Unidentified_Anomalous_Phenomena

Note: As is often the case when copying from some PDF sources, it gets kinda wonky when pasted here. All External Content below from the paper linked above unless otherwise noted. And the authors use various terms like NHI (Non Human Intelligence) or cryptoterrestrials and such, I'm just calling them what they are, aliens.

In a nutshell, psychology researchers Tim Lomas and Breandan Case of the Human Flourishing Program, Harvard University along with Michael P. Masters, a biological anthropologist at Montana Tech, argue that we should seriously consider the possibility that aliens are already here and have been. They may be living in the oceans, in caves, in remote areas of the world, on the Moon or Mars or even stealthily in your own town:

External Quote:

This is the ultraterrestrial hypothesis, which includes as a subset the “cryptoterrestrial”
hypothesis, namely the notion that UAP may reflect activities of intelligent beings concealed in stealth
here on Earth (e.g., underground), and/or its near environs (e.g., the moon), and/or even “walking
among us” (e.g., passing as humans). Although this idea is likely to be regarded sceptically by most
scientists, such are the nature of some UAP that we argue this possibility should not be summarily
dismissed, and instead deserves genuine consideration in a spirit of epistemic humility and openness.
The authors go on to quote the usual suspects, with Hal Puthoff and Jaques Vallee from the old guard and David Grutsch and Karl Nell from recent times. Without getting into all the details, these quotes amount to a "sum is greater than the parts" argument with the added weight of the US government being involved. Basically, UAPs have been seen forever, even today we can't explain them all and the government is looking into them. Therefore, there is something non-prosaic about many UAPs so we need to consider all possible explanations equally, including their hypothesis that "stealth" aliens are and/or were here:

External Quote:

This denotes a broad category of conjecture centred around the possibility that UAP may involve forms of non-human intelligence (NHI) that are already present in Earth’s environment in some sense, which Puthoff (2022) describes as “sequestered terrestrial cultures… existing alongside us in distinct stealth.”
External Quote:

For centuries, people worldwide have observed aerial phenomena that seemed “anomalous” in some way, some of which crucially we today – even with our more advanced technologies and scientific understanding – might still regard as extraordinary (Vallée, 2008; Lomas & Case, 2023)
External Quote:

Moreover, in June 2023 explosive “whistleblowing” claims were made publicly by David Grusch – a veteran of the National Reconnaissance Office and National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency4 – who alleged that the US government and private aerospace companies had for decades maintained a secret “crash retrieval” and “reverse engineering” program (Kean & Blumenthal, 2023). At the time of writing there is no way to know the validity of his claims.
External Quote:

. For example, Retired Army Colonel Karl Nell – who served alongside Grusch in the UAP Task Force – said “His assertion concerning the existence of a terrestrial arms race occurring subrosa over the past 80 years focused on reverse engineering technologies of unknown origin is fundamentally correct” (von Rennenkampff, 2023)
External Quote:

A less well known but perhaps even more striking case was divulged by Lue Elizondo (2021a) – a former intelligence officer closely linked to US investigations into UAP
And is becoming more common lately, we again have Puthoff as one of the original instigators for the authors basic premise:

External Quote:

Consider Puthoff’s claim that there could be an “ancient occult group, isolated pre-Diluvial high-tech society… existing alongside us in distinct stealth.”
As @Giddierone suggested in the afore mentioned thread about pareidolia, this paper may be part of a larger effort by UFOlogist to publish as many papers as possible in various journals in an attempt to legitimize UAP/UFO studies. Something akin to the "Teach the Controversy" ploy used by creationists here in the US back in the '90s. The creationists logic was "If evolution cannot be totally and completely proven, then there is room for other theories like Intelligent Design". Of course, Intelligent Design actually meant the God of the Bible. Here it seems to be, "If each and every UAP cannot be proven to be prosaic, then there's room for other non-prosaic explanations." We're not saying it's aliens, but it's aliens.

The problem these folks run into is they have no actual UAP/UFOs or aliens to study. It's a bit like publishing papers and having discussions about Angels and Deamons. Nobody can produce an actual Angle or Deamon, so they talk about what other people claim to have seen or experienced. Same thing here, as the authors try to make the case that aliens might be living in caves or in secret bases under and in the Earth. They have no actual evidence of this however and that can lead to some issues, like this paragraph that jumped out at me from 1/2 way through the paper. After first suggesting the idea that UAP might come from inside the Earth:

External Quote:

However, other people speculate that some UAP might not only be drawn to such locales (e.g., as a portal, or for purposes such as hiding or gatheringenergy), but might come from underground (i.e., with the NHI responsible residing in a subterranean way).
They explain how this idea might have originated, including the writings of Richard Shaver:

External Quote:

Then, building on this possibility, people have speculated these realms could potentially host ancient civilizations – whether human or some other species – which chose to conceal themselves there. Among the earliest modern proponents of this idea is the writer Richard Shaver. According to Ray Palmer (1975), editor of Amazing Stories magazine, Shaver argued in a 10,000-word manifesto that advanced prehistoric races had built cities inside Earth but fled to another planet due to concerns about radiation damage from the Sun, leaving a cohort of offspring who remained underground. Palmer revised the manuscript and published it as “I Remember Lemuria!” in the March 1945 issue of Amazing Stories, a tale which became the foundation for a genre of science fiction on this theme. Although many people condemned Shaver’s narrative as a “hoax” (Dash, 2000), he and Palmer continued to maintain its veracity. Furthermore, over the years, UAP scholars have begun to contemplate similar ideas in relation to the burgeoning UAP observations, most notably John Keel (1983), who – without believing Shaver per se – was persuaded of the notion of cryptoterrestrials living underground.
Most notably is this line from the above paragraph:

External Quote:

Although many people condemned Shaver’s narrative as a “hoax” (Dash, 2000), he and Palmer continued to maintain its veracity.
I'm reading that as "maybe it wasn't a hoax" or "maybe Shaver was on to something". It certainly doesn't come out and say "It's just a story". Which is what it was. These guys seem to be using what is collectively known as The Shaver Mysteries as possible evidence for their claim?

Briefly, Richard Shaver claimed that his welding set up at work could transmit other people's thoughts:
External Quote:

Shaver "began to notice that one of the welding guns on his job site, 'by some freak of its coil's field atunements', was allowing him to hear the thoughts of the men working around him. More frighteningly, he then received the telepathic record of a torture session conducted by malevolent entities in caverns deep within the earth."
And a whole host of other things were told/transmitted to him, including the make up of the various people/aliens living inside the Earth:

External Quote:

Those ancients also abandoned some of their own offspring here, a minority of whom remained noble and human "Teros", while most degenerated over time into a population of mentally impaired sadists known as "Deros"—short for "detrimental robots". Shaver's "robots" were not mechanical constructs, but were robot-like due to their savage behavior.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Sharpe_Shaver

One could go on for pages with The Shaver Mysteries, but most people recognize now that Shaver suffered from some mental health issues and that Ray Palmer was both a friend and exploiter of him. His writing was possibly cathartic for Shaver, and Palmer would rework them to sell his magazines, claiming that it was all true (wink, wink). Shaver later went on to publish books about rocks he thought contained all kinds of writings and messages (pareidolia) as noted by @Giddierone in the pareidolia thread.

Why any academic paper would mention Shavers writings as anything but literary background is strange. But the authors go on to cite John Keel, famous for his Mothman Prophecies, as confirming, or at least legitimizing Shaver's claims, even if he didn't quite believe them:

External Quote:

Furthermore, over the years, UAP scholars have begun to contemplate similar ideas in relation to the burgeoning UAP observations, most notably John Keel (1983), who – without believing Shaver per se – was persuaded of the notion of cryptoterrestrials living underground.

Indeed, in an article titled “Secret UFO bases across the U.S.”, Keel (1968) suggested that the idea of such entities being responsible for UAP was more reasonable than the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) which was gaining some momentum at that time. Given that UAP have “been consistently active in the same areas for many years,” he argues “it is quite reasonable to speculate that these objects originate in some unknown manner from these areas, rather than traversing great spatial distances to make brief random and apparently pointless “visits.” In short, many of the thousands of observed “flying saucers” and “spook lights” are more apt to be a part of the Earth's environment than extraterrestrial craft flying in from some distant point” (p.9)
Further supporting the idea that aliens live underground is information from Nick Redfern:

External Quote:

in his book The NASA Conspiracies, for example, Redfern (2011) includes an interview with someone seemingly associated with the Gemini program who claimed there was a small band of individuals who represent the last vestiges of an ancient advanced, isolated civilization – responsible for the legends of Atlantis and similar stories – forced by circumstances to retreat into remote sequestered locales for survival.
And the notion that Einstein talked to the Roswell aliens who told him they lived underground:

External Quote:

Indeed, comparable testimony continues to emerge that lends further support to the CTH. An example is the apparent testimony of Dr Shirley Wright, Albert Einstein’s assistant in 1947. Speaking in 1993 – in recordings which only became public in 2021 – Wright claimed she and Einstein had helped investigate the famous Roswell UAP crash (Verma, 2023c). Incredibly, she said this was not only a genuine UAP, but that biological entities had survived the crash and were subjected to questioning. Most relevantly here, she suggested these were actually “just humans, but an advanced form,” and as Verma summarizes it, that many of their “species” actually “reside underground on our planet.”
Shaver, Keel, Redfern an old recording of Eistien assistant, not exactly compelling evidence. Nevertheless, after piling up these dubious claims, we once again find the UFOlogist making the reverse burden of proof argument (bold by me):

External Quote:

We are not arguing that UAP do have a cryptoterrestrial explanation, but simply that they could, and the judicious approach is to consider all valid theories until the evidence decisively demonstrates they should be rejected.
So, once again, the UFOlogists have made a claim with little to no evidence, but until that claim can be decisively countered, it's as valid as any other claim. The UFOlogist need not prove their point, only say that the skeptic can disprove it, thereby proving for them. I'll read through some more latter.

Gosh...rather than suffer a brain hernia trying to respond to so much nonsense from UFOlogists, I'll let Sam Harris give the best response...


quote-if-someone-doesn-t-value-evidence-what-evidence-are-you-going-to-provide-that-proves-sam...jpg
 

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIWOxR3maYI


Michael Masters, one of the authors of the papers, did an interview. I can't watch it in one go since if I don't pause from time to time my eyes will roll out of my head. It's mind baffling how people seem to have interpreted the government saying, "It's true, there are UFOs, and we don't know what they are" to mean "It's true, there's flying saucers filled with little people, and we don't know what they are".

Few quotes (auto generated transcript so might be a bit wonky)
Michael
I'm a biological Anthropologist I teach forensic anthropology, I do archaeological field schools I teach quantitative methods a number of various classes related to um anthropology sociology, and I guess what got me interested in this is how often these being are described as looking just like a um or sort of at the point where we can't just talk about the craft any longer but we also have to acknowledge that there are seemingly an intelligent um group of individuals species that are piloting these things and they ubiquitously described as looking just like us
Paula (interviewer):
so let me go back there because I think over the last few years people have become used to this notion, because at you know the military and some Congressional hearings it was acknowledged that yep there are these unidentified uh craft as you call them and there's no real reason to think there is not alien life, um so we've kind of quickly gone to a general acceptance of not just what we've seen in sci-fi in the last few years but the military acknowledging that yeah Pilots have seen things that are unexplained and you're saying that in your research and and people that study this field uh it's gone to the actual beings themselves

Michael
so you're saying one of the areas of study is a being that exists in a future that is able to come in and out of our sense of the time space continuum yeah I mean personally I see that as the most likely scenario we know we're here we know we've had a long evolutionary history on this planet and I've I've written three books about this idea over the last five years um that we may go on to look like them we based on our evolutionary characteristics over the last 6 to eight million years we are arguably going to have bigger heads smaller faces more advanced technology and a lot of these traits are described in association with these being so I think it's possible that rather than jumping forward and backward Through Time constantly they could come back through time set up an a civilization in or around Earth in the many places that we don't have access to yet or can explore like the Deep oceans The Far Side of the Moon until recently now we go there um so I see that as one of the more likely scenarios based on the four that we proposed
Paula
That is interesting that you put forth that when we think of or we look at academic drawings of cavemen much smaller beings with much smaller skulls we have evolved this and yet typically when people have mentioned or when people describe extraterrestrial beings they do have a large head and a smaller body
Michael
Yeah, and importantly right yeah not just that they're upright walking bipedalism we're the only habitual biped on this planet among all mammals so it's highly unlikely that we would get these same characteristics that they would also be just like us but evolve on a different planet different distance from its Sun different gravity different atmosphere all of these things so the more parsimonious explanation May simply be that they're us

Paula
yeah how you know it's tough like you said you joined on to this paper uh conducted by Harvard researchers without proof without evidence is it difficult to have some of these theories uh taken with credibility taken seriously you know it is a it is a Avenue of scholarship you know that people are theorizing futurists um you know how do you approach that when you know there's going to be a certain segment of people that say yeah they can't believe it without it's Pascal's wager right they're going to believe in it in case they're going to be our overlords but nobody has prove
Michael
yeah that's a great question and and to some extent yes, but the paper is a theoretical paper we're not claiming there's evidence for this, we're not providing you know data to back this up, we're saying what are some possible scenarios to help explain this UAP phenomenon, which like you said people are more open to now because it's real.
It's been demonstrated by the Department of Defense the Navy there's been testimony in front of Congress under oath, so we're sort of getting to the point where yeah still eye rolling and some Giggles, but honestly you know taking this seriously having conversations like this one and so I very much appreciate that you're willing to to open your minds, and provide logical critique to your viewers because it is something we should all be talking about, and you're right there has been a shift in the cultural zeitgeist recently where we're starting to feel like it's okay to do that now where previously even four or five years ago it was a very different situation

There's a bit more I haven't covered with my quotes (the video is 13 minutes long).

Personally, the video got me infuriated with how this dude just casually talks as if what he's saying isn't just stuff he made up, only once mentioning how "the paper is a theoretical paper we're not claiming there's evidence for this we're not providing you know data to back this up" yet having no problem repeatedly talking as if UFOs that travel at insane speeds are normal or how there are human-like creatures piloting them as if these were facts with mountains of evidence behind them. The interviewer also doesn't seem like the smartest cookie, but that's more understandable from a journalist.
 
@Calter (quote from Masters)

External Quote:
"...we can't just talk about the craft any longer but we also have to acknowledge that there are seemingly an intelligent um group of individuals species that are piloting these things and they ubiquitously described as looking just like us"
Or ...let's go with the explanation the doesn't have to deal with the difficulties of either interstellar travel or time travel... they look like humans because humans invented them. Of course, it's harder to sell a book with common sense. I had much the same reaction to that interview. You could probably hear my eyes rolling from wherever you are.
 
Or ...let's go with the explanation the doesn't have to deal with the difficulties of either interstellar travel or time travel... they look like humans because humans invented them.
basically why most TV/movie aliens look humanoid (which in turn shape the public imagination)
 
External Quote:

"...seemingly an intelligent um group of individuals species that are piloting these things and they ubiquitously described as looking just like us"
JUST like us? Orly?
5dbed6fa94376472150a607484b08ab5.jpg


They're not even ubiquitously described as looking like each other!
 
what pisses me off the most, is the argument of "these ufos have been reported for thousands of years" that even gets repeated by seemingly smart people with academic backgrounds.

like they just mix everything together, acting as if every single reporting were the same thing.

even if only 0.01% of 100000000 cases are true, there are still 10000 real sightings

no, if you pile up a 100 meter tall tower made out of bs, its not transforming to anything else just because its a big, its just a giant pile of bs
 
It's also interesting that some people that hold the argument "there's a lot of reports, some of them have to be true" don't really apply them equally.

There's some conspiracists that believe in pretty much every conspiracy, but I bet there's a decent chunk of ufologist that think "they can't all be wrong" about aliens but don't believe in ghost (even though there's as many if not more reports), miracles, cryptids, reincarnation, etc. Even within UFO beliefs, there's people that think "they can't all be wrong" but still don't believe crop circles or abductions.

"They can't all be wrong; except the things I don't believe in".
 
Even if we allow that none of them are really Jesus...

At least two or three hundred of them have got to be John the Baptist.
 
JUST like us?

Ah, one of my bugbears- Joe Nickell's Betty and Barney Hill abductor is portrayed how modern UFO enthusiasts like to "see" him
(i.e. essentially a "Gray" from central casting).

bbha.JPG

Which doesn't match anything actually described by either Betty or Barney (though their descriptions changed a fair bit, depending on whether they were Betty's recollections of her dreams, or obtained during hypnosis). Betty did describe the alien's faces as having a greyish tinge.
One of Betty's drawings comes closest to the stereotypical Gray
Capture.JPG

...but it includes the hat (which she described as like a military academy hat IIRC, presumably a peaked cap?) which UFO book illustrators almost never include in their artist's conceptions. Betty has omitted the large nose she described earlier.
The "wraparound" eyes (not her term) might just be a really poor representation of eyes with epicanthic folds:

In a letter dated October 20, 1964 to “Walter”, Betty wrote (my emphasis):

External Quote:

“Last night Barney and I went to Phillips Exeter Academy to hear Dr. Coon, anthropologist, of Harvard, lecture on the ‘Races of Man’. He showed several slides, but one of them looked like the people on the space ship. Barney and I both recognized this at the same time! ...I believe she is of Mongolian background, with very distinct slant eyes. ... It was surprising to actually see a picture which resembled the men so closely – much better than we could ever begin to do.”
From blog Yankee Skeptic, "Who Invented Little Grays? Hollywood or the Hills?" by blogger kittynh (Kitty, if I remember),
viewable courtesy of Wayback Machine.
In passing, some of Carleton Coon's views are now seen as scientifically wrong, e.g. the different "races" evolved into H. sapiens separately, and at different times- Europeans first, of course. Betty and Barney campaigned for civil rights; interesting how even for them, back then Coon's views were presumably uncontentious.
Same article, in a letter to Marjorie Fish, dated July 12, 1969, Betty writes:

External Quote:
Barney and I had a theory that the star that the humanoids were from probably was a colder planet than the Earth. We based this thought on similarities between the humanoids and a group of Indians who live in the Magellan Straights, south of South America. These Indians have adapted to the climate or severe cold by developing fat folds to protect themselves which give the impression of being much like the humanoids. IE, the Indians have very large slant eyes, surrounded by a fat fold which gives the impression of extremely large eyes
(It doesn't consider occur to Betty that the alien planet might have different climates, like Earth, home to those Indians, does).

As for poor Barney, his descriptions, made under hypnosis, were recorded on audio tape (I've lazily cut and pasted this from another post, the link still works)

From Internet Archive, https://archive.org/details/Barney_Hill_Hypnosis_Session_1, "Uploaded by Kameron D Kiggins, obtained from Wendy Connors."
The timings below are approximate, the emphases are mine:

At 15:00 minutes, Barney sees a man looking over his shoulder through the "window" of the UFO;
"...I think of a red-haired Irishman..."

At 17:15, "..and the evil face- he looks like a German Nazi" and Barney goes on to describe a black uniform, and a black scarf around his neck draped over one shoulder. Later, Hill says the figure is wearing a black shiny jacket.
18:12, apparently about the "German Nazi", "...his eyes were slanted but not like a Chinee.." (Old, now offensive term for person of "Chinese" appearance).

20:20 Hill becomes distressed, again at 21:10, "his eyes..."

26:00 "...they're men - all with black jackets...", 26:44 "the eyes are there..."

So, (Betty's idea of) short-ish natives of Tierra Del Fuego in what might be mid-20th century American police or military parade uniforms, a redheaded Irishman (Barney doesn't explain how he knows he's Irish, but comments on his feelings about Irish-Americans) and a Gestapo man with a scarf.

Even UFO enthusiasts must realise this is implausible; generally they seem happier to ignore the Hill's testimony where it's inconvenient and pretend to themselves, and anyone else who'll listen, that the Hills described Grays.
 
As has been pointed out before, if we have no extraterrestrial visitors, then the UFO spotters CAN all be wrong...and that 0.01% of "true" sightings is an arbitrarily invented number.

This is why I generally chose 10[sup]-(10[sup]100[/sup])[/sup] as my preferred arbitrary number. It tends to quash any other arbitrary numbers that are put into an equation.
 
As has been pointed out before, if we have no extraterrestrial visitors, then the UFO spotters CAN all be wrong...and that 0.01% of "true" sightings is an arbitrarily invented number.
yes of course, they all do the same mistake. even by assigning 0.000001% probability then this still means that aliens on earth are a given of 100%
 
yes of course, they all do the same mistake. even by assigning 0.000001% probability then this still means that aliens on earth are a given of 100%
0.00001% is, of course, just as arbitrary, and even if we knew the probability of what they refer to as "true" sightings, that is still no "100%" guarantee that we have had any. Think of putting your hand in a jar of jelly beans that are 90% green ones...you can still grab a red one. And probabilities cannot be assessed without having REAL numbers to work with.
 
yes we agree 100%, maybe my non native english skills resulted in some misunderstanding due to poor phrasing
 
To be fair, the authors didn't claim that stealth aliens are here, just that the possibility of stealth aliens being here should not be dismissed out of hand.

I would categorized the paper type as a perspective paper. The definition of a perspective paper may vary depending on the journal, but this description generally captures the nature of this type of paper.

The Perspective presenting the author's opinion and insights regarding current research or other topics of interest to scientists should be concise and stress a new and unique viewpoint on existing problems, fundamental concepts, or prevalent notions on a specific topic, propose and support a new hypothesis, or discuss the implications of a newly implemented innovation. Perspective pieces may focus on current advances and future directions on a topic, and may include original data as well as personal opinion.

https://jle.hse.ru/pop

There are problems with the paper, but there can be some value in perspective papers and the academic discussions they initiate.

On topics like astrobiology or SETI, you simply have no hard evidence of existence yet. But a likelihood of existence can be proposed by extrapolating from what we know, and making some assumptions.

On the topic of SETI, NASA wrote in their recent UAP report:

There is an intellectual continuum between hypothesizing that faraway extraterrestrial civilizations might produce detectable technologies, and looking for those technologies closer to home.

https://smd-cms.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/uap-independent-study-team-final-report.pdf

Arguably, we should not dismiss the possibility of an ETI coming here from another star, especially not while simultaneously championing the idea that one day we may explore other stars systems ourselves.

A Roadmap to Interstellar Flight
... We posit a path forward, that while not simple, it is within our technological reach. We propose a roadmap to a program that will lead to sending relativistic probes to the nearest stars and will open up a vast array of possibilities of flight both within our solar system and far beyond ... The human factor of exploring the nearest stars and exo-planets would be a profound voyage for humanity, one whose non-scientific implications would be enormous. It is time to begin this inevitable journey far beyond our home.

https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/roadmap_to_interstellar_flight_tagged.pdf

If we take the hypothesis that faraway extraterrestrial civilizations might produce detectable technologies closer to home, as NASA puts it, seriously, then there would be reason to have a serious discussion about what to look for, where, and how.

Given the distances involved, we can suppose the trip would likely take a long time, and if so a one way trip might be more likely than coming and going. And given that reasons to come here that are unique to our time (like radio leakage) are too recent to have reached many stars close enough to receive them and for them to respond by coming here, we can suppose that it is unlikely that the timing would coincide with our moment in time.

In other words, it may be most likely that if they are here, they came a long time ago. And if they are still here, they must be stealthy and reside somewhere. And if we choose to look for signs they are here, we should take all of this into account. At least that much seems reasonable to me.
 
Last edited:
In other words, it may be most likely that if they are here, they came a long time ago. And if they are still here, they must be stealthy and reside somewhere. And if we choose to look for signs they are here, we should take all of this into account. At least that much seems reasonable to me.

Agreed, if that were the point of the paper. Whether it's a bunch of academics, or you and I here discussing ideas and possibilities it's always a good thing and we should be open to new ideas. However, I don't think that's what's going on in this paper.

We all know UFO/UAPs are real in the sense that some things observed or recorded can't be explained, likely due to a lack of information. On this forum Mick coined the term Low Information Zone (LIZ) and there are things in the LIZ. As I've noted before, if there are 100 reports of things in the sky and 90 of them can be confirmed as aircraft, satellites, balloons, celestial bodies, hoaxes and other mundane things, then I suspect the other 10 likely would fall into one of these categories as well if there was enough information. The authors never even mention this possibility, rather for them UFO/UAPs are real, in the alien sense.

Having started from the position that UFOs are real and alien, they then try to offer every conceivable explanation for how this could be. A serious dive into the UFO question should start with examining the various stories, claims and myths the subject is based on, then look for possible solutions. This paper is more of an exhaustive list of answers looking for questions.

As UFOs are real for these authors, they then suggest the aliens in these UFOs are from our future or the past or under the oceans or underground or interdimensional or maybe fairies or (insert pet idea here). All possibilities are equally valid.

I would argue all ideas are not equally valid. The idea that aliens from the past or future might live underground based on the fiction of Jules Vern, the likely delusional writings of Richard Shaver and a few photos of supposed UFOs at a Mexican volcano IS NOT as valid as a cultural explanation for UFOs. Author Masters has said he is board with the "banality or reality", but reality is what we have. Not future human aliens living in volcanos.
 
Having started from the position that UFOs are real and alien, they then try to offer every conceivable explanation for how this could be.

They do say at the start that:

Hypotheses for such phenomena tend to fall into two classes: a conventional terrestrial explanation (e.g., human-made technology), or an extraterrestrial explanation (i.e., advanced civilizations from elsewhere in the cosmos).

Although they don't go into detail on the conventional explanations.

A serious dive into the UFO question should start with examining the various stories, claims and myths the subject is based on, then look for possible solutions. This paper is more of an exhaustive list of answers looking for questions.

True, but the paper isn't really meant to be a deep dive into the UFO question. It's more narrowly scoped on a specific category of possibilities.

As UFOs are real for these authors, they then suggest the aliens in these UFOs are from our future or the past or under the oceans or underground or interdimensional or maybe fairies or (insert pet idea here). All possibilities are equally valid.

I'm not sure they are saying all possibilities are equally likely.

They say this:

we argue this possibility should not be summarily dismissed, and instead deserves genuine consideration in a spirit of epistemic humility and openness

I do agree the paper has problems.
 
not dismissing something right away and assigning unreasonable probabilities are a very big difference however.
 
To be fair, the authors didn't claim that stealth aliens are here, just that the possibility of stealth aliens being here should not be dismissed out of hand.

I would categorized the paper type as a perspective paper. The definition of a perspective paper may vary depending on the journal, but this description generally captures the nature of this type of paper.



https://jle.hse.ru/pop

There are problems with the paper, but there can be some value in perspective papers and the academic discussions they initiate.

On topics like astrobiology or SETI, you simply have no hard evidence of existence yet. But a likelihood of existence can be proposed by extrapolating from what we know, and making some assumptions.

On the topic of SETI, NASA wrote in their recent UAP report:



https://smd-cms.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/uap-independent-study-team-final-report.pdf

Arguably, we should not dismiss the possibility of an ETI coming here from another star, especially not while simultaneously championing the idea that one day we may explore other stars systems ourselves.



https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/roadmap_to_interstellar_flight_tagged.pdf

If we take the hypothesis that faraway extraterrestrial civilizations might produce detectable technologies closer to home, as NASA puts it, seriously, then there would be reason to have a serious discussion about what to look for, where, and how.

Given the distances involved, we can suppose the trip would likely take a long time, and if so a one way trip might be more likely than coming and going. And given that reasons to come here that are unique to our time (like radio leakage) are too recent to have reached many stars close enough to receive them and for them to respond by coming here, we can suppose that it is unlikely that the timing would coincide with our moment in time.

In other words, it may be most likely that if they are here, they came a long time ago. And if they are still here, they must be stealthy and reside somewhere. And if we choose to look for signs they are here, we should take all of this into account. At least that much seems reasonable to me.

Well, it's equivalent to taking all the Bigfoot and Yeti sighting reports at face value and writing a thinkpiece on the implications for how Sasquatch evades detection and where the creature(s) may have come from and where they reside -- ignoring that most of the "solid" Bigfoot evidence is from known hoaxers and that the pop-cultural impact of Bigfoot induces people to interpret half-seen things as hominids, while not including any researchers with expertise in the relevant scientific disciplines.

Or -- a lot of people believe in magic; magic is performed by wizards; wizards have to learn how to cast spells, so they must have a secret school or schools somewhere; so here are our suggestions for narrowing down the location of Hogwarts.
 
Well, it's equivalent to taking all the Bigfoot and Yeti sighting reports at face value and writing a thinkpiece on the implications for how Sasquatch evades detection and where the creature(s) may have come from and where they reside -- ignoring that most of the "solid" Bigfoot evidence is from known hoaxers and that the pop-cultural impact of Bigfoot induces people to interpret half-seen things as hominids, while not including any researchers with expertise in the relevant scientific disciplines.

Or -- a lot of people believe in magic; magic is performed by wizards; wizards have to learn how to cast spells, so they must have a secret school or schools somewhere; so here are our suggestions for narrowing down the location of Hogwarts.

There are similarities with those examples, but also differences. It's not equivalent. An analogy can be helpful, but drawing equivalencies between different things can get into fallacy territory.
 
not dismissing something right away and assigning unreasonable probabilities are a very big difference however.
They did say this in the paper:
To reiterate, this hypothesis carries a very low probability weighting, and even people open to it remain sceptical. However, such scepticism is entirely
appropriate, and does not negate the point of this paper, namely taking seriously the CTH as a possible explanation for UAP. We are not arguing that UAP do have a cryptoterrestrial explanation, but simply that they could, and the judicious approach is to consider all valid theories until the evidence decisively demonstrates they should be rejected
 
In other words, it may be most likely that if they are here, they came a long time ago. And if they are still here, they must be stealthy and reside somewhere.

But the issue is, we have no real evidence that "they" exist at all, anywhere. If they do, there's no reliable evidence that they have visited Earth at any time, ever.

With this paper, Michael P. Masters turns scientific methodology on its head:
Because we have no real evidence for extraterrestrials on Earth, that is evidence that they might be hiding.

"There are extraterrestrials on Earth" becomes an unfalsifiable hypothesis: If we have clear evidence, the hypothesis is confirmed (well, the experimental hypothesis can't be discarded). But if we don't have evidence-
-other than people sometimes see lights in the sky that they can't identify, and much more rarely report strange experiences of greater informational richness but without confirmatory evidence- then the ETs must be in remote areas/ looking exactly like us/ under the sea/ on the Moon.
Unfalsifiable hypotheses are unscientific, and have no predictive value.

A more prosaic conclusion might be, there are no ETs on Earth. The one force that UFOs are vulnerable to is Occam's Razor.

If ETI exists, we can only guess at its priorities, motivations or intent. But to maintain a technological society capable of crewed interstellar flight, that part of their culture must be rational, at least in the sense of planning, mustering resources, problem solving and communally working towards a very difficult aim over a prolonged period of time.

Why should they hide once they're here?
Even if, despite their technological superiority, they were individually as vulnerable as a human, a few dozen fusion devices left (e.g.) in orbit, representing a tiny fraction of the energy and technological sophistication required for interstellar flight might be a practical insurance policy. An individual ET doesn't check in, goodnight Vienna (and a handful of other targets pour encourager les autres).

If they want to gather information, remote sensing, use of micro-drones greatly more advanced than ours might be more efficient than individuals, even flying individuals with an interest in people on backroads, isolated farmers/ loggers/ anglers etc. For us, human intelligence (in the military sense) and the Mk. 1 eyeball is still important, but ever since Gary Powers was shot down we've relied more and more on recce satellites, signals intelligence, and more recently computer hacking and UAVs, and that trend will continue.

If they want to settle here, they could request assistance to build an acceptable habitat (not "District 9") and the right to travel as they please, with an assurance they won't interfere in our affairs (not, perhaps, that we could refuse or enforce that).

A benign ETI might be able to give us some scientific information or tips that might improve our quality of life/ reduce human suffering as a gesture of goodwill without compromising their technological lead. I don't share David Grusch's cargo-cultish beliefs that we already have the know-how for free clean energy etc. from recovered ET craft, if only the Bad Men would share it.
Imagine the advertising revenues a TV series about the history/ culture of the settlers might bring in! -We'd have no idea if it was true, but it might help them pay the bills, and it'd still be more believable than Skinwalker Ranch.

If the ETI is malign, game over. They only require a 1960s level of technology for a hypothetical space-based nuclear arsenal; a starflight-level of tech might provide many other coercive options. No need for Men In Black or empty threats on the 'phone.

UFO enthusiasts often seem to think that the People In Charge don't share what they know about UFOs/ ETI because they fear the reactions it will cause in wider society.
However, billions of people- probably the majority of humanity- already believe in a superior intelligence or governing principle and knowledge of ETI doesn't challenge the major articles of faith of any major religion (AFAIK).
All reasonably well-educated people are aware that organised groups of humans have imposed their wants, and inflicted terrible suffering, on other wholly blameless humans. Since at least the early 1960s to 1989, pretty much any educated person living near a major city, power installation, military base or communications hub in the USA, Canada, most of Europe, the USSR and China knew that there was a possibility that their lives could be ended, or horribly restricted, in a matter of hours. Yet for the most part people carried on with normal life. Reactions to any proof of ETI might be varied, but normal life would continue.
 
I'm not sure they are saying all possibilities are equally likely.

They say this:

The quote I'm thinking of is this one from the paper (bold by me):

External Quote:

We are not arguing that UAP do have a cryptoterrestrial explanation, but simply that they could, and the judicious approach is to consider all valid theories until the evidence decisively demonstrates they should be rejected.
So, that means the Shaver Mysteries about Daros and Teros:

External Quote:

Shaver argued in a 10,000-word manifesto that advanced prehistoric races had built cities inside Earth but fled to another planet due to concerns about radiation damage from the Sun, leaving a cohort of offspring who remained underground. Palmer revised the manuscript and published it as “I Remember Lemuria!” in the March 1945 issue of Amazing Stories, a tale which became the foundation for a genre of science fiction on this theme. Although many people condemned Shaver’s narrative as a “hoax” (Dash, 2000), he and Palmer continued to maintain its veracity.
Claims by Nick Redfern that there are vestiges of ancient aliens in secluded areas:

External Quote:
in his book The NASA Conspiracies, for example, Redfern (2011) includes an interview with someone seemingly associated with the Gemini program who claimed there was a small band of individuals who represent the last vestiges of an ancient advanced, isolated civilization – responsible for the legends of Atlantis and similar stories – forced by circumstances to retreat into remote sequestered locales for survival
And Hal Puthoff's Lovecraftian suggestion of Antediluvian technology:

External Quote:

Consider Puthoff’s claim that there could be an “ancient occult group, isolated pre-Diluvial high-tech society… existing alongside us in distinct stealth.”
Could be valid theories, therefore it's up to us to PROVE they are not.

Just no.

If Hal Puthoff wants to claim there was an antediluvian high-tech society, it's not up to you and me to PROVE THERE IS NOT such a society. That's just bassakwards. Puthoff, and to an extent the authors are making the claim, it's up to them to provide evidence. Instead, they play this coy trick of saying "Well it could be but were not saying it is". They don't have any evidence that it's true to offer, but since we don't have any evidence that it is NOT true, we should seriously talk about it. Just not how it works.

I can postulate that most UFO activity started in late '40s through to today because there is a concerted effort by Hollywood insiders to promote aliens. SyFy movies were and are big business at various times in the history of Hollywood and the entertainment industry post WW2. From B grade drive-in fair to big budget spectacles, SyFy has always played a big part in Hollywood.

Now what better way to drum up almost subconscious buzz about SyFy movies, than to suggest aliens aren't just in the movies but are real. Who better equipped to pull this off, between Hollywood's massive PR and advertising arms and their literal dream factories, it would be easy to plant a story here, plant a photo there. Just keep the whole thing rolling at a low level, then ramp up when needed.

Note that The Mouse (Disney) acquired Lucasfilm in 2012, thus gaining all the rights to the Star Wars franchise, something they greatly expanded upon beginning in 2015:

External Quote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucasfilm

Note also that right in the middle of that run of movies, the latest UFO flap got rolling with the NYT 2017 article that brought us Elizondo and AATIP. Hmmmm?

Now, I don't have any proof of this but I'm pretty sure nobody has proof that it DID NOT happen. So, by the authors logic, the theory that UFOs are really just part of a Hollywood secret marketing campaign:

External Quote:

we argue this possibility should not be summarily dismissed, and instead deserves genuine consideration in a spirit of epistemic humility and openness.
I await someone proving my HAM (Hollywood Alien Marketing) idea wrong ;).
 
But the issue is, we have no real evidence that "they" exist at all, anywhere. If they do, there's no reliable evidence that they have visited Earth at any time, ever.

Indeed. Before anyone argues over how aliens get to Earth....shouldn't people be proving that aliens even exist ? Otherwise it is on par with arguing over what sized shoes Bigfoot wears or how big a unicorn's horn is.
 
Why should they hide once they're here?

I personally think that the case where they send small exploratory missions that are meant to last a long time is one of the most plausible cases. If you assume that were the case, there could be a number of reasons why they might want to remain hidden.

And based on whatever reasons they have, they may also make it a rule, or part of the programming if it were an AI based mission. Those rules, or that programming, could have been created by the senders. The senders would probably not be in direct communication, or control of what they send once it arrives, so it would be reasonable for them to do their best to make sure that what they send doesn't do anything harmful to the mission, or the native wildlife. Depending on how much independent authority the mission would have, they also may not be able to interfere ways they consider contextually reasonable, at least without long delays if orders come from the host star system.

One plausible reason for not making contact is that it could risk cultural contamination. It may be more interesting to observe an undisturbed primitive civilization than to try to make friends. Arguably, since we are such a fresh technological civilization, and the majority of other technological civilizations are probably vastly older than us (assuming rapid extinction following technological development isn't too common), then we could be a major interest for observation. Our era could be a rare and pivotal moment in the natural evolution of intelligent life. I've heard people suggest that for a highly developed technological civilization, it could be similar in a way to observing abiogenesis.
 
Last edited:
The quote I'm thinking of is this one from the paper (bold by me):

External Quote:

We are not arguing that UAP do have a cryptoterrestrial explanation, but simply that they could, and the judicious approach is to consider all valid theories until the evidence decisively demonstrates they should be rejected.
So, that means the Shaver Mysteries about Daros and Teros:

External Quote:

Shaver argued in a 10,000-word manifesto that advanced prehistoric races had built cities inside Earth but fled to another planet due to concerns about radiation damage from the Sun, leaving a cohort of offspring who remained underground. Palmer revised the manuscript and published it as “I Remember Lemuria!” in the March 1945 issue of Amazing Stories, a tale which became the foundation for a genre of science fiction on this theme. Although many people condemned Shaver’s narrative as a “hoax” (Dash, 2000), he and Palmer continued to maintain its veracity.
Claims by Nick Redfern that there are vestiges of ancient aliens in secluded areas:

External Quote:
in his book The NASA Conspiracies, for example, Redfern (2011) includes an interview with someone seemingly associated with the Gemini program who claimed there was a small band of individuals who represent the last vestiges of an ancient advanced, isolated civilization – responsible for the legends of Atlantis and similar stories – forced by circumstances to retreat into remote sequestered locales for survival
And Hal Puthoff's Lovecraftian suggestion of Antediluvian technology:

External Quote:

Consider Puthoff’s claim that there could be an “ancient occult group, isolated pre-Diluvial high-tech society… existing alongside us in distinct stealth.”
Could be valid theories, therefore it's up to us to PROVE they are not.

Just no.

If Hal Puthoff wants to claim there was an antediluvian high-tech society, it's not up to you and me to PROVE THERE IS NOT such a society. That's just bassakwards. Puthoff, and to an extent the authors are making the claim, it's up to them to provide evidence. Instead, they play this coy trick of saying "Well it could be but were not saying it is". They don't have any evidence that it's true to offer, but since we don't have any evidence that it is NOT true, we should seriously talk about it. Just not how it works.
I pretty much agree with these points.

I can understand some background explaining why people care about the topic right now, that includes some of the notable events and claims that have been made that have given rise to the current atmosphere surrounding the topic.

But they go way too far, inluding everything up to Facebook posts and X posts, and bringing up topics like Lemuria, etc.
 
Last edited:
I personally think that the case where they send small exploratory missions that are meant to last a long time is one of the most plausible cases. If you assume that were the case, there could be a number of reasons why they might want to remain hidden.

And based on whatever reasons they have, they may also make it a rule, or part of the programming if it were an AI based mission. Those rules, or that programming, could have been created by the senders. The senders would probably not be in direct communication, or control of what they send once it arrives, so it would be reasonable for them to do their best to make sure that what they send doesn't do anything harmful to the mission, or the native wildlife.

One plausible reason that we can understand is that making widespread contact would risk cultural contamination. It may be more interesting to observe an undisturbed primitive civilization than to try to make friends. Arguably, since we are such a fresh technological civilization, and the majority of other technological civilizations are probably vastly older than us (assuming rapid extinction phenomenon following technological development isn't too common), then we could be a major interest for observation. Our era could be a rare and pivotal moment in the natural evolution of intelligent life. I've heard people suggest that for a highly developed technological civilization, it could be similar in a way to observing abiogenesis take place.
"'They' might", "could have been", "plausible reason", "it would be reasonable", "may be", "probably vastly older", "rare and pivotal moment"... I think these might be considerations if you were writing a Sci-fi novel, but are way out in left field for a serious discussion of facts. Every sentence assumes that "they" (whoever) exist, and that "they" are (or have been, or will) visit us. That's a significant stretch.
 
"'They' might", "could have been", "plausible reason", "it would be reasonable", "may be", "probably vastly older", "rare and pivotal moment"... I think these might be considerations if you were writing a Sci-fi novel, but are way out in left field for a serious discussion of facts. Every sentence assumes that "they" (whoever) exist, and that "they" are (or have been, or will) visit us. That's a significant stretch.

I disagree. These are logical arguments with clear assumptions. We make similar arguments when we propose that ET life might be likely to be carbon based or require water.
 
I disagree. These are logical arguments with clear assumptions. We make similar arguments when we propose that ET life might be likely to be carbon based or require water.
I'd argue that we are on pretty firm ground with the need for water and carbon, especially carbon.

I'd say that this position is based on logical arguments with clear assumptions that are based on what we know about chemistry (which is substantial), and this differs from logical arguments based on clear assumptions which are based on hearsay and folklore and what would be cool if it were true.
 
I personally think that the case where they send small exploratory missions that are meant to last a long time is one of the most plausible cases. If you assume that were the case, there could be a number of reasons why they might want to remain hidden.
So use remote sensing, signals intelligence (including straightforward radio and TV monitoring), nano-tech drones or whatever.

Stop flying around in craft which (according to some reports) are lit up like sodding Christmas trees or the size of football fields.
And stop using endoscopy/ gynae/ urology kits from the 1950s. Or at least anaesthetise your captives.

Even Jacques Vallée has stated
External Quote:
unexplained close encounters are far more numerous than required for any physical survey of the earth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Vallée

For a civilisation which is supposedly technologically far in advance of ours, they're doing a really bad job of keeping a low profile.
And yet they're doing an excellent job of not leaving any material evidence of any sort whatsoever.
 
I disagree. These are logical arguments with clear assumptions. We make similar arguments when we propose that ET life might be likely to be carbon based or require water.

I guess I would argue that when we make assumptions about carbon/water-based life it's from a known thing. We know that a carbon/water-based life form is possible because we can look around at every living thing on Earth and see they are in fact based on carbon and water. Additionally, every living thing on Earth (maybe not viruses and prions but that's a different topic) uses ATP for energy.

So, saying that life based upon water and carbon that synthesizes ATP for energy is more that an assumption, it's what defines life on Earth. The assumption would be, since we know it works here, we can assume it might work elsewhere. That doesn't mean it does or that some other combination of elements might have a similar result. But we're making assumptions from a clearly grounded base.

Any assumptions about aliens, whether their biological make up or behavior is really just speculation as no one has ever presented an alien to verify any assumptions that might be made. We can make assumptions about carbon-based life because we are in fact carbon-based life forms. We cannot make any assumptions about aliens because there aren't any that we know of.

Again, we can speculate and that's fun in the right setting. I think the speculation that aliens might send probs is for more logical than a bunch of Greys and Nordics or Lumarians hiding out under Mt. Shasta. But it's still just speculation.

And a belated Welcome to the forum.
 
Back
Top