SETI chief says US has no evidence for alien technology. 'And we never have'
"The idea that the government is keeping something like this secret is just totally absurd. There's no motivation to do so."
If all the reports of mysterious objects buzzing our skies are taken as true encounters, the Earth appears to be under assault.
But spoiler alert: For the chief leader of the SETI Institute, established to search for and understand life beyond Earth, there's a need to step back and cuddle up to a cup of cosmic reality.
"We don't have any evidence of any credible source that would indicate the presence of alien technology in our skies. And we never have," said Bill Diamond, president and chief executive officer of the SETI Institute, headquartered in Mountain View, California. "The idea that the government is keeping something like this secret is just totally absurd. There's no motivation to do so."
SETI is a key research contractor to NASA and the National Science Foundation, and collaborates with industry partners throughout Silicon Valley. Space.com caught up with Diamond for a close-encounter with his own thoughts and counterpoints to claims of alien visitation and to ask whether there's any signal in all the UFO noise.
Thought experiment
Diamond said that, while we should not outright rule out the possibility that we might someday discover evidence of alien technology in our skies, "we should equally not jump to the conclusion that UFOs are alien technology in the absence of any compelling evidence to that effect. And there is no compelling evidence," he contends.
To help visualize why, Diamond urges people to try a thought experiment.
Get the Space.com Newsletter
Breaking space news, the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!
The fastest spacecraft that humans have ever built and continues to head outward from Earth is NASA's New Horizons spacecraft. It was hurled outward back in January 2006, cruising by Pluto and is still adding mileage to its odometer.
"If you sent that spacecraft to our closest neighbor star, Alpha Centauri, it would take 80,000 years to get there," said Diamond. "Any civilization that has mastered the ability to traverse the incomprehensibly vast distances of interstellar space would have technology so far advanced from our own as to be beyond our comprehension."
It would be much like a smartphone to a Neanderthal, Diamond suggested.
"If such beings exist, they would likely send hardware here first and not biology, and they certainly wouldn't crash-land in our deserts," he said, like the alleged and highly acclaimed 1947 nose-dive of a UFO and its accident-prone occupants near Roswell, New Mexico.
In short haul language, that's a long way to travel and run out of braking fluid.
Where's the mothership?
"Long before they sent any craft into our sky they would have some understanding of what they were dealing with," Diamond observed, "as they would already know everything about our atmosphere, our airspace, our technology and more."
It just wouldn't happen, Diamond emphasized.
"And if it did they wouldn't leave them behind. And by the way, if you have a small craft zipping around in our airspace, where is the mothership? And if they didn't want to be observed, they wouldn't be!"
Connective tissue
All the same, in the public mind, is there some kind of connective tissue between SETI and UFOs?
"There is definitely connective tissue," Diamond responded. "Why do people have these beliefs? It is because they want to believe. Nobody really wants to think that this Earth is the only place in the vastness of space where life has emerged. Even that idea is also kind of absurd."
For example, Diamond points to the revelations cranked out by the NASA Kepler mission, lofted in March 2009.
That hunter/data-gatherer spacecraft discovered more than 2,700 planets beyond our solar system. Compiling deep space data for nine years, the message from Kepler: there are billions of unseen planets, indeed, more planets than stars.
Statistical probability
"Statistically speaking, every single star in the sky has one or more planets around it," Diamond pointed out. Furthermore, 50 percent or more of these are Earth-like (rocky surface and similar size) and in the habitable zone of their host star, he said.
"That implies the existence of tens of billions of potentially habitable worlds in our galaxy alone," Diamond said. "So indeed, the statistical probability that we are alone in the Universe is zero. Surely there is life beyond Earth!"
But the presence, both in space and time, as well as proximity, of advanced alien civilizations is another matter completely, Diamond continued. "There are innumerable variables, all of which in the sciences of astrobiology, planetary science, astronomy and astrophysics, we are trying to figure out."
Accidental observations
Diamond questions why any alien civilization would send biology when they could isntead send hardware.
"The farthest things we have sent into space are hardware. And that's logical," said Diamond. "But if you did send beings and the most interesting thing you can do is draw circles in crops … come on!"
One other scoop of skepticism Diamond added is that every single UFO — now tied to the term Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) — are all "accidental observations."
"Therefore, they are highly unreliable. They don't have instrumentation, technology, or methodology to discern what they are looking at," said Diamond.
Lastly, the SETI Institute leader said if the government actually believed in ET buzzing our planet, where's the study money?
"The lack of government funding to study UAP/UFO is evidence of either the government being quite certain that there's nothing to these accidental observations — or — the government preferring that we not use available technology to closely watch our skies because of our own human technologies that are being developed — in secret," said Diamond.
"I think that's the most compelling bit of evidence against the idea that we've got visitors in our skies," Diamond concluded.
For more information on the SETI Institute and its programs, go to https://www.seti.org/
Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.
Leonard David is an award-winning space journalist who has been reporting on space activities for more than 50 years. Currently writing as Space.com's Space Insider Columnist among his other projects, Leonard has authored numerous books on space exploration, Mars missions and more, with his latest being "Moon Rush: The New Space Race" published in 2019 by National Geographic. He also wrote "Mars: Our Future on the Red Planet" released in 2016 by National Geographic. Leonard has served as a correspondent for SpaceNews, Scientific American and Aerospace America for the AIAA. He has received many awards, including the first Ordway Award for Sustained Excellence in Spaceflight History in 2015 at the AAS Wernher von Braun Memorial Symposium. You can find out Leonard's latest project at his website and on Twitter.
-
Beauxdensteiner What's all them thar' videos that the Navy has of them little flying things flying all around them thar' airplanes? What's all them 'air??? Because if it's not interdimensional beings or extraterrestrial beings or fairies then Sherlock would say we might be in trouble... Because who else could it be? The Russians? The Chinese? Ourselves? One way or the other, it's definitely something because I have seen at least two myself (in a group of people so we knew it wasn't hallucination) but they were not large spaceship looking things. They were more like what people describe as fairy lights. Seeing is believing.Reply -
COLGeek
I have no doubt you saw something. As to what it was is in question.Beauxdensteiner said:What's all them thar' videos that the Navy has of them little flying things flying all around them thar' airplanes? What's all them 'air??? Because if it's not interdimensional beings or extraterrestrial beings or fairies then Sherlock would say we might be in trouble... Because who else could it be? The Russians? The Chinese? Ourselves? One way or the other, it's definitely something because I have seen at least two myself (in a group of people so we knew it wasn't hallucination) but they were not large spaceship looking things. They were more like what people describe as fairy lights. Seeing is believing.
Eyewitness testimony is often misleading. That is an endless debate all in itself.
Riddle me this. With all the high-definition cameras covering the globe, why do none of them ever capture a clear image of these UAPs/UFOs?
Seeing is believing, but belief is subject to interpretation, misconception, and rationalization that may simply not be true. -
p3orion
Quite right. For some five decades following the Roswell "crash" that inaugurated the UFO craze, eyewitness observations were largely hampered by the fact that it was often unlikely that there was any photographic evidence to back up the accounts. But in the last 20 years, the likelihood that there's a camera immediately available to ANY group of people at any given time has risen by several orders of magnitude, and yet there has been no corresponding rise in the number of photos of "flying saucers." If anything, they seem to have decreased.COLGeek said:I have no doubt you saw something. As to what it was is in question.
Eyewitness testimony is often misleading. That is an endless debate all in itself.
Riddle me this. With all the high-definition cameras covering the globe, why do none of them ever capture a clear image of these UAPs/UFOs?
Seeing is believing, but belief is subject to interpretation, misconception, and rationalization that may simply not be true.
Not to imply that all UFO encounter photos of the 1950s through the early 2000s were deliberate hoaxes, but certainly some were. In those days, it would have taken a modicum of effort and skill to fabricate a believeable UFO photo; that level of difficulty tended to lend such photos at least a little credibility: "if it isn't real, how could he have done it?" But now anyone can use PhotoShop or even AI to generate an authentic-looking photo in mere minutes. Stripped of their presumption of reality, evidently it's just no fun to hoax anymore, and the supply has dropped off. Those reports and photos that are left --actual sightings of something, as by airline and military pilots-- are, if not explained, still most likely explainable, as something other than a visit by little green men.
Like the author, I am convinced (by the mathematics alone) that it's almost 100% certain there is other life in the universe, and that there are even intelligent civilizations. It is much much less likely that we have ever encountered any of them, or they us. -
Classical Motion Those "tic tac" objects and those gold orbs were interesting. I haven't heard anything further on the orbs. But I did read an interesting article about those tic tacs. It reported that the tic tac video image screens were set at the wrong range. It's lowest range, something like 50 meters. Two planes in formation were set that way, the others in that patrol were not. Only those two planes recorded that, the others were clear and looking for what the other thought they were seeing.Reply
Extremely embarrassing for a navel aviator. And no other explanations were offered.
Haven't heard anything about the orbs.
However my experience with DSP, multiple sensors, and RF networking of them.....have shown to produce multiple processing artifacts. Most are filtered and cancelled out. But with this type of threat, and the software used, an un-expected artifact could be considered a target and plotted. Better to plot a fake, than to not plot a target. Allowing human pilot or operator to verify.
If there was ANY evidence of UFOs, we would have seen it.
There is none. And our present science says there can not be.
Only star trek and star wars science can do these things.
Observation is the easiest and the oldest method of deception. A predatory method. -
Dave A thousand years ago Europeans did not come to the Americas. It was impossible at the time. The earth was flat. How did that all turn out?Reply
Countless UAP spacecraft have been seen that defy the laws of physics. These are true observations and as much as we would like to believe we are the center of the universe, we are not. Intelligent lifeforms observing us do not wish contact. They do not wish to be discovered. Their science is a better science.
The people who collect the data on this subject are the military. For decades they have lied covered up and misled not only the public, but congress as well. Finally there is some push back by bipartisan members of congress. They will get to the bottom of it and reveal the truth. It will take time. Even at this very moment they have to fight tooth and nail to get any answers. Let mainstream scientists investigate UAP sightings. Allow future whistleblowers access to congressional meetings. People can rationalize anything away they like, but not the truth. -
BuckTurgidson
I would suggest spending a bit more time reviewing the testimony of Cmdr. David Fravor (USN Ret.), et al, regarding the 2004 Nimitz incident. The evidence is compelling and supported by multiple sensors -- both air and ship-borne. Ignoring these data points highly suggests the desire not to find anything.COLGeek said:I have no doubt you saw something. As to what it was is in question.
Eyewitness testimony is often misleading. That is an endless debate all in itself.
Riddle me this. With all the high-definition cameras covering the globe, why do none of them ever capture a clear image of these UAPs/UFOs?
Seeing is believing, but belief is subject to interpretation, misconception, and rationalization that may simply not be true. -
BuckTurgidson
How did "nothing" get tracked by multiple sensor suites, including radar aboard the Princeton and Mark I eyeballs in the air and on the water -- over multiple days? How did this "nothing" get to the exercise's CAP point in mere seconds -- a location not widely briefed and impossible to reach in that time frame. How could experienced fighter pilots maneuver against "nothing," and find themselves unable to match its performance, though they were in state-of-the-art fighters that should be capable of daylight bfm with any peer or near-peer aircraft in the world?Classical Motion said:Those "tic tac" objects and those gold orbs were interesting. I haven't heard anything further on the orbs. But I did read an interesting article about those tic tacs. It reported that the tic tac video image screens were set at the wrong range. It's lowest range, something like 50 meters. Two planes in formation were set that way, the others in that patrol were not. Only those two planes recorded that, the others were clear and looking for what the other thought they were seeing.
Extremely embarrassing for a navel aviator. And no other explanations were offered.
Haven't heard anything about the orbs.
However my experience with DSP, multiple sensors, and RF networking of them.....have shown to produce multiple processing artifacts. Most are filtered and cancelled out. But with this type of threat, and the software used, an un-expected artifact could be considered a target and plotted. Better to plot a fake, than to not plot a target. Allowing human pilot or operator to verify.
If there was ANY evidence of UFOs, we would have seen it.
There is none. And our present science says there can not be.
Only star trek and star wars science can do these things.
Observation is the easiest and the oldest method of deception. A predatory method.
I'll be charitable and suggest you're either ignorant of the topic as a whole, or you're being completely disingenuous. -
COLGeek
Agreed. Even if one is not willing to accept the reality of the matter.Dave said:People can rationalize anything away they like, but not the truth. -
COLGeek
Thank you for the suggestion. Sorry, but there is nothing of substance there.BuckTurgidson said:I would suggest spending a bit more time reviewing the testimony of Cmdr. David Fravor (USN Ret.), et al, regarding the 2004 Nimitz incident. The evidence is compelling and supported by multiple sensors -- both air and ship-borne. Ignoring these data points highly suggests the desire not to find anything.
The U does not mean extraterrestrial. I am more than familiar with all of those sensor platforms and how they work, including their capabilities and limitations. -
BuckTurgidson
And we wonder why trust in institutions is so abysmal right now. But you keep toeing the party line.COLGeek said:Thank you for the suggestion. Sorry, but there is nothing of substance there.
The U does not mean extraterrestrial. I am more than familiar with all of those sensor platforms and how they work, including their capabilities and limitations.