Proof? Evidence? Put Up or Shut Up! Why Skepticism is Essential to the Consideration of the UFO Problem.

Greetings. Why be skeptical? Let me explain. 

The scientific method is applied in the effort to examine a wide range of topics, problems, and unknowns. The collection of physical, tangible, falsifiable proof and evidence is an essential part of that endeavor, an absolutely essential aspect. When a topic or problem is examined despite a wanting of such evidence, any and all subsequent investigative efforts must be called into question, at the very least to keep the focus of the aforementioned examinations clear, honest, and transparent. Without physical evidence to follow, such efforts end up meandering in a barren desert of opinion and/or subjective belief structures, usually nonsensical and often biased strongly towards the woo. The so-called "Dave Scott Zone."

The investigation of the UFO problem is a unique exception, one that is often overlooked by many within the confines of the field, including archivists, researchers, and field investigators. While many people have maintained a credible and focused attack on the problem in question, they have been forced to conduct their undertakings without a substantial amount of non-anecdotal evidence or information. While field investigators like the late Ted Phillips did focus on physical trace cases, to his eternal credit, nothing definitively non-terrestrial and/or artificial has ever been recovered by anyone on the planet. Nevertheless, while the lack of evidence to support an extraterrestrial explanation for the UFO problem is troubling, such a shortcoming does not, and should not, influence the scientific method. Evidence of anomalous, out of the ordinary phenomena has been discovered, and as a result, the extraterrestrial explanation still holds a place on the investigative table of potentialities, albeit a extremely unlikely one. However, and isn't there always a however, it is absolutely essential to maintain a skeptical approach to any and all anecdotal claims. Why? Because people can lie, embellish, and misrepresent. Would any of us blindly believe an alien abduction story told to us by a total stranger on a random street in downtown New York City? I would certainly hope not, but some people seem to do so without blinking an eye, which could not be more disconcerting. Just think of Harvard's John Mack, David Jacobs, Peter Robbins, and his dear friend, the deceased Budd Hopkins, credulous "investigators" all, willing to believe such stories without a shred of proof, taking up their positions based solely on opinion, and whom they decide are credible. Talk about an embarrassment. 

UFO investigators don't investigative UFOs, they investigate reports of UFOs. That particular distinction that is lost to the UFO subculture. 

Anecdotal claims are now commonly viewed as evidence by a good majority of the UFO subculture, a viewpoint which could not be more erroneous. The scientific method views anecdotes as the weakest form of information, not as evidence, or as anything else which could, or should, be seen as objective information. Since the investigative "goal posts" are constantly moved when it comes to the UFO problem, such a lack of evidence is not really a problem, as far as the UFO field is concerned. Unfortunately, when taken in combination with the field's lack of standardized methodologies, the pseudoscientific approach to UFOs becomes readily apparent, at least to those who are willing to see what is sitting in front of them, instead of what usually happens, the otherwise.

Stories are good enough for most in the UFO subculture, however they are just that, stories and nothing else. Not good enough. 

As always on the playing field of the UFO subculture, there is no skepticism in sight, none whatsoever. 

The UFO subculture has become, in my opinion, far more pseudoscientific in recent decades, with logical, skeptical, data and evidence-driven approaches to the issue having become less and less popular, and unfortunately, less credible in the eyes of many people who reside in the UFO realm. The investigative approaches of the aforementioned Ted Phillips, the late Coral and Jim Lorenzen, the late Dr. James E. McDonald, and the recently deceased Peter Sturrock would not be embraced with open arms by today's UFO "community," with the limelight squarely in the laps of the shiny objects of the UFO world; the Dolans, the Corbells, and the Knapps, among many others, with too many left to name in this particular writing. 

Without proof or evidence, a scientific problem cannot be reasonably considered or examined, period. Sorry UFO people, don't cry, simply provide some evidence to back up your outlandish stories. Put up or shut up.

I look forward to eating some ufological crow, but my order may take some time, some time indeed.

Thank you for your time and consideration.