Thursday, September 02, 2021

X-Zone Broadcast Network - Dr. Abraham (Avi) Loeb and the Galileo Project


This week I spoke with Dr. Abraham (Avi) Loeb, who made a splash last spring when he suggested an object moving through the Solar System was artificial. It was moving at a relatively slow speed that suggested it had been traveling for a very long time. Make no mistake, this was the first time that something had entered the Solar System from outside of it or maybe I should say, it was the first time that such an object was detected. The question was whether it was artificial or natural. You can listen to that earlier interview here for an in-depth background on that object:

Dr. Loeb

We did talk about his Galileo Project, which was an outgrowth of the discovery. The premise is that if there was one, there are probably others. The search was for those others with an idea of being prepared when that next one showed up. Coincidentally, another such object was found recently, but it turned out to be a used rocket booster from the 1960s. That seemed to underscore that this other visitor was something artificial, given the characteristics of its flight when compared to the flight of the used booster. You can listen to the latest interview here:

I wondered if SETI might not be a little annoyed that here was another group of scientists searching for extraterrestrial life in a different way. While it seemed that some of SETI was on board, others were not. I think that any method of searching for intelligent life deserves our support.

I had also wondered if their rejection of looking at the history of the UFOs, now known as UAPs (I suppose to distinguish them from UFOs, but I’ll stick with the old term… flying saucers, though John Greenewald just posted a YouTube video suggesting the term, UAP, was used as early as 1949) might provide some insight into the nature of these other artifacts. At this point the conversation became a bit adversarial. He believed that the data from the history of the UFO had been poorly collected (which, of course it had) and that it hadn’t been properly documented (which, of course, it hadn’t), and was surrounded in controversy (which it is). He talked of fuzzy images and eyewitness testimony. I said nothing about some of the UFO photographs being quite clear and distinct, and had it not been for the government, Air Force, and some high-profile scientists throwing mud on the cases (think Robertson Panel and Condon Committee here), then the conversation might have been different today.

I did mention, at one point, Dr. Donald Menzel, a Harvard astronomer, was one of those throwing mud. Menzel would offer a variety of answers and solutions for sightings and when all else failed, he just labeled the report a hoax. That was what he did in the case of the Lubbock Lights photographs. Without a shred of evidence that Carl Hart, Jr. had faked the pictures, that was what Menzel said after suggesting some sort of light temperature inversion creating a reflective surface that bounced the light from the city back towards the ground. I will note here that when I spoke with Hart in the 1990s, he said he still didn’t know what he had photographed.

Nor did I mention that Clyde Tombaugh, who discovered Pluto, had a UFO sighting in Las Cruces, New Mexico. He saw several square lights fly over. He thought they were separated, but his wife, thought she saw a very faintly glowing object connecting the images. Menzel, who wasn’t there and ignored Tombaugh’s statement that the sky was clear, meaning there was good “seeing,” postulated an inversion level. While you can argue that Tombaugh didn’t see an alien spacecraft, you can’t reject his sighting because Menzel invented an inversion layer. Who is more likely correct about the sky conditions? The astronomer who was there or the one who was in Massachusetts? I vote for the guy who was there rather than the man who believed there cannot be alien visitation and therefore there is no alien visitation.

This was not the direction I wanted the interview to go. I didn’t want to get bogged down in a discussion of how the UFO field had been manipulated from the very beginning and the reason for much of the controversy is the arguments between believers and debunkers with a touch of Air Force duplicity thrown in. Much of it was not about the evidence.

We did get back to the Galileo Project and the search for other artifacts that enter the Solar System from really deep space. The idea that if these are artificial, they would be populated by AI with no thought to reporting what had been found to those who launched the object. The distances are just too vast and the odds are that a successful mission would be tens of thousands of years in the making. The civilization that launched them would probably be gone.

And, although we didn’t really explore the idea, this might be the answer to the Fermi Paradox which wondered if there are other intelligent lifeforms out there, why aren’t they here… It’s because they’ve sent out, what thousands, hundreds of thousands of these probes, of these artifacts without a thought of coming here in person. The reason they’re not here is because their civilizations have collapsed long ago. (This is the flaw in SETI… even if we detected an electromagnetic signal such as radio or TV, the civilization might have collapsed before we received it, or before our reply, if we sent one, could reach them).

Anyway, our discussion took on a more scientific turn than a UFO discussion would. To make up for that, next week, I’ll be talking with Mike Rogers of Fire in the Sky and Travis Walton abduction fame. If anyone has questions, let me know.


John Steiger said...

Dr. Loeb is a close-minded "scientist" willfully blind to the pursuit of knowledge via UFO investigation, research, and history. His anti-UFO prejudice is foundational and manifest across his ethos.

Thank you for exposing him.

KRandle said...

John -

I'm not sure this is a fair comment. I understand his reluctance to deal with the UFO data given the history. He, and his colleagues can avoid a great deal of controversy by starting out new. Oh, I think they are missing a bet here, but I understand wanting to stay away from UFO history. Just look at what has gone on... not to mention Donald Menzel and his rabid anti-UFO activities.

While I would certainly like for them to take a look at some of the better UFO cases, I understand their avoidance of that controversy. It might be more of a distraction than it is worth for them.

John Steiger said...

Kevin - Unfortunately, I am sure that my comment above is fair.

You have written a large number of incredibly informative books on the UFO field. They cover the vast scope and depth of the subject. While there are other insightful authors vis-a-vis UFOS, few come close and I would argue no one surpasses your body of work.

That said, do you honestly believe after hearing out Dr. Loeb in this interview that he would willingly take up and read any of your books? I highly doubt it. His "scientific" mind is closed to UFOs. It is a blindness of his own making by his own choice.

Now, to qualify, I am not comparing Dr. Loeb to Menzel who was so antithetical, so vehemently prejudiced, so out-and-out bigoted against UFOs that he would proffer whatever lies he felt were necessary to undermine the UFO field of inquiry and those who worked in it.

Clarence said...

The stigma attached to the study of UFOs appears to fall uncomfortably at the feet of scientists like Loeb and those who proceeded him (like Carl Sagan). And now they want to start fresh to avoid the controversy?