In Umberto Eco’s novel, Foucault’s Pendulum, a character remarks that every conspiracy theory inevitably invokes the Knights Templar. I have noticed a similar rule when it comes to pseudo-scientific nonsense: sooner or later, they inevitably invoke Stephen Hawking. The following prolix nonsense was published by journal JStor, which just goes to show that there’s nothing so nonsensical, no argument so bad, that it won’t be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
To boil it down to a couple of sentences, the author argues that resistance to claims that UFOs are indeed extraterrestrial visitors is grounded in ‘human exceptionalism’. Simply put, we humans are so conceited that we refuse to believe there may be intelligent life elsewhere in the universe and that it regularly visits Earth.
Despite any media coverage of UFOs, the underlying prejudice against the possibility of genuine extraterrestrial visitation remains deeply entrenched. This is evidenced by the lack of significant national or international discourse on the existence of extraterrestrial visits following any reported sighting, within mainstream media, major international bodies (such as the United Nations), and among political leaders. At best, the prevailing response is one of resignation, with calls for further observation. The idea that we’re currently being visited by extraterrestrials is generally considered ludicrous, whether explicitly or implicitly, something truly extraordinary, and beyond serious consideration. Consequently, questioning the existence of extraterrestrial life, whether in the Earth’s atmosphere or on its surface, remains largely taboo.
At this point, I’m sure most readers will be wondering whether the author is himself an extraterrestrial visitor, because, whatever planet he’s from, it bears little resemblance to planet Earth.
“The idea that we’re currently being visited by extraterrestrials is generally considered ludicrous”: is he serious? Survey data indicates that around one-third of Americans believe UFOs are proof of alien life. This proportion has steadily grown over time. Indeed, fully one-quarter of Americans believe they’ve personally witnessed extraterrestrial spacecraft.
Britons are roughly similarly credulous, as are Europeans. Indians and Chinese are twice as likely to believe so. A 2010 Reuters/Ipsos poll showed that 20 per cent of adults surveyed in 22 countries believed alien beings have come to Earth and walk among us disguised as humans. A majority of Britons believe that, whether they have visited Earth or not, intelligent alien life does exist elsewhere in the universe.
So, far from ‘taboo’, the existence of extraterrestrial life is a commonplace belief. Even political leaders – as disparate as Winston Churchill and Barack Obama – have at least pondered the possibility. And, yes, Stephen Hawking.
Leaving such obvious straw-man arguments behind, we come to the other gaping logical hole in the article. One which I’m sure most schoolchildren could spot with ease:
Maybe it’s just because of the near complete lack of serious evidence?
Strikingly, not once does the author consider this fundamental challenge to his argument. Kind of a biggie, as we might say.
Because, despite what true believers may say, there simply isn’t any compelling evidence that aliens are visiting the Earth. Note that I say compelling evidence. ‘Someone saw a thing in the sky once and couldn’t explain it’ is not compelling evidence. That aliens are visiting Earth is a very extraordinary claim – and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In relation to alien visitors, such extraordinary evidence is non-existent.
‘Ah, but governments are covering it up, to prevent mass hysteria,’ doesn’t hold as an explanation. As we’ve already seen, belief in alien visitors is extraordinary commonplace. Far from mass hysteria, most people would welcome proof positive of alien visitors (the same surveys show that most don’t believe aliens are a threat, no matter what movies say).
That the author is not just talking through his arse but babbling pop-sci nonsense is further evidenced by stuff like this:
The concept of extraterrestrial life has long challenged human exceptionalism. It’s worth recalling that Giordano Bruno, who maintained that the universe was infinite and populated by other worlds similar to ours, was burned at the stake.
Someone’s been spending too much time listening to that mid-wit hack Neil deGrasse Tyson. Bruno wasn’t burned at the stake for arguing for alien life: he was burned for his heretical religious views, which rejected such fundamental Christian doctrines as the Trinity, the divinity of Christ and the existence of the individual soul and its afterlife.
So, where does Stephen Hawking come into this? Like far too many social media ‘thinkers’, the author resorts to the so-called ‘Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness’, which he asserts Hawking was a signatory to. In fact, the text of the declaration states that it was signed “in the presence of Stephen Hawking”. Which is like saying, ‘Ah, but the Knights Templar’ and stroking one’s chin. What possible relevance does Hawking’s apparently divine presence have to a declaration on consciousness? Neither a biologist nor a philosopher, Hawking’s opinion – oops, ‘presence’ – on that particular matter carries about as much weight as my opinion on black hole evaporation.
Don’t get me wrong: I would love for there to be actual aliens, actually visiting the Earth. You’re just going to have to try a lot harder than this garbage to convince me.
