Have Private UFO Research Organizations Outlived Their Usefulness?
Since the closing of Project Blue Book and the government’s refusal to further expend public funds in providing the public with a forum for reporting unexplained aerial phenomena, private UFO reporting organizations have borne the brunt in providing the public with a means of reporting their UFO encounters. Indeed, many of these organizations have flourished in the past 20 years while some have quietly shut down. The list of these organizations is endless: NICAP, APRO, CUFOS, MUFON, NUFORC, and others are just some of the organizations that have either existed in the past, or are still extant to this day. But the purpose of this article is not to compare or name all of the public or private organizations one can go to report a UFO sighting. The purpose of this article is to question their usefulness.
Lately, questions have arisen in the UFO community concerning the applicability and effectiveness of these reporting organizations. These questions revolve around the following concerns:
1) These organizations are no closer to resolving the UFO question now than when these organizations were founded. Indeed, these organizations have become repetitious in their possible interpretations of the phenomena, and they have been less than forthcoming in sharing their data with the public. Moreover, they seem to have become less “user-friendly,” standoffish, and elitist.
2) There is some evidence of discontent within the ranks of some of the larger organizations, particularly with the way research teams are organized, coordinated, controlled, and monitored. The reports gathered from these teams are collected, collated, and analyzed and the results are rarely – if ever – shared with other organizations.
3) There exist some concerns as to the priority given to the reports sent in to these organizations. Many potentially dazzling reports are never investigated. Many of those that are investigated are never followed up with respect to getting back to the original witnesses that made the report. Furthermore, many reports involving small children – especially those that seem potentially threatening to the safety of those same children – are ignored.
4) Many of the public forums involving these organizations whereby the public can attend and/or participate (such as the many UFO conventions around the country) have become stale with the same public speakers providing the same concerns and viewpoints – or worse, using these gatherings as a means to advance or sell books.
5) Many that wish to join these organizations have to expend their personal time and money with little to no advantage in their expenditures. Often, the organization provides access to “privileged information” if the member agrees to spend the extra money; however, the special access gained does not grant access to any information that is not already accessible for free from many sources on the internet. (See note 1.)
6) There already exist many forums on the internet where a person can go to report their sightings. These areas are more user-friendly, are more interactive, and provide instant gratification in the form of messaging, mail, and support from other witnesses that have had similar experiences.
7) There is some concern that these private research organizations are an elaborate cover for governmental operatives who use these groups as a bank from which they could monitor and follow-up on select sightings without having to show a public presence to their actions.
Each of these points will be discussed separately.
The first concern is perhaps the most irritating. Over 70 years have passed since the reported UFO crash at Roswell. No answers have ever come forth from these organizations providing closure for the events that have puzzled the UFO community for years, nor have any proofs been forthcoming in the way of “hard evidence” to force the mainstream scientific community to take notice. Indeed, the majority of “proof” has come from private citizens – many on their deathbeds. If some groundbreaking breakthrough has been made by the analysts of these private organizations, then either they have been ineffectual in bringing this news into the light of day, or they have been keeping the news hidden for reasons only known by them. Of course, this statement is a matter of opinion and perspective. However, those that disagree with the points made in this paragraph would still have to explain why acceptance of any explanation regarding the UFO phenomena has not made any headway with the national media (which still either belittles reports, or fails to give them much air time,) mainstream science (which still bemoans the lack of “hard evidence’), or the government (which still considers the phenomenon of no importance because it has no relevance to National Security). The main perception concerning these private UFO research organizations remains to be “just a place to send your UFO sighting report” so that it can be read and filed. (See note 2.)
The second concern follows closely from the first. Often the witness is asked to fill out a sighting report which is often confusing. This is usually done over the internet. Then the witness might be contacted via email or telephonically, then perhaps an investigation team is sent to the area to interview all potential witnesses, gather environmental samples, check with local law enforcement and or other governmental agencies. Next, all pertinent evidence is collected and the entire package is sent to analysts for review. (See note 3.) Sometimes the witness is contacted concerning the results, often they are not. Many promising cases are not investigated because of a lack of environmental evidence (trace samples,) the question of witness veracity, or the lack of available research teams. How does an organization decide whether a certain sighting report is worth investigating? Are the results of these investigations aggressively provided to the public, shared with other organizations, or are they filed away for historical purposes and statistical processing?
The previous concern allows for a seamless transition into the next concern. Recently, a UFO researcher has painstakingly read and collated experiences submitted to a major UFO reporting organization from the early 1940s to the late 1990s. (See note 4.) After perusing this extremely large number of reports, one is immediately struck by the number of cases that were not apparently followed up or passed on to the public or any other organization. Many of these reports involved children – children with pleas for help in dealing with a phenomenon that they could not understand. Often, these cases involved multiple experiences over an extended period of time. Surprisingly, the majority of these “dazzling” cases were not apparently investigated – indeed, many of the families were possibly not even contacted. Why?
Lately, the cases discussed above, compiled and made into a more reader-friendly format, have been re-issued and the introductory page to the newly-presented reports has been inserted into this particular UFO research group’s web site. However, to see this already publicly-accessible material you have to join the organization, which includes paying a fee. For cross-reference purposes, the underlined headings to every report that has been included in the compendium is a direct link to the actual submitted report on the organization’s database.
The public has the opportunity to periodically interact with the many UFO reporting organizations through the many UFO conventions that are held in the United States. For those who have attended more than one of these events, it is a sure bet that this person could accurately predict the main speakers who would be present for any future events. Moreover, it is reasonable to assume what the gist of their presentations would cover. Over the years, these conventions have grown to become carbon copies of each other, with only the location of the event providing some variety. Not surprising is the fact that many private research organizations presiding at these events are as guilty of this predilection for conformity. Lately, there has been as much priority given to bake sales and book sales as there has been on the subject of UFO research. Sadly, any “new” information is just a regurgitation of older information, re-packaged for the event.
Many still possess the passion for investigating UFO phenomena that they possessed when they were young and have elected to join the various UFO reporting organizations. This passion has often turned to disappointment after attempting to join. One of the largest organizations in the US requires a potential member to pay up front for a field guide, supporting documents as to the qualifications and identity of the applicant, and in some cases to provide other supporting documents for various other reasons. While this is only to be expected from a large organization, what is not expected is the lack of “payoff” after having been accepted by the organization. There are certain benefits that are withheld based upon how much money the potential applicant is willing to pay. And even after paying the extra fees required to gain deeper access into the deeper informational archives, one often finds that this information is already accessible for free from the internet! (See note 5.) Moreover, there appears to be a lack of centralized control and procedure among teams from the same organization but in different regions and/or states. Though this last comment is based purely on observation from an “outsider”, it nevertheless colors how many UFO enthusiasts perceive those organizations.
If there was ever an argument to be made against the applicability of these organizations, it has to be in the presence of alternate means of reporting that are available on the internet. This concern is perhaps the strongest case to be made by the public against these organizations. Any witness can share a sighting on the internet using a plethora of mediums. Among these mediums, Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, standard email, various UFO discussion pages and other forums provide the witness with a user-friendly means of sharing an event. Moreover, depending upon the courage of the witness, others can be asked for immediate feedback. Already, this writer has used these forums to investigate and provide immediate feedback to witnesses – many of whom have already reported their sightings to various research organizations (to no effect). They have received more comfort and/or closure for their efforts than they have by relying on private organizations. However, many would argue that this takes out the professionalism and expertise of an established organization. But these traits are only useful if they are applied with brevity and a care for the individual – traits that seem to be lacking in those same private organizations. If one has the choice of contacting an impersonal agency to investigate their sighting – with the possibility of never receiving any visit or any feedback after the visit – or receiving immediate attention and focus from others familiar with the phenomena, then it is not surprising that many are choosing to use alternate means of sending in their sighting reports.
The last concern is the most problematic to discuss and is only recognizable and cognizant among those who have spent their lives in the private pursuit of researching the UFO phenomena. Among these private UFO researchers is the growing suspicion that these private UFO research organizations are a tool used by the government to provide an archive of reports. This allows the government to monitor the phenomenon free from public scrutiny. The reasons for this belief lie in the fact that many of the leading figures at the head of these organizations are former government officials – many of them former CIA. (See note 6.) Also, it would explain the reticence that these organizations have in investigating the more sensational cases and publicly presenting them for scrutiny by others outside the organization. The advantages for this set-up are obvious. First, the government saves money by not having to produce another public office. Second, the government is immune from having to be accountable to the public. Third, the government has access to a bank of reports that is not immediately accessible to the public. Indeed, there exist some indications that periodic “reviews” are held by “outside organizations” into the case files of these private UFO research organizations. However, it is only fair to admit that no evidence – other then circumstantial – has ever come forth to support this last concern.
Lately, there have been initiatives to force the government to publicly admit that there is a UFO presence in our skies – a presence that defies mainstream explanations and points to an extraterrestrial source. These Disclosure projects have gained some steam as of late, but they have been less than successful in forcing public discussion among the three entities responsible for “lifting the lid” on the subject of UFOs: the mainstream media, the mainstream scientific community, and the government. (See note 7.) If this were ever to change, then the arguments presented in this article will have been rendered moot and there will be less of a need to have these private organizations as the mantle of UFO research will have been passed on.
In this case, only time will tell.
Notes:
1. As of this date, the MUFON organization is in the process of re-formatting its web page to make it more user-friendly.
2. The 3 biggest institutions that effectively control the public’s perception concerning UFOs have always been the mainstream media, mainstream science, and the government. This is also discussed in detail in Leslie Kean’s book, UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Record. Random House, NY, 2010. Page 271.
3. This process is a standard one followed by many of the private organizations and find their source from the original Blue Book processes pioneered by J. Allen Hynek, and from source information gathered from field investigators whose identity cannot be given due to privacy concerns.
4. The researcher referred to in this paragraph is currently a member of a Private UFO Research Organization. This researcher has spent 5 months so far compiling reams of reports from 1943 to the late 1990s and organizing the reports by similarities in content.
5. Taken from written correspondence between myself and a newly recruited field researcher of a noted Private UFO Research Organization. This person has not consented to have his/her identity revealed for reasons of concern over how this would affect this person’s place in the organization.
6. The reader is invited to verify this claim by doing their own research. Many of the officials in charge of these organizations have resumes online that are viewable by the public.
7. Ibid. (See note 2 above).
