The “Ufologists” have contributed not a little to creating first, to keeping awake then, to exasperating in some cases the public interest in the problem of the presence of intelligent life in the universe.
At least for this reason, official science should pay, at a minimum, a debt of gratitude to those “Don Quixotes” of heaven who are the Ufologists. Generally they are young people who know nothing about science (because they never did it, because it is not their job), nor its methods, nor its purposes, nor its categories. Full of enthusiasm and prejudice that derive directly from the mysteries, fables, fantastic tales, the ancient aspirations of man, full of confidence in the value of eyewitness testimonies which are their main observation in the external world and their most noteworthy source of information, quite full of themselves and very sure of their ability to see right, almost messianic, as is moreover appropriate to ”
This, in fact, was given to him and, as will be seen, in a completely sufficient way for the official science to be able to draw its conclusions.
However, since they are not favorable to the theses of ufologists, they are contested by them together with the methods followed to obtain them. Official science is accused of having manipulated the cards, of neglecting very important facts, of having hidden on purpose, terribly disturbing events, of being placed at the service of governments that do not want to hear about UFOs. Obviously, it is very difficult to get out of this state of affairs. Either you give him reason and then everything is fine, or you do not give it to him and then you are an academic, reactionary, unimaginative mold, foot-licks and bag holders of the powerful who will adequately compensate you for your subjection to their ideas that are dead and buried.
The general public – educated, as we have seen, by the information articulated and reasoned by the mass media – has no hesitation. Holds for Ufologists. Which is also right, given that, moreover, there were no other reasons – but there are! – one cannot avoid being on the side of the victims, of the persecuted. And therefore there is no possibility of dialogue. However, as I said, someone among astronomers owes something to these dreamers. And not just among astronomers. There is also a whole host of people, science fiction writers, film subject writers, comic book authors, film directors and other entertainment staff, publishers, toy manufacturers; an infinity of people who, although not owing everything to ufologists, a little
Indeed, ufology is a business. A deal worth billions. Indeed, not a few served to enrich themselves. Instead ufologists, like all enthusiasts, derive nothing from what they do. Indeed, with some rare exceptions, as is probably the ex-astronomer Hynek who is a bit the scientific reference of the whole company that has made important and fruitful ties with the businessmen, they almost always work, as they say, on expenses.
The last remnant of that authentic breed of generous, selfless, who does not extinguish despite the severe blows inflicted by materialistic consumerism, have, in return, only the possibility, and to some extent the consolation, of feeling like scientists. Or even more, heroic scientists, opposed by the stupid, obtuse, overbearing official science. Many Galilei, many Giordano Bruno in power. And they continually attack believing themselves to be attacked, thinking of creating trustworthiness by making noise. But it is clear that it takes more. In fact, in times when they keep calm they are completely forgotten.
But those who have certainly lost and paid for the affairs of each and the passions of the others, have been the common people who, ultimately, have done nothing but lose a little more of that little brain that the organization modern life had left him.
Before talking in detail about UFOs and ufologists, it will not be bad to immediately say why, except for some exceptions that are statistically not relevant, scientists reject UFOs and ufologists …
Science, indeed, let us say more correctly, the scientists, those of the caste, had made themselves, since ancient times, a whole world of ideas on natural phenomena. He liked those ideas. But then they threw them away and built others. And he liked these too. They also threw these and formulated others. This has happened many times in history and has happened either as a result of second thoughts, or because of external pushes, or because of new phenomena that have imposed an adjustment, sometimes a radical change of views. The news, the provocations to change have always come from the world of men, not from heaven. This means that scientists, by ancient custom, not only do not refuse to consider possible novelties – and how could they? news, problems, are their daily bread! – but they are happy to meet them. This is why they are actually among the most unprejudiced people there are. More than politicians, who are perhaps more unscrupulous, they are flexible and inclined to compromise. We must therefore reject any insinuation on a kind of conspiracy that scientists would have designed against ufologists. Instead, it has happened that ufologists, like astrologers, like many of these confusioners who have, as you often hear jokingly, few but well confused ideas, have come out of time. Had they arrived before Galileo they would certainly have had great success in
Ufologists arrived out of time, when by now the scientific world had had the opportunity, in four centuries, to make many reflections and to clarify the ideas on the techniques of thinking and the validity of the results. They not only do not take into account the modern rules of the game, but, as in pre-Galelian times, they continue to want to do science on the basis of confused, uncontrollable facts, not within everyone’s reach, which occur when they please. Furthermore, the evidence they use comes almost always from people who are not trained to observe, who see things never seen before, of which they therefore have no experience, and who, moreover, find themselves in conditions of surprise and often of great excitement. In the field of ufology all the witnesses are good: the boys, the peasants, the teachers, the illiterate, the military, the presidents, all in short; even animals. Instead, as is known, to make even the most banal scientific observation requires professional preparation without which one cannot work seriously or honestly.
And let it not be said that among the testimonies on which the “scientific” conclusions of ufology are based, there are also objective facts. Which ones are they? Burns on the ground, or footprints; all things of little value that, moreover, could also have been done artfully as in the many cases of false proof in which ufology has repeatedly fallen. The bulk of the observation base however comes from eyewitness accounts. Of course, the good faith of the people who see is not questioned, although it is proven that there are also those – and not only in this field – who say they see without this being true. But in any case, what does it mean to see? And does seeing in itself prove that what has been seen has really happened? If in itself it is not proof, with the use of what techniques can it become? Is the number of facts seen enough? Then you have to ask yourself: why should the visions related to UFOs (I intend to speak also of those few cases among tens of thousands that, it seems, remain unexplained) should be particularly reliable visions? Or must it be believed that the visions of the dying, those of the saints, those of the drunks, also correspond to objective realities? Does the Lockness monster really exist given that someone says they have been able to observe it, or even photograph it? And does the famous Yeti, the abominable snowman, exist? Some UFOs are said to have been seen by entire crowds; hallucination is therefore excluded. And those medieval crowds who saw flaming swords and severed heads in comets? But without going so far (it could be that the news that has come to us does not correspond to what really happens) you can take the magazine “Gente” of 30 May 1980 and read the article that begins on page 48, with the title “Strani prodigies in the sun “just like 33 years ago. Talk about events that took place in Rome on April 12, 1980 – 1980, not 1280! – to the sanctuary of the Tre Fontane. “Thousands of people have seen the Sun, surrounded by a colorful halo, moving in the sky, rotating swirling on itself, changing color, presenting inside images and religious symbols that varied continuously. Among the witnesses mentioned and photographed by the newspaper, there is a degree in agriculture, a medical graduate, children, priests. There is also a seer who at the Tre Fontane in 1947 saw the Madonna (and since then, a specialist in seeing things that others do not see, she has seen her another twenty-two times) “.
Here it is. What should be done with these testimonials? Do we take those two doctors, one in agriculture, the other in medicine, or are they less good than the policemen and airmen mentioned by ufologists? In other words, who says he saw a UFO, is it more reliable than who says he saw the Madonna? And those three thousand people who have followed the bewildering (as the newspaper defines it) event for more than half an hour, have gotten into trouble? All three thousand or not? In short, was it a physical phenomenon or not? But if it was, the Sun, as it was seen by those thousands of people, shouldn’t it have been seen by those other billions that had it above the horizon? And if, on the other hand, it was not a physical phenomenon, if it was not one of those phenomena that are visible and experienced by everyone when they occur, can it be part of physical science? Here: no, it cannot be part of it and it cannot even be the subject of scientific discussion concerning the world of objects. It could possibly find a place in a study of man and his behavior. In the extreme, it could be part of a study of the physiology of hallucination. Each era has had its own type of visions and visionaries and perhaps this is the phenomenon to be studied: “why does man have visions? Why can he exchange for reality what is only in his head ?. It could possibly find a place in a study of man and his behavior. In the extreme, it could be part of a study of the physiology of hallucination. Each era has had its own type of visions and visionaries and perhaps this is the phenomenon to be studied: “why does man have visions? Why can he exchange for reality what is only in his head ?. It could possibly find a place in a study of man and his behavior. In the extreme, it could be part of a study of the physiology of hallucination. Each era has had its own type of visions and visionaries and perhaps this is the phenomenon to be studied: “why does man have visions? Why can he exchange for reality what is only in his head ?.
Once angels and saints appeared, and also witches, gnomes, creatures more or less distant from the human. Dragons have always been seen green and it has always been found that they threw fire from the mouth or nostrils.
In the nineteenth century there was no respectable lounge that did not have a moving table that was made by spirits, who were also capable of materializing. Today, time of special and refined technologies, UFOs rightly appear. Objects that are substantially compatible with the reality in which we live – albeit a little fictional, Verne-like – and consistent with what people, poorly informed, believe is the stage of development of space technology and electronics.
Well; science that deals with the world of objects (physics, chemistry, astronomy, etc.) deals, so to speak, with stones that fall for everyone in the same way.
Even for those who can’t see.
One does not do science, simply by dealing, chatting, discussing anything: in this way one becomes a living room.
To make science is to apply an investigation technique, fairly precise although not absolutely precise, to natural phenomena. All that comes out of the objectives and scientific methodology is not science, even if it is not said that we should throw it away. For heaven’s sake, we have already said it; we know well that science does not exhaust the world of man.
Based on the “material” collected with methods, these, prejudiced, certainly not in line with the rules that make a scientific investigation, ufologists conclude, in different ways, with different nuances, or with notable differences, that around us there is a world of mysterious beings.
It is useless to describe this world and these beings.
The characteristics, the properties of the material or spiritual entities coming from other worlds of our universe, or from other universes contiguous to ours, are what we have seen from the beginning when we talked about gods of fairies, gnomes, d ‘ angels and demons.
What these ufologists bring us is a modern version, 20th century, god of ancient fears, of myths and legends of a remote past, of the time when man trembled with lightning which was a sure sign of divine anger. These good young people, who accuse science of being rational, are the true rational ones, who would like to impose buried ideas, with all due respect, for at least four hundred years.
One of the many alleged photographic documentation on UFOs.
But the photographic image is no longer objective of the visual image:
who could say that what you see is a small object
at 50 meters or a 100 times larger object at five kilometers?
The staff of Ufologia.biz refrains from adding any comment to this article, leaving the reader free to evaluate and deepen the topic but with hope. In fact, this article was written about 30 years ago and it is hoped therefore that throughout this time the state of affairs has changed, both in the field of Ufology and in that of official Science.
Mario Rigutti was born in Trieste and completed his university studies in Florence, where he then carried out research at the Arcetri Observatory.
Obtained the chair of astronomy at the University of Naples, he directed the Astronomical Observatory of Capodimonte (Naples), which has equipped an astronomical station on the Basilicata mountains with one of the largest and most modern telescopes present in Italy and a Astronomical museum. He was president of the National Astronomy Group of the CNR and of the Italian Astronomical Society, of which he directed the Journal of Astronomy for several years. He held important positions within the International Astronomical Union and was part of the “Sun” Group of ESRO (today: ESA). He has organized and directed four expeditions for the observation of solar eclipses and has published multiple research works, teaching, scientific popularization, articles and reviews: