UFOs:
The Psychocultural Hypothesis
by
Steven Novella, MD, Editor
The
Vol. 3 Issue
4 (Fall 2000)
Millions of Americans believe that we are being visited by a spacefaring alien race. These aliens allegedly fly in saucer-shaped
ships, they routinely abduct humans for some experimental purpose we can only
guess, some believe they are responsible for such phenomena as cattle
mutilations and crop circles, our government is aware
of the whole thing and is engaged in a decades-long cover-up to keep this
shocking truth from the public.
Or, perhaps not.
Those who espouse scientific skepticism as
the best method of discerning the truth are often placed in the position of naysayers, by denying the claims of pseudoscientists
or those with an anti-scientific world view.
Countering such claims is a valuable and necessary enterprise, but is
often painted with the brush of negativity.
Further, just pointing out that a particular extraordinary claim is not
likely to be true, although it may be correct, is often unsatisfying to the
public. It is far better to not only
counter an unlikely claim, but to also propose in its stead an alternate
hypothesis. This is especially true when
an alleged paranormal phenomenon grows to such large proportions that it
demands some sort of explanation, as has certainly become the case with the UFO
phenomenon.
Belief in UFOs is now widespread in our
society. Reports of sightings and
encounters of various kinds is numbered in the
millions. The belief that the UFO
phenomenon is the result of actual alien visitors to Earth is known as the
extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH). The
standard skeptical belief is often stated in terms of rejecting the ETH due to
insufficient evidence. But the size and
scope of the UFO phenomenon has lead many to believe that something must be
going on – where there is so much smoke, it is argued, there
must be a fire.
Rather than simply refuting the ETH,
therefore, the skeptical response is better formulated as an alternative
hypothesis, what I will call the psychocultural
hypothesis (PCH).
The elements of the PCH are nothing new, and
have been part of the standard skeptical response to ETH claims for years, but
compiling these elements into a cohesive hypothesis allows us to compare the
ETH and the PCH to see which one better fits the
available evidence.
The
UFO Phenomenon
In June of 1947, private airplane pilot
Kenneth Arnold observed several unidentified flying objects while flying his
small private plane. He radioed the
local tower, describing the objects roughly as boomerang shaped, but noted that
they appeared to be skipping through the air, like a saucer skipped across the
surface of a body of water. A newspaper reporter covering the sighting keyed in
on the saucer analogy, and dubbed the objects “flying saucers.”
In July of 1947, only days after the press
flap over
The 1950’s saw the next phase of the UFO
phenomenon, known as the “contactees.” These individuals claimed not only to have
seen a flying saucer, but to have been contacted by the pilots of the craft.
The most famous of the contactees was a man named Adamski, who claimed to have been contacted by Venusians,
who appeared as glowing beautiful humans.
In the 1960’s, the contactee
phenomenon took the next logical step and evolved into the abductee
phenomenon. Betty and Barney Hill, a
The abduction phenomenon has increased in
the last 30 years, and now dominates the UFO phenomenon. Many books have been
written on the subject, by such authors as painter turned UFO investigator,
Budd Hopkins, Harvard psychiatrist John Mack, and science fiction writer
Whitley Strieber. Together they claim
that millions of Americans are regularly being abducted by little gray aliens, many right out of their bedrooms.
The “
Today, a casual search on the internet can
yield hundreds of photographs and even video of unidentified flying objects,
offered by believers as evidence of flying saucers. There are constant accusations of secret
documents referring to government knowledge of aliens (such as the MJ12 documents), hidden bases harboring captured flying
saucers (such as Hanger 18 and later Area 51), ongoing abductions involving a
secret alien breeding program, and countless sightings of UFOs. The flying
saucer and the little gray alien are icons of our culture, as well recognized
as Mickey Mouse or the
Regardless of what we make of all this,
there is clearly something happening – something which requires an explanation.
The
Extraterrestrial Hypothesis
Believers who accept claims of aliens
espouse what is known as the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (ETH). Simply stated,
the ETH says that there are real aliens visiting the Earth. Evidence suggests that these aliens are 3-4
feet tall, gray in complexion, with a small mouth, nose, and ears, and very
large oval black eyes. Some reports also
indicate that there are much taller gray aliens, who appear to be the leaders
of their shorter counterparts. These aliens travel primarily in saucer-shaped
ships, although other descriptions have been given as well. At least one, and perhaps more, such saucers
have crashed and have been recovered by our government.
As evidence for the ETH, believers put
forward the many millions of eyewitness accounts of flying objects that seem to
defy ordinary explanation. Many people report seeing lights traveling at speeds
and performing maneuvers impossible for conventional aircraft. In addition,
there are many individuals who report, most under hypnosis, that they have been
abducted by aliens who performed unspeakable examinations on them. Some even claim to have been impregnated by
aliens and to have given birth to alien-human hybrids, their offspring then
taken away from them by the same aliens.
Heavy weight is placed on the fact that there is a great deal of similarity
of detail between different eyewitness accounts. Some of the more rationale ETH
proponents admit that not all such accounts are believable, but even if most
are discounted, there remains a credible few which demand the ETH as
explanation.
Another important source of evidence is
photographic and video evidence.
Everyone has seen by now blurry images of saucer shaped objects, or
video of bright lights moving through the sky.
The recent case of the lights over Pheonix is
a good example. Again,
even if some of these photographs can be explained as photographic artifacts,
mistaken ordinary objects, and hoaxes, there remains a few which defy such
explanations.
A recent addition to the abduction
phenomenon is the alien implant phenomenon.
Many abductees claim that small objects were implanted in them by their
alien captors. These objects have later been removed, and in some cases it is
claimed that the objects are made of mysterious materials.
Still, proponents of the ETH must defend the
fact that despite the vast number of alleged alien sightings and contacts,
there is no single piece of evidence which undeniably establishes the ETH. There is no recovered artifact which is
unambiguously alien, no video or even photograph which shows an object which
can be nothing else other than a spacecraft, and which survives careful
analysis designed to detect fakery. In short, there is no smoking gun of the
ETH. Proponents, however, have several answers to this problem. The first is the aliens themselves. Clearly, the aliens do not want us to know of
their existence, or else they would have made themselves openly known to
us. The aliens, therefore, make an
attempt to cover their tracks.
Therefore, implants are disguised as bits of glass or metal, abductees
are treated in such a way as to obscure their memory, and ships never hang
around long enough to allow for a clear photograph or video.
The aliens also have help in their
track-covering task from the governments of the world, who also do not want
knowledge of aliens to be widespread.
The world governments, especially the
Believers, however, still propose the ETH
as the best explanation for the UFO phenomenon.
You may not be able to prove the ETH, they argue, but you can infer it
from all the collective evidence. The only alternative, they argue, is to deny
the ETH in the face of millions of individuals who have had some type of
experience with aliens or flying saucers.
How can so many people be wrong?
The
Psychocultural Hypothesis
Despite the size of the UFO phenomenon, and
the copious amount of evidence offered for the ETH by proponents, the
scientific and skeptical communities remain…well, skeptical. Every argument has been countered, every
piece of evidence found wanting, and every claim debunked. Although there is a large volume of evidence,
it is all low quality and insufficient to establish the ETH. The skeptical position, therefore, is that the
ETH is currently rejected for insufficient evidence. Among the general public, however, the
response to this position is almost always the same – then how do you explain
all the eyewitnesses, all the abductees, all the photographs, all the
government lies, etc.?
There is, in fact, an answer to these
questions, but it involves a separate explanation for each component of the
ETH. Someone not well versed in
skeptical philosophy and the various mechanisms of self-deception might be left
with the sense that UFO skeptics would find some trivial problem with any
evidence that was offered in support of the ETH, and that they really don’t
have a good explanation themselves, just a lot of doubts. I do not believe this is true, but the shear
size and complexity of the UFO phenomenon is bound to create this perception,
and in fact this has been a tremendous public relations problem for UFO
skeptics.
The solution is to find a way to formulate
the skeptical position in terms of a positive explanation, an alternative
hypothesis to the ETH, rather than merely a rejection of the ETH. I have dubbed such an alternative hypothesis
the Psychocultural Hypothesis (PCH).
The PCH attempts to understand and explain the UFO
phenomenon as a cultural phenomenon rooted in human psychology – a modern
post-technological mythology. The PCH is really nothing new, it is
simply a synthesis of the skeptical position with an emphasis on explaining the
UFO phenomenon, rather than just denying the ETH. The strength of the PCH is that it looks at the entire UFO phenomenon as it has
evolved historically, not just in its current form. Taking such an historical view is very
instructive, because looking at how the UFO phenomenon has changed provides
clues as to why it has changed, and in fact why it began in the first place.
According to the PCH,
belief in UFOs as a real phenomenon developed out of a pre-existent fascination
with the concept of space-flight and aliens. It is to be expected, in fact,
that such a mythology would emerge on the heels of the dawn of human space
flight, amid a cultural background awash in science-fiction stories of space
aliens and flying spacecraft.
The UFO phenomenon then evolved as any
cultural narrative might evolve. The
villains in this story are the governments and government agents who have been
fighting to keep the truth about aliens hidden.
The heroes are the UFO believers, struggling to expose this truth to a
largely deceived public. The aliens
themselves also have evolved over time, beginning first as just glowing humans
– a somewhat unsophisticated and almost childish view by later standards – then
evolving into the standard small gray alien type.
Aliens represent both our greatest hopes
and our greatest fears, as mythological icons usually do. At times they are here to save humanity,
usually by offering simplistic advise about the threat
of nuclear holocaust or environmental irresponsibility. At other times they are cold and sinister,
performing invasive and frightening experiments for their own mysterious and
dark purposes.
Support for belief in aliens is gathered by
the faithful from every ambiguous and unreliable source possible, without a
single piece of hard undeniable evidence. Sightings are often of points of
light, or of unusual but otherwise unidentifiable objects. Photographs are
ambiguous or blurry. Testimony is also
tainted by fuzzy details, or compromising circumstances, such as waking up from
sleep. Or testimony is “recovered”
during hypnosis, which is much more likely to manufacture false memories than
reveal true but hidden memories. Some
testimony is unambiguous, but it is never substantiated by corroborating
evidence, or is later discovered to be fraudulent. Alleged implants are never demonstrated to be
actual alien devices. The Men In Black remain as
elusive as ever.
To summarize, there is a tremendous amount
of noise, or random events and stimuli, in the world, and UFO believers mine
this noise for any anomaly that can be interpreted as an alien phenomenon. Belief, the PCH
argues, drives the UFO phenomenon, not aliens.
Added to this are the
occasional outright hoaxes.
Individuals, looking for their 15 minutes of fame, or for some complex
psychological reason, decide to construct elaborate hoaxes of space
aliens. The most celebrated such case is
that of Billy Meier, a Swiss farmer who perpetrated a many year hoax of
repeated encounters with aliens. He has submitted as evidence video of a
classic flying saucer, which is clearly swinging like a pendulum from a string.
He also claims to have been taken into the future by his alien hosts, and
submitted a picture as proof, however, the picture turned out to be a drawing
taken from a science fiction magazine.
In part II of this article we will directly
compare the PCH to the ETH to see which fits better
as an explanation of the UFO phenomenon.
UFOs:
The Psychocultural
Hypothesis
- Part II
In
Part II of this article, we will directly compare the Extraterrestrial
Hypothesis (ETH) to the
Psychocultural Hypothesis (PCH)
to see which better fits the available evidence as an explanation of the UFO
phenomenon.
by Steven Novella, MD, Editor
The
The
ETH vs the PCH
How can we tell which hypothesis is most
likely to be true, the ETH or the PCH? Well, an important criteria
of any scientific hypothesis is that it makes predictions which can be
tested. What predictions, then, do the
two hypotheses make, and how do the predictions fare when tested? We can generate, mainly from common sense, a
list of characteristics that a psychocultural
phenomenon should have, and compare this to a comparable list of
characteristics that a genuine alien phenomenon should have, and then compare
each to the UFO phenomenon to see which hypothesis fits better.
Physical
Evidence
If the ETH is correct, then it is possible
to obtain physical evidence as proof of the ETH. In other words, if aliens are truly visiting
the Earth and interacting with humans, then it is possible to obtain something
physical that is demonstrably alien. One
might argue, therefore, that the ETH predicts the eventual discovery of a
genuine unambiguous alien artifact. To be inclusive, I will count as an alien
artifact either an alien themselves, a technological object created by the aliens
(such as a spacecraft or implant), or even a photograph or video of an alien or
alien object which is of high quality, unambiguous, and survives careful
scientific scrutiny.
The PCH does not
allow for any such alien artifact, and the presence of
even a single such artifact would falsify the PCH, at
least as the sole explanation of the UFO phenomenon. The presence of a demonstrable alien
artifact, therefore, seems like a pretty good test to distinguish between the
ETH and the PCH.
The evidence test, however, is much more significant when positive then
when negative. In other words, the
presence of a single alien artifact definitively favors the ETH, and ends all
scientific debate. The absence of such
demonstrable artifacts, however, is not definitive and does not end the debate,
the reason being that ETH supporters can argue that the evidence is too hard to
come by (what with government conspiracies and all), and as a matter of logic
the absence of current evidence cannot prove that no such evidence exists.
All skeptics, and even most believers,
admit that no definitive “smoking gun” evidence exists, at least that is in the
public domain. This lack of evidence favors the PCH,
but the point of contention between ETH skeptics and believers is to what
degree. Admittedly, the current lack of
definitive physical evidence is not and can never be conclusive, but it does
strongly support the PCH and increasingly so as time
goes on. Here the enormous size of the
UFO phenomenon works against ETH proponents.
As the size and duration of the phenomenon grows, it becomes
increasingly unlikely that the ETH can be true without some physical evidence
surfacing. Eventually the aliens and the
government agents have to slip up, UFO researchers will get lucky, and a piece
of real and undeniable evidence will fall into the public domain. Each
generation of UFO enthusiasts profess that such evidence is right around the
corner. The fact that this has not yet happened is a very strong point in favor
of the PCH over the ETH.
The lack of unambiguous photographic and
video evidence of aliens or alien spacecraft is also increasingly unlikely, if
the ETH were correct, as video cameras, and now digital video, are increasingly
available. The ubiquity of such video has
even spawned a new genre of television programming, so called reality TV. Such programs feature video of unexpected
dramatic events, such as crashes, animal attacks, disasters, and extreme
weather. The video is typically
reasonably well in focus with adequate lighting and close enough to clearly
show the events. By comparison video of
UFOs show nocturnal lights, blurry objects, and ambiguous images (much like
alleged video of Bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, and other dubious phenomena).
Those occasional pictures and video which
are unambiguous as to content, such as the alien autopsy film, tend to have two
features in common: the originators or discoverers of the video wish to remain
anonymous, and the video does not survive close scrutiny designed to determine
if it is a hoax. The justification for
anonymity is usually fear of persecution, but such
shyness seems to only come up for video which appears to have been hoaxed. Some
video, such as the
As digital technology advances, so does the
quality of such hoaxes. However, to
date, no such footage has ever passed skeptical inspection.
Cultural
Antecedents vs. Discontinuity
Another feature of a truly alien phenomenon
is that it should contain elements which are genuinely alien. When European societies first encountered the
cultures of the
If the Earth were contacted by an alien spacefaring race, a species that is the product of
evolution on a different world with a completely independent culture,
technology, and world-view, then we would expect such contact to produce a
significant cultural discontinuity. The
aliens and their spacecraft should look like nothing dreamed of in previous
science fiction (in all probability, barring an extreme cosmic coincidence).
They might also bring new or unique information to the human race.
The ETH, therefore, predicts that the UFO
phenomenon should be accompanied by cultural discontinuities,
whereas the PCH predicts that the UFO phenomenon will
have no such discontinuities, but rather will evolve from demonstrable cultural
antecedents.
Let us first look at the aliens
themselves. Many scientists and science
fiction writers have noticed that the little gray aliens look incredibly human. As one writer put it, “aliens have no business
looking so human.” The
probability that an alien race, the product of a completely separate
evolutionary history, wouldlook even vaguely humanoid
is vanishingly small. The aliens, however, do not just appear as
humans, they appear like humans with those traits we psychologically associate
with intelligence exaggerated. If, for
example, we compare humans to apes we can observe that humans have larger
relative craniums, smaller faces with more gracile
features, and less hair. If we take a
human and then increase the cranium size, make the face smaller and all
features more gracile, and take away the hair, you
end up with a typical gray alien.
Rather, if true aliens were ever
encountered they would likely look like nothing as yet conceived of in science
fiction. Following such contact, all
science fiction would instantly become dated and campy, and the many species of
humanoid “aliens” which populate human fiction about aliens would look suddenly
silly. I predict that science fiction fans in a post-contact world will look
back on pre-contact science fiction and shake their heads, asking, “How could
people back then have thought that aliens would look so human.” I hope I live
to see if my prediction comes true.
The aliens sometimes have names as well
(see article by Sheila Gibson in this issue with a list of names on page 9 for
examples). Alien names should be alien,
and likely would not sound like any human tongue. Some of the names listed are obviously meant
to be English translations, but most of the others are simply names. It is very telling that the aliens do not
just have human sounding names, but most of them have European sounding
names. Also, those encountered by people
from Hispanic cultures have Hispanic sounding names. They are not even as
different from European phonetic structure as human names from other cultures,
such as Asian or African. Truly alien
names should, however, be more different from any human language than any two
human languages are from each other.
To analyze this a bit further, all
languages have a certain phonetic structure – consonants that are more common
than others, a certain ratio of consonants to vowels, unique phonemes,
characteristic inflections and placement of accents. These elements make up the character of a
language – how the language sounds. This
is why it is possible, even easy, to recognize a language that someone else is
mimicking even if they are speaking in jibberish and
made up words.
Writers of speculative fiction (science
fiction and fantasy) sometimes face the challenge of inventing alien cultures,
including languages. One of the pitfalls
of this endeavor is giving your aliens names that follow the linguistic
characteristics of your native tongue (such as Xenu,
the alien overlord invented by science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard for his
manufactured religion, Scientology).
Experienced writers will try to manipulate the specific elements of
language to create names with a genuinely alien sound. The price of not doing this is creating silly
sounding names that have a campy 1950’s science fiction sound to them (“Klaatu Barada Nikto”).
When reviewing the alien names listed here,
it is fairly clear that they conform to the linguistic styles of the cultures
of the alleged contactees. To date, no truly alien language or names
have come out of alleged alien contact.
Again, we see a lack of discontinuity and the influence of cultural
antecedents.
What about the aliens’ spaceships? The majority of UFO witnesses who describe an
actual object (rather than just points of light) describe a typical flying
saucer. The very concept of a flying
saucer, however, was nothing more than a misinterpretation of Kenneth Arnold’s
original description. The objects he saw
were not saucer-shaped, but he described their motion as that of a skipping
saucer. The press, however, reported
that the UFO’s were flying saucers.
Since then most eyewitnesses have seen flying saucers. Again, this is either an ironic coincidence
of cosmic proportions, or we are seeing the effects of suggestion and wishful
thinking.
We can also see the cultural antecedents of the flying
saucer icon in the science fiction of the early 20th century. Although other images were also popular, such
as rocket ships, the flying saucer was a staple of science fiction magazines
before Kenneth Arnold’s famous encounter in 1947. The 1950s produced a slew of science fiction
movies featuring classic flying saucers, solidifying this shape as the standard
alien craft.
Some contactees
or abductees have been given warnings by the aliens they have encountered. The most common such warnings are typically
along the lines of alerting humans to the dangers of nuclear war or of
destroying the Earth’s environment (well, duh). It seems that the aliens have
similar global concerns to most Americans.
The aliens so far have not brought us any information which is new or
unique; they have warned humanity of nothing we didn’t already know.
This aspect of the abductee
phenomenon also brings up an interesting question. If aliens visiting the Earth wished to give a
warning to humanity why would they impart this warning to a handful of
individuals with no authority or position, under circumstances in which they
were likely not to be believed, and then wipe their memory so that the
abduction, including the warning, could only be remembered in a hazy fashion
under hypnosis? So far their warnings have not seemed to affect the course of
human history one jot.
In a similar vein, other aliens have
informed their abductees that their visitation is a prelude to the second
coming of Christ, as Betty Andreasson reports in The Andreasson Affair (Fowler, 1979). All such abductees,
however, had a pre-existence belief in Christianity and the second coming.
The aliens therefore appear to mirror the
beliefs and concerns of their captives, and have brought no new or surprising
information to humanity. Again, this
represents a cultural continuity that is predicted by the PCH
and demonstrates a lack of the discontinuity which is predicted by the ETH.
Some UFO proponents have offered as an
explanation for the lack of biological and cultural discontinuity the
speculation that alien visitors have in fact been visiting the Earth for many
thousands of years, influencing our culture and perhaps even our biology. This
strategy, however, does not eliminate the discontinuity problem; it merely
moves it into the past.
The human species, for example, is part of
the continuum of life on Earth.
Biological and fossil evidence both strongly suggest that there is no
biological discontinuity - homo sapiens evolved on
Earth. There is also no evidence to suggest any cultural or technological
discontinuity in the past of any human society.
Mythology
or History
The ETH and the PCH
also make different predictions about how the UFO story would develop and
evolve over time. If the UFO phenomenon were real history, we would expect the
storyline to have certain features, such as a core of consistency. Certain specific details, unexpected at
first, would soon characterize genuine contacts. Media hype and science fiction would tend to
follow in the footsteps of the phenomenon as we learned more about it. A cumulative (rather than revolving) body of
evidence would accumulate.
The PCH, rather,
views the UFO phenomenon as a modern mythology.
Mythologies develop out of the popular culture,
they are not imposed from without. The
storyline of such mythologies is crude and simple at first, but then evolves
over time as new elements are added.
Details are at first scattered and disparate, but later consensus
develops over time. Not all details are
retained, only those which turn out to be most compelling and resonant. And the storyline will tend to be driven by
the media and the fiction of the popular culture, rather than the other way
around.
If we look at the modern UFO story, it
conforms to what we would predict by the PCH. In the 1940s and 1950s the UFO story had the
character of the science fiction of the time, now obvious from the perspective
of history. The contactees
of the 1950’s described contacts with glowing humans from Venus, Moonmen, and Martians (isn’t that where aliens were from in
the ‘50s?). Such stories seem ridiculous
by today’s standards, but they were the beginning of the UFO story.
The aliens then changed over time, taking
many different forms from hairy dwarves to giant insects. Eventually the little grey alien makes his
appearance with the Betty and Barney Hill alleged abduction in 1966. For reasons described above, the image of the
little greys resonated with the human psyche. They become increasingly reported until the
1970s, when they emerge as the “victors” and become solidified as the standard
alien icon. Joe Nickell
did a wonderful job of chronicling the “alien timeline,” demonstrating
graphically the process of alien evolution over time (Nickell,
1997).
Once certain details become a standard part
of the mythology, they are often then retrofitted into older stories. The famous Roswell Incident, for example,
existed for almost thirty years, from 1947 until the 1970s, without any mention
of alien bodies. It was only after the
little greys emerged that testimony arose of
witnesses seeing similar aliens in
Terry Matheson examined the alien abduction
literature in Alien Abductions: Creating a Modern Phenomenon (Matheson, 1998).
He found that the literature conforms to the characteristics of mythology, as
described above. He writes, for example:
“It will be found that more recent accounts
tend both to respond to problems and answer questions created by older
narratives, and also insert new elements, as if such elements are being tested
for appropriateness. Conversely, aspects of previous narratives that do not
somehow strike a cord with the public are often discarded. Further, earlier accounts tend to be
comparatively simple and down-to-earth, while more recent ones (those of the
1990s) are more detailed and involve other areas of the paranormal similar to
those frequently encountered in so-called New Age writings.”
Although Matheson states that he is not
attempting to determine the truth of abduction accounts, he concludes that
approaching the abduction narrative as a modern mythology is very instructive
to understanding the evolution of the narrative and its place in modern
culture.
So far we have examined the ETH and the PCH in light of features we expect each hypothesis should
predict, based mainly on common sense.
We do, however, have one excellent historical example which validates
many of the characteristics of the PCH. In UFOs &
Alien Contact (Bartholomew & Howard, 1998), Robert E. Bartholomew and
George S. Howard describe the airship sightings of 1896-1897.
At this time there was great anticipation
that flying machines were on the brink of being invented. This led to much speculation concerning
government programs and lone inventors.
Not surprisingly, it also led to sightings of unidentified lights or
objects in the sky that were quickly interpreted as the expected airships.
Bartholomew and Howard demonstrate through careful documentation that the
airship fever contained many of the features of the modern UFO story, including
credible witnesses, media hype driving sightings, contact and even abduction,
and alleged physical evidence which always turned out to be wanting. Also, the airships themselves conformed to
the quaint fiction of the 19th century (cultural antecedents), with flapping
wings and bulbous fuselages, rather than the form real aircraft eventually took
(unanticipated by contemporary fiction).
Conclusion
The UFO phenomenon remains a vast and
controversial part of modern culture.
Without definitive proof as to the cause of the phenomenon, we are
forced to infer the best explanation. When the entirety of the phenomenon and
all evidence are considered, I submit that the psychocultural
hypothesis emerges as the best explanation to date. The extraterrestrial
hypothesis, although compelling to many, remains
without credible support.
The PCH also
enables UFO skeptics to deal with UFOs and aliens as a real phenomenon
deserving a serious explanation. The evidence points to a complex phenomenon
combining modern mythology, literary narrative, popular culture, and human
psychology. It also seems likely that
this explanatory approach can be generalized and applied to a wide variety of
modern paranormal and fringe beliefs.
References:
Fowler,
Raymond. The Andreasson Affair.
Nickell, Joe. Extraterrestrial
Iconography. Skeptical Inquirer, Volume 21, No. 5, 18-19
Matheson,
Terry. in Alien Abductions: Creating a Modern
Phenomenon.
Bartholomew, Robert E., Howard, George S. UFOs & Alien Contact.