A SURVEY AMONG INVESTIGATORS AND SCHOLARS - Part I


It has been a wonderful experience to get the opinion of a very selective group of people at an international level and get them together giving answers to just 8 questions referred to the Unusual Aerial Phenomena.

We give a big thanks to all those colleagues who answered our survey and we are very pleased to present to you their ideas. We hope that what they say would be useful to you in your own work with the UAP and that their criteria would help to shape your own one.

We start today the publication of the answers of these colleagues, and we are doing so in the order they were received.
---------------------
                                           
Igor Kalytyuk is an expert of the system analytical department of the Ukrainian Research Center for studying the “Zond” anomalies, which operates at the Faculty of Aerospace Systems, National Technical University "Kiev Polytechnic Institute", as well as the editor of the news resource "Ufology News" www.ufology-news.com. A historian studying the ufological subculture, UFO identifier, Anomalous Aerospace Phenomena researcher, since 2016 has been invited as an expert in the State study program identification of UFO. Resident of Rivne, Ukraine.



1) Do you use the acronym UFO or another designation, and if so, why?


Let's start with the terminology: UFO - is an unidentified flying object, any object located in the atmosphere or in outer space, not identified by a particular observer. It can be anything that an eyewitness could not recognize, and the task of a UFO identifier is to recognize this object. UFO-identification is a process of careful analysis and classification of an array of primary messages for their level of unusualness and information contained in the working directory (A, B, C, D). It is a discipline at the intersection of meteorology, ecology, and psychology. 



See practical implementation examples:


 
Most of the UFO statements (unidentified for a specific observer) are fully or partially identified, yet some cannot be identified because of the incompleteness of quantitative or qualitative data, and only a very small part of the applications cannot be identified, although there are good qualitative and quantitative data, such phenomena can potentially be of interest to meteorologists, since they may not yet be open or very rare natural phenomena, as well as interest for the military as they may be potentially intelligence apparatus and intelligence services pose a threat to national security, even for part of the environmentalists if there is an impact on the living and not living nature, "human factor" and UFOs are also of interest to psychologists, etc. 

The quality of identification depends both on the expertise of the expert council and on the accuracy of the calculations of the object-oriented expert system.

2) Have your idea about UFOs changed along the time?

No, I initially perceived the term UFO as something that could not be identified for lack of additional information That is the term without any references to unknown technology and aliens, for these "new entities" do not correspond to the name. “Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate” - "You should not involve new entities without extreme need"

3) Should the UFO investigator become an expert in IFOs?

The expert approach is the formalization of the arrays primary message (APM) of the reflection of qualitative parameters on the classification scales and the assignment of the importance of the weight coefficients to messages. Before the formation of the APM, documents with the content of information on the observation of an event or fixation on the relevant equipment, in which detailed information is provided with technical details, are broken at the stage of copying into separate fragments containing information on only one observation. 

The array of primary information should include all messages, regardless of the content. When typing a message from a message into a computer database, you cannot distort the text, that is, print it as it is easier and more convenient. The text is entered in such a way, as his eyewitness wrote. It is allowed only correction of grammatical errors, but not stylistics, which in itself can be the subject of research for psychologists. In addition, studies of stylistics can tell us whether we are dealing with a normal person or mentally unbalanced. 

Further work with the APM is related to the preparation of the preliminary catalog (PC) and the working directory (WD) and requires a special procedure. Each of these arrays can serve as an independent subject of research. 

Formation of the PC is a logical continuation of the work with the MPS and is carried out, respectively, on its basis, including documents containing information about the observation of an event or fixation on the relevant equipment. It is possible that the same eyewitness can send additional details or clarifications on the previous observation.

A variant is also possible when a group of independent and unconnected observers can send messages about the same concrete phenomenon observed at the same place and time. Such primary documents at the stage of PC formation should be systematized and sorted by date, time and place of observation. More detailed sorting at this stage is not needed. 

The set of coincidences of primary documents on these parameters also forms a case. In turn, the totality of cases is PC. The further stage of the work is the formation of the RC - it is connected with the analysis of cases and their identification with known natural and technogenic phenomena. For this purpose, it is advisable to use the experience of classifying cases, for their level of unusualness and information content, with a division into four categories:

Category A - cases that could be reliably identified with known natural and technogenic phenomena and objects.

Category B - cases that could not be reliably identified with known natural and technogenic phenomena and objects, but probably this could be done with more complete and accurate data on the phenomenon or object being studied.

Category C – cases about which can not be said anything definite due to lack of information or ambiguity of the data.

Category D - cases for which there is complete, detailed and exhaustive information, but on its basis and within the existing knowledge it is impossible to identify the phenomenon or object being studied with known natural or technogenic phenomena or objects.

Additionally, you can add subcategories for category D, this is:

Subcategory D1 is an unknown phenomenon or object, at an average level of unusualness and information content (for example: one witness or no photo)

Subcategory D2 is an unknown phenomenon or object, at high level of unusualness and information content (for example: there are photos from different places of observation from independent witnesses)

In the proposed model of identification, the phenomena of category C should be filtered first, and among the remaining three categories, the qualitative accumulation of knowledge about the phenomenon occurs primarily at the expense of category D. 

At the same time, conclusions about the nature of the observed phenomenon of a particular category of identification are made predominantly by an expert on the basis of generalization and careful study of available information.


4) If there were still some unexplained phenomena, what could they be?

Modern world is making such progress that even most ambitious futurologists could only have dreamt about just half a century ago. 

Never before have scientists had an opportunity to rely on extensive experience and bring together powerful means for exploring the outside World, as they do today. However, research tools and relevant skills alone are not sufficient and essential to push and drive forward our cognition. 

Any breakthrough begins by becoming aware of an anomaly, that is by establishing the fact that nature we see around us has somehow defied our expectations anticipated by dominant paradigms, which direct the scientific advances. 

Prehistoric people lived in close contact with anomalies, or phenomena of the outside World. It was noumena which underlay an explanatory model of that world with respect to those things. The gradual analysis of observed events, modeling and determination of their relationship have made it possible to improve and deepen the paradigm so as to reach its current level. 

The entire cognitive process in this world appears to be an ongoing discovery of anomalies, which indicates that paradigms are immature.

In order to account for anomalous facts, a revolution must happen leading to a new theory or an adaptation (modification) of the prevailing paradigm through extension of its scope. 

An absence of anomalies has remained a chimera or idealistic utopia for a long time. Lack of anomalies show an incomplete representation that we have of the World, in which case there can be no place for cognition, either, because all constraints and properties of the World would be known. Obviously, such a scheme of things looks impossible even for a small and cognizable portion of the Universe, which arises out of the fundamental ambiguity and incalculable nature of the World.  

A phenomenon is an existential and descriptive essence of an occurrence that is not associated with its explanation or the cause of its origin. It arises directly from observation, rather than a premise. 

Defined as non-periodic and transient occurrences observed in the environment, anomalous phenomena are phenomenological, as well. With no explanation given in the conceptual framework and scope of the existing scientific paradigm, what remains is only a description of their parameters and characteristics which are, nevertheless, real. 

Thus, the actual purpose of studying anomalous aerospace phenomena is to form a science-based view of the phenomenon as part of a scientific image of the World at large.

5) How do you consider this issue in general? What do you think about the whole subject?

I consider it appropriate to separate the UFO-identification and the AAP-study, from the quasi-scientific subculture called ufology, and put an end to this dispute. Show that it is possible to examine AAP and identify UFOs within already recognized scientific disciplines, hence, there is no need to create a separate science, to multiply what exists without the need.

6) Is it possible to do something effective to bring the truth to the public and to change the mind of those who still proclaim or believe that extraterrestrial beings are living with us on Earth?

We need to educate. For example, I've been working since 2013 in the Handbook "How to Identify Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO)?" How to investigate Anomalous Aerospace Phenomena (AAP)? ".
And I plan to distribute it for free and openly, in order to start qualitative transformations or revolution in the ufological environment. 

At the moment: the model of automatic computer identification of UFOs has been created, taking into account: the completeness and quantity of information, the factors of anomaly, the influence of the human factor, there are also analyzes on the instrumental measurement of the human factor, and information over-saturation; The methodology is clearly outlined: visual and instrumental observation of an object or phenomenon, the development of a static monitoring complex, a mobile monitoring complex, and a field mobile laboratory; A detailed catalog of natural and anthropogenic phenomena has been created, which can serve as a source of error in identification; Collection of material samples at the site of the impact on: geochemical analysis, cytological analysis, biological analysis, metrological measurements and much more.

So far we have no reason to believe that we are dealing with extraterrestrial beings, aliens - who they are, it is impossible to answer this within the existing knowledge, there are only a lot of hypotheses, but the hypothesis of travelers in time is the most sympathetic to me. 

There are facts of mental trauma in only some individuals who say that they were "abducted by aliens," but where did they get these mental trauma? - interesting question. I described the rest in my book http://ufology-news.com/wp-content/store/Kalytyuk_I._Application_and_the_first_results_of_the_test_methodology_
the_Ukrainian_school_study_information_about_the_UIBC_2015.pdf

The essence of the approach is to catch an eyewitness to a lie, use the bluff in the course of the dialogue, looking at the gestures and facial expressions, and analyzing the handwriting in a specially designed application for universal application, as well as the adequacy analysis, the measurement of the level of distortion seen by subjective eyewitness convictions, the definition of physical reality and so on. 

In total, 26 people were examined in the group. Seven (7) of them were caught on perjury (quackery) with the help of a bluff, and also analysis of gestures. Concerning eight (8) participants there were suspicions on different forms of psychic deviations. Five (5) had experience that had nothing to do with physical reality. And only six (6) out of twenty-six passed the test and were of interest to me.

7) Do you think SETI and similar searches are valid activities?

The project SETI is very useful since it does not remove the issue of the existence of extraterrestrial intelligent life from the agenda. Many researchers at us, were simultaneously and rather respected participants of the SETI, but also rather respected researchers of the anomalous phenomena. Also very interesting is the study of the Transient lunar phenomenon.

8) What is your idea about multiple universes?

I think that this is already a scientific fact, example Great Attractor, there are many scientific papers on this issue. We are on the verge of new ideas, discoveries, opportunities, should not lose this moment ...



Next publication : the answers given by Commodore (R) Rubén Lianza, Director of the CEFAe, the Commission of Study of Aero-space Phenomena belonging to the Argentinian Air Force.

0 comments: