Scientists who once rolled their eyes at flying saucer stories are now treating strange things in the sky as a serious research problem, not a punchline. Across government, academia and private observatories, top researchers are asking hard questions about unidentified objects and whether any of them could hint at alien technology, even as they stress that extraordinary claims still lack extraordinary proof. The result is a new, more disciplined debate about UFOs and extraterrestrial life that is less about belief and more about data, risk and how science should respond when the evidence is incomplete.
From “flying saucers” to UAPs: how the language finally caught up
The first shift is linguistic but profound. What used to be called “flying saucers” or UFOs is now more often labeled “unidentified anomalous phenomena,” a term that signals how researchers want to focus on unexplained data rather than pop culture imagery. Experts who study these sightings describe unidentified anomalous phenomena as objects or events in the sky, in space or even under water that defy easy explanation after known aircraft, drones, balloons and atmospheric effects are ruled out, and they emphasize that the label does not assume anything about aliens. In recent work highlighted by Phaedra Trethan, these experts say that unidentified anomalous phenomena have become a magnet for an unusual amount of collaboration among astronomers, physicists and defense analysts who once operated in separate silos, a convergence that reflects how seriously they now take the underlying questions about what is being seen in the sky and on sensors, even when the data are messy or incomplete, and that collaboration is captured in reporting on experts who call them unidentified anomalous phenomena.
That more careful vocabulary sits alongside a long and complicated history. The very term “unidentified flying object” was coined for military and intelligence purposes, and decades of official inquiries have tried to sort misidentifications from genuine mysteries. According to a detailed overview of the subject, no official government investigation has ever publicly concluded that unidentified flying objects are indisputably real, physical objects that are extraterrestrial spacecraft, even though many reports have flagged them as a matter of concern to national defense and air safety, a tension that is laid out in the entry on unidentified flying object.
Why scientists are finally taking UFO reports seriously
What has changed in recent years is not that the skies suddenly filled with strange craft, but that investigators of all types now argue that the unexplained fraction of sightings deserves systematic scrutiny. Physicists, atmospheric scientists and security analysts point out that unidentified anomalous phenomena sit at the intersection of aviation safety, national security and basic curiosity about the universe, and they say that ignoring credible reports risks missing either a human-made threat or a discovery about nature itself. Those investigators stress that most cases will likely turn out to be mundane, but they argue that the small remainder, especially those recorded on multiple sensors or by trained observers, justify careful study, a case that has been made by investigators of unidentified anomalous phenomena who want serious scientific scrutiny.
At the same time, researchers are candid about how difficult that is to do well. Many sightings come from chance encounters, not controlled experiments, and the data are often low resolution, poorly calibrated or wrapped in secrecy. One analysis of attempts to formalize this work notes that scientists trying to get serious about studying UFOs face a tangle of social stigma, limited funding and classified information that cannot be freely shared, all of which make it hard to build the kind of open, reproducible datasets that modern science relies on, a challenge described in detail in a discussion of how scientists try to get serious about studying UFOs.
NASA’s verdict so far: no aliens, but real mysteries
Into this fraught landscape stepped NASA, which convened an independent panel to look at unidentified anomalous phenomena with fresh eyes and modern tools. When the agency released its first dedicated report, it was explicit that there was no evidence of aliens in the data it had reviewed, and that none of the cases studied provided proof of extraterrestrial technology visiting Earth. Yet the same report also emphasized that big questions remain, that the current evidence base is too thin to draw sweeping conclusions, and that NASA would appoint a chief to study the phenomenon and coordinate future work, a stance summarized in coverage of how there were no aliens in NASA’s debut UFO report but big questions remain.
Other assessments of the same study underline that NASA is trying to thread a narrow needle. On one hand, the agency states plainly that there is no proof aliens exist, and that its review did not conclude extra-terrestrial life exists or that any unidentified anomalous phenomena are evidence of non-human technology. On the other hand, NASA also acknowledges that such life might exist and that some sightings could, in principle, involve unknown technology operating in Earth’s atmosphere, which is why it is investing in better data collection and analysis tools, a nuanced position captured in a report that notes that there’s no proof aliens exist, but they might.
Inside the U.S. government’s uneasy relationship with UFOs
Government agencies, especially in the United States, have long been caught between public fascination and operational concerns when it comes to unexplained sightings. When the intelligence community released a long-awaited report on unidentified flying objects, Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks framed the issue squarely as a question of national security, saying it is critical that the United States maintain operations security and that many of the observations have been near military areas, a reminder that even prosaic drones or foreign surveillance platforms can pose serious risks if they go undetected, as described in the account of how Hicks and the United States intelligence community released a UFO report.
That report also marked a shift toward greater transparency, which some researchers see as a precondition for serious science. Analysts who reviewed the Pentagon’s findings argued that simply publishing the document reversed a long tradition of secrecy surrounding U.S. government reports on UFOs, and they suggested that this openness might finally draw more scientists into the effort by giving them access to at least some of the underlying data and case summaries, a hope expressed in commentary that noted that time will tell if transparency brings science to the UFO world.
The government’s top UFO scientist and the case for an open mind
Within that more open environment, individual officials have started to speak more frankly about what they know and what they do not. The U.S. government’s top UFO scientist has described having an open mind about alien visitation, acknowledging that while there is no confirmed evidence that extraterrestrial craft have reached Earth, the possibility cannot be ruled out in principle and should not be dismissed out of hand if future data demand a radical explanation. That same scientist has invited the public to share sightings by asking, “Have you seen something inexplicable,” signaling a willingness to treat credible civilian reports as potential data points rather than fringe stories, a posture detailed in an interview that profiles how the government’s top UFO scientist has an open mind about alien visitation.
Other former officials have gone further in trying to tamp down the wilder narratives that have grown up around these programs. In the most extensive media interview he has given, Sean Kirkpatrick, who led a key Pentagon office on unidentified anomalous phenomena, laid out a detailed case that the stories swirling for years about secret crash retrievals and hidden alien bodies do not match the evidence his team saw. Kirkpatrick has argued that the actual hidden truth about UFOs is more mundane but still important, saying that the real threats are likely to be found right here on Earth in the form of misidentified aircraft, balloons or surveillance systems that exploit gaps in U.S. defenses, a perspective he shared when he spoke at the Capitol on May 17, 2022, and which is unpacked in an analysis that begins, “In the most extensive media interview he’s given,” and concludes that In the most extensive media interview he’s given, Kirkpatrick says the real threats are found right here on Earth.
Harvard’s provocative “secret civilization” hypothesis
Even as officials urge caution, some academics are testing more speculative ideas in peer-reviewed form. A new paper from researchers at Harvard University’s Human Flourishing Program has argued that unidentified anomalous phenomena might, in some cases, be evidence of a “cryptoterrestrial” civilization, a hypothetical secret UFO civilization that could already be here on Earth and remain hidden from mainstream detection. The authors suggest that this framework could, in theory, account for some of the stranger patterns in sightings and folklore, although they acknowledge that the hypothesis is highly unconventional and would require extraordinary evidence to be taken as anything more than a thought experiment, a proposal that has been summarized in coverage of how Harvard University Human Flourishing Program researchers floated a secret UFO civilization.
Harvard is also home to one of the most outspoken astronomers on the possibility of alien technology. Avi Loeb has argued that humanity should treat the search for extraterrestrial artifacts as a legitimate scientific project, and in a widely viewed talk titled “My Search for Proof Aliens Exist,” he describes how he and his collaborators are combing through interstellar objects and oceanic debris for signs of non-human engineering, even speculating about advanced beings that might have mastered the job of creating a new universe. Loeb contends that given the vastness of space and the long timescales involved, it would be arrogant to assume that Earth is the only cradle of intelligence, a view he lays out in his Jul talk “My Search for Proof Aliens Exist”.
Searching for alien “technological civilizations” in our backyard
Those ideas are not purely theoretical. Loeb and his colleagues have also tried to ground them in specific expeditions and lab work, including controversial claims about materials recovered from the ocean floor. In one high-profile case, a Harvard scientist presented what he described as new evidence that samples collected from a suspected interstellar object might be fragments of an alien spacecraft, arguing that their composition and trajectory could be consistent with artificial origin rather than a natural rock. That work has attracted both interest and skepticism, but it has been notable enough that NASA agreed to fund a Harvard-led hunt for alien “technological civilizations,” signaling that at least some officials see value in testing these bold claims with rigorous analysis, a development described in a report that notes that NASA funds Harvard hunt for alien technological civilizations.
These efforts sit alongside more traditional searches for extraterrestrial life, such as scanning exoplanet atmospheres for biosignatures or listening for radio signals. What distinguishes the new wave of work is its focus on potential artifacts or probes that might already be in or near our solar system, and its willingness to treat some unidentified anomalous phenomena as possible leads rather than curiosities to be ignored. Critics argue that the evidence so far falls far short of proving any alien connection, but even they often concede that carefully cataloging and analyzing unusual objects can yield valuable insights into meteors, space debris and the dynamics of Earth’s atmosphere, regardless of whether any of them turn out to be products of non-human intelligence.
Culture, stigma and the “1987 Dodge Omnis” problem
Beyond the data and the hardware, there is a cultural tangle that shapes how scientists and the public think about UFOs. One writer who spent time with military pilots and intelligence officials described how the 2021 national intelligence report on unidentified anomalous phenomena landed in a world primed by decades of science fiction and conspiracy theories, and quoted a source who joked that the sightings were “like everybody’s sending us their 1987 Dodge Omnis,” a wry way of saying that if aliens are visiting, they seem to be doing it in vehicles no more impressive than an aging compact car. That same account revisits classic cases, such as a famous sighting in the sky near Papua New Guinea, to show how stories can grow in the retelling even when the original evidence is ambiguous, a dynamic explored in a long-form piece that asks what’s the deal with UFOs and jokes about 1987 Dodge Omnis.
That mix of humor, fear and fascination feeds directly into the stigma that researchers say has long discouraged serious study. Scientists who venture into this territory risk being associated with fringe beliefs, while pilots and radar operators who report anomalies worry about their careers. Commentators who have tried to map out the new landscape argue that the only way forward is to separate the signal from the cultural noise, treating eyewitness accounts and sensor data as raw material to be tested rather than proof of anything on their own. They also note that recommended stories about alien invasion narratives, such as those by Daniel H. Wilson on finding a Native take on traditional alien invasion stories, show how deeply these themes are woven into fiction, a point raised in an essay that lists Recommended Stories like Daniel Wilson on finding a Native take as part of the broader conversation.
Where the evidence stands, and the questions that remain
Pulling these threads together, the picture that emerges is neither a tidy debunking nor a triumphant confirmation of alien visitors. On one side, official reviews from NASA, the intelligence community and long-running government investigations all converge on the conclusion that there is no public proof of extraterrestrial spacecraft operating in Earth’s skies, and that most unidentified anomalous phenomena are likely to be misidentified aircraft, balloons, atmospheric effects or sensor glitches. On the other side, those same reviews concede that a small fraction of cases remain unexplained, that the data are often too poor to resolve them, and that the stakes for aviation safety and national security justify continued study, especially when sightings cluster near sensitive sites or involve multiple independent sensors.
As a reporter following this debate, I see a field in transition. Top researchers are raising serious questions not because they are convinced aliens are here, but because they recognize that unexplained does not mean unimportant, and that the tools of modern science can and should be applied even to topics long dismissed as fringe. Whether the answer turns out to be secret drones, rare weather, a hidden human civilization or, in the most dramatic scenario, evidence of another intelligence, the process of asking better questions, gathering cleaner data and confronting our own biases may prove to be the most valuable discovery of all.
More from MorningOverview