80 million Americans can't be wrong...or can they?

I read one of those “filler” stories in the paper today (you know: the kind they use when they have an awkward space to fill).  The headline: “80 million Americans believe in UFOs.” Wow! That’s more than twice the population of Canada. The story matched the headline (not always the case.)

That left me scratching my head (metaphorically). What the heck do the words believe in and the abbreviation UFO mean?  The second one is fairly easy: Unidentified Flying Object. That means, if I interpret Modern American correctly: there are things in the sky (deduced from “flying”) that we can’t identify. Fair enough. I can’t always immediately identify everything I see either. And, just because I can’t immediately identify it does not mean it is involved with an alien planet. I mean, that is the last conclusion I would draw if I was baffled by something. Occam's razor aside, we rarely accept the most complicated and convoluted explanation when there is a simpler explanation at hand. Well, I guess, to many people (80 million Americans at least) the easiest solution is to assume an alien presence.

This approach was popularized by Erich von Däniken in his 1968 misinterpretation of anthropology called Chariots of the Gods? Unsolved Mysteries of the Past. It really is a fun read if you can stand the supermarket tabloid leaps of logic (it’s a mystery, so it must be the work of alien visitors). (I once saw one of these publications on a newsstand with the headline Scientists Photograph Heaven over a photo of a spiral galaxy seen edge-on.)  von Däniken was especially entranced by halos in medieval art. This standard symbol of sainthood absolutely must be a drawing of a Plexiglas space helmet. He finds unknown shapes around the heads of many Aztec bas relief and there you have it: the final proof that earth has been visited by creatures from another planet. Crop circles just underscore the evidence and are proof that they are still around watching over us.

Okay, enough fun at Herr von Däniken’s expense. He isn’t the only one: just one of the first mass popularizers of the blame it on aliens school of thought. One thing that many members of that school cite as evidence is the pyramids of Egypt. Humans simply could not have built them; heck, we couldn’t even do it now with all our modern technology. The trouble is that those who are inspired by facile drawings of slaves dragging stones while men with whips stand over them, are missing a vital piece of information. Why assume that slaves dragged these monstrous building blocks? Why not assume, if you are going on assumptions, that the Egyptians were smart enough to figure out the (relatively) easy way to move a large block? It’s really very simple—and you may kick yourself if you never thought of it. Lash logs lengthwise to each of the four faces of the stone. Build the logs up until you have about as close to a circular shape (as seen from either end) as you can get. Now push the stone just enough that it passes the point of equilibrium at an edge (remember, that you can now “rock” the stone thanks to the cleverly placed logs)—and the stone will complete the rest of the journey to its next face. Rock and roll, as they say.  (If you are lucky enough to be going down-hill, the stone might just keep on going on its own once you get it started.)

You still need a lot of slaves and a system of pulleys and levers (which were not beyond the capabilities of our ancient ancestors), and lots of time, but there you have it: no alien energy rays or anti-gravity devices required.

Sorry folks, but using aliens to explain away things that you don’t understand just doesn’t wash. I might as well say that my car runs with alien technology because I certainly can’t understand all the technology that goes into making my car move when I want it to.

Now, back to the sky. When I was about 10 years old the kids in the neighbourhood all saw what they called a “flying saucer.” Well, there certainly was an unusual-looking something overhead. An older kid got out his binoculars and informed us solemnly that he could see mice on the saucer. Now this was getting too weird for me, even in my 10-year-old naivety.  Of course it turned out that the strange object was a weather balloon. The “mice” were probably the blurry “circles of confusion” you see when something is not quite in focus.

Well, if you lean to the “conspiracy” side of interpreting events, you could always blame anything you see in the sky that you don’t understand on secret military weapons research. I’m not even going to go near the “testimony” of those who have been abducted and sodomized by aliens. I am fairly certain that rare meteorological events can be readily misunderstood. Imagine what the first persons to see the aurora borealis must have concluded.

However, in the end, I will admit that there are some things that people experience that just can’t be explained away—yet.

Now, in case you forgot, I italicized the words believe in in my second paragraph. I’ve always had trouble understanding questions like: Do you believe in love at first sight? Do you believe in evolution? Do you believe that God is going to strike dead everyone you disapprove of? Speaking of that last point, I once attended a religious service where the church was between ministers, so a lay person took over the services. Unfortunately, the chosen lay-person in this case was senile; she couldn’t read a passage from the Bible without getting it backwards; and, generally, her “sermons” made no sense and were completely disconnected from the Scripture readings. This particular Sunday she informed us that she had a very sad story to tell.

Apparently, a life-long friend of hers was dying. The friend confessed that she could never quite “believe” no matter how hard she tried. Our pseudo-minister then clucked her tongue and told us it was unfortunate that her friend had to go to Hell because she hadn’t tried hard enough to “believe.”

Seemed to me that the friend was putting a lot more effort into it than the preacher who, apparently, never had experienced a moment’s doubt—ever.

So, anyhow, was does this believe in actually mean?

Do I believe in love at first sight? Well, I know that sometimes a couple will experience a strong attraction to each other on first meeting. But, I ask, how many of those “instant-infatuations” evolve into a deeper and more committed relationship? I mean, I think that love means a deep commitment that survives more than one evening.

Do I believe in evolution? How can one mix “belief” and “knowledge?” I know that many think that the phrase “scientific theory” means that it is just a casual opinion that some scientists hold, making any  “theory,” no matter how far removed from reality, equally valid and worthy of consideration.  However, the word “theory” in this context has a very specific meaning that has nothing to do with opinions; its meaning in science is that it is a hypothesis that has been tested many times in many different situations and is yet to be proven incorrect. It verges on being a “scientific law,” but still leaves an opening for an exceptional case.  It’s a long ways from that to “I believe the universe was created in six days.” (And, by the way, speaking of universal scientific laws, Newton’s “laws of motion” have turned out to not be so universal after all.) As for evolution, there are millions, if not hundreds of millions, of pieces of evidence that all support this “theory” that has yet to be proven to be incorrect in any meaningful way. (Other than by misunderstanding and misapplying some random quotations from ancient books.)

 Do I believe that God is going to strike dead everyone you disapprove of? This one simply doesn’t make any sense to me. If God went about killing everyone anyone who was not approved of by someone who professed to be a “believer,” there wouldn’t be anyone left. Not only, if you do believe in a loving personal God who taught that we should forgive each other our grievances, then how can you reconcile that with God stepping in to kill those very people that he said you are supposed to forgive? Ah, the mysteries of fundamentalist theology!  What is a poor simple member of the “Holiest Church of the Only True Redeeming Saviour” to do when he encounters a practicing Hindu? Is he supposed to welcome him, feed him, make him feel at home, as the Bible that I read instructs? Or is he to kill him on the spot because he is a “sinner,” a “heathen,” and an “unbeliever?” Tough one, but fortunately the “believers” do not feel compelled to answer questions posed by “unbelievers,” so it is very unlikely that we will ever get a complete answer to that one. (Other than being quoted misunderstood and misapplied random phrases from some very old books.)

So, there you have it: yes, I believe that there are many things—even some things in the sky—that have yet to be explained in any sort of reasonable way. I guess we could call those events “Unidentified Flying Objects” for lack of a better name. But aliens?—whether obsessed with sodomy or with “universal peace” (some both at the same time)—no, not in my universe. Maybe in yours, but, that’s another story altogether.