Tag: UFO skepticism

Posted on

The Sagan Paradox, Chapter 2: Extraordinary Claims and the Bermuda Triangle

“Extraordinary?” Sagan’s 1977 Standard Stuns UFO Dreamers

In 1977, when the film “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” was released, Washington Post readers first heard of the “Sagan Standard”: that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.“

Carl Sagan uttered this aphorism in relation to the first film scene. In the scene, planes were found in the Sahara which years earlier disappeared in the Bermuda Triangle. The notion of extraordinary claims was central to Sagan’s skepticism about extraterrestrial causes.

“There is no evidence that lights in the sky or the disappearance of ships or planes are due to extraterrestrial interference (in the Bermuda Triangle)”, Sagan said.

Reference: Second View, Sagan on ‘Encounters’
NEW YORK — Carl Sagan, the 43-year-old glamor boy of astronomy, is hunched down in the fifth row of the Ziegfeld Theater on West 54th Street, waiting for the five o’clock matinee to roll. Whoooooosh! A sandstorm rages across the screen, enveloping viewers in a yellow haze.

Bermuda Triangle Bombshell: Planes, Submarines & Atomic Mystery

Bermuda Triangle, 1986:
Nine years later, in the shadowy depths of the North Atlantic, the Russian nuclear submarine K-219 vanished beneath the waves. It left a chilling mystery in its wake. As the vessel settled silently on the ocean floor—nearly 18,000 feet (5.5 kilometers) below the surface—a more disturbing discovery emerged. The submarine’s full arsenal of nuclear warheads had inexplicably disappeared, raising extraordinary claims about what might have occurred.

Any attempt to retrieve or remove the warheads should have been impossible at such an unfathomable depth. It was beyond the reach of all human technology in 1986. Yet, the weapons had vanished nonetheless, leaving behind only unanswered questions and a silence as deep as the ocean itself.

Official records claim that the catastrophic incident aboard K-219 took place hundreds of miles from the Hatteras Abyssal Plain. This spot was the very location where the lost submarine ultimately came to rest (Wikipedia).

Yet this contradiction is curious, to say the least, inviting extraordinary claims and speculations.

Deep-Sea Riddle: Vanished Russian Nukes Hide Under Triangle

Consult the Marine Gazetteer Map, and you’ll notice a small dot nestled between Miami and Bermuda. This is the location of the Hatteras Abyssal Plain. In other words, it is inside the notorious Bermuda Triangle.

Science moves forward through doubt, evidence, and the enduring patience to pursue both. But in a case like this, extraordinary claims about the vanished nukes cannot help but intrigue those. These claims make people wonder what secrets still lie hidden beneath those mysterious waters.

Location of the sunk Russian nuclear submarine K-219. Until now, no publication has linked it’s sinking and the disappearance of it’s nuclear arsenal to the presence of the Bermuda Triangle.

Cosmos Mania: Sagan Turns the Universe into Prime-Time TV

In 1980 the name Sagan finally became a household name when Carl presented his extraordinarily successful TV series “Cosmos.”

The series covered topics ranging from the origin of life to a perspective of our place in the universe.

The Sagan Standard, first phrased in the Washington Post article from December 1977, that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” became the mantra of the series. Carl claimed that nearly every UFO sighting is based on optical illusions and misinterpretations.

Carl Sagan wrote regarding UFO claims:

“When confronted with a claim for which there is no compelling evidence, we should reserve judgment. I know of no evidence for visits to Earth by beings from other worlds.”

  • – Carl Sagan
Posted on

The Sagan Paradox, Chapter 7: The UFO controversy

Sagan’s UFO Paradox: Fostering Scientific Rigor Through Skepticism and Advocacy

A landmark event highlighted the Carl Sagan UFO controversy: the 1969 symposium he co-organized for the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). This meeting notably brought together leading UFO proponents, such as J. Allen Hynek.

Cameo of J. Allen Hynek in “Close Encounters Of The Third Kind”, an UFO encounter category he defined himself..

The meeting also included prominent skeptics, like the first theoretical astronomer of the United States, Donald Menzel. In 1968, Menzel testified before the U.S. House Committee on Science and Astronautics – Symposium on UFOs, stating that he, Menzel, considered all UFO sightings to have natural explanations.

While critics accused Sagan of legitimizing what they considered a “pseudoscience,” Sagan defended the AAAS symposium. He argued that significant public interest in UFOs warranted serious scientific scrutiny.

Carl Sagan was a prominent advocate for the search for extraterrestrial life. Yet, he remained a skeptic regarding Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) as evidence of alien visitation. This seemingly contradictory stance fueled the ongoing debate between UFO skeptics and believers. This is often referred to as the Carl Sagan UFO controversy.

Sagan’s influence on UFO studies produced its most significant beneficial effect by pushing researchers to ground their investigations more firmly in scientific methods. This emphasis on rigor contributed to the emergence of two distinct categories of researchers in the field.

SKEPTICS VS. BELIEVERS: The Secret War Over UFOs

A: Serious UAP researchers who set themselves the goal of identifying and cataloging UFOs, with the main focus on the assumption that there can be no extraterrestrial UFOs. Their focus was on finding conventional, or “banal,” explanations for sightings. They aimed to demystify the phenomenon and bring it within the realm of established science. The Carl Sagan UFO controversy played a role in how these explanations were pursued.

B: Marginalized Fringe UFO researchers, who in contrast remained open to, or actively pursued, the hypothesis of extraterrestrial intelligence behind UFO sightings found themselves increasingly on the periphery. This group, while not necessarily uncritical or prone to accepting every hoax, was willing to explore unconventional explanations. These were explanations that the “serious” camp often dismissed outright.

UAP or UFO? The Government’s Sneaky Word Game to HIDE the Extraterrestrial Truth!

The contemporary preference for the term UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon or Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena) rather than UFO (Unidentified Flying Object) starkly reflects the divide between serious and fringe research.

While both terms essentially refer to the same core mystery—observed objects or phenomena in the sky that are not immediately identifiable—’UAP’ has gained traction among those seeking to legitimize their research. They want to avoid the cultural baggage and stigma associated with ‘UFOs,’ which are often colloquially synonymous with alien spacecraft. This shift is part of the Carl Sagan UFO controversy, as different terminologies affect the perception of research.

Researchers, particularly those affiliated with governmental or academic institutions, often opt for ‘UAP’ to protect their professional reputations. They use it to signal a more data-driven, agnostic approach, free from preconceived notions of extraterrestrial involvement.

“BANAL” OR ALIEN? Inside the Bitter Feud Splitting UFO Hunters in Two!

The comparison between a case like the authors “Mufon UFO case #111680” and a frame from the Pentagon’s “Gimbal UAP” video can illustrate this division:

A MUFON (Mutual UFO Network) case, typically investigated by citizen researchers often aligned with the “fringe” category (though MUFON itself has varying methodologies), might present evidence and interpretations that lean towards or explicitly suggest an extraordinary (extraterrestrial) origin.

A government source released the “Gimbal” video, and serious UAP researchers—including military and intelligence analysts—analyzed it. They discussed its flight characteristics, sensor data, and possible but elusive mundane explanations. Although they acknowledge the video’s anomalous nature, they focus their rigorous approach on ruling out known technologies or natural phenomena.

In contrast, the “fringe” perspective may treat the footage as evidence supporting an extraterrestrial hypothesis. But this is due to careful consideration.

Unusual Flight Characteristics in Navy’s 2015 Gimbal UAP Sighting
A study by Yannick Peings and Marik von Rennenkampff analyzes the Gimbal UAP video.

“FRINGE” RESEARCHERS FIGHT BACK

In essence, Carl Sagan’s legacy in UFO studies is complex. His insistence on scientific rigor undoubtedly elevated the quality of investigation in certain quarters. It helped to filter out less credible claims. However, it also contributed to a climate where exploring the more speculative, yet potentially profound, extraterrestrial aspects of the phenomenon became scientifically and academically challenging. As a result, these inquiries were pushed to the margins. This is a key part of what makes the Carl Sagan UFO controversy so enduring.

In essence, Carl Sagan’s legacy in UFO studies is complex. His insistence on scientific rigor undoubtedly elevated the quality of investigation in certain quarters. It helped to filter out less credible claims. However, it also contributed to a climate where exploring the more speculative, yet potentially profound, extraterrestrial aspects of the phenomenon became scientifically and academically challenging. Consequently, such inquiries were pushed to the margins.

PHOTO PROOF? 1947 UFO vs. Pentagon’s “Gimbal” UAP

Similarities. Left: 1947 – first modern UFO sighting, Kenneth Arnold
Right: 2015 – Pentagon Gimbal UAP. © ContactProject.org 25. May 2025

SAGAN’S PARADOX: Did His “Science First” Rule KILL the Search for Alien Life?

Was Sagan a hero of reason—or did his skepticism accidentally suppress the truth? The ongoing debate and the terminological distinctions highlight this enduring tension between cautious, mainstream scientific inquiry and the persistent, more speculative allure of the unknown inherent in the UFO/UAP enigma. Discussions continue over his role and influence in shaping public perception and scientific investigation of unexplained aerial phenomena. The Carl Sagan UFO controversy exemplifies this tension.