What a silly opinion piece about UFOs. Really, LA Times?
For the publisher: If your goal is to turn The Los Angeles Times into a tabloid, you’re doing it the right way by running an opinion piece saying Congress needs to “conduct this conversation” on UFOs.
There is not a single physical evidence that flying saucers and little green men have visited our planet, and renaming UFOs to PAN – unidentified aerial phenomena – does not change this reality. The best you can do is show a photograph of a plastic snowflake that has fallen on the image plane of a video camera.
The author of this opinion piece asserts that by creating this office, Congress legitimized the long ridiculed subject of the NAPs. No, he just degraded himself further in the public eye. I hope this “office” will also investigate the existence of leprechauns, as they may also “pose a challenge to the national security of the United States.”
Steven Morris, Torrance
For the publisher: Rumors have abounded for decades that the US government knows and is hiding the truth about UFOs.
A common belief is that information is withheld to prevent the public from panicking. And then, of course, there are the bodies of alien beings recovered from Area 51 stored in a secret freezer.
It is therefore a great disappointment to learn that the government is as helpless as we are. I was ready to panic.
William Goldman, Palos Verdes Estates
For the publisher: Calling the UAPs “home-grown” is a huge hoax. Unidentified aerial phenomena are just that – not identified.
Professionals who spend time seriously studying such things ditched the term “unidentified flying object” many years ago for a reason: there is no, and never has been, evidence. believable that something is flying.
There have been thousands of sightings of strange things in the air over the past 17 years. That everything but 143 remains unexplained in last June’s UAP report from the Pentagon really shows that there is little cause for concern.
One could invent all kinds of strange explanations for these remaining observations: cryptozoological (undiscovered air creatures? Flying spaghetti monsters?); mystical (wizards? witches?); spiritual (ghosts?); “Scientific” (quantum fluctuations? Space-time bubbles?); or meteorological (ball lightning?).
But until there is conclusive evidence one way or another, all of them (including that these things are some sort of “contraption”) are equally likely. Keep an open mind and stay calm.
Robert Lieberman, Redondo Beach