Alien conspiracy theories are a tale as old as time. Usually, the stories are convoluted and confusing. But David Grusch, a former military intelligence officer and now a whistleblower, left little to interpretation. Grusch told US lawmakers that the federal government is covering up unidentified anomalous phenomena (known as UAP or UFOs). He also claimed executive agencies have withheld information about these objects for years. The Pentagon promptly dismissed the allegations. So… how do we interpret all of this?

UFOs have made headlines repeatedly in recent years. The US military has said it is investigating the small number of sightings for which there’s no obvious explanation. Military officials have said most cases have innocuous origins but there are some that remain unexplained, with individuals claiming the military knows more.

Now, the Congress has decided to hold a public hearing to further discuss the issue, inviting three speakers, including Grusch. He told lawmakers the US government carried out a “multi-decade” program that collected and tried to reverse-engineer crashed UFOs, claiming to have been denied access to the program despite several attempts.

Grusch, who worked in the Air Force and the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, said he faced a “very brutal” reprisal because of his claims and said he had knowledge of “people who have been harmed or injured” as part of efforts to hide UFO data. Last month, Grusch said the US had in storage intact and partially intact alien vehicles.

However, Sue Gough, a spokeswoman at the Pentagon, said the office hasn’t discovered “any verifiable information” to support claims that programs such as the ones described by Grusch have existed or currently exist. She also said the Pentagon is “committed to timely and thorough reporting to Congress,” responding to lawmakers.

Looking into UFOs

As well as Grusch, the lawmakers invited Ryan Graves, a former Navy pilot who has previously claimed to have encountered UFOs on missions, and David Fravor, who spotted an unidentified object during a flight in 2004. All three said reporting systems are inadequate to investigate encounters, which they described as not rare or isolated.

Graves said he and his squad have encountered unknown objects on many occasions, describing them as “dark grey or black cubes, inside of a clear sphere.” He said a pilot told him about an incident in which an object flew between two F-18s and came very close to the aircraft. There was no official acknowledgement of the incident, he added.

“If everyone could see the sensor and video data I witnessed, our national conversation would change,” Graves told the lawmakers. “I urge us to put aside stigma and address the security and safety issue this topic represents. If UAP are foreign drones, it is an urgent national security problem. If it is something else, it is an issue for science.”

Fravor also described his encounter with an object, recorded on video. He said he and another pilot saw an oval-shaped unidentified object hovering over water before it climbed 12,000 feet in the air, speed up and disappeared. “What we experienced was beyond the material science and the capabilities we had at the time,” Fravor added.

The hearing comes as lawmakers are demanding that federal agencies release more information about these mysterious incidents, with many claiming they could pose a national security threat. There’s an amendment to the annual defense spending bill currently being discussed, which would require agencies to release more information.

Republican congressman Glenn Grothman said the hearing was “illuminating” and that there will be next steps further down the line: “Obviously, I think several of us are going to look forward to getting some answers in a more confidential setting. I assume some legislation will come out of this,” Grothman said in the concluding remarks.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We don’t have that yet

As exciting as the hearing can be, it provided zero tangible evidence other than the testimony. If we’re truly talking about UFOs, interstellar rockets, these would be big structures sporting alien technology. The likes of which (you know), you’d recognize when you see; and you’d probably try to get photographic evidence.

The common story is that photographic evidence exists but it is kept secret. Sure, that’s not impossible — but it’s a great claim, and there’s no great evidence to go with it.

The other, more pressing counterargument is that if such a rocket were indeed to land on Earth, you’d expect at least one of the thousands of satellites we have around to get a glimpse of it. Some sign, some radio interference… something. There’s nothing of the sort.

What we do know is that in 1947, the US government provided a disingenuous response about the discovery of crash debris near Roswell, New Mexico. The government decided to lie to the population, and ever since, conspiracy theories have run amok. What’s perhaps concerning about the hearing is that some people in Congress seem to be equally inclined to conspiracy theories. Grothman’s response is an example.

Sure, there could be aliens in some US hangar somewhere. But we don’t have any proof to say that there actually are. Besides, why would they specifically visit (or crash) onto the US? UFO sightings are massively concentrated in the US (and in the UK), which seems to be linked to hubris more than an actual preference of aliens.

Carl Sagan famously once said “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” That axiom remains true today, particularly when addressing matters as profound as extraterrestrial existence and visitation. While it’s undoubtedly important to continue the search for life beyond our own planet, it’s equally vital to stay grounded in scientific facts and evidence. When it comes to unexplained phenomena like UAPs or UFOs, we should maintain an open but skeptical mind.