In a brief commentary, Victor Tangermann highlights concerns from scientists about the chaos that could ensue if we discover an alien signal. The general sentiment is that humans are "tragically unprepared for contact." Perhaps it's the scientists who need to reflect, as this sounds reminiscent of a psychological concept known as ‘projection.’ It seems they may be more unsettled by the prospect of losing their authoritative roles than by the actual contact with extraterrestrial life.

Scientists predict public panic in response to such a discovery, but shouldn't we consider whether scientists themselves are equally human and susceptible to panic? They often assert that "everyone lies," which raises the question of whether this includes themselves.

For decades, scientists have dismissed the existence of extraterrestrials, so if any were to suddenly claim they've detected a signal, they would likely face skepticism—especially from their peers, who might demand concrete evidence like a photograph or a landing at the White House. The academic community has been critical of UFOs for over 75 years; this skepticism has consequences.

Social scientists, on the other hand, may find their expertise invaluable in a post-contact scenario, as understanding the sociology and psychology of aliens will be crucial. While technological understanding is important, the manner in which such technologies are utilized will be of even greater significance.

Scientists at the newly established SETI Post-Detection Hub at the University of St Andrews in Scotland face the challenging task of determining the necessary steps should we ever establish contact with an intelligent alien civilization.

What kind of scientists are engaged in this work? Are they engineers or physicists? The reality is that navigating post-alien contact is more aligned with social science—an area often criticized for its perceived lack of rigor compared to physics. As a community mental health counselor, I believe I could effectively contribute to this discussion, and I wouldn't mind doing so in Scotland!

Contrary to the belief that our world is solely a mathematical problem, humans are conscious agents. If aliens were to send us a signal, it suggests their consciousness is on par with ours—neither superior nor inferior, but just right.

Expectations of panic among humans may be overstated. Reactions will likely vary according to individual backgrounds; religious individuals may interpret contact in spiritual terms, while middle schoolers might adapt better than college students.

Stephen Hawking once cautioned against reaching out to aliens, labeling them as potentially malevolent. But does his expertise in black holes validate this assertion? What rationale supports this conclusion? If humans can exhibit malevolence, does that mean aliens must as well? If so, Hawking's social reasoning could be considered flawed. Most people are fundamentally good, notwithstanding the claims that everyone lies.

Aliens may not be so different from us. There is hope that extraterrestrial beings will share similarities with humanity, fostering a connection. However, the scientific community often insists that any resemblance to humans is purely speculative, dismissing anecdotal evidence of encounters.

Many who claim to have had alien experiences do not base their conclusions on conjecture; they report having interacted with humanoid beings directly.

How is it that we have degrees in astrobiology when we have yet to prove life exists beyond Earth? I believe life exists elsewhere, and it's reasonable to deduce that if life emerged naturally on Earth, it likely does elsewhere too. However, I'm not using concrete reasoning to arrive at this conclusion.

According to scientific principles, the ability to smelt metals or create paper products is not feasible in an aquatic environment. This leads to the exclusion of octopuses and dolphins as potential intelligent life forms capable of taking over the universe. Their aquatic lifestyle complicates their cognitive abilities, raising questions about their potential for advanced tool use, which is traditionally associated with opposable thumbs.

Interestingly, the discovery of intelligent species on Earth did not induce panic; instead, we have a fondness for these creatures. Despite our failure to protect their habitats, we have shown empathy, such as teaching Koko the gorilla sign language, without succumbing to panic.

Unless, of course, telepathy is involved. Could it be that octopuses, who some scientists believe might be alien in nature, are reaching out psychically to guide humans in building spaceships? This notion, while amusing, leads to a more serious discussion about the nature of potential extraterrestrial encounters.

While humanoids might be the primary shape of any extraterrestrial life, it’s conceivable that intelligent insect species could also develop tool-using capabilities. The concept that nature has preferences for certain forms is scientifically valid; it’s been observed that unrelated species often evolve into crabs.

The question is, how did H.G. Wells predict a future dominated by crabs? Recent scientific discussions suggest that this evolution is indeed possible, although it's perplexing.

Perhaps we should turn to science fiction writers for insights into how humans might respond to alien contact. Positive portrayals of human-alien interactions, such as in Star Trek, are relatively rare. In contrast, narratives like Star Wars often depict a more hierarchical relationship between humans and aliens.

If aliens were to arrive, they might justifiably fear human advancements in technology, as depicted in films like Avatar, where nature-loving aliens confront humanity’s destructive tendencies.

I firmly believe we should prioritize environmental restoration, such as planting an abundance of fruit and seed-bearing trees, rather than fearing alien encounters.

In various narratives, humans engage with aliens and form connections, while government and military responses tend to lean towards fear and control—an instinctive reaction to the unknown.

Why do scientists consistently dictate our reactions to potential alien contact? Are they trying to incite panic? Retired Navy Commander David Fravor claimed to have encountered a UFO, yet there was no public outcry during the events of 2017 and 2018.

Despite the apparent lack of public demand for transparency regarding UFO evidence, there is speculation about whether Congress members were privy to undisclosed information. Did their behavior change after such meetings? Did they start to exhibit signs of stress or withdrawal?

No evidence suggests that Congress panicked, which raises questions about their humanity. Are they mere experts in deception, as some scientists claim? Where do scientists fit into this dynamic?

The silence from the scientific community regarding UFOs suggests a collective denial or fear of the implications. What further stages of acceptance must scientists navigate before acknowledging the realities of potential alien existence?

The evidence that officials may be disregarding UFO phenomena hints at a deeper fear that the public would indeed panic if the truth came to light.

Alternatively, it’s possible that those in authority believe that the public is incapable of handling such knowledge responsibly. They may fear that citizens would abandon political games in favor of a more enlightened existence if they were to learn about advanced technologies that could transform our way of life.

Ultimately, it seems that scientists and politicians are the ones genuinely panicking, exhibiting signs of trauma through their inconsistent responses to the idea of alien life.

Nonetheless, if they are correct, humans may require an adjustment period. The U.S. government has confirmed the existence of UFOs—it's time to confront this reality head-on.

Are you feeling anxious yet?