Eggs on the Comet
My visit to a popular “alternate news” Web site just days after the dramatic November 2014 landing of the European Space Agency’s (ESA) comet probe on the surface of Comet 67P Churyumov-Gerasimenko gave me access to a three- part video in which a person unfamiliar with astronomy and space science expounded on three Comet 67P photographs released by the ESA. The commentator discussed the photos in voice-over (the gentleman did not put himself on screen), using a cursor to draw viewer attention to important areas on the comet’s surface. He led our eyes along horizontal “lines,” toward evidence of various things he described as “anomalous”: supposed laser excavations, various egg-shaped objects with shiny highlights, and a pair of what he called “Saturn objects” rising from the comet’s surface on “pedestals.” The commentator wondered who had done the excavations, and who left the objects.
Beyond the fact that the person had no scientific training (he hissed “Zzzst!” whenever he mentioned excavation), his use of language illustrated much of the presumption that characterizes the outer fringes of the UFO/extraterrestrial community, and diminishes the importance of credible sightings and other events. As the video poster moved his cursor across the photographs, I saw no lines in the comet’s surface—but because he used the word “lines,” the easily persuaded might see lines. He introduced the viewer to the shiny objects by describing them as “egg shaped,” but later simply called them “eggs,” which assumes that they are indeed egg shaped, and not simply a possible misreading of sun and shadow. The commentator is familiar with eggs, so when he saw objects that approximated that shape, the rock or ice fragments he had zeroed in on did not simply appear to be oval—they were eggs, or something akin to eggs.
Although the moderator did not articulate specific questions as to the objects’ origins, those questions were clear: Are these objects true, organic eggs? If not, did intelligent hands carefully machine them in an egg shape? Could the objects be sensors? Beacons? Who deposited them on the comet’s surface? (The last question is predicated on the assumption that there is a “who” in the first place.) Similarly, the “Saturn-shaped” forms (spherical-appearing objects bisected horizontally at midline by what resembles an apron or ring) soon became “the Saturn objects.” Their apparent shape reminded the commentator of the planet Saturn, and so they acquired special significance. Once again, inevitable questions, though unspoken, leapt to mind: Did the Saturn objects come from Saturn? Did beings from Saturn visit the comet on a flyby? Were the Saturn objects the work of intelligences that were cognizant of space and Saturn’s shape?
The commentator regarded the laser excavations as “clearly obvious” rather than as just unsubstantiated guesswork. “Clearly obvious” relieved the viewer of burdensome analysis or doubt. The ESA images of Comet 67P show a surface riddled with bright areas and sharp, contrasting shadows. According to the commentator, the images also reveal the scars of excavation because the excavation itself is “obvious.” The commentator was coy about who or what may have left artifacts on the comet and altered the body’s terrain. As suggested above, one inference was that this was the work of an unknown extraterrestrial intelligence. Another was that unknown human agencies had preceded the ESA lander to Comet 67P. In either case, the truth wasn’t likely to be shared with the public anytime soon.