Interview with Kal Korff - author of 'The Roswell UFO Crash: What They Don't Want You to Know'

Skeptical Inquirer

SI: You've just written a book that puts the final nail in the UFO aspect of the Roswell coffin. How do you feel about that?

KK: As a UFO researcher, I am sad that the verdict came out as it did, because, if nothing else, the book is an indictment against the truly sorry state that the UFO field is in. Unfortunately, ufology's blind acceptance of the Roswell case has now come back to haunt it, and I hope this book sends a very loud message to all concerned parties, like my previous one did. If the UFO field doesn't stop this sad game of uncritical acceptance of cases like Roswell, then the field is doomed to be a bastard science at best, and deservedly so.

On the other hand I am also glad that the truth has now been found and that we can move forward to investigating other cases.

SI: What do you think your pro-UFO peers will think of your book?

I suspect, for example, that my relationship with Stanton Friedman will suffer, as well as with others. But that's their problem, not mine. It is their fault that their faulty research has come back to haunt them. Now they have to deal with it. I'm just the messenger. When I study a UFO case, I am after the truth, whatever that truth might be, and I am not predisposed toward any point of view. Unfortunately, Roswell is not the Holy Grail the UFO promoters make it out to be.

SI: You've written two books now that have a decidedly skeptical bent, yet you claim to be "pro-UFO." Isn't this a contradiction?

KK: (Surprised) Not at all! I fully support decent, legitimate, scientific research into the UFO subject. While I believe that all UFO cases must be analyzed and considered on their own individual merits, I am for investigating the topic objectively and scientifically. I guess you could say that's a "pro-UFO" position, but I wouldn't necessarily call it that. Instead, I think, if anything, it's a scientific position and the right one to have.

SI: Do you think there's any scientifically credible hard evidence for the existence of UFOs or aliens 'visiting Earth today?

KK: Unfortunately as painful as this may sound to the UFO community, the answer is no, and here's why.

All UFO cases can be broken down into four fundamental categories, the first of which is a sighting, when a person sees a UFO. UFO photos and films are also included in this category since they, too, are supposed to depict what the witness or witnesses allegedly saw.

The second category includes the radar-visual cases, instances where a UFO is seen and tracked on radar.

The third category covers the landing-trace cases, incidents where a UFO allegedly hovers above or near the ground or lands and produces some sort of physical evidence to show that it has been there. Examples of such physical evidence are landing-gear impressions, radioactivity, so-called burnt rings, flattened grass, and so on.

The fourth and final category of UFO cases is the alien-being or abduction cases: instances in which the actual alien pilots are supposedly seen in or about their craft, or have forcibly taken onboard their ship one or more human beings. Usually, these people claim they are subjected to some sort of physical examination or interrogation (sometimes with a sexual component) and are then released.

Surely the existence of millions of reports worldwide proves something, doesn't it? Of course it does, but unlike a good deal of my colleagues, I don't profess to have the answer as to what it might prove. The reason for my cautious stand rests with the very nature of this so-called evidence. To be blunt, most of it is scientifically worthless.

Consider if you will the first category of UFO data: sightings. In truth, a sighting is nothing more than a story. You can't prove it actually happened. Unless glaring evidence of a hoax is detected, all you can do is accept the person's word that what he or she is telling you is the truth. After you've gotten this far and made this leap of faith (not science), you have another problem: How can you prove that the incident actually occurred precisely the way the witness describes? Practically and scientifically speaking, you cannot.

What about the second category of UFO reports: radar-visual cases? Once again we're left with the same problem in that you cannot prove that the object in question is an extraterrestrial spacecraft. It could be a secret military vehicle for all we know.

The landing-trace or landing-track cases offer theoretically the largest potential for scientific pay dirt. But while there are more than 4,500 such reports on record, a truly unexplainable physical trace or irrefutably extraterrestrial artifact has yet to be uncovered, even in the Roswell case.