Would We Really Panic?

For long decades the belief has been - supported by sociologists and psychologists - that the public reaction to news that, "Yes, Virginia, UFO's are real..." would be unadulterated panic, hysteria, and fear.

Childhood is filled with the potentially frightful, terrors and horrors imagined in the dark, and great big unexplained things that seem to tower over us. Yet, we are taken, step-by-step into an awareness of understanding the reality that surrounds us, adapting to its strangeness, overcoming fears and frights with great success.

In scanning old newspapers, documents, and statements of people who claimed to have seen extraordinary things in the skies they occasionally say they were frightened, awe-struck, dazzled, curious, and confused. I have yet to find any report of people who ran off in screams and terror. The blood may have pumped a little faster as their hearts galloped but not to the degree the newspapers and the military/government seemed to want them to experience.

In reading the 1963 work "The World of Flying Saucers" by Project Blue Book consultant Donald H. Menzel and co-author Lyle G. Boyd, the terms pop up so often they seem to jump off the page. These events caused "panic", made people "hysterical," and caused them to run around in a constant state of "anxiety" and " fear".  Then reading some of the military press releases and newspaper editorials the same terms keep popping out. 

Yes, the people viewing the event might be excited but that is not being hysterical. They might be frightened by a momentary unknown but that is not being in a panic.

Fortified by movie images of people running in terror from alien attacks - from War of the Worlds and The day the Earth Stood Still to modern films such as Independence Day, the stereotype of first contact derives from wartime and military models.  Anyone being attacked could expect to respond in terror, to panic, and to become hysterical - but no one in the sightings (with one or two exceptions) ever felt they were in danger of being attacked.

Recent articles discussing the 'soft disclosure' presumed by the release of some information from the military and releases by various international governments, have also used the terms of panic, hysteria and terror (see https://www.independent.com/2019/08/20/ufos-in-santa-barbara-%E2%80%95-do-you-believe/).

Anthropological arguments stemming from the meeting of unevenly matched civilizations may contain some truth but can we also learn from those experiences to prepare people for accepting the reality of a off world life form, for accepting that this should not challenge the basics of spiritual beliefs or challenge the role of religion in human life (since no religion has identified that such things are impossible in their cosmology) and finally, accepting that a strong peaceful and diplomatic relationship based on safeguarding human culture's best aspects be in place.

As the governments and military continue to operate 'in loco parentis', saving us from ourselves, firmly believing we have not the intelligence or ability to enlarge our understanding of the universe (or multi-verses) they merely compound problems and hinder the productive development and maturity of our human species.

The dramatic scene in A Few Good Men where the character of the commanding officer played by Jack Nicholson responds to the demand that the truth with: "You can't handle the truth!"

It has been over fifty years since the Summer of '47 saw so many unexplained burst into the skies of the Earth. I think we are old enough to handle the truth...