“Wow”, scribbled Jerry Ehman, encircling the mysterious 72-second burst from the stars, a signal so sharp and unearthly that he could hardly believe his telescope had caught it.
In the summer of 1977, a lone radio telescope in Ohio detected a 72-second signal from deep space, a mysterious pulse from Sagittarius that could be of alien origin or a cosmic coincidence. Decades later, the world still debates whether it was a brush with extraterrestrial intelligence or just the most tantalising false alarm in the history of astronomy.
As someone who is chronically obsessed with the UFO – now UAP – phenomenon, I have devoured nearly everything ever made public on the subject, from declassified files and scientific papers to sensational documentaries, and from actual Project Blue Book documents and eye-witness records to the Reddit chatter on the recent UAP sightings. I have had my share of conspiracy theories and ‘mind-blown’ moments. But deep down, I also feel that in reality, the ‘Wow Signal’ could have been as close as we came to a meaningful ET contact.
But in 2025, if you are on social media, you are likely to disagree.
In one week alone, I’ve counted no fewer than 19 separate reports, some hinting, others flat-out declaring that Earth is on the brink of an alien attack, citing a supposed remark by a ‘Harvard scientist’, turning a scientific debate into prophecy.
The nonstop hype bothered me enough to write this piece. What struck me was not just the laziness of the headlines but the way they distorted the work of Avi Loeb, the Harvard astrophysicist who has become the most recognisable face of the UAP debate in recent years. Loeb is not a prophet of doom, nor is he calling for panic. He is, in fact, one of the few voices arguing for a scientific approach to phenomena that most of the scientific establishment has either ignored or ridiculed.
In his recent paper, Loeb and his collaborators looked at the path of an interstellar object called 3I/ATLAS. It behaved in unusual ways. Its orbit was retrograde. In simpler words, it’s moving against the direction of most objects in the solar system. And yet, somehow, it is almost perfectly aligned with the solar system’s plane, something statistically rare. It passed unusually close to planets like Venus and Jupiter, and, unlike a normal comet, showed little to no outgassing. Loeb argued these anomalies deserve attention. He suggested science should at least consider the remote possibility that the object is artificial and called for better observation systems to gather more data.
Forget Loeb, any impartial scientist would say the same, given the decades of US-funded campaigns to ridicule anyone who so much as hinted at the possibility of the UAP phenomenon.
That’s it. He made no declarations of impending attack, no forecast of alien fleets preparing to descend on Earth. Loeb’s emphasis was on caution and curiosity: don’t assume, but don’t dismiss either. It was an academic exercise in risk assessment and open inquiry, one that echoes his broader Galileo Project, which seeks to collect hard data on UAPs rather than rely on speculation.
The media, however, took a cautious paper and turned it into clickbait prophecy. “Harvard scientist warns of alien threat”, now scream the headlines that are being eagerly recycled by tabloids and influencers. An invitation to a scientific and academic debate has become a rallying cry for hysteria.
There are, of course, far simpler explanations for 3I/ATLAS than alien technology.
Interstellar objects can end up in odd orbits simply because of gravitational nudges from stars and planets over millions of years, which can easily explain their unusual trajectories. The absence of the bright tail we expect from comets may not be mysterious either. Many are made of heavier, less volatile materials or coated in dust that traps gases, making them appear inert. What seems extraordinary could be perfectly natural.
And this is where perspective matters.
Our catalogue of interstellar visitors is unbelievably small, built on just a handful of observations in human history. In a universe of limitless possibilities, what looks anomalous to us may simply be behaviour we haven’t yet documented. Rather than evidence of alien engineering, 3I/ATLAS might just be a reminder of how little we have seen or know of the universe.
Now here’s the fun part, sadly, which might dampen the enthusiasm of my fellow UAP enthusiasts.
There are basic parameters for an object to qualify as an ‘Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon’. By definition, a UAP should show behaviour that current models and instruments can’t account for, including but not limited to sustained non-gravitational acceleration not explainable by outgassing, course changes that imply control, repeatable anomalies across multiple sensors, or detectable technosignatures.
So far, 3I/ATLAS hasn’t cleared that bar. Its motion is consistent with a simple ballistic path through the Sun’s gravity. Long-term gravitational nudges and chance alignments can explain the unusual orbit and close planetary flybys. And the absence of a bright tail may just mean the object is coated in dust or made of heavier, less-volatile ices that don’t release gas as easily.
In other words, the anomalies that sparked interest are still comfortably inside the envelope of natural possibilities. Like I said, perspective matters: with so few interstellar visitors observed, some will look extraordinary simply because we don’t yet know what ‘normal’ is.
However, if future data were to show thrust-like accelerations inconsistent with any plausible outgassing, narrowband emissions, or deliberate course corrections, the UAP label would be warranted. But on the evidence we currently have, the conservative, and more scientific, conclusion is that 3I/ATLAS is a natural interstellar body, and the right response is better observation, not instant promotion to alien tech.
Thus, the next time a headline screams about an alien invasion in November, remember: to fit the UAP category, objects must meet a specific criterion. As much as I share the excitement of fellow UAP enthusiasts about the prospect of ET contact, 3I/ATLAS simply doesn’t meet the criteria at the time of writing. And statistically speaking, it’s climate change, not interstellar aliens, that’s far more likely to end the world as we know it. Keep calm and carry on.
The writer is the founder and executive director of Media Matters for Democracy. He tweets/posts @asadbeyg
