Congressional testimony this week about reverse engineering from crashed UFOs and the recovery of non-human “biologics” sounds like science fiction.

And that’s the realm in which it will remain unless scientific and other hard evidence enters the picture, says Northeastern University assistant physics professor Jonathan Blazek.

He says he finds it “very frustrating” that former intelligence officer David Grusch “back(ed) away from specifics” in his July 26 testimony before a House Oversight subcommittee on national security.

“I think what I find most surprising is that lawmakers seem to be taking him so seriously at this point. I’m sure they know things that I don’t,” Blazek says.

Grusch, a U.S. Air Force veteran who previously worked at the National Reconnaissance Office, told members of Congress that the U.S. is operating a secret crash retrieval and reverse engineering program and that he “knows the exact location” of unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs) in the government’s possession.

He also said that remains of non-humans had been recovered and that he knew of people who have been harmed or injured in connection with the phenomena. 

As startling as his testimony was, Grusch did not offer firsthand accounts or corroborating evidence of his claims, saying repeatedly that “I can’t discuss that publicly.”

Where’s the evidence

“I don’t find Grusch very credible,” says Blazek, who read a summary report of the hearing.

Besides lacking specificity, Grusch has made “increasingly implausible claims,” including telling News Nation that allegedly retrieved crafts could come from other physical dimensions, Blazek says.

It may be that members of Congress “don’t want to be seen as suppressing anything, so it’s better to be transparent about the sorts of claims being made,” he says.

“Hopefully this is part of a process to get everything out into the open so that the community can proceed to look into the more credible and/or actually mysterious things.”

“I don’t think this particular hearing will make the public take the claims of ‘aliens’ more seriously,” says Blazek, whose primary focus is on understanding the universe using astronomical surveys that cover large areas of the sky.

He says he is looking forward to a report from an independent NASA panel of highly regarded scientists who are looking into the origins of UAPs, be they optical illusions or atmospheric or stranger phenomena.

The panel, which includes retired astronaut Scott Kelly, is scheduled to release a published report any day now. The publication date was originally set for the end of July.

What UFO enthusiasts have to say

Some civilians who investigate UFO reports also question Grusch’s testimony.

“The UFO ‘street’ has understood that material and bodies have been in U.S. custody since 1947,” says Bob Spearing, the director of international investigations for MUFON, the Mutual UFO Network.

“This is nothing new except this was allegedly told under oath. That’s telling,” Spearing says, adding that he is speaking as an individual and not for MUFON.

He questioned whether Grusch’s testimony is “a slow turn towards disclosure” or part of a campaign to mislead the public as well as foreign adversaries.

“Until they show the physical evidence, caution dictates it is a misinformation campaign. I think it is all orchestrated,” Spearing says.

Serious study of UFOs

Long the subject of official derision, UFO reports are increasingly being taken seriously, at least on paper.

The Department of Defense established the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office to identify UAPs that might pose a threat to national security in 2022—five years after a blockbuster New York Times story about a secretive DOD UFO program. 

The Times also showed the world a declassified video of Navy fighter pilots being outmaneuvered by an oval object that traveled at seemingly mind-boggling rates of speed.

Two of the pilots included in the Times coverage, retired Navy Commander David Fravor and former Navy fighter pilot Ryan Graves, also gave testimony during the July 26 House hearing and described their first-hand, in-flight encounters.

So far, however, the Pentagon has not officially acknowledged the existence of off-earth UAPs.

Sean M. Kirkpatrick, AARO’s first director, testified during the open portion of a Senate Committee on Armed Services in April that his office “has found no credible evidence thus far of extraterrestrial activity, off-world technology or objects that defy the known laws of physics.”

Grusch previously worked with AARO’s predecessor, the UAP Task Force.

Is more information on the way?

As wary as Grusch was about revealing details of his explosive claims—which he says came from interviewing dozens of witnesses—he said several times during the July 26 hearing that he would discuss issues further in a SCIF or sound-proof room for officials with appropriate security clearances.

In the meantime, Blazek is looking forward to hearing what scientists on NASA’s independent panel on UAPs have to report.

“There’s probably been a realization in the last decades that the culture around this has gotten sort of toxic, on both sides,” Blazek told Northeastern Global News following the NASA panel’s first public meeting May 31.

“Actual explanations for some of these events would be really interesting.”

Cynthia McCormick Hibbert is a Northeastern Global News reporter. Email her at c.hibbert@northeastern.edu or contact her on Twitter @HibbertCynthia.