Navy videos of potential UFOs should be addressed in 'scientific' way: Steve Ganyard

ABC News contributor Steve Ganyard and Lue Elizondo, former director of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, discuss an upcoming Pentagon report on "unidentified aerial phenomena."
4:29 | 05/23/21

Coming up in the next {{countdown}} {{countdownlbl}}

Coming up next:

{{nextVideo.title}}

{{nextVideo.description}}

Skip to this video now

Now Playing:

{{currentVideo.title}}

Comments
Related Extras
Related Videos
Video Transcript
Transcript for Navy videos of potential UFOs should be addressed in 'scientific' way: Steve Ganyard
Let's bring in our experts. We're joined by the former director of the advanced aerospace threat identification program at the department of defense, and colonel Steven ganyard. Let me begin with you. Your program studied the national security implications of aerial phenomenon. Based on what you know, do you believe these sightings are evidence of alien visitors? They're certainly evidence of something. We know that whatever it is in our skies is real. The question is, what is it? And of course, you can go down the rabbit hole or we can look at it from a foreign adversarial perspective. The bottom line is we simply don't know. What we know is that these -- whatever these aircraft are, are displaying next generation capabilities and what's concerning from a national security perspective, they can outperform anything that we have in our inventory. What do you say to those skeptics like Mick west who post mundane explanations like balloons and drones and even the blinking lights of a 737? I would say to remain skeptical, but keep in mind when we see video being released online, a lot of times there's eyewitness testimony coming in from the pilot who is by the way are trained observers who are actually witnessing much more than the five or ten seconds on video. There's also radar data. So when you have something like that, obviously you're having something that's not an effect of the camera. You're dealing with a real object, and let's not forget there's other footage as well that's taken at the same time from different angles. I think we have to be very careful coming up with a prosaic explanation. What's your take on these sightings? I think it's intriguing pfrankly, George. The Navy videos have some things we've never seen before. Usually you'll see a grainy picture, and a person that these people are easily spoofed, but in this case we have data from three parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. You have four pilots, two separate radars, and you had infrared data. All roughly correlated. Does that mean they were ufos? No. It doesn't. Does that mean there could be a scientific explanation? Sure, it does, but I think it raises compelling questions that ought to be dressed in a scientific and deliberate way. You're a former fighter pilot. Did you ever see anything you couldn't explain? Not anything that would be attributed to aliens here, but I think we need to think about this from a perspective of science and advancing science, George. There's some conspiratorial undertones to all of this that I don't think are useful. I think that anybody that's worked in the U.S. Government before knows that the U.S. Government is completely incapable of complex conspiracies or keeping sensational secrets. So, you know, Washington leaks like a sib, and if there were alien remains somewhere, it would have leaked by now. "Men in black" was not a documentary. That's fair, but is it fair to say the government knows a lot more than has been released so far, and should we expect some surprises in the report? Yeah, George. That's a great question. Whether or not we know more, I think what's fair to say is we have a lot more data. We have a lot more information, and what we need is a robust capability to analyze that data over time, and hopefully then we can start drawing some conclusions of what these are. I agree with the colonel. He's absolutely right. We have to have a fair-minded and purposeful, deliberate, scientific approach to this, and I think it needs to be a government approach. I don't think it needs to necessarily be a department of defense or intelligence community only type study. I think we need to include department of energy and FAA, and academic and scientific community. Steve, we have a few seconds left, but what are the big national security implications if indeed we do have indications these are alien visitors? Is there anything we can do about it? The U.S. Military has its hands full with China and Russia and North Korea and Iran, and if congress wants to add aliens to the threat list, then they have the ability to write the checks and the statutes to make that happen. We'll see how serious congress is after the report is released. Thank you very much for your insight.

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

{"duration":"4:29","description":"ABC News contributor Steve Ganyard and Lue Elizondo, former director of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, discuss an upcoming Pentagon report on \"unidentified aerial phenomena.\"","mediaType":"default","section":"ABCNews/ThisWeek","id":"77859243","title":"Navy videos of potential UFOs should be addressed in 'scientific' way: Steve Ganyard","url":"/ThisWeek/video/navy-videos-potential-ufos-addressed-scientific-steve-ganyard-77859243"}