Comment by thegrim33
2 days ago
If you actually read his post on the topic, he very clearly states:
"Our paper is largely a pedagogical exercise, with interesting realizations worthy of a record in the scientific literature. By far, the most likely outcome will be that 3I/ATLAS is a completely natural interstellar object, probably a comet, and we await the astronomical data to support this likely origin."
He's doing what scientists are supposed to be doing. He's proposing hypotheses that match the current data. Then science can continue gathering more data to try to disprove the various hypotheses that currently exist, to try to reduce it down to the one that fits best.
If you refuse to entertain hypotheses that match the data, even if they're unlikely to be the true hypothesis, you are not doing science.
It's the same pattern for the other times he's been in the headlines. He never says "X is aliens". He always clearly states that his various alien hypotheses are incredibly unlikely. You've gotten suckered into an incorrect view of reality by sensationalist headlines.
This is not what scientists are supposed to be doing. This is the academic version of click baiting or the version of the TV show where everything was made by ancient aliens.
It's fine to have a few fringe theories under the table and take a look from time to time, but before publishing them is important to get enough evidence. Otherwise it removes the credibility of science for important topics.
[Anyway, the important thing is not that a guy/gal with a white coat said it, it's understanding that the claim has enough support. You don't trust science, you analyze the evidence.]