Summary
npr All Things Considered interview (Scott Detrow, May 13 2026) with astrophysicist adam-frank of the University of Rochester on the pursue Release 01 UAP files. Frank dismisses the May 8 release as “just more the same” — fuzzy blob videos, photos, and unverifiable personal testimony. He traces the modern UAP era to the 2017 New York Times revelation of aatip and notes that congressional hearings produced “extreme claims” about crashed spaceships and “nonhuman biologics,” yet the PURSUE documents fail to substantiate any of them. Frank criticizes the release as not very serious, noting at least one document appeared unrelated to UAP. He supports full document disclosure but demands scientific evidence — bodies, craft, or published study results — rather than stories.
Key Claims
- The PURSUE Release 01 materials contain nothing new: “fuzzy blob videos or photos and unverifiable personal testimony” (Frank)
- The release includes at least one document (a launch-failure report) that appears unrelated to UAP, suggesting a careless keyword-search compilation (Frank)
- Congressional hearing claims about recovered spaceships and nonhuman biologics remain unsubstantiated by any released material (Frank)
- If the government possesses alien craft or bodies, there must be “pages and pages” of scientific studies — the absence of such studies undermines the claims (Frank)
- “I just see a lot of terrible science happening” in the UAP space (Frank)
Notable Quotes
“Spaceships. That’s all I’m asking for. Just one actual stinking spaceship.” — Adam Frank
“Fuzzy blob videos or photos and unverifiable personal testimony.” — Frank characterizing PURSUE Release 01
“It’s like somebody just typed in space, you know, into the government database, and then just grabbed a bunch of stuff and threw it in there.” — Frank on the inclusion of an irrelevant launch-failure document
Context
Frank’s skepticism aligns with the broader expert reaction documented in src-sciam-pursue-skeptics-2026-05 (sean-kirkpatrick’s “playhouse politics theater company” critique, mick-west’s parallax analysis) and src-twz-pursue-shrug-2026-05 (“nothing groundbreaking”). His demand for scientific evidence over testimony echoes avi-loeb’s call for raw sensor data in src-loeb-wh-uap-videos-skeptic-2026-04.