Harvard astrophysicist Avi Loeb is stepping straight into the federal UFO hot seat, tapped to chair a new U.S. scientific advisory council that will sift through recently declassified government files on unidentified anomalous phenomena, or UAPs. The UAP Science Advisory Council says it will bring peer-reviewed methods to those mysterious "orbs" and other odd sightings, focusing on hard data instead of online noise. The move puts a Boston-area researcher at the center of a sprawling effort that involves the Pentagon, the intelligence community and the White House.
In a June 13 Medium post, Loeb wrote that he had been asked by the White House, the Pentagon's All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the FBI to assemble the council. He laid out a roster of experts in fields that range from astrophysics and oceanography to AI and psychology, and argued that better sensors and AI tools are needed to separate commonplace explanations from genuinely puzzling cases. Loeb said the group should work with unclassified, shareable data and urged scientists to "keep our eyes on the orbs, not the audience."
Who Is on Loeb's Team and What They Will Do
Loeb has pulled together a mix of academics, technologists and skeptics, with early members including Tim Gallaudet, Garry Nolan and Michael Shermer. According to DefenseScoop, the council will review unclassified material, advise a higher-level UAP Governance Board and recommend upgrades to sensors and data collection. Members say the focus is on measurement, instrumentation and reproducible analysis, not on speculation or storytelling.
What the Council Asked For First
After its first meeting, the council requested more than 50 videos, images and documents from the Pentagon connected to unresolved UAP incidents. The goal is to assemble the kind of higher-quality dataset that Loeb has argued is essential. As Boston 25 News reports, Loeb framed the work as both a national security concern and a search for any evidence that could transform science. The request signals how the council plans to convert public releases into testable, peer-reviewable research rather than viral clips.
How It Fits Into Washington's UAP Machine
The advisory council reports to a newly created UAP Governance Board overseen by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which is coordinating interagency work on the topic. As Scientific American explains, the board brings together military, law-enforcement and intelligence officials to integrate investigations and to coordinate when and how information is declassified. Officials said the board met in mid-June and is supported by outside advisory groups, including Loeb's council.
Pushback and Scientific Skepticism
Not everyone in the scientific community is thrilled with the choice. Some researchers argue that Loeb's public style and willingness to promote speculative ideas have damaged his academic standing. As WBUR reports, critics worry that the council could unintentionally boost fringe theories, even as other scientists welcome the promise of stronger data. Loeb and his supporters counter that a transparent, data-driven process is precisely what is needed to separate signal from noise.
Local Roots With Big Implications
Loeb's Galileo Project at Harvard, which drew attention in 2023 for retrieving metallic spherules from the Pacific Ocean floor, helps explain why his name surfaced for the job and why the reaction has been so mixed. The work has drawn praise from disclosure advocates and skepticism from peers who argue that conventional explanations are often sufficient. The Associated Press notes that Loeb's blend of high-profile bets and mainstream credentials turns his new role into a test of whether the council can deliver defensible science in a politically charged arena.
Loeb has said the council will emphasize unclassified, shareable evidence, publish its findings when possible and recommend specific steps to strengthen U.S. sensing and analysis capabilities, according to Medium. For Boston-area researchers and federal officials, the early document requests and internal meetings suggest a shift from disclosure theater to a more structured scientific review. Whether that produces clear answers will depend on better sensors and sustained interagency cooperation, with more document requests and public briefings likely as the council turns public files into peer-reviewable studies.
