1992: The UFO Problem

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS AIR UNIVERSITY

MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE AL 36112,5001

October 16, 1992

HQ AU/IMD

50 LeMay Plaza South

Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6334

This is in response to your Freedom of Information Act request of September 14, 1992, for a copy of the “Thesis Submitted to the Air Command and Staff College of Air University …” entitled “The UFO Problem: Time for a Reassessment” by J. King, Major, USAF, dated June 1968.

The requested document is releasable and a copy is attached. there is no charge for the document.

Sincerely

/s/ Lucy P. McInnis

LUCY P. McINNIS 1 Atch

Chief, Records Management Division Copy of Thesis

Directorate of Information Management

Strength Through Knowledge

—————————————————————————

AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGE

THE UFO PROBLEM: TIME FOR A REASSESSMENT

by John R.King, FR 47113, 1930- Major, USAF

A Thesis Submitted to the Air and Staff College of Air University in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for Graduation

June 1968

Thesis directed by Dale E. Downing, Lieutenant Colonel, USAF

No. 0670-68

AIR UNIVERSITY

MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE, ALABAMA

—————————————————————————

ABSTRACT

The debate centered around whether or not UFOs are extraterrestrial space vehicles, or whether they exist at all, has raged for many years. During the course of the debate the United States Air Force, official govern- ment agency responsible for UFO report evaluation, has been subjected to severe criticism for the manner in

which it has handled this problem. This paper presents the positions of the critics, outlined the Air Force re- sponse and general approach to the subject and concludes that the Air Force has performed ineptly. Recommendations are made for the future conduct of UFO investigations.

—————————————————————————

PREFACE

Anyone attempting a discussion of the UFO problem must present his scientific/technological credentials to the reader. Failure to present some assurance that things scientific and technological are not totally be- yond the comprehension of the writer exposes the writer to possible dismissal as untrained and/or unreliable.

The writer of this paper presents the following: Occupation: Active duty Air Force officer with over fourteen years service.

Academic Experience: Scientific. Chemistry, Biology, Botany, mathematics. Baccalaureate degree in Geology, University of Cincinnati, 1953.

Member, Sigma Gamma Epsilon national geology honorary fraternity.

Civilian Experience: Soils technician, The H. C. Nutting Company, General Engineering Testing, Cin- cinnati, Ohio.

Air Force Experience: Technical officer. Communications- cs operation, maintenance. Radar site selection. Project Officer, Minuteman System program Office, in charge of develop- ment and aquisition of minuteman II Ground Electronics System (Launch Control and Sta- tus Monitoring System – digital data).

iii

—————————————————————————

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

The Psychology of the Times

The Antagonists and the Bewildered

Formalities of the Approach to the Subject

The Plan

II. THE POSITION SPECTRUM AND SALIENT CHARACTERISTIC .. 9

The Ultra Group (Hostile)

The Ultra Group (Benevolent)

The Normal Believers

The Converts

The Neutrals

The Non-Believers

III. THE AIR FORCE AND UFOS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Past Performance

The Current Situation

IV. THE IMPLICATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Political

Sociological

Military

V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . 91

FOOTNOTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

APPENDIX A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

APPENDIX B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

APPENDIX C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

APPENDIX D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

—————————————————————————

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The Psychology of the Times

We have not yet arrived at the point in our culture where it is in vogue to believe in flying saucers. On the contrary, if one suggests that these machines might exist, and that we need to look at the problem objective- ly, he frequently meets with a not so subtle change in the topic of conversation. Why is this so?

Within the last twenty years, Man has discovered that through his conscious efforts he can improve his material lot in marvelous ways. He no longer waits for accidental discoveries to take place. Rather, he active- ly searches out answers in the physical sciences and con- verts these discoveries into tangible and practical materi- al things for the good of humanity. The general advance- ment of what is known as technology is attributed to scientists, to the scientific method, and to the pragma- tism of the laboratory. The accomplishments in technolo- gy have been so impressive that scientists and things sci- entific have assumed an aura almost of infallibility.

—————————————————————————

We are living in a pragmatic society. However, one

detects a curious thing about all this objectivity. There

has been built up almost a cult of allegiance to, and un-

questioned confidence in, the scientist of today. the

high priests are the coldly objective scientists, who

“prove” truth and falsity in mathematical formulae and

in laboratory demonstration. Their ability to do this

in many areas has been quite convincing. This success

has in large measure been responsible for the commonly

heard statements, “It’s not scientific,” or, “Science

has proven that…etc.” Science is looked upon as the

authority. However, people forget that some of the mis-

conceptions of mankind have been shared with, or even

caused by, the scientists of the times. The concept of

the flat Earth and the concept of the Earth as the cen-

ter of the universe were concepts commonly held by the

scientists and people of the times. We today hold dif-

ferent views about the nature of the Earth. Hopefully

we are closer to the truth. It must be remembered that

every succeeding generation has modified the scientific

“truths” of past generations. No generation should be

so brash as to think that it has once and for all deter-

mined the ultimate in scientific truth.

—————————————————————————

Man continues to be egocentric and arrogant about

his status in the universe. he has a tendency to be-

come resentful and confused when he is confronted with

a problem which he feels may be beyond his capacity.

Scientists have developed what is known as the scienti-

fic method. This approach to a problem includes as one

of its precepts testing of hypotheses. This testing

places emphasis on demonstrations perceivable to the

five obvious senses. The scientific community until re-

cently has looked askance at any attempt to include ad-

ditional senses to the human inventory. Science has been

using the five senses as the intellectual base for support-

ing or refuting hypotheses. the scientific method has been

sacrosanct. To challenge its adequacy has been heretical.

Then along came things like psychic phenomena: clair-

voyance, clairaudience, precognition, apportation, psychic

surgery. In some scientific circles this must have been

traumatic. Psychic attributes are not included in the

five standard senses. Immediately some scientists set

about to prove that demonstrations of psychic powers were

either fraudulent or could be explained in terms of the

five senses. Others refused to discuss the topic at all.

Some of the open-minded scientists started to do what

—————————————————————————

True objectivity demands: investigate, on the assump-

tion that these powers may in fact exist, and may war-

rant a change in the established order of things. Out-

of-hand rejection based on ignorance appears to be more

human than scientific. These scientists who decided that

psychic phenomena deserved investigation have been sub-

jected to the scoffings and ridicule of the “stable”

scientific community to the extent that much investiga-

tion has had to be conducted clandestinely and anonymous-

ly to preserve scientific reputation. Today, investiga-

tions into psychic phenomena do not carry the paralyz-

ing stigma of the past, but the existence of psychic

senses is still not universally accepted.

The writer’s point is that objectivity may be sub-

ject to various definitions, depending on how closely

this objectivity conforms to the norms of the times.

It appears to be much easier to be objective about any

given “fact” or theory if the “fact” or theory fits neat-

ly into the body of information currently accepted as

valid. A “fact” or theory which fits may be taken almost

as prima facie proof of itself. On the other hand, if

some piece of information turns up which runs counter to

current thought, which is unscientific, or which shakes

the egocentricity of the scientific community or Man

himself, then that piece of information or theory meets

—————————————————————————

with particular non-objecvtivity. man finds it extreme-

ly difficult to accept or even to objectively investi-

gate anything which threatens to shatter his emotional

equanimity or his high regard for himself.

The Antagonists and the Bewildered

It is not at all surprising that the UFO debate has

frequently become charged with emotion. It contains

within it many of the characteristics of the Earth-as-

the-center-of-the-universe debate; it is probably viewed

by some in the scientific community as a threat to their

reputation of near-omniscience; it carries implications

of the highest import to Man’s status and future. The

idea of the existence of UFOs ( and the corollary that they

are operated by intelligent beings who are extraterrestrial)

is emotionally difficult for Man to contemplate. A large

section of society probably wishes that the problem would

go away. The writer feels that, at least subconsciously,

this wishful thinking has pervaded what is claimed to be

an objective investigation. Currently the debate is con-

centrated on what constitutes valid proof and evidence.

The non-believers insist on physical, “scientific” proof

and evidence. they are adamant. The believers maintain

that there is already ample evidence, which should be

—————————————————————————

accepted by the non-believers. But among the believers

are those who have taken up positions so far away from

the norm that they have earned nothing but the scorn and

ridicule of the non-believers. These believers have serv-

ed the non-believers well, because it is in the far out

literature that monsters, little green men and ray guns

appear, and the non-believers can point to this litera-

ture as they make their sweeping statements about the

mental condition of believers. And so the debate rages.

Formalities of the Approach to the Subject

The Problem: To investigate the bases for the op-

posing positions taken in the existence of extraterrestri-

al unidentified flying objects in order to determine the

validity of the predominantly negatively oriented position

of the U.S. AIr Force.

The Major Objective: To determine the advisability

of a modification in the Air Force’s public relations

approach to the subject of UFOs.

The Specific Objectives:

– To identify the various camps which are study-

ing the UFO problem and to characterize their attitudes

and consider their arguments.

—————————————————————————

– To weigh the divergent positions.

– To assess the political, sociological and

military implications contained in the UFO

debate.

– To analyze the advisability of the current

Air Force approach to the UFO problem in

view of the implications.

Research Limitations: Research will be limited to

source materials available in the Montgomery, Alabama,

area, with the possible exception of written or tele-

phonic contact with Air Force Project Blue Book person-

nel and special project personnel at the University of

Colorado.

Assumptions:

That: –

– The Air Force will not modify its approach

to the problem prior to the completion

of this paper.

– Physical evidence of the type acceptable

to the Air Force will not be re-

ceived prior to the completion of this paper.

– Cognizance over UFO matters will not be

removed from the Department of the Air Force.

—————————————————————————

The Plan

In succeeding chapters the author will review the

various schools of thought of the believers, will pre-

sent their respective stands, and will present the types

of evidence offered by each school. He will also present

the position of the non-believers and of the U.S. Air

Force. An analysis will be made of the opposing and non-

committal positions, with an attempt to present the salient

points of each position. In the closing chapters, some

of the debate will be explored, and certain conclusions

drawn and recommendations made for consideration by the

Air Force.

—————————————————————————

CHAPTER II

THE POSITION SPECTRUM AND

SALIENT CHARACTERISTICS

The Arena

In the UFO debate there are many shades of opinion,

from the ultra-liberal to the ultra-conservative, with

a graduation of opinion between these two extremes. As

is usual in a debate with high emotional content, and

on a subject with such profound implications, the most

vociferous are to be found at the extremes, with the

middle ground pleading for objectivity on the one hand

and open-mindedness on the other.

Diagrammatically, the position spectrum might be de-

picted as follows. The diagram indicates the names of

the principal spokesmen for the respective positions.

There is no absolute line of demarcation between the con-

tiguous positions of the believers. However, there are

in each group certain rather clearly identifiable central

traits which do not appear as major traits in the other

groups. These key characteristics have been used by the

author as the basis for the position spectrum.

——————————————————————————

The Position Spectrum

————–The Family of Believers————— Neutral Non-Beliver

Ultra group Ultra group Normal Converts

(Hostile) (benevolent) Believers

Barker,G. Adamsky,G. Aime’, M. (USAF) – – – USAF – – – – USAF

Edwards,F. Bethurum,T. Girvan,W. Hynek,J. Fuller,J. Airman mag.

Kent,M. Fry,G. Hall,R. Ruppelt,E. Jung,C. Menzel,D.

Steiger,R. Leslie,D. Keyhoe,D. Look mag. Project

Blue Book

Williamson,G. Lorenzen,C. Quintanilla Tacker,L.

Skully,F. Simon,B. Von Braun,W.

Vallee,J. Sagan, C.

Young,M. Time mag.

University—-University

of of

Colorado Colorado

Note: Dashes for USAF, Qunintanilla/Project Blue Book and University of

Colorado indicates that the position is either not clear or tends to

vacillate

<<< CUFON Note: original has dashed line between “Qunintanilla” and Project >>>

<<< Blue Book. Original diagram is turned 90 degrees. >>>

——————————————————————————

The Family of Believers

Although there are differences of opinion in some

areas, all groups in the family of believers have cer-

tain characteristics in common. Among these are:

– A belief in the existence of UFOs as extrater-

restrially originating space vehicles controlled by in-

telligent beings.

– Enthusiasm and active attempts through personal

contacts and published material to persuade the popu-

lace that UFOs do exist.

– A general contempt towards the investigative ef-

fort of the USAF and towards its official pronouncements

and findings. This contempt of the USAF effort is the

most important single unifying factor within the camp

of the believers and presents itself to the Air Force

As a common position.

The Ultra Group (Hostile). Although this group is

smaller than the group which believes that space visitors

are benevolent, the members of this group will neverthe-

less be heard. The literature of this group contains

claims of hostile actions by space beings. Hostility

in this context includes instances of death and injury

supposedly related to UFO appearances, abductions, the

appearance of monster-like beings, reconnaissance of

—————————————————————————

defense installations, harassment of aircraft and auto-

mobiles, power blackouts, imminent invasion of the world

and other happenings which purportedly take place because

of the basic hostility of the space beings towards Man. [1]

It is this group which publishes the sensational, alarmist

material so often seen at the news stands. The emphasis

is on the threat to mankind. It is claimed that the space

beings have mastered space travel and are using this know-

ledge to menace the Earth. the inference is that the space

beings are sub-humans who are morally and spiritually de-

generate.

Usually the books of this group are of the paperback

type and deal with only one or two alleged incidents of

hostile action on the part of space beings. the writing

is usually not of the highest caliber, and the depth of

thought and of analysis leaves much to be desired. In

addition, care is usually taken by the authors to conceal

the identity of the person or persons involved. [2] This

prevents any reader from pursuing independent investiga-

tion. While this prevents a reader from confirming the

story, it likewise protects the author from exposure. Be-

cause of the sensationalism, the concealment of the identi-

ty of the principals involved, the shallow treatment of the

subject and the general alarmist approach, the credibili-

ty and qualifications of the authors is subject to question.

—————————————————————————

One suspects commercial motives in the bulk of this type

of literature

Nevertheless, one does find a few works which are

serious attempts to warn of the malevolent nature of at

least some of the space beings. [3] In any serious investi-

gation of a problem all factors and approaches should be

considered. For this reason, claims of hostile actions

must be considered and not rejected out of hand.

What are hostile actions/ For the purpose of this

paper, hostile actions are defined as actions which re-

sult in the death or injury of human beings and actions

which disrupt the normal flow of human activity in a

manner antagonistic to human interests. There are in

the literature many examples of hostile actions on the

part of space beings: death of two South AMerican tech-

nologists, [4] death of Capt. Mantell (USAF), [5] disappear-

ance of U.S. aircraft, [6] injury to a scout master in

Florida, [7] abduction of a South American farmer, [8] abduc-

tion of Mr. and Mrs. Barney Hill, [9] the appearance of a

monster-like being in Virginia, [10] reconnaissance of de-

fense installations, [11] harassment of aircraft and auto-

mobiles, [12] power blackouts [13] and actions which purported-

ly indicate preparations for an invasion of the Earth. [14]

—————————————————————————

members of the group claiming hostility on the part

of space beings take the ominous approach. In addition

to citing examples of distasteful contact with space

beings, they also claim suppressive actions on the part

of mysterious representatives of space societies, and

even threatening visits by individuals who, in the opin-

ion of the visitee, represent such agencies as the CIA,

FBI and clandestine US government agencies. [15] It is

claimed that these visitors issue threats to UFO investi-

gators to terminate their investigations immediately.

It is claimed that the reason for such government interven-

tion is that the implications in the existence of extra-

terrestrial beings are so serious that the government

does not want their existence proved to the public. [16]

The subject of implications is treated in chapter IV of

this paper. Suffice it to say at this point that the

implications are serious enough that the rationale for

suppression is not altogether unreasonable.

Those who claim hostile intent share the burden of proof is

upon them. As with the other camps, the hostile group

has no convincing hardware-type evidence. The evidence

—————————————————————————

is circumstantial. Conclusions are drawn from the frame

of reference of the observer. For example, if an indi-

vidual suffers temporary paralysis caused by some action

on the part of a space being, he, as a human being , may

consider this to be undesirable and a hostile act. This

is a subjective conclusion drawn from an act which in it-

self contains no malevolent or benevolent connotation.

In this example, consider that paralysis may likewise be

a beneficial condition to prevent death or injury to the

observer by keeping him a safe distance from harm. The

same rationale can be used for the death, injury, abduc-

tion and reconnaissance incidents cited in the literature.

these acts could be considered benevolent or neutral in

intent as well as malevolent. For this reason, the author

has found that hostile type literature is more interesting

from the standpoint of description of the incident than

from the conclusions drawn. The account of the abduction

of Mr. and Mrs. Barney Hill is one of the most compelling

report in the literature and is highly recommended to in-

terested readers. [17] While such an abduction would admit-

tedly be very unnerving to the abducted, the incident

caused no harm, if one can discount the possible long term

psychological effect of the experience on the Hills.

—————————————————————————

In summary, the proponents of hostility tend towards

sensationalism, address only specific cases without re-

gard to the general context, are rather superficial in

their treatment, may conceal the identity od the prin-

cipals and draw conclusions concerning intent which do

not necessarily follow from the incidents. On the other

hand, some of the points made worthy of consideration,

especially those which relate to implications.

The Ultra Group (Benevolent). this group is charac-

terized by claims of periodic personal contact with saucer

beings, trips in flying saucers to other planets, tours

of exotic cities on other planets and discussions with

extraterrestrial beings concerning their way of life, at-

titudes, philosophies and reasons for contact with the

Earth. As a general rule, the extraterrestrial beings

described by this group are similar to Man in physical

characteristics, but of much higher order of intelli-

gence. The space beings are technologically, morally,

and spiritually for advanced and either directly or through

implication attempt to allow Man that he, too, can attain

this higher degree of development. The space beings are

benevolent and urge the spiritual approach to life. [18] They

have a fraternal attitude towards Man. Their visits to

Earth occur either as a part of programmed visits to

—————————————————————————

various parts of space for educational or recreational

purposes or specifically for the purpose of enlighten-

ing Man. In addition, there is some concern with Man’s

experimentation with nuclear energy, since atmospheric

detonations modify the lines of magnetic force around

the Earth sufficiently to cause an imbalance of the mag-

netic relationships within the solar system. [19] this dis-

turbs the space beings for at least four reasons: They

use magnetic forces for power for their space ships; [20]

they use magnetic lines of force for navigation; [21] they

do not want to see the planet Earth significantly altered,

since this would cause an imbalance within the solar sys-

tem; and they feel that Man has within himself the poten-

tial for spiritual development, which would suffer re-

gression in the event of world nuclear suicide. [22] So,

the interest of the space beings in humanity is one of

self interest in addition to the more compelling desire

to see Man advance spiritually. It is claimed that through-

out the history of Man the space beings have taken an

interest in the spiritual development of Man. [23] Propo-

nents of the benevolent approach cite many cases of con-

tact between Man and the space beings throughout history.

Classic examples of such contacts, supposedly not proper-

ly recognized, are the miracle at Fatima [24] and Ezekiel and

—————————————————————————

the wheel. [25] The cloud by day and fire by night which

guided Moses on his journey out of Egypt is also claimed

to have been a space ship. [26]

the general approach of the benevolent space beings

is to discuss problems of humanity in very broad terms.

Concepts of love for fellow man, cooperation, pursuit

of things spiritual, a downgrading of material wealth….

all these topics are discussed by the space beings with

select Earth beings. The message is that Man’s value

system is in error and that pursuit of his present way

of life is contrary to the universal plan nd prejudi-

cial to Man’s further spiritual enlightenment. Mastery

od space travel, telepathic communication, reception and

display of images three-dimensionally and in color as

exact reproductions of the original, electromagnetic

transmission or power….all these technologies and abi-

lities are presented as only natural consequences of high-

er spiritual development. [27] It is pointed out that Man

does not yet recognize that relationship which exists be-

tween the spiritual and the material and therefore strug-

gles along in his feeble efforts to advance his technolo-

gy without truly understanding what he is doing. The

point is made that Man will continue to ponder the “whys”

in his scientific investigations until he has reached the

—————————————————————————

point in his spiritual development where he will be able

to comprehend the interrelationship between the spiritual

and the material, and be able to use this understanding

to further his interests, which he will recognize as spiri-

tual.

Although the emphasis is on the spiritual shortcomings

of Man, as a matter of course during these discussions the

Earth contactee is treated to tours of space vehicles and

contacts with space beings. [28] the space people are usual-

ly described as being similar to Man in stature, facial

features, skeletal structure, etc., but of superior intel-

ligence and ethical development….soft spoken, kind,

gentile, polite and with a radiance which comes from super-

ior spiritual development.

The most convincing writers in this group present

comprehensive, lucid, logical, literate writings in the

highest ethical tradition. Students of philosophy,

world religions, occult sciences and the Bible will find

that the purported statements if the space beings are in

consonance with the major religious beliefs of Man. Ac-

cording to authors of this group, the space beings have

long ago recognized the universal truths scattered through-

out all Earth religions and have been able to synthesize

these truths into an ethic which they live in their daily

—————————————————————————

lives. This recognition of and adherence to the Truth

gives the space beings individual powers which we consider

supernatural, but which they claim derive as a natural

result of spiritual development.

Here again, the evidence presented by this group is

not physical. That is, they do not present pieces of

apace ships or other tangible items. They ask us to be-

lieve their accounts on face value because the contacts

did in fact occur as written. In some cases the author

presents affidavits warranting the truth of the story or

has signed statements by the witnesses. [29] Affidavits not-

withstanding, many in contemporary society will find the

spiritual approach to be too rarified to accept and will

continue to insist on physical evidence as the only accept-

able scientific proof.

The Normal Believers. The author has included the

word “normal” in identifying this group because its member-

ship is composed of individuals who would be considered

rational human beings, as opposed to cult-oriented, by

the uninitiated. The Normal Believers are, nevertheless,

believers. As such, they still are targets for the non-

believers, but are not subjected to the intensely sarcas-

tic criticism reserved for the Ultra Believers. The Normal

Believers are convinced that UFOs exist and urge a serious,

—————————————————————————

methodical approach to investigating UFO incidents.

In addition, they feel that some attempt should be made

to understand the extraterrestrials: to try to determine

the reasons for their Earth visits.

This group takes an approach acceptable to modern

society. That is, their approach is pragmatic, practi-

cal and in consonance with the scientific method. It is

this group which shows an objective approach to the prob-

lem while at the same time vigorously urging a serious

investigation into the UFO phenomenon.

The emphasis in this group is on establishing for the

populace that UFOs do exist. the interest of this group

is in feasibility, technology and the establishment of

motive or intent. Their general approach is documentation

of sightings, description of incidents, establishment of

witness credibility and sincere requests for a thorough

and methodical investigation.

The National Investigations Committee on Aerial Pheno-

mena (NICAP) is the single best representative organization

for this group. It consists of respected and “normal”

members of society who are specialists in fields such as

the physical sciences, the humanities, psychology, etc.

In addition to members and consultants in the Washington,

D.C. area, the location of the home office, NICAP has

—————————————————————————

qualified regional representatives who are on call to

respond to reports of sightings in their respective

geographical areas. Reports of sightings are investi-

gated promptly and documented much in the same format

as is recommended by the Air Force. [30] The NICAP report,

“The UFO Evidence,” is an excellent example of the object-

ive, thorough approach of NICAP. The report consists

of complete reports of sightings: diagrams of space ve-

hicles as sighted, statements on color, size, shape,

maneuvers, direction of movement, etc. Most impressive

are the paragraphs on witnesses. NICAP has collected

sightings from diverse individuals whose testimony can-

not be lightly dismissed. reports come from airline

pilots, technical people and a host of other men, women

and children, either as individual or group witnesses

to sightings. many sighting reports come from indivi-

duals who were skeptics prior to their personal involve-

ment in a sighting. NICAP is thoroughly convincing in

pointing out that UFO sightingg do not only come from

UFO cultists, but come from random sources and from people

of various educational levels and occupations. In one

section of the report there is a table showing compari-

sons of UFO shapes, size, color, maneuvers, etc. The

reader is immediately struck with the consistency in

—————————————————————————

characteristics which is apparent among re-

ported at different locations and at different periods

of time by different witnesses. However, these consis-

tencies are apparent not only within the NICAP report

but appear throughout the literature, whether the UFO

is supposedly benevolent, malevolent or neutral. (Ap-

pendix A to this paper describes those characteristics

of UFO sightings most commonly reported throughout the

literature.)

The Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO)

is another organization which uses a “rational” approach,

but organizational discipline appears not to be as re-

fined as NICAP’s. Hover, in addition to being rela-

tively objective, the APRO periodical publication enables

a reader to learn of recent sightings in the world short-

ly after they are reported to APRO. [31]

lest it be assumed that the Normal Believers are all

members of one or the other of the above cited organiza-

tions, the author offers the following examples of the

types of statements which come from independent techni-

cal people:

– Dr. Herman Oberth, noted German rocket expert:

These objects are conceived and directed by intel-

ligent beings of a very high order. They probably

do not originate in our solar system, perhaps not

even in our galaxy. [32]

—————————————————————————

– Dr. James E. MacDonald, professor of meteorology at

the University of Arizona and senior physicist at the

Institute of Atmospheric Physics in Tucson:

(UFOs) are probably extraterrestrial vehicles

engaged in something of the nature of a recon-

naissance operation. (This conclusion is) the

least unsatisfactory hypothesis for accounting

for the fascinating array of UFO phenomena that

are now on record. [33]

– from the noted psychoanalyst, Dr. Carl Jung, after

he tried to explain UFOs as a psychic manifestation:

Unfortunately, however, there are good reasons

why the UFOs cannot be disposed of in this simple

manner. It remains an established fact, supported

by numerous observation, that UFOs have not only

been seen visually but have also been picked up

on the radar screen and have left traces on the

photographic plate. It boils down to nothing less

than this: that either psychic projections throw

back a radar echo, or else the appearance of real

objects affords an opportunity for mythological

projections. [34]

– Dr. Leo Sprinkle, professor of psychology at the

University of Wyoming, after having seen “something in

the sky, round and metallic looking:”

“…from a personal viewpoint, I am pretty well

convinced that we are being surveyed.” [35]

Perhaps the key characteristic of the Normal Believers

is their belief that the whole issue of the existence of

UFOs is being suppressed by the Air Force. this allega-

tion is dealt with more fully in Chapter III. There are

various reasons given for this alleged suppression, but

the most popular are the impotence of NORAD against UFOs

—————————————————————————

and orders given to the Air Force to debunk UFOs to

prevent mass hysteria among the populace. [36] The Normal

Believers argue that to ignore a reality is to take an

ostrich-like approach to the problem, and furthermore,

the populace would be able to cope woth the realization

that UFOs exist without hysteria. It is claimed that

the Ir Force knows UFOs exist, protestations to the

contrary notwithstanding. SO, the Normal Believers

persist in their efforts to establish the existence of

UFOs. That a congressional hearing on UFOs took place

in 1966 largely because of the pressures of this group

attests to its influence. [37]

The Converts. Those who have been neutrals, skeptics

or outright non-believers but who have eventually sided

with the Believers have been placed in this category.

This group, although relatively small, contains indivi-

duals who speak persuasively, its members having been

at one time in the neutral or negative camp. In addi-

tion, the top level converts have been, or are present-

ly, officially connected with the U.S. Air Force inves-

tigation of UFOs.

The author places in this category Edward J. Ruppelt

(formerly Capt. Ruppelt, chief of Project Blue Book,

1951-1953), and Dr. J. Allen Hynek, (director of Dearborn

—————————————————————————

Observatory, director of the Lindheimer Astronomical

Research Center, Chairman of Department of Astronomy

at Northwestern University and consultant to the USAF on

the UFO problem since 1948.) ____ of the understandable

characteristics of this group is the tendency to issue

ambiguous or ambivalent public statements on the sub-

ject of UFOs which st__ _____ t the speaker to

maneuver in response to diverse external pressures.

Their official and public relationship to the Air Force

investigation most likely causes these investigators to

assume this relatively safe, non-commital, fence-sit-

ting position. However, the difference between the pub-

lic position and the private position can be rather easi-

ly detected by the serious researcher.

Let us look at a few of the statements of Captain

Ruppelt and Dr. Hynek as exemplifying this sometimes

subtle shift from non-belief or skepticism to belief.

Capt. Ruppelt (deceased) was the chief of the Air Force’s

Project Blue Book, the project charged with the resonsi-

bility for investigating UFO reports, from 1951 until 1953.

During the course of his tenure in this position, he and

his staff studied over 4500 reports of UFOs. All reports

were subjected to military intelligence analysis proce-

dures. they were analyzed through consultations with

—————————————————————————

astronomers, physicists, aerodynamic engineers and

psychologists in the course of the Air Force investiga-

tions. [38] After his release from the Air Force, Captain

Ruppelt wrote a now famous book about these investiga-

tions entitled “The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects.” [39]

The following statements by Capt. Ruppelt appear in

the Book.

I know the full story about flying saucers and

I know it has never before been told… [40]

Personally, I don’t believe that “It can’t be.”

I wouldn’t class myself as a “believer” exactly,

because I’ve seen too many UFO reports that first

appeared to be unexplainable fall to pieces when

they were thoroughly investigated. But every time

I begin to get skeptical I think of the other re-

ports, the many report made by experienced pilots

and radar operators, scientists, and other people

who knew what they are looking at. These reports

were thoroughly investigated and they are still

unknowns. Of these reports, the radar-visual

sightings are the most convincing. When a ground

radar picks up a UFO target and a ground obser-

ver sees a light where the radar target is loca-

ted, then a jet interceptor is scrambled at inter-

cept the UFO and the pilot also sees the light

and gets a radar lock on only to have the UFO

almost impudently outdistance him, there is no

simple answer. We have no aircraft on this earth

that can at will so handily outdistance our

latest jets. [41]

What constitutes proof? Does a UFO have to land

at the River Entrance to the Pentagon near the

Joint Chiefs of Staff offices? Or is it proof

when a ground radar station detects a UFO, sends

a jet to intercept it, the jet pilot sees it, and

locks on with his radar, only to have the UFO

streak away at a phenomenal speed? Is it proof

when a jet pilot fires at a UFO and sticks to his

story even under the threat of Court Marshal? Does

this constitute proof? [42]

—————————————————————————

Maybe the final proven answer will be that

all of the UFOs that have been reported are

merely misidentified known objects. Or may-

be the pilots, radar specialists, gene-

rals, industrialists, scientists, and the man

on the street who have told me, “I wouldn’t

have believed it either if I hadn’t seen it

myself,” knew what they were talking about.

maybe the Earth is being visited by inter-

planetary space ships. [43]

The reader asks himself, “What does Capt. Ruppelt,

the former chief of Project Blue Book, really think about

the reality or non-reality of the existence of UFOs”

This writer suggests that Ruppelt’s personal beliefs

are rather thinly disguised, if at all.

Dr. Hynek, the present consultant to the Air Force

in UFO matters, makes statements similar in approach

to Ruppelt’s. The following are examples. For the

congressional record, Dr. Hynek made the following

statement:

During this entire period of nearly twenty

years I have attempted to remain as open-

minded in this subject as circumstances per-

mitted, this despite the fact that the whole

subject seemed utterly ridiculous, and many

of us firmly believed that, like some fad or

craze, it would subside in a matter of months. [44]

In a well known magazine, Dr. Hynek made this statement:

In 1948, I was asked by the U.S. Air Force

to serve as a scientific consultant on the

increasing number of reports of strange

lights in the sky. I was then Director of

the Astronomical Observatory of Ohio State

University, and am now the Chairman of the

Astronomy Department at Northwestern. I had

—————————————————————————

scarcely heard of UFOs in 1948 and, like

every other scientist I knew, assumed

that they were nonsense. [45]

Hynek’s early skepticism and caution is further reveal-

ed in this statement:

It has come to my attention rather force-

ably through correspondence and personal

contact, that many of my colleagues in

various fields are more than just a little

interested in the “natives”, although they

might well disclaim this interest if chal-

lenged. I certainly would not have expres-

sed openly any such interest had I not been

asked to do so officially many years ago,

first under Project Sign and later under

Project Blue Book. [46]

The shift from skepticism to cautious urging that the

subject of UFOs be taken seriously can be seen in the

following statements:

Despite the seeming inanity of the subject,

I felt that I would be derelict in my scien-

tific responsibility to the Air Force if I

did not point out that the whole UFO pheno-

menon might have aspects to it worthy of

scientific attention. [47]

All of this increased my own concern and

sense of persona; responsibility,. and moti-

vated me to urge the initiation of a meaning-

ful scientific investigation of the UFO pheno-

menon be physical and social scientists. I

had guardedly raised this suggestion in the

past and at various official hearings, but

with little success. UFO was a term that

called forth buffoonery and caustic

banter precisely because scientists paid no

attention to the raw data – the reports them-

selves. [48]

—————————————————————————

Still, on the average, if several pilots

and/or poicemen concur on the main points

of the story, particularly if the duration

of their experience was long enough (a mat-

ter of minutes rather than seconds) to have

brought their judgement into play, it is

difficult to brush aside their seemingly

hardheaded testimony. And when one gets

reports from scientists, engineers and tech-

nicians whose credibility by all common

standards is high and whose moral caliber

seems to preclude a hoax, one can do no less

than hear them out, in all seriousness. [49]

As a scientist, I must be mindful of the

lessons of the past; all too often it has

happened that matters of great value to

science were overlooked because the new

phenomenon simply did not fit the accepted

scientific outlook of the time. [50]

I cannot dismiss the UFO phenomenon with a

shrug. I have begun to feel that there is

a tendency in 20th Century science to for-

get that there will be a 21st Century science,

and indeed a 30th Century science, from which

vantage points our knowledge of the universe

may appear quite different than it does to us.

We suffer, perhaps, from temporal provincial-

ism, a form of arrogance that has always ir-

ritated posterity. [51]

Referring to a methodical investigatiuon which he proposes,

Dr. Hynek says the following:

Admittedly, I will be surprised if an intensive,

year long study yields nothing. To the contrary,

I think thatr mankind may be in for the greatest

adventure since dawning human intelligence turned

outward to contemplate the universe. [52]

This writer feels that the foregoing statements need no

commentary. It is to be remembered that the statements

come from a man who has been officially connected with

the UFO problem since 1948 and has been privy to most,

if at all, of the data officially reported, in addition

—————————————————————————

to having been personally involved in many of the

investigations.

The Neutrals. This group consists of that segment

of the population which has no opinion in the UFO de-

bate, either through personal choice or because of pro-

fessional constraint. Within this large group are con-

tained the astronomers, biologists and other scientists

who speak of the possibility of intelligent life else-

whe5re in the universe, but who are non-committal about

the existence of UFOs. The U.S. Air Force is a member

of the neutral group, at least officially. the Air

Force position is a perplexing one. Al;though the Air

Force has attempted to show officaial neutrality and

objectivity in the UFO debate, it has in reality vacil-

lateed between belief and non-belief, all the while try-

ing to give the impression of neutrality. A reader of

official Air Force pronouncements is left with the prob-

lem of determining for himself what the position is, if

in fact there is a position, since he may read official

Air Force statements which are pro-UFO, neutral, and

anti-UFO. This problem will be discussed at length in

Chapter III of this paper.

Of interest are the statements made by various mem-

bers of the sceintific community relative to the possibi-

lity of the existence of life elsewhere in the universe.

—————————————————————————

It is acknowledged that it would not necessarily fol-

low that UFOs exist as vehicles controlled by some extra-

terrestrial intelligence even if it could be proven that

life does in fact exist elsewhere. However, it appears

that the UFO believers would derive a certain degree of

support and the positive UFO position would gain increased

credibility if it could be demonstrated that life exists

elsewhere, since it is assumed that “intelligence” pre-

sumes some type of living form.

Dr. Carl Sagan (Department of Astronomy, Harvard

University; Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory,

Cambridge, Massachusetts; and advisor to the armed

services on extraterrestrial life) has this to say:

It now seems quite clear that Earth is not the

only inhabited planet. there is evidence that

the bulk of the stars in the sky have planbetary

systems. recent research concerning the origin

of life on Earth suggests that the physical and

chemical processes leading to the origin of life

occur rapidly in the early history of the major-

ity of planets. The selective value of intelli-

gence and technical civilization is obvious, and

it seems likely that a large number of planets

within our Milky Way galaxy – – perhaps as many

as a million – – are inhabited by technical civi-

lizations in advance of our own. Interstellar

space flight is far beyond our present technical

capabilities, but there seems to be no fundamen-

tal physical objections to preclude, from our own van-

tage point, the possibility of its deveopment

by other civilizations. [53]

In 1962, in an address to the convention of the American

Rocket Society in Los Angeles, Dr. Carl Sagan said that mankind

—————————————————————————

must be preapared to face the possibility that the Earth

has already been visited by intelligent beings from

elsewhere in the universe, and that they have, or have

had, bases on the far side of the moon. [54]

Another astronomer, Dr. Jesse Greenstein, staff

member of Mount Wilson and Palomar observatories and

professor of astrophysics at the California Institute

of Technology says:

Fascinating problems of the future will be

concerned with life and intelligence on other

worlds beyond the realm of physical science.

We must try to understand things much more

difficult than the universe, such as future

discoveries of life and intelligence somewhere

out there. [55]

Certain competent lay members of society will also

be heard. One such individual is John G. Fuller, a

journalist recently turned free-lance UFO investigator,

and the author of “Incident at Exeter” [56] and “The Inter-

upted Journey.” [57] Both these works are examples of

objective reportage. Mr. Fuller has added significant-

ly to the UFO literature with his moderate approach.

In “Incident at Exeter” Mr. Fuller very carefully

documents the sighting at Exeter, New Hampshire, in

September 1965. The documentation is exhaustive, con-

taining numerous interviews with people who were wit-

nesses to the sighting, containing a detailed explanation

—————————————————————————

of the approach taken by Mr. Fuller, and containing a

detailed discussion of the many factors and situations

surrounding that particular sighting. Incidentally,

Mr. Fuller quotes Frank B. Salisbury, of the Department

of Botany and Plant Pathology of Colorado State Univer-

sity, as having said:

I must admit that any favorable mention of

the flying saucers by a scientist amounts

to extreme heresay and places the one making

the statement in danger of excommunication

by the scientific theocracy. Nevertheless,

in recent years I have investigated the story

of the unidentified flying object (UFO), and

I am no longer able to dismiss the idea light-

ly. [58]

Although Mr. Fuller does not specifically state that he

is convinced that UFOs of extraterrestrial origin exist,

his concluding statements in “Incident at Exeter” are com-

pelling in their appael for release by the government of

any information which it may be withholding and for a

scientific investigagtion an a major scale.

In “The Interrupted Journey”, Mr. Fuller once more

meticulously documents the experience of Mr. and Mrs.

Barney Hill in connection with their alleged abduction

by space beings. This account is anything but frivo-

lous, and does not contain the science fiction sensa-

tionalism which one might expect. It is a report of the

circumstances surrounding the abduction as revealed

—————————————————————————

independently by Mr. and Mrs. Hill to Dr. Benjamin

Simon, M.D., under rigidly controlled hypnosis. The

book is in large part made up of the transcript of

the tape recorded interviews between Dr, Simon and

Mr. and Mrs. Hill while the Hills were under hypnosis.

Appropriate professional commentary by Dr. Simon is

included. “The Interrupted Journey” raises many trouble-

some questions about the existence of UFOs, the motives

of the space beings (if the in fact exist), and what

the experience which the Hills apparently had portends

for the future of Man.

Of recent, we have seen the entry of the mass news

media into the UFO debate in a posititon of neutrality.

Numerous articles have appeared recently in “reputable”

newspapers and magazine in the form of editorials and

special features, and scientific journals have carried

a few articles on UFOs. There has been a significant

change in the approach that the mass circulation publi-

cations have taken. Whereas early articles were usual-

ly derisively written as human interest stories, replete

with appropriate references to green men, the more recent

articles seriously raise the question of the existence

of UFOs. [59] This change in attitude may be attributable

—————————————————————————

to the generally more permissive outlook which the pub-

lic has recently taken. the approach taken by mass media

publications seems to reflect quite accurately the atti-

tudes of the general populace at any particular point in

time.

Those in the neutral camp have made a most signi-

ficant contribution to the UFO debate: they have brought

the subject to the attention of the general public quth-

out taking sides. they have in effect assured the public

that the subject of UFOs can be discussed in public. It

appears that as long as UFO articles did not appear in

mass media in serious form the general public was reluc-

tant to broach the subject for fear of ridicule. Once

the newspapers and magazines began to address the subject

with some seriousness, they seemed to signal to the faint

hearted that it was now all right to discuss the subject.

Popular interest and discussion in a society responsive

to public opinion is usually a precursor of official

action.

One might say in summary that the Neutrals view the

UFO debate from a position which allows them interest

without involvement. It is a position which is politi-

cally equivoacl and more or less professionally safe.

—————————————————————————

The Non-Believers

The spectrum for Non-Believers is less definite

than for the Believers, and the author has chosen to

place all Non-Believers in a common category. There

have been, and continue to be, a few spokesmen for the

Non-Believer group, but the output of literature for

this group is quantitatively far below that of the

various believer groups. Generally, the Non-Believer

literature has as its main objective the debunking of

believers, the challenging of witnesses to UFO incidents,

and attempts to demonstrate “scientifically” that UFOs

do not exist. the usual approach is to cite examples

wherein a UFO sighting has been definitely identified

as some neutral or man-made phenomenon or object, and

then by analogy to extrapolate that particular solution

to unresolved cases.

Characteristically, the Non-Believer literature

contains shallow argument, irrelevancies, faulty anal-

ogy and a failure at address knotty cases of UFO sight-

ings without rebuttal in specific or convincing terms.

The author has personally encountered many cases

of non-belief in which the NonBeliever has had little

or no knowledge of the specifics of the debate and of

—————————————————————————

the evidence and has merely “felt” that UFOs do not

exist. In these instances, the position of non-belief

is probably taken out of a combination of ignorance

and the desire to be considered normal, conventional

and stable.

Within the anti-UFO group there are various shades

of non-belief: from the doubting to the absolutely in-

transigent. But regardless of the degree of non-belief,

the Non-Believers use “rationality” as a common approach.

That is, they explain sightings in terms of what Man

today considers acceptable as defined by the scientific

method. This group feels that all instances of UFO

sightings can be explained “rationally” as man-made ob-

jects or misinterpretations of natural phenomena, or

mental aberration, or hoax. Even in instances in which

they are at a loss to propose an explanation they are

confident that the explanation lies in one of the cate-

ories cited. they do not deny that many people have

seen what they consider to be UFOs; they say that these

observers are mistaken in their observations and that

what was truly seen was some “rationally” explainable

object or phenomenon. this group will not entertain

the idea that UFOs are extraterrestrial space vehicles.

—————————————————————————

The usual approach is to cite examples of positive

identification of something sighted as man-made or

natural and then to attempt to use that particular

example as a plausible explanation for those sightings

categorized as unknown.

The literature of the Non-Believers becomes at times

as caustic about the subject as that of the Believers.

One of the prime weapons of this rational, science-orient-

ed group ridicule. Dr. Hynek, scientist-tuened-con-

vert, properly points out that “ridicule is not a part

of the Scientific Method and the public should not be

taught that it is.” [60]

The attempts by the Non-Believers to explain UFOs

in terms of natural phenomena and mistaken identity is

exhaustive. Let us look at some examples of the approach]

taken as exemplified by the writings of Dr. Donald

Menzel, [61] Professor of Astrophysics at Harvard University,

and Lt. Col. Lawrence J. Tacker, USAF. [62] Both these

writers are placed by the author in the category of in-

transigent Non-Believers and, as such, may not truly

represent the more moderate Non-Believers. However

both Menzel and Tacker are quoted profusely in most of

the Non-Believer literature as authorities – Menzel re-

presenting science and Tacker representing the United

States Air Force.

—————————————————————————

Dr. Menzel, in his “Flying Saucers'” [63] sets the general

tone of the book in his first sentence: “Throughout the

ages, apparitions of one kind or another have plagued the

human race.” On page 6 of the same book,. menzel states

that “Flying saucers are real – as real as a rainbow,

and no more dangerous.” From that departure point he

goes on throughout the book to describe how various natur-

al phenomena in the sky behave. he implies in most cases

that UFOs can be accounted for in large measure by these

celectial phenomena. He describes the behavior and ap-

pearance of the setting sun, comets and meteors, solar

halos, mock suns, ice crystals, lenses of air, mirages,

refraction, aurora borealis and conditions causing radar

anomalies. These discussions are very interesting, but

the reader is left to his own resources to try to match

these descriptions of natural phenomena to specific UFO

sightings. In those few instances in which Menzel arrempts

to relate these phenomena to sightings, he does so very

briefly and almost as if he were anxious to move on to

his next topic.

As an example: beginning on page twelve of the cited

work, and continuing through page seventeen, Menzel re-

peats several reports made by pilots in connection with

sightings. The reports are by pilots of Eastern Airlines,

—————————————————————————

Mid-Continent Airlines, Lt. George F. Gorman (ANG) and

others. After describibg the various encounters, Menzel

comments only on the Gorman incident. After describibg

“fireball fighter” (foo fighter) cases experienced in

World War II, he extrapolates the observation to the

Gorman case with, “to my mind, the similarity of Gorman’s

object to the foo fighters seems entirely reasonable.” [64]

He gives no specifics and no analysis. He asks us to

accept this as an explanation because it “seems reason-

able to him. Once having established in this manner

that the explanation lies in foo fighters, Menzel then

incorporates this conclusions into the statement, “I

think Gorman was right when he stated that the foo

fighter seemed to be controlled by thought. However,

the thought that controlled it was his own.” [65] Gorman

did not say the object was a foo fighter. [66] Menzel

does not say how he arrived at the conclusion that the

object was controlled by Gorman’s thought; he just comes

to that conclusion. Lest the reader question the logic

of Menzel’s conclusions, he says, “We may not be able to

account for every detail; the impressions of the obser-

ver are hazy and leave many gaps.” [67]

Menzel goes on in the same vein in his attempt to

explain some of the sightings reported throughout history,

—————————————————————————

and dispose od Ezekiel’s wheel as a misinterpretation

of a complex solar halo. [68] In like manner, the classic

Lubbock lights case is explained: [69]

. . . a low, thin layer of haze or smoke re-

flected the lights of a distant house or some

other multiple source. The haze must have been

inconspicuous to the eye, because Tombaugh com-

ments on the unusual clarity of the sky. [70]

Capt. Ruppelt comments thus on the Lubbock lights case:

When four college professors, a geologist,a

chemist, a physicist and a petroleum engineer

report seeing the same UFOs on fourteen differ-

ent occasions, the event can be classified as,

at least, unusual. Add the fact that hundreds

of other people saw these UFOs and that they

were photographed, and the story gets even bet-

ter. Add a few more facts – that these UFOs were

picked up on radar and that a few people got a

close look at one of them, and the story begins

to convince even the most ardent skeptic. [71]

Apparently, Menzel was not convinced. In Menzel’s dis-

cussion of radar there is no explanation as to how radar

picks up light reflections.

The above examples illustrate the type of logic used

by Menzel. The approach is one typical of the Non-Believ-

er group. In Menzel’s case, one gets the feeling almost

of desperation. He has so long resisted the idea of UFOs

as space vehicles, has attacked so amny of the Believers,

becoming the champion of many of the Non-Believers, that

he has placed himself in the uncomfortable position of not

being able to gracefully extricate himself from his un-

yielding position. he, himself, best illustrates his

—————————————————————————

intransigence and closed mind with these words:

It would be absolutely impossible for an ob-

ject of such a shape to veer or maneuver as

reported. And there is no possible way that

such an object could be immune to the high

resistance of the Earth’s atmosphere at its

reported speeds of movement. [72]

It would appear that the use of the words “impossible”

and “no possible way” is presumtuous and not character-

istic of the inquisitiveness and open-mindedness desir-

able in a scientific investigator.

Another widely quoted Non-Believer is Lt. Col.

Lawrence J. Tacker, a former chief of Public Information,

Headquarters, USAF. He published a book in 1960 titled

“Flying Saucers and the U.S. Air Force.” [73] This book has

been a key publication in the UFO debate. It is used

by the Non-Believers for official support of their po-

sition. Tcaker takes generally the same approach as

Menzel in that he attempts to demonstrate that UFOs are

cases of mistaken identity of man-made or natural objects

and phenomena. Tacker devotes a large part of the book

to assuring the populace that the Air Force is not with-

holding UFO information, a charge constantly levied

against the Air Force by all Believer groups. In Tacker’s

book one encounters what might be called the demented-by-

reason-of-association technique, or the oblique ridicule

method. Also, one encounters false logic in the Melzelian

pattern.

—————————————————————————

Let us briefly look at some examples of Tacker’s

approach.

The foreword to the book is by General Thomas D. White,

Chief of Staff of the Air Force at the time. Gen. White

explains that the Air Force is responsible for the air

defense of the United States He goes on to say that

the Air Force is in charge of UFO investigations. The

last two sentences of the statement are subject to quest-

ion if they are based on Tacker’s arguments. These state-

ments are:

1. “. . . all unidentified flying object

sightings are investigated in meticulous

detail by Air Force personnel and quali-

fied scientific consultants.”

2. “So far, not a single bit of material

evidence of the existence of spaceships

has been found.”

In his book, Tacker uses an approach which seems to contra-

dict the first statement about meticulous Air Force investi-

gation. The second statement should have added to it the

words “as far as the Air Force is concerned.” Another

interesting thing about the second statement is that it

illustrates to some degree the ambivalence or equivoca-

tion of so many of the official pronouncements. It will

be noted that the statement does not say that spaceships

do not exist; it merely implies that they do not exist. What

this sentence does is lead the careless reader to a false

—————————————————————————

conclusion while at the same time preserving an escape

opportunity, semantically, if the existence of UFOs is

“proven” at some later date. In itself, it may appear

to be a sincere statement, but in the context of the

debate it is evasive.

In his opening chapter, Tacker gives an account of

a sighting near the Hawaiian Islands on 11 July 1959.

This was a sighting reported by five separate observers,

all airline pilots: one from Slick Airways, one from

Empress Airlines, one from United Airlines and two from

Pan American – all reporting the same object. Although

each report varies in some of the specifics, these com-

mon observations were made: very bright lights in a clear

sky, moving at high speed and making a sharp (90 degree)

turn in flight at high speed. Tacker then goes into

some general information about meteors and fireballs

and disposees of this sighting by saying that the opinion

of the Air Technical Intelligence Center was that the

object was a fireball, and that they felt that all ob-

sevvers had seen this same meteor. [74] It should be noted

here that Tacker uses the same device as Menzel, in that

he tries first to establish in the mind of the reader

what the object was and then, using his conclusion, he

incorporates that conclusion into a subsequent statement.

—————————————————————————

At the end of this particular narrative, Tacker makes

a footnote comment that he used poetic license in report-

ing this incident, for dramatic effect, and also, that

this narrative “proves” the “fact” that even highly

trained observers can be mystified by what they have

seen. [75]

After dealing with several other sightings, Tacker

closes his third chapter with, “And so it goes. Sight-

ings come in from all over the world from various types

of individuals, with the great majority of sightings

logically explained after objective investigation.

Certainly the experience gained over the last 13 years

points up to the fact that flying saucers are not space

craft from other worlds but, rather, represent con

ventional objects or aerial phenomena seen under con-

fusing conditions.”

Another interesting statement by Tacker appears on

page 47 of his book:

The Air Force emphasizes the belief that if

more immediate detailed objective observation-

al data could have been obtained on the unex-

plained flying saucer sightings in its files,

these too would have been satisfactorily ex-

plained as conventional objects or some form

of aerial phenomena.

Another example of Tacker’s logic is illustrated in

a letter, dated 15 November 1960, which he sent to

—————————————————————————

Coral Lorenzen, of the Aerial Phenomena Research Organi-

zation (APRO), and which deals with the famous Trinidade

Island sighting. [76] In his letter Tacker quotes a state-

ment by the Brazilian Navy Ministry, which reads in part,

. . . . This Ministry has no motive to im-

pede the release of photographs of the re-

ferred to object taken by Mr. Almiro Barauna,

who was at the Trinidade Island at the invitation

of the Navy, and in the presence of a large

number of the crew of the ALMIRANTE SALDANHA from

whose deck the photographs were taken. Clear-

ly, this Ministry will not be able to make any

pronouncement concerning the object seen be-

cause the photographs do not constitute suf-

ficient proof for such purpose.

Tacker then says,

This official statement of the Brazilian Navy

Ministry clearly indicates the fact that the

photographs were of no value in proving or

disproving the existence of flying saucers

as space ships. I trust this clarifies any

misunderstanding you may have had concerning

this sighting and the Air Force Conclusion

that it was a hoax.

Let us consider these statements. The Brazilian Navy

Ministry refers to an “object.” They say that

the photographs were taken in the presence of “a large

number of the crew.” They go on to say that the photo-

graphs “do not constitute sufficient proof” to allow

them to rule on what the object was. Tacker’s logic

leads him on to say that “clearly” the photographs

were of no value in proving or disproving the existence

of flying saucers as space ships. The Brazillian Navy

—————————————————————————

Ministry did not say this. They said thta the photo-

graphs did not constitute sufficient proof to enable

them to make a pronouncement. In addition, Tacker

qualifies his statement about the existence of fly-

ing saucers by adding. “as space ships.” So, he does

not say that Mr. Barauna and the crew didi not see a

flying saucer. The final twist of logic comes in the

last sentence when Tacker says that the Air Force has

concluded that the whole thing was a hoax.

Mrs. Lorenzen discusses the processing and analysis of Mr.

Barauna’s film in Chapter XI of her book, “The Great

Flying Saucer Hoax.” [77] She says that the film was pro-

cessed immediately after the photos were taken, and that

the processing was witnesses by several of the officers

of the ship, and that the negatives were viewed by the

entire crew of the ship immediately after processing.

She says that the negatives were sent to Cruzeiro do Sul

Aerophotogrammetric Service, where they were analyzed.

The laboratory determined that they were genuine. If this

is true, then this causes one to wonder on what basis

the Air Force has declared this sighting a hoax.

These brief examples illustrate the approach taken

by Lt. Col. Tacker and Dr. Menzel. A was pointed out

earlier. Menzel and Tacker are not in the moderate Non-

Believer camp, but they have become champions of this

—————————————————————————

group and are widely quoted as the scientific and of-

ficial authority by the Non_believer group. Some of

the explanations for sightings presented by this group

are easy to accept within the framework of the scienti-

fic method. There is no question that a portion of the

sightings arew indeed misinterpretations or hoaxes. The

Non-Believers cite several cases of sightings which have

been definitely identified as misinterpretations, and

they substantiate these cases. Also, there have been

several cases in which individuals have admitted perpe-

trating a hoax. However, it does not follow that because

some cases can be demonstrated to be misinterpretations

or hoaxes that all sightings can be explained in these

terms. It is most difficult to reconcile many sightings

as reported by reputable and qualified observers with

the explanantions proposed by the Non-Believers.

This group has been severe in its debunking of

witnesses and has incurred the wrath and disgust of

many. The Non-Believers should remember that, while

the Believers must demonstrate that UFOs exist, the

Non-Believers must demonstrate that they do not. the

crux of the debate lies in the definition of acceptable

and valid evidence.

—————————————————————————

Summary

very generally, these are the participants in the

UFO debate, which goes on interminably. Unfortunately,

the Air Force is caught in the cross-fire as the Believ-

ers debate the intent of the space beings, the Non-Be-

lievers try to discount the whole subject, and the

Neutrals and Converts plead for level-headed investi-

gation. The Air Force response to, and involvement in,

the UFO debate will be discussed in the next chapter.

Some Observations

Of recent, there seems to be a general shift in

attitude, frequently quite subtle, on the question

of UFOs. Reputable scientists issue statements from

time to time which do not reflect as negative as ap-

proach as they have borne heretofore. There appears

to be among the populace less reluctance to consider

the possibility, at least, of the existence of UFOs.

The shift may be attributable, in part, to advancing

space technology, to more and more sightings by repu-

table individuals and groups, to more photographic

evidence and to a general feeling that there may be

something to the UFO debate if the Air Force has asked

the University of Colorado to study the problem.

—————————————————————————

CHAPTER III

THE AIR FORCE AND UFOs

It can be seen from the foregoing discussion that

there is diversity of opinion in the UFO debate. The

populace at large looks to the Air Force as the author-

ity and is apparently willing to accept official Air

Force explanations. The Air Force position on the exist-

ence of UFOs is as follows:

To date, the firm conclusions of project Blue

Book are:

1. No unidentified flyinf object re-

ported, investigated and evaluated by the Air

Force has ever given any indication of threat

to our national security.

2. There has been no evidence sub-

mitted to or discovered by the Air Force that

sightings categorized as UNIDENTIFIED repre-

sent technological developments or principles

beyond the rangee of present day scientific

knowledge.

3. There has been no evidence indi-

cating that sightings categorized as UNIDENTI-

FIED are extraterrestrial vehicles. [1]

The challenge to this Air Force position comes from

those who have studied the UFO problem in some detail

and includes individuals who have been associated with

the Air Force investigation.

—————————————————————————

Past Performance

From the very beginning of the current UFO debate,

which is defined as the way Mr. Arnold reported objects

which appeared to him like “flying saucers,” the Air

Force was off to a bad start. [2] Dr. Hynek at that time

suggested that Mr. Arnold’s “saucers” were some type of

known aircraft. Based on Kenneth Arnold’s sighting, and

the interest it generated across the nation, the Air

Force became officially involved with UFOs. [3]

The early years were devoted to investigation of

specific cases and to the development of an organiza-

tion to handle the problem. The pattern for official

Air Force pronouncements seems to have been established

in 1952 when a panel of consultants recommended that the

“Air Force take immediate steps to strip the unidenti-

fied flying objects of the special status and the aura

of mystery they had unfortunately acquired.” [4] The Air

Force has from that time very consistently followed this

advice. One could get the feeling that at no time has

the Air Force been really seriously interested in the UFO

problem. As Tacker states, “The Air Force’s interest,

or program, was born or, one might say, evolved from

necessity.” [5] In this case, necessity could be understood

to mean necessity to quell the public clamor which followed

—————————————————————————

Arnold’s sighting. So, one might say that the Air Force

was peressured by public opinion into doing something.

Dr. Hynek, the Air Force’s special consultant on

UFOs, says this about Air Force interest in UFOs in 1948:

. . . The Wright-Patterson group usually con-

sisted only of a captain, who headed the team,

one other officer, a sergeant, and myself as

occasional consultant. The fact that the com-

manding officer was a captain indicates the ex-

tent of the Air Force’s concern for this inves-

tigation. [6]

Since 1948 there has been little change in the staf-

fing of this management office. Today, a major heads the

office, he has a lieutenant, a staff sergeant and a secre-

tary to assist him. However, it must be recognized that

this is a central staff only. Major Quintanilla is assist-

ed in investigation and evaluation by various consultants

and by the Air Force officers located at Air Force bases.

The writer of this paper has serious reservations about the

competence of the officers delegated the duty of acting as

investigating officers at Air Force bases. Although it is

recognized that generalities may not be valid, this writer

was apalled at the ignorance of one such officer who was

interviewed by the writer. He had his equipment: camera,

compass, binoculars, etc., but knew little about what he

was supposed to investigate. He had not read any of the

UFO literature, did not know any of the background of the UFO

—————————————————————————

debate, except what had been briefed to him in grossly

general terms, and did not know of the existence of

NICAP, which he referred to as “nightcap” in his brief-

ing notes.

Even if one attributes exceptional competence to

the central Blue Book staff, the grade structure and

paucity of numbers could be interpreted by sensitive

individuals as an indication that the Air Force does

not take the UFO problem seriously and maintains the

Blue Book office to assuage the sensibilities of

the public.

Admittedly, the Air Force is in a difficult posi-

tion. They must try to maintain objectivity; they must

be relatively conservative and operate within the frame-

work of the scientific method as presently defined; they

must consider the effects of their pronouncements on the

American Public, bot the man-at-large and the scienti-

fic community; they must insure that their pronounce-

ments on the are in consonance with natioal policy….and they

must be able to reconcile these constraints with the truth.

In cases where the truth and the constraints are not

compatible, something must be sacrificed. It goes with-

out saying that any official pressure on the Air Force,

an agency of the government, can be quite effective. If

—————————————————————————

these pressures dictates that only partial truths be

told, then the Air Force has only three options:

tell that partial truth as best it can, refuse to

comply, or refuse to say anything. The Air Force,

as the official agency for UFO investigations, can-

not remain silent, and it is not realistic to think

that the Air Force is in a position to refuse the

“guidance” of higher authority. This leaves the last

option: tread the hazardous path of partial truth,

ambivalence, ambiguity and vagueness. This, of course,

may be the best path from a national standpoint, in

view of the implications, but organizations like NICAP

and APRO are not satisfied with this approach and con-

stantly remind the Air Force of their displeasure through

publications, letters to the Air Force and agitation

among various congressmen and senators.

A serious investigator of the UFO problem cannot

believe that the AIr Force is satisfied with its solu-

tions. This presumes that the investigations are carried

out with competence. One begins to appreciate the dilemma

of the Air Force when one sonsiders that Captain Ruppelt

spent two years as the chief of Project Blue Book but did

not publish his book until 1956, after leaving the Air

Force. The question could be asked, “Why was the infor-

mation contained in Ruppelt’s book not published as an

—————————————————————————

official Blue Book report while he was in charge of the

UFO investigation? Ruppelt speaks his mind in his book.

Why did he not say what he had to say while he was hold-

ing his official position? Was it because he was official-

ly constrained? Tacker has this to say in a rather obvious

reference to Ruppelt:

. . . It is conceivable that some person

or persons associated with the Air Force

program were personally convinced that

flying saucers might be real and could

be interplanetary spaceships.

If this statement is with reference to Ruppelt, it is

indeed astounding. Was it not Ruppelt’s job to make an

evaluation? If not, what was his function as chief?

Was Ruppelt the Air Force’s expert on UFOs? If not,

was he incompetent? If he was incompetent, why did the

Air Force accept his reports during his tenure as chief?

Does a change from active duty to civillian life

change a man’s basic competence? If Ruppelt held the

views which he espouses in his book during his tenure

as chief, why did he not make these views publically known?

Questions such as these are elementary. Unfortunately,

throughout this whole UFO debate the Air Force’s answers

to questions such as these have shown remarkable inept-

itude. In cases in which the Air Force has attempted to

answer such questions, ineptitude has only compounded the

—————————————————————————

problem, because the Believers immediately have taken

the Air Force to task. In an effort to clarify and

explain what it really meant, the Air Force has clari-

fied itself into even greater problems by trying to ex-

plain the logic on which the initial statement was based.

As an example of how the Air Force gets into a posi-

tion from which it has difficulty extricating itself,

the writer of this paper has selected at random just

one case from among the almost innumerable cases which

would just as well illustrate the point. This case also

illustrates the problem of credibility, the question of

the thoroughness of Air Force investigations, the prob-

lem of inconsistency, the problem of carelessness and the

problem of community relations. This particular case

has been widely commented on in the UFO literature and

has caused considerable consternation as to the Air Force

approach.

The sighting occurred on January 11, 1966, at

Wanaque, New Jersey. [8] The sighting was witnessed by

entire communities. At the Wanaque reservoir, over

which the UFO hovered for two hours, the police had to

set up traffic controls to handle the volume of pede-

strians and automobiles which converged on the reservoir.

Among the witnesses were the mayor of Wanaque, a city

—————————————————————————

councilman, various police officers and the general

public. The UFO hovered over the reservoir from

6:20 PM until 8:58 PM. It was observed with the naked

eye and through binoculars. It was described as a bright

disk between two and nine feet in diameter, silent, and

playing a bright light an the surface of the ice on the

reservoir. Its speed in flight was described as about

1000 MPH as it moved up and down the reservoir (6 miles).

The light was white, changed to green, and at times the

white light had a red fringe. The UFO came to within

twenty feet of the surface of the ice. Those are the

essential elements of the sighting.

This sighting was reported immediately to the near-

est Air force bases (Stewart AFB, N.Y. and McGuire AFB,

N.J.). Stewart Air Base reported no military aircraft

in the area. Later, McGuire Air Base said that the UFO

was a weather balloon which was launched from Kennedy

International Airport. A weather observer at Patterson,

N.J. then said that the UFO might be the planet Venus

or an aircraft. Then Stewart Air Base said that an Air

Force helicopter with a powerful beacon had been on a

mission in the area. McGuire then called the local police

and rescinded their balloon explanation. A Major Sherman

—————————————————————————

then called from Stewart Air Base and denied the earlire

Stewart explanation of the helicopter. he said that there

were no aircraft from Stewart in the area. This call took

place after several aircraft were seen over the reservior.

The next day, the Pentagon announced that the UFO was a

helicopter witha powerful beacon. Shortly thereafter,

Wright-Patterson made the announcement that the UFO could

be attributed to the planets Venus and Jupiter and an

Air Force Helicopter.

This narrative need little comment. If one tries

to reconcile the sighting as reported by many witnesses

at any of the explanations offered, there are sever-

al things left unexplained. The inconsistencies in the

official statements are obvious. Of interest is the

matter of the aircraft in the area. There are many cases

in the literature in which it is claimed that the Air

Force has denied dispatching aircraft to investigate,

even though these aircraft have been seen in the UFO

area. As for the object itself and the official explan-

ation, one would question a disc-shaped object able to

move up and down the reservoir silently at 1000 MPH as

a helicopter, a planet, or a weather balloon. How were

these explanations arrived at without an on-the-spot

official observer? If the Air Force did not know what

—————————————————————————

the object was, why did they try to explain it? Could

they not have said that they did not know but would

investigate? This is a case of poor judgement and

inept handling. The press was quite caustic in its

comments about the Air Force explanation. Even assum-

ing that the thousands of people had observed some natural

phenomenon, or aircraft, or were suffering from mass

hallucination, or that a hoax was being perpetrated, it

would appear that the Air Force handled the situation

poorly and not in the best interest of Air Force-com-

munity relations. With the way the Air Force handled

this sighting, would it not seem natural for the popu-

lation to wonder, at least, about the efficiency and

coordination of the Air Force?

In another case, several sightings of UFOs occurred

ove the state of Oklahoma during the period 31 July to

3 August 1965. The UFOs were tracked on radar by the

weather bureau in Wichita and were seen by a variety of

witnesses, including many at McConnell Air Force Base.

The Oklahoma Highway Patrol reported watching diamond-

shaped formations of UFOs for half an hour. details in

this case are unimportant, because regardless of the

specifics, the Air Force pronouncement on this incident

—————————————————————————

is inexcusable. The Air Force answer to these sightings

was that the observers had seen the stars Rigel, Capella

and Aldebran. There was only one problem: These stars

were on the opposite side of the Earth from Oklahoma

during the period of the sightings. Star locations

were confirmed by Walter Webb, Hayden Planetarium, Boston,

and Robbert Risser, Director, Oklahoma Planetarium, who

said of the Air Force explanation. “This is as far from

the truth as you can get.” [10] This case illusrates the

type of answer provided to the public by the Air Force

in many cases. This type of answer has become so com-

mon that the Believers have come to expect that the Air

Force will “solve” UFO cases in this manner. What this

does to Air Force credibility is obvious.

Another interesting point is that the Air Force

classifies UFOs in three general categories: Identi-

fied, Insufficient Data and Unidentified. [11] In the case

just mentioned, one wonders into which classification it

was placed. the whole matter of the Air Force classifi-

cation system, the basis on which the Air Force classifies

sightings, what constitutes adequate substantiation for

a classification of Identified and the validity of the

statistical approach as a method for determining the

existence or non-existence of UFOs have come under fire

—————————————————————————

from a variety of sources. A particularly pointed re-

mark comes from the “Yale Scientific Magazine”:

Based on unreliable and unscientific sur-

mises as data, the Air Force develops elabor-

ate statistical findings which seem impressive

to the uninitiated public, unschooled in the

fallacies of the statistical method. One must

conclude that the highly publicized periodic

Air Force pronouncements based upon unsound

statistics serve merely to misrepresent the

true character of UFO phenomena. [12] (See Appendix B)

The allegation that the Air Force is concealing the

truth about UFOs and knows more than it is telling the

public is a frequent one. In the forefront of the censor-

ship debate is Donald Kehoe (Major, USMC, Ret.),

Director, NICAP. His books, “The Flying Saucer Conspira-

cy” [13] and “Flying Saucers, Top Secret” [14] deal with what is

claimed to be Air Force censorship of UFO information.

One example from the latter book will illustrate the

problem. [15]

Kehoe had been invited to appear on a radio pro-

gram, Armstrong Circle Theater, to participate in a

panel discussion of the UFO problem. He had planned

to bring up Capt. Ruppelt’s claim that UFOs were real,

were interplanetary and that the Air Force knew this,

to the extent of publishing a report to this effect

in an official Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC)

—————————————————————————

report in 1948. [16] The individuaL charge of review-

ing the program prior to its airing told Kehoe that he

could not use that material because of time limitations

Kehoe suspected Air Force pressure on the radio station

and asked if this was the case. The answer he received

was that CBS did not want ot get into difficulty with the

Air Force. Kehoe cut the referenced discussion from his

script, but in the heat of the discussion during the actual

broadcast he declared that he would make an announcement

never befor made to the public, at which time his micro-

phone was cut off. There was a public clamor about this

in the press and in letters from individuals to the radio

station. In answer to an inquiry by a NICAP member,

Herbert A. Carlborg, CBS editor of Editing, made this

statement:

This program has been carefully cleared for

security reasons. therefore, it was the re-

sponsibility of this network to insure per-

formance that was in accordance with pre-

determined security standards. Any indica-

tion that there would be a deviation from

the script might lead to a statement that

neither this network nor the individuals on

the program were authorized to release… [17]

This case raises the question: Cleared for security

by whom? It is interesting to note that Tacker claims

that no such report existed, [18] even though Capt. Ruppelt

said that this information was contained in a Top Secret

—————————————————————————

ATIC report which he had read while hw was chief of

Project Blue Book. [19] Either Tacker or Ruppeli is in

error.

Direct and threatening official pressure on indivi-

duals who have been involved in UFO sightings is a re-

curring subject throughout the literature. A frequent

charge is that the individual is approached by men in

uniform or plain clothes and threatened with loss of

job if he talks about his sighting. Frank Edwards cites

one such incident in which it is claimed that an indus-

trial worker who had seen an UFO was interviewed by two

military men and asked to maintain silence on the subject.

When the worker appeared hesitant, he was supposedly told

by these military men that his employer had government

contracts and that they would not like to see the work-

er get into trouble with his employer. [20] This pattern

is a frequent one in the literature.

Although incidents such as those outlined above are

cited in the UFO literature as indicating duplicity,

inefficiency and confusion in the Air Force, the offi-

cial Air Force pronouncements themselves are so phrased

that they are subject to question. The very UFO credo

of the Air Force, as stated in Blue Book pronouncements,

is confusing and evasive.

—————————————————————————

Let us look at the three-part Blue Book position

statement. [21] This is Blue Book statement:

No identified flying object reported, investi-

gated and evaluated by the Air Force has ever

given any indication of threat to our national

security.

A reader of this statement might ask: Does this mean

that the Air Force has determined that UFOs do exist,

bu that the Air Force is trying to reassure the people

that they are not hostile? Is this the prime concern

of the Air Force. ..to determine the intent of UFOs?

Are they not interested in determining whether or not

UFOs exist, hostile or not? The above statement is

qualified by the words “by the Air Force.” In view of

the way the Air Force conducts UFO investiagtions, as

indicated by some of the examples cited earlier, the

above statement seems to be safe enough for the Air

Force, since the Air Force can control the outcome of

any investigation. That is, if the Air Force says that

a UFO sighting can be explained as a weather balloon,

then they may also say that the weather balloon had no

hostile intent.. The problem here is credibility. Also

one wonders why there is even the need to make a state-

ment about intent, since the Air Force has long maintain-

ed that UFOs do not exist. One might also ask why an

Air Force aircraft would shoot at a UFO if there was no

—————————————————————————

The second statement is:

There has been no evidence submitted to or

discovered by the Air Force that sightings

categorized as unidentified represent tech-

nological developments or principles beyond

the range of present day scientific knowledge.

The Blue Book definition of UNIDENTIFIED is:

A sighting is considered unidentified when a

report apparently contains all pertinent data

necessary to suggest a valid hypothesis con-

cerning the cause or explanation of the report

but the description of the object or its motion

cannot be correlated with any known object or

phenomenon. [23]

The Air Force statement admits that UNIDENTIFIED objects

cannot be correlated with any known object or phenomena.

The statement says that a report categorized as UNIDENTI-

FIED contains all pertinent data necessary to suggest a

valid hypothesis. It also says that the motion of the

object cannot be corelated with any known object or

phenomena. It seems strange, based on the above, that

the Air Force can then say that sightings categorized

as UNIDENTIFIED do not represent technological develop-

ments or principles beyond the range of present day scienti-

fic knowledge. It appaers that the Air Force is saying,

in effect, that even though the object cannot be corre-

lated to anything known, it nevertheless does not exhi-

bit any features that are unknown . . . a difficult

exercise in logic. Also, it is obvious that the Air Force

—————————————————————————

does not accept the numerous reports of ultra-high

speed right angle turns performed by UFOs …

or do they? In the official statement why is it

necessary to say “Technological developments or

principles . . .?” Would not “developments” suf-

fice? One could suggeat that use of the word

“principle” has been included to enable semantic

escape for the future. The reason for this suggestion

is that it is claimed by the Believers that UFGOs are

propelled by application of certain principles of magne-

tism. It is true that modern science is aware of the

existence of magnetism. However, to date, it appears

that Man has not been able to apply these principles

to propulsion as exhibited by the flight characteristics

of UFOs. therefore, to say that UNIDENTIFIED objects

do not exhibit any unknown principles could be partial

truth . . . it is just that we have not discovered how to

apply these principles.

The third statement is:

There has been no evidence indicating that

sightings categorized as UNIDENTIFIED are

extraterrestrail vehicles.

There can be no argument with this statement, since the

word “evidence” used in this Air Force statement is evi-

dence as defined by the Air Force. If the Air Force is

—————————————————————————

convinced that it has not received acceptable evidence,

then it is pointless to argue the validity of eye wit-

ness reports as circumstantial but adequate.

It can be seen that there are certain inscrutabili-

ties in the Air Force credo. From time to time, the Air

Force tries to clarify its position, all the while cling-

ing to its credo. An article appeared in the July 1967

issue of “Airman” magazine, official magazine of the

Air Force. [24] The magazine is published monthly by the

Internal Information Division, Directorate of Information,

Office of the Secretary of the Air Force. Al though there

is the usual official disclaimer, the editor of the maga-

zine, in a note preceeding the article on UFOs, states that

the author has done admirably in presenting an article

which tells the truth about UFOs and what the Air Force

knows about them. The article uses several of the ploys

encountered in the Non-Believer literature. it begins by

citing examples of UFO reports which were subsequently

definitely resolved as misidentification of common ob-

jects. The reader is then to extrapolate these cases to

the unknowns. hoaxes are emntioned. the planet Venus is

mentioned. The Air Force statistical listing is mentioned.

many of the arguments against UFOs are presented. . . argu-

ments which have become classic over the years. there is

—————————————————————————

nothing new is presented in the article. It is unfortun-

ate that this particular article will be read by so many,

from the pages of “Airman” magazine and from the special

“True” magazine reproduction of the article. [25] The author

of the article has attempted to review years of compli-

cated debate in five pages. The article is offered as

the “truth.” The author asks, “Are flying saucers fact

or fiction? What does the Air Force know about them?

Read on, and then form your own judgements.” Unfortun-

ately, amny reders will do just that. Some of the most

intensely debated aspects of the UFO problem are perfunct-

orily brushed aside. How this is done in the article

can be illustrated by the following statements in the

article. Note that the author does several things in

this statement: ridicules the rationality of Believers;

implies that the reader should not associate himself with

the Believers (This is the “demented by association”

ploy mentioned earlier); presents a faulty analogy;ex-

poses his own closed mind with reference to the possibi-

lity that science may progress beyond the Twentieth Cen-

tury; leaves the questions unanswered; tries to cause

the reader to come to an “obvious” conclusion which is

incorrect.

—————————————————————————

Why do not UFOs, which reportedly move at

supersonic speeds, produce sonic booms? An

earth aircraft, or any solid object, always

creates an audible “boom” when it exceeds

the speed of sound. Bullets produce a sonic

boom! Missiles cause a “boom” once they sur-

pass the speed of sound! However, not one

of the thousands of reports received by the

Air Force mentions any sonic boom associated

with the reported UFO sighting. How can UFOs

defy Earth’s gravity and perform erratic aerial

maneuvers and square turns at supersonic speeds?

The pilots of our aircraft and space vehicles

haven’t been able to ignore the laws of gravity

and motion!

the above statement illustrates the general tenor of

the article. It can be seen that when the author says,

“read on, and then form your own judgements” that he has

stacked the evidence in favor of the negative position.

No valid judgement can be made based on the article.

It is unfortunate that the writer of the article is

either not familliar with the UFO literature or has chosen

to ignore it. there are several works which deal with

the sonic boom, high speed and right angle turns. [26]

The author of the “Airman” magazine article might also find

it illuminating to check on the status of government-

sponsored anti-gravity research programs. [27]

The rather transparent attempt by the Air Force to

dissuade the public takes a shameless form in project

Blue Book material. As part of this material, the fol-

lowing items are included:

—————————————————————————

1. A suggested reading material list which con-

tains thirteen references. Of the thirteen references,

eight deal with astronomy; one with weather; one with

optics; one with the space program, written by Von Braun,

a Non-Believer; one written by Menzel, the classic in-

transigent Non-Believer; and one written by Jacques

Valle, who reviews the history of UFO sightings. of the

thirteen works cited, the book by Valle is the only one

which leaves room for questioning the Air Force’s nega-

tive approach. The references to astronomy, weather,

optics and the space program are not even relevant to the

UFO debate. WAs the Air Force afraid to include pro-UFO

literature? Valle is not pro-UFO; he is neutral. If a

reader were to read every reference in the suggested read-

ing list he would understand more about astronomy but

would hardly see why the Air Force’s position on UFOs is

being challenged.

2. An article entitled “Arriving from Mars by UFO?.

this article discusses the relative positions of Earth

and MArs with reference to favorable periods for the

launching of space vehicles from Mars to Earth. It goes

into several arethmetic discussions and concludes that:

When one goes back to examine the direction

from which the UFOs arrive, we find not a single

case for the UFO coming in from the proper direc-

tion to indicate that it had originated on Mars

or Venus.

—————————————————————————

Here we see an example of the refusal to consider that

UFO technology may not be hampered by the limitations

of our own embryo space program. The presumptuousness

of the conclusion is so gross as to be insulting to the

intellect.

3. An interview with Werner Von Braun, in which he

concludes by saying that he will not believe in UFOs un-

til he sees one.

4. A questionnaire that is to be completed by any-

one seeing a meteor or fireball and then mailed to the

American Meteor Society.

Such an irrelevant, one-sided, transparent approach

is demeaning to the United States Air Force.

The Current Situation

The results of a recent Gallup poll [28], would seem to

indicate that the Air Force is having limited success in

dissuading the public. According to the poll, there are

more than five million Americans who are certain that they

have seen flying saucers or other UFOs. A more signifi-

cant figure is the 46% of America adult who believe that

UFOs are real.

Such an indication of belief in UFOs is truly amazing

when one considers the exotic nature of the subject and

the Air Force’s attempts to dissuade the public. However,

—————————————————————————

the UFO problem has been with us for a long time, and

some of the sensationalism has worn off. The subject

of UFOs has become a more acceptable topic of conver-

sation. Mass media are addressing the problem openly.

The ridicule index is down. more and more reputable

scientists are making statements which are more permis-

sive and hint at the possibility that UFOs might exist.

Dr. Hynek has done much to reinforce the Believer posi-

tion and weaken the Non-Believer position by his subtle

shift away from the intransigent Non-Believers. Also,

the populace is aware that the Air Force has asked a

University of Colorado team to study the problem.

It appears that the citizenry is at least temporari-

ly satisfied that the problem is being looked into.

Both the critics and the Air Force appear to have de-

clared a truce while they await the results of the

Colorado investiagtion, due for public release in 1968.

The writer of this paper predicts a resumption of

the debate with renewed fury upon release of the Colorado

recommendation. The reason for this prediction is that

in the fall of 1968, the recommendation as to whether or

not the government should invest more money in UFO investi-

gation is csheduled to be made by the Colorado team. If

the Colorado team recommends that the investigation be

pursued, the Believers will feel vindicated and clamor

—————————————————————————

for information, and the Air Force will fell the brunt

of the assault and will be placed on the defensive. On

the other hand, if the Colorado tem recommends no further

investigation, this will incur the wrath of the Believers,

who will not be convinced. So, in either case, the de-

bate will continue on some form. It would appear to be

advisable for the Air Force to prepare contingency plans

for either eventuality.

Confidence is apparently running high in some circles

that UFOs are here to stay. In an article in “Air Progress,” [29]

Don Berliner states that civillian industry has been, and

continues to be, interested in capitalizizng on the techni-

cal aspects of UFO construction and propulsion and has been

carrying on research projects aimed at solving such things

as flight principles of a disc form and magnetic field

propulsion. At the end of his article he says,

Numerous large corporations, sensing the re-

search and development potential of UFO in-

vestigation, have quietly begun pilot projects

aimed at cashing in on an expanded government-

financed study which would almost certainly

follow any positive conclusion by the Univer-

sity of Colorado. An example is the instru-

ment loaded microbus now being prepared by a

large West Coast aerospace firm, which hopes

to get it to the site of a major wave of UFO

sightings and get precise trackings and high

quality photographs. Additionally, there are

billions of dollars waiting for the firm which

first solves the puzzles of the UFO propulsion

control and maneuverability.

—————————————————————————

This rather commercial approach to the UFO problem

would seem to ignore the Air Force assurance that UFOs

are natural phenomena, man-made objects, hallucinations,

or hoaxes.

Summary

It is really small wonder that the Air Force is

being challenged. Any private citizen, trying to under-

stand the UFO debate, and researching the problem from

materials available at a public library, will soon see

that the manner in which the Air Force has handled this

problem justifies the challenge. The Air Force has suf-

fered poor publicity, has given irrational answers to

the public, has insulted the intelligence of the citi-

zenry, has alienated many commerciial pilots and scientists,

has made careless mistakes, has become officious, has lost

credibility, has been inconsistent, has refused to modi-

fy its basically irrelevent statistical approach to the

problem and continues to insist that even the unknowns

are probably explainable in terms of the familiar Even

Dr. Menzel, the anti-UFO stalwart, has criticized at least

one of the Air Force “solutions”. Referring to the Air

Force determination that Gorman’s UFO was really lights

suspended from a balloon, Menzel says, “Of all possible

explanations, the idea of balls of light suspended from

—————————————————————————

balloons could account for the observations is complete-

ly at variance with the reports. i should rather accept

the alternative that the objects were interplanetary

saucers.” [30]

The frustration and anger felt by those who believe

that the Air Force is mishandling the UFO problem has

been succinctly, if emotionally, summed up by an author

famous for his acrimonius attacks on the Air Force:

Almost everybody else in the world agrees

that where there is much smoke there must

be some fire. But not the Air Force. To

them we all have soot on our sun glasses

and the moving disck we think we see are

really drops of sweat. Very simple fellows

in the Air Force. Too simple. [31]

—————————————————————————

CHAPTER IV

THE IMPLICATIONS

The Air Force has for many years had a special of-

fice staffed for the handling or the UFO problem. Many

specialized disciplines have been called upon to assist

in the analysis of UFO reports. Large civilian organi-

zations have been formed to investigate UFO reports.

There has been a congressional hearing on UFOs. Letters

on the subject of UFOs have been passed between the popu-

lace and the Air Force, the populace and members of con-

gress, and the Air Force and members of congress. Mass

media have sponsored programs and published special issues

on the UFO debate, Currently the UFO problem is being

studied by a team from the University or Colorado. Why

does the interest and concern of the people and the govern-

ment continue over the years at such a high level? The

key reason lies in the implications inherent in the UFO

debate.

For the next few pages the author will outline some

of the major political, sociological and military impli-

cations associated with the existence of UFOs. Unfortun-

ately, even if UFOs do not exist as extraterrestrial space

—————————————————————————

vehicles, the implications of the debate have already

been felt by the Air Force to the detriment of that ser-

vice. Irreparable damage has been suffered by the Air

Force in the minds of a large segment of the population

of this country because of the way that the Air Force

has handled the UFO problem up to this point, as pointed

out in Chapter III of this paper.

One finds throughout the UFO literature charges, ac-

cusations and allegations of censorship and suppression

aimed at the Air Force. Usually the critics end their

discussions with a plea for release of the information

which the Air Force is supposedly concealing, There is

usually some statement to the effect that no matter how

dire the implications, the sophisticated U.S. public,

accustomed to a daily existence in a rather dire world,

will be able to cope with the knowledge that other intel-

ligent beings share the universe with us and have been

visiting the Earth. One wonders whether or not the public

has really thought out some of the implications. If the

Air Force is under orders not to reveal what it knows

about UFOs, maybe the implications give us a clue as to why

this is so.

Political Implications

If UFOs are hostile, some of the implications might be:

Demand for protection. Most likely, one of the

first actions on the part of the populace after it has

—————————————————————————

had time to assess the situation would be to demand

protection from hostile UFOs, The public would demand

to know of the political leaders what they had done or

are doing to protect the people of the nation. Under

the assumption that UFOs represent a technology far

superior to our own, the answer would most likely be

that programs are under consideration to study the prob-

lem, but no effective defense has yet been devised.

Such an announcement would be politically embarrassing,

since UFOs have been with us for many years. In a situ-

ation in which the populace felt threatened, and consi-

dering that most people would not understand the techni-

cal problems involved, such an announcement would be dis-

advantageous to the incumbent political party.

Transfer of emphasis from current world problems to

the international threat. To that degree this would hap-

pen would depend on the nature of the UFO threat. That

is, if the hostility were moderate, only one or two iso-

lated incidents. then the threat might serve only to add

to the world’s problems; on the other hand, if there were

some significant and larger scale hostile operation then

the emphasis would shift to one of immediacy,

Change in international conflict status. This effect

would most likely follow any significant hostile action

against the Earth at large. Nations would soon recognize

—————————————————————————

a common threat to Man and might reassess their posi-

tions relative to international jealousies and conflicts.

Demand for international unity. It is likely that the

peoples of the world would lose interest in internation-

al conflicts and demand international unity to try to

counter the common threat.

Politically, any of the last three effects would be

highly disruptive to the political status quo and to

government programs and plans.

Political implications if UFOs are benevolent;

Assuming that the intelligence behind the UFOs began

to take more than a passing interest in Earth society,

and in consideration that this intelligence would probab-

ly be more advanced not only in technology but in other

areas as well, some of the effects might be:

Loss of allegiance; Existing political organi-

zations might be hard pressed to maintain the allegiance

of their people if extraterrestrial beings of a superior

nature criticized the actions of the existing governments.

Loss or sovereignty; International boundaries and

traditional prerogatives or government may be lost. Direc-

tions issued by an existing government would be subject

to review by an authority which might be considered by

the people to be wiser, and the people might be reluctant

—————————————————————————

to comply without the approval of this superior authori-

ty.

Loss of confidence in government might be brought

about by extraterrestrial disapproval of government opera-

tion.

Modification or invalidation of national object-

ives; If national objectives were criticized by higher

intelligences, governments might have to make a choice

between a change of objectives or political chaos caused

by dissension among the populace as to proper national

objectives.

Loss of national ego might result from decline

of nationalism, and an enhancement of international

spirit.

Loss of national prestige: The loss or reduction

or individual and national ego, the weakening of the poten-

cy of government dictates, a decrease in nationalistic

pride, and the realization that Earth civilization is

relatively retarded would probably result in a loss or

reduction of national prestige throughout the world.

Alteration of political systems; Revamping of

entire concepts of government may result because of ad-

vice from superior beings, who could point out deficien-

cies and recommend better forms of government.

—————————————————————————

Change in international power relationships:

With a change in national objectives, possibly new forms

of government and a shift in government priorities, power

relationships may drastically change, since the new object-

ives may not be supported by the existing power structures.

Political chicanery and deception: A remote pos-

sibility, but one which is not beyond the unprincipled,

would be an attempt on the part of politicians to per-

suade the people that a certain course of action or pro-

gram was recommended by the superior intelligences, when

in fact it was not.

The effects listed above are far-reaching, sweeping

effects. But one wonders if considerations such as out-

lined above have not been causing feelings of uneasiness

in certain government quarters,

Sociological Implications

The political and military effects and responses have

their foundations in the sociological implications, influ-

ences on the very core of the individual, . . his beliefs,

his understanding of himself and his relationship to others…

in short, his Man-oriented society. An intrusion by extra-

terrestrial beings into this closed society may have the

following effects on the human being.

—————————————————————————

If UFOs are hostile;

Initial shock and consternation; Active hosti-

lity on a significant scale by extraterrestrials would

represent an event for which Man is ill-prepared. He

would need some time to realize the magnitude of the

threat. After realizing what this threat meant to Man-

kind, he would most likely be disoriented, since there

is no historical precedent that he can call on to aid

him in confronting the problem. With time, Man would

realize more and more what the implications were, and

shock and consternation would grow into:

Worldwide fear; localized panic; Classical

panic would probably not occur except in the immediate

vicinity of the hostile action, when it was realized

that Man is powerless to defend himself effectively.

With worldwide communications, any hostile action of

significance would become worldwide knowledge. World-

wide reaction, on an individual basis, would probably

take the form of deep fear for the future of Man. This

reaction would probably not be immediate, but would

slowly evolve, becoming more and more intense with reali-

zation.

A turning to religion: on the face of the reali-

zation that Man would be, for all practical purposes, de-

fenseless against hostile UFOs, there may be a turning to

—————————————————————————

religion for help and comfort.

A change in human relationships: There may be

more cooperation among the peoples of the world and among

people in the same nation, community and neighborhood as

they join together to face a common threat and to com-

miserate with one another. As General Douglas MacArthur

said in the New York Times, October 9, 1955,

The nations of the world will have to unite,

for the next war will be an interplanetary

war. The nations of the earth must someday

make a common front against attack by people

from other planets.

Sociological implications if UFOs are benevolent:

Again, initial shock and consternation: Man

would need time to sift out for himself what the appear-

ance of extraterrestrial beings means to Man as an indi-

vidual and as a society. Once more, Man is ill-prepared

to do this. He would have to view flying saucers as some

thing more than subjects for TV and comic strips, He would

most likely look to his government for guidance. This

guidance would be either non-existent or feeble and inade-

quate.

Change in human relationships: As in the Case of

hostility, people would probably grow closer together as

they struggled to develop an understanding and modus viven-

di under the new conditions.

—————————————————————————

Loss or reduction of ego: An encounter with

superior beings, superior technology and superior under-

standing in all areas which Man considers important would

act to deflate Man’s high esteem for himself. His ac-

complishments would appear rudimentary.

Modification of the human value system: Again,

assuming that extraterrestrial beings took an active

interest in the affairs of Man, certain ends pursued

by Man as worthwhile objectives in life may be demon-

strated convincingly to be either of limited value or

worthless. Man would then have the choice of continu-

ing to pursue objectives which were demonstrated to be

false, or of modifying his value system.

Decrease in status of scientists and world

technology: As in the case with loss or reduction of

ego, world technology and the scientific community which

promotes it would lose some of its luster in the face of

superior technology and understanding of the workings of

natural laws and their application. This factor may be

the basis, in part, for the too frequent reluctance of

scientists to look too deeply into the UFO problem.

There is the chance that the UFOs will not become active-

ly involved with Earth society. If scientists can de-

bunk UFOs with moderate success, and if the involvement

of UFOs with our society remains as it has over the last

few years, then the scientists stand a fair chance of re-

taining their esteem.

—————————————————————————

Turmoil in world religions: Religious concepts

based on the notion that Man holds a special and exclu-

sive place in the Master Plan will have to be re-evalu-

ated, not because of the special place of Man, but be-

cause of the idea of exclusivity. Such re-evaluation

will revitalize religion because of a better understand-

ing of concepts presently misunderstood.

Transfer of allegiance from traditional religions

to the philosophy and religion of the extraterrestrials:

While the traditional religions are undergoing a reassess-

ment, and assuming that the extraterrestrial beings are

advanced over Man in spiritual development, there will

most likely be a shift in allegiance from the tradition-

al religions to that of the extraterrestrials. The hunger

for spiritual answers and the inability or traditional re-

ligion to convincingly provide the answers is legendary.

Any religion which makes Man’s purpose clear and which can

provide answers to his questions will gain a large follow-

ing.

Military Implications

Since the Air Force is charged with the responsibi-

lity for assuring the security of the skies over the

United States, it is understandable that intrusion into

U.S. air space by strange air vehicles at any place and

—————————————————————————

at any time would cause considerable Air Force nervous-

ness. Although there have been instances in which these

strange vehicles have been pursued and fire upon by Air

Force aircraft (See Chapter III), the Air Force claims

that it has no physical evidence of the existence of these

vehicles. This is a declaration of the impotence of the

Air Force against these craft. However, the Air Force

should not feel that it is remiss in providing air secur-

ity for the nation. The Wright brothers would have had

little success in convincing an F-4 pilot that he should

be escorted to the nearest airfield.

There are two very significant problems confronting

Earth technology today, assuming a military threat from

the UFOs. First, forces in being are demonstrably inade-

quate to cope with any such threat. This inadequacy is

reflected both in the passive role of detection and track-

ing and also in the active role of offense action. De-

tection by radar is thwarted by a combination of small

radar cross-section, high speed, and ability to stop while

in flight. Assuming that the reflective surface were suf-

ficient to give a good return, high speed and an erratic

flight path would make it virtually impossible to effective-

ly pass the track through the radar network or individual

radar stations. Any radar station working on the ballistic

—————————————————————————

trajectory principle, or equipped with moving target

indicator (MTI) circuitry would be confounded by the

erratic flight and the ability of the space vehicles

to come to a stop in flight. In the case of MTI, the

UFO would appear to disappear from the scope when it

stopped moving.

Even assuming that a UFO could be detected and

tracked, we have nothing in the inventory, aircraft

or missile, that is capable or coping with the UFO.

Ultra-high speed, angular maneuvers and unlimited

ceiling assure the UFO’s ability to elude any inter-

cepting weapon, provided that the UFO is able to de-

tect an attack. The detection capability of UFOs is

not discussed in the literature available to the public.

The second major problem confronting Earth technolo-

gy is the matter of lead time, both in the laboratory and

on the production line. If we assume that at some point

in time we are able to determine the vulnerabilities of

the UFO , we must then translate this understanding into

a defensive weapon system. It would appear from the de-

scriptions of the behavior of these vehicles that they

employ principles which are rather exotic, in terms of

Man’s understanding of physical laws. If this is so, it

will be no mean task to understand these principles suffi-

ciently to be able to design a counter weapon, to

—————————————————————————

produce that weapon, and then to deploy a system to the

field. In such a situation, the time lapse is reckoned

in years. We may not have sufficient time to develop

such a defensive weapon, even assurance that we had enough

information to begin with.

If the UFOs are not hostile, and if they are benevo-

lent, then the problem is not a technical one; it is more

an ego problem and a human relations problem. Military

ego would suffer a severe setback in the face of just one

public demonstration of the capabilities of a disc. The

impotence of the military establishment to cope with the

UFOs would be manifestly apparent to all. Military wea-

ponry and tactics would appear obsolete overnight. In

addition to the blow to military prestige, a far more

significant effect could be felt by military establish-

ments world-wide. If th@ extraterrestrial beings sug-

gested that war between nations was not a valid method

for the resolution of international conflicts, and if they

could demonstrate an alternative and offer guidance. mili-

tary forces would gradually fall into disrepute and the

world would probably see the eventual dissolution of mili-

tary establishments world-wide.

Summary

Any reader would be able to think of almost an in-

finite number of implications in economics, industry,

—————————————————————————

the arts . . . across the whole spectrum of human acti-

vity. The point is that we should be thinking about all

these implications so that we can be better prepared for

the day when we might be confronted with an overt approach

on the part of extraterrestrials. The other nagging quest-

ion is the matter of intent. If we could determine intent

this would be a start towards psychological adjustment and

possible accommodation, whether the intent be hostile or

benevolent.

It can be seen that if the question of implications

is explored fully, one gains an appreciation of Dr. Hynek’s

statement that “Mankind may be in for the greatest advent-

ure since dawning human intelligence turned outward to con-

template the universe.

Also, one can begin to appreciate why the Believers

have been so unkind to the Air Force. They feel that any

knowledge which the Air Force may be withholding is right-

fully the property of mankind, and not the exclusive pro-

perty of any one military or political organization.

The thought arises, or course, that in view of the

implications, maybe release of all information on UFOs

would herald the beginning of the dissolution of the world

as we have come to know it. For some, this may be unac-

ceptable, and as was pointed out earlier, if the UFOs have

only a casual interest iu Earth and do not plan to involve

themselves with mankind, then maybe some of the problems

are only academic.

—————————————————————————

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

It is once more pointed out that if the Air Force

is handling the UFO problem properly, in view of the

seriousness of the implications, nevertheless, the

interested researcher is left with the impression that

either the Air Force investigation has been inept or

some important information is being purposely withheld,

giving rise to the many curious statements made by the

Air Force as it tries as best it can to assuage the

public, while withholding the truth.

Based on an exhaustive review of the literature

available to the public, the writer of this paper comes

to the following conclusions:

1. Many objects reported as UFOs are misidentifi-

cations of natural phenomena or man-made objects.

2. Many objects reported as UFOs are space vehi-

cles.

a. These vehicles originate extraterrestrially.

b. These vehicles are controlled by some intel-

ligence either on board the vehicles or at some extra-

terrestrial location remote from the vehicles.

—————————————————————————

c. The space technology or the extraterrestrial

intelligence is far superior to ours.

d. It is likely that contact has been made with

Man on an individual and covert basis.

e. It is not known why overt contact with Man

has not been made.

f. The intent of the extraterrestrial beings

is not known.

3. The implications for the world in the existence

of UFOs is presently significant, and will become even

more significant if overt contact is made.

4. The Air Force has been inept in its handling of

the UFO problem.

5. The Air Force has lost some of its esteem in the

eyes of a large segment of the U.S. population because

of the manner in which the Air Force has handled the UFO

problem.

6. Defense of the anti-UFO position has been weak.

Charges and allegations against the Air Force have not

been satisfactorily answered.

7. The gravity of the implications for mankind in

the existence of UFOs may be the root cause for the

puzzling official pronouncements and approach to the

problem.

—————————————————————————

Recommendations

1. Conduct an open congressional hearing with the

Air Force, NICAP, APRO and the University of Colorado

represented. Conduct this open hearing upon completion

of the current initial study being conducted by the

University of Colorado, even if results show that fur-

ther study is required.

2. If it is considered inadvisable to conduct an

open hearing because of the implications, then:

a. Quietly call in members of NICAP and enlist

their cooperation. Explain current status and implica-

tions, and have NICAP contact key people in APRO.

b. Disband Project Blue Book.

c. Establish a nationwide official UFO investi-

gative organization independent of the Air Force. Staff

this organization with a broad spectrum of experts.

Train all investigators. The disbanding of Project Blue

Book and the establishment of the investigative organi-

zation should be done without fanfare. These actions

might be justified as a reorganization in order to pro-

vide a more detailed, prompt investigation of reports

by citizens.

3. The United States government should prepare

contingency plans for contact with UFOs (hostile and

benevolent).

—————————————————————————

4. After establishment of the new investigative

organization, the United States should actively try

to establish contact with the UFOs and determine

motive. Attempts at contact should not be provocative

or aggressive.

—————————————————————————

FOOTNOTES

Chapter II

1. Brad Steiger and Joan Writenour, “Flying Saucers

Are Hostile” (New York: Universal Publishing and Distri-

buting Corp.,l967), p. 66.

2. Malcom Kent, “The Terror Above Us” (New York:

Tower Publications, 1967, p. 15.

3. Steiger, op. cit., p. 10.

4. Ibid., p. 12.

5. Edward J. Ruppelt, “The Report on Unidentified

Flying Objects” (New York: Doubleday and Co. Inc., 1956),

p. 51.

6. Donald E. Keyhoe, “The Flying Saucer Conspiracy”

(New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1955), p. 288.

7. Coral Lorenzen, “The Great Flying Saucer Hoax”

(New York; William-Frederick Press, 1962), p. 32.

8. Coral and Jim Lorenzen, “Flying Saucer Occupants”

(New York: The New American Library, Inc., 1967), p. 42.

9. John G. Fuller, “The Interrupted Journey” (New York:

Dial Press, 1966).

10. Lorenzen, “Flying Saucer Occupants,” p. 116.

11. Frank Edwards, “Flying Saucers Serious Business”

(New York: Bantam Books, Inc., 1966), p. 167.

12. Ibid., p. 170 and Ruppelt, op. cit., p. 119.

—————————————————————————

13. John G. Fuller, “Incident at Exeter” (New York:

Putnam, 1966), p. 203 and Edwards, op. cit., p. 142 and

Steiger, op. cit., p. 69.

14. Steiger, op. cit., p. 10.

15. Keyhoe, op. cit., p. 38.

16. Vincent H. Gaddis, “Mysterious Fires and Lights”

(New York; David McKay Co. Inc., 1967), p. 11 and Steiger

op. cit., p. 153.

17. Fuller, “The Interrupted Journey”.

18. George Adamski, “Inside the Flying Saucers!” (New

York: Paperback Library, Inc., 1967), p. 66.

19. Ibid., P. 69.

20. Ibid., p. 59 and 69.

21. Frank Skully, “Behind the Flying Saucers” (New

York: Holt, 1950), p. 52.

22. Adamski, op. cit., p. 7O and 7l.

23. Jacques Vallee, “Anatomy of a Phenomenon” (Chicago:

Henry Regnery Co., 1965), p. 167.

24. Ibid., p. 148.

25. Cleve Mitchell, “The UFO Saga” (Lakemont, Georgia:

CSA Press, 1966), p. 84.

26. Ibid., p. 84.

27. Adamski, op. cit., p, 64.

28. Ibid., p. 35.

29. George Adamski and Desmond Leslie, “Flying Saucers

Have Landed” (New York; The British Book Centre, 1953),

facing p. 192.

30. Richard H. Hall, “The UFO Evidence” (Washington,

D. C.: NICAP, 1964).

31. “The APRO Bulletin” (Tucson, Arizona)

—————————————————————————

32. Gaddis, op. cit., p. 9.

33. Ibid.

34. “A Fresh Look at Flying Saucers”, Time (August

4, 1967), p. 32 and Lorenzen, “Flying Saucer Occupants”,

p. 164.

35. “Flying Saucers”, (Special Issue by Look Magazine),

(New York: Cowles Communications, Inc., 1967), p. 59.

36. Fuller, “Incident at Exeter”, p. 221.

37. “Hearing on Unidentified Flying Objects”, Committee

on Armed Services, House of Representatives, 89th Congress,

2nd Session, 1966, Hereafter cited as “Hearing on UFOs”.

38. Ruppelt, loc. cit.

39. Ibid.

40. Ibid., p. 13.

41. Ibid., p. 314.

42. Ibid., p. 8.

43. Ibid., p. 315.

44. “Hearing on UFOs”, op. cit., p. 6006.

45. J. Allen Hynek “The UFO Gap”, Playboy, Vol. 14,

No. 12 (December 1967), P. 146.

46. J. Allen Hynek, in a letter to “Science” magazine,

(1 August, 1966).

47. “Hearing on UFOs”, op. cit., p. 6007.

48. Hynek, “Science”.

49. Hynek, “Playboy”, p. 270.

50. “Hearing on UFOs”, op. cit., p. 6007.

51. Hynek, “Science”.

52. Hynek, “Playboy”, p. 271.

—————————————————————————

53. Carl Sagan “Unidentified Flying Objects”, (an

article copyrighted in 1963 by The Encyclopedia Americana;

reprinted for private circulation), p. 5.

54. Edwards, op. cit., p. 112. .

55. Graham Berry, “Those Mysterious Signals from

Outer Space”, Los Angeles Times West Magazine, (January

8, 1967), p. 27.

56. Fuller, “Incident at Exeter”.

57. Fuller, “The Interrupted Journey”.

58. Fuller, “Incident at Exeter”, p. 193.

59. Time

60. Hearing on UFOs, loc. cit.

61. Donald H. Menzel, “Flying Saucers” (Massachusetts:

Harvard University Press, 1953).

62. Lawrence J. Tacker, “Flying Saucers and the USAF”

(New York; Van Nostrand, 1960).

63. Menzel, op. cit.

64. Ibid., p. 18.

65. Ibid., p. 19.

66. Ibid., p. 17.

67. Ibid., p. 19.

68. Ibid., p. 125.

69. Ruppelt, op. cit., p. 133.

70. Menzel, op. cit., p. 38.

71. Ruppelt, op. cit., p. 133.

72. Menzel, op. cit., p. 283.

73. Tacker, loc. cit.

74. Ibid., p. 8

—————————————————————————

75. Ibid., p. 10.

76. Lorenzen, “The Great Flying Saucer Hoax”, p. 188.

77. Ibid., p. 159.

Chapter III

1. Project Blue Book, 1 March, 1967, p. 4.-

2. Tacker, op. cit., p. 12.

3. Ibid., p. 13.

4. Ibid., p. 17.

5. Ibid., p. 13.

6. Hynek, Playboy, p. 146.

7. Tacker, op. cit., p. 83.

8. Edwards, op. cit., p. 179 and Edward J. Babcock

and Timothy Green Beckly, “UFO Plagues Now Jersey Reservoir”

Fate, October 1966, Vol. 19, No. 10, Issue 199, p. 34.

9. Mort Young, “UFO Top Secret” (New York; Essandess

Special Editions, 1967), p. 101.

10. Ibid., p. 102 and Edwards, op. cit., p. 167.

11. Project Blue Book, op. cit., p. 1.

12. Yale Scientific Magazine, (Yale University,

Vol. XXXVII, No. 7, April 1963).

13. Keyhoe, “The Flying Saucer Conspiracy”.

14. Donald E. Keyhoe, “Flying Saucers Top Secret” (New

York; Putnam’s Sons, 1960).

15. Ibid., p. 155.

16. Ruppelt, op. cit., p. 62.

17. Kehoe, “Flying Saucers Top Secret”, p. 164.

—————————————————————————

18. Tacker, op. cit., p. 83.

19. Ruppelt, op. cit., p. 62.

20. Edwards, op. cit., p. 140.

21. Project Blue Book, op. cit., p. 4.

22. Keyhoe, “Flying Saucers Top Secret”, p. 100.

23. Project Blue Book, op. cit., p. 2.

24. George W. Ogles, major, USAF, “What Does the

Air Force Really Know About Flying Saucers?”, The Airman,

Vol. XI, No. 7, July 1967, (Washington, D. C.: U. S.

Government Printing Office, 1967), p. 4.

25. George W. Ogles, Major, USAF, “Air Force Takes

the Stand: ‘Just the Facts, Sir’ ” The New Report on

Flying Saucers by the Publishers of True, No. 2, 1967

(Connecticut: Fawcett Publications, Inc., 1967), p. 4.

26. Leonard G. Cramp, “Space, Gravity and the Flying

Saucer (New York: British Book Centre, 1955) and Keyhoe,

“The Flying Saucer Conspiracy”, p. 247 and Skully, loc. cit.

and Michael Aime, “Flying Saucers and the Straight Line” (New

York: Criterion Books, 1958).

27. Edwards, op. cit., p. 127.

28. Time, op. cit., p. 32

29. Don Berliner, “The UFO from the Designer’s View-

point”, Air Progress, Vol. 21, No. 4, October 1967, p. 72.

30. Menzel, op. cit., p. 18.

31. Skully, op. cit., p. 186.

100

—————————————————————————

APPENDIX A

TYPICAL UFO CHARACTERISTICS AND EFFECTS

As was pointed out in Chapter II of this paper, it

is apparent, after review of UFO sighting reports con-

tained throughout the literature, no matter what the

particular persuasion of the author, that there are

certain consistencies in these sightings, regardless

of the stand which has, at least in the past, been

taken by Project Blue Book (Special Report #14). These

consistencies are tabulated below.

If it is felt that within any category of character-

istics there is too much diversity, the author suggests

that these differences are no greater than those which

exist between a helicopter and a commercial jet aircraft.

There are many reports of elongated, cigar-shaped

objects, thought by some authors to be what is termed

a “mother ship” i.e., a much larger vehicle which usu-

ally does not land, but hovers near the area where the

disc-shaped objects descend to lower altitudes or land.

It has been theorized that master control over the disc

shaped objects may be exerted from the “mother ship”, re-

gardless of whether or not the discs are remotely control-

led from the “mother ship” or carry intelligent beings

101

—————————————————————————

on board. A modification of this theory suggests an

aircrart carrier type role for the “mother ship”, i.e.,

the “mother ship” transports the discs across the ex-

panse of interplanetary space and discharges the discs

upon reaching the near environment of the Earth. The

cigar-shaped vehicles have been reported to be immense

objects…..approximating the length of a football field.

Several other shapes have been reported: bell-shaped

triangular, egg-shaped, rectangular…..but these shapes

are in the minority.

The characteristics and effects outlined on the next

page are applicable to the classic disc-shaped object,

by far the most commonly reported. This is the “flying

saucer” model. The Believer literature usually ascribes

a scouting, probing, investigation, reconnaissance, funct-

ion to this type of object.

102

—————————————————————————

Typical UFO Characteristics and Effects

Physical Characteristics:

Size: From two feet in diameter to over 100 feet

in diameter.

Shape: Circular; disc-shaped; like two saucers, one

inverted over the other. The center of the

disc is thicker than the edges, which may be

sharp or blunt.

Color: Daytime: Brilliant silver color with a sheen.

Nighttime: Intense white light. May also be

orange, red, green, blue. Many reports indi-

cate a gradual change of color as maneuvers

change, i.e., disc may be dull orange while

hovering and change through brilliant orange

to red to white as the disc moves progressive-

ly faster in a horizontal or vertical direct-

ion. The light is usually described as extreme-

ly intense and pulsating.

Construction:

Material: Metal- pure magnesium. (Incidentally,

Coral Lorenzen, of APRO, claims she had a

sample of this material analyzed. Her report,

with several spectrographic tables and discus-

sion, appears in her book, “The Great Flying

Saucer Hoax”, p. 89)

Lnnding Gear: Tripod spherical….like ball

bearings; or tripod extensions with flat or

wedge-shaped plates at the end of each of the

three “legs”.

Access: Throu@h a panel usually on the under-

side of the vehicle. Panel opens and closes

silently and smoothly. When closed, the fit

with the vehicle body is so precise that seams

cannot be detected.

103

—————————————————————————

Exterior Features: Antenna-like projection

is frequently reported. Center of disc fre-

quently has a cupola. May have running lights

and port holes.

Interior Features: Extremely bright “burnish-

ed aluminum” appearing walls. Compartments in

the shape of a pie wedge, with the point or

the wedge joining a central column. Doors fit

without seams. May have more than one level.

Lighted instrument panels; star charts ( See

“The Interrupted Journey”, J.G. Fuller). Source

of light is not apparent, “seems to come from

everywhere.”

Flight Characteristics:

Speed: 0 (hover) to 5000 MPH or greater.

Maneuverability: Hover; vertical ascents vertical

descent; horizontal. High speed departure

from Earth surface is usually on a slant.

Ability to change from hover to high speed

is instantaneous; ability to stop from high

speed movement is instantaneous; right angle

turns at high speed are common.

Special Flight Characteristics: The discs are usual-

ly seen to “wobble” at low speeds (instabili-

ty?). At night, while hovering, the light

emitted by the disc is usually reported to

“pulsate”.

Propulsion: Propelled through application of principles

of magnetism as yet not understood by Man.

(Navigation is theorized to be based on a

compehensive understanding of magnetic fields

in space….therefore the concern that Man

may alter the relationships by his nuclear

explosions in space.) The power system is

absolutely silent or may hum much like an

electrical transformer. A high pitched,

intense hum or whine is often reported.

Effect on Immediate Vicinity:

Electrical Systems: Disruption. Lights go out; auto

ignitions fail. Some authors theorize that the

recent power blackouts were caused by UFO experi-

mentation.

104

—————————————————————————

Radioactivity: Low to high readings on radioacti-

vity d@tection instruments.

Human Beings: No effect, to tingling sensation, to

paralysis, to burns on flesh. Some cases

of involuntary compliance with unspoken

orders from space beings.

Animals: Horses panic; dogs cower; insects and frogs

stop chirping. These occurrences are report-

ed many times to have been the reason for the

observer leaving his house to investigate,

and once outside, then seeing the UFO.

(See “The Interrupted Journey” for a descript-

ion of the effect on a dog.)

Vegetation: Matted grass; burned grass and bushes

in the vicinity of a landing.

Other: Many reports of strong metallic odor, some

to the point of causing nausea, in the im-

mediate vicinity of the UFO.

105

—————————————————————————

APPENDIX B

Extracted from Project Blue Book material distri-

buted to Air Force base UFO officers at a meeting at the

University of Colorado on 12 June 1967.

TOTAL UFO (OBJECT) SIGHTINGS

(Con@piled 15 Feb 6?)

TOTAL

YEAR SIGHTINGS UNIDENTIFIED SOURCE

1947 122 12 Case Files

1948 156 7 Case Files

1949 186 22 BlueBook, Page 108

1950 210 27 Case Files

1951 169 22 Case Files

1952 1,501 303 BlueBook, Page 108

1953 509 42 Case Files

1954 487 46 Case Files

1955 545 24 Case Files

1956 670 14 Case Files

1957 1,006 14 Case Files

1958 627 10 Case Files

1959 390 12 Case Files

1960 557 14 Case Files

1961 591 13 Case Files

1962 474 15 Case Files

1963 399 14 Case Files

1964 562 19 Case Files

1965 887 16 Case Files

1966 1,060 30 Case Files

—– —

TOTAL 11,108 676

106

—————————————————————————
L—+—T1—-+-T–2—-T—-3–T-+—-4T—+—T5—-+-T–6—-T—-7–T-+——————-R

STATISTICAL DATA FOR YEARS 1953-1965

TOTAL CASES BY CATEGORY

(Compiled 15 Feb 67)

1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 TOTAL

Astronomical 175 137 135 222 341 231 144 235 203 136 85 123 250 2417

Aircraft 73 80 124 148 218 106 63 66 77 68 73 71 222 1389

Balloon 78 63 102 93 114 58 31 22 37 19 28 20 36 701

Insufficient Data 79 103 95 132 191 111 65 105 115 94 59 99 85 1333

Other 62 58 65 61 120 93 75 94 77 65 58 88 126 1042

Satellite 0 0 0 0 8 18 0 21 69 77 82 142 152 569

Unidentified 42 46 24 14 14 10 12 14 13 15 14 19 16 253

TOTAL 509 487 545 670 1006 627 390 557 591 574 399 562 887 7704

ASTRONOMICAL SIGHTINGS

Meteors 70 92 79 88 179 168 100 187 119 95 57 61 101 1396

Stars and Planets 101 44 52 131 144 56 40 45 78 36 23 55 140 945

Other 4 1 4 3 18 7 4 3 6 5 5 7 9 76

TOTAL 175 137 135 222 341 231 144 235 203 136 85 123 250 2417

OTHER CASES

Hoaxes, Hallucinations,

Unreliable Reports and

Psychological Causes 15 6 18 16 37 29 14 13 17 11 16 34 34 260

Missiles and Rockets 2 1 1 3 2 6 14 12 13 9 13 7 10 93

Reflections 4 6 4 3 2 7 11 9 3 3 0 2 7 61

Flares and Fireworks 1 4 8 6 8 3 5 7 4 3 3 7 4 63

Mirages and lnversions 3 2 4 1 5 2 4 5 6 3 0 2 5 42

Search and Groundlights 9 6 14 9 12 8 5 6 1 3 2 6 9 90

Clouds and Contrails 6 3 2 1 9 5 3 4 5 4 5 0 3 50

Chaff 0 2 0 1 2 6 1 4 3 5 2 1 1 28

Birds 4 7 2 6 1 1 0 3 2 2 2 4 11 45

Radar Analysis 15 7 1 8 27 3 8 6 9 0 1 2 3 90

Photo Analysis 1 1 2 4 1 7 4 6 3 2 3 6 6 46

Physical Specimens 1 6 5 3 5 10 3 7 4 15 3 8 12 82

Satellite Decay 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 3 3 3 4 8 31

Other 1 7 4 0 9 5 3 3 4 2 4 6 13 61

TOTAL 62 58 65 61 120 93 75 94 77 65 58 88 126 1042

107

—————————————————————————

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC TOTAL

ASTRONOMICAL 14 8 44 47 15 12 20 20 12 38 21 4 255

AIRCRAFT 8 4 32 42 31 26 29 28 14 24 22 10 270

BALLOON 0 0 2 5 3 2 7 4 2 5 1 1 32

INSUFF DATA 8 3 34 27 30 22 19 19 19 34 21 6 242

OTHER 5 1 19 15 7 5 10 5 7 9 8 3 94

SATELLITE 2 0 32 5 12 21 5 23 5 11 2 1 109

UNIDENTIFIED 1 2 5 2 1 4 3 3 4 3 1 1 30

PENDING 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 2 6 14 28

TOTAL 38 18 158 143 99 92 93 104 67 126 82 40 1060

ASTRONOMICAL

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC TOTAL

Meteors 8 1 8 19 5 3 10 7 4 8 8 2 83

Stars/Planets 4 6 32 23 7 8 9 10 7 29 12 2 149

Other 2a 1a 4a 5a 3a 1a 1a 3ab 1a 1a 1c 23

TOTAL 14 8 44 47 15 12 2 20 12 38 21 4 255

(a) moon (b) unusual sunset (c) unusual meteorological condition

OTHER

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC TOTAL

Hoaxes,Conf.Psy 2 1 6 3 2 2 2 1 3 4 3 29

Missiles/Rockets 1 1 2

Search/Gd Lights 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 10

Flares/Fireworks 1 1 1 1 4

Reflections 3 1 2 1 2 9

Clouds/Contrails 2 3 1p 2p 1p 9

Birds 1 4 1 2 1 9

Radar Analysis 1n 1

Physical Speciman 1f 2st 1f 2st 4

Satellite Decay 1 1 2

Photo Analysis 5bcdei 2ge 2c 1q 10

Miscellaneous 2ah 1j 1k 1r 5

TOTAL 5 1 19 15 7 5 10 5 7 9 8 3 94

(a) swamp gas (b) stellar image (c) no image (d) insuff data (e) processing defect (f) chaff

(g) electric light (h) blown transformer (i) lighthouse (j) plasma (n) anamalous propogation

(p) artificial cloud release (q) time exposure of moon reported to be UFO (r) electric wires

sparking (s)indentations in ground, and soil samples (t) unknown animal

108

—————————————————————————

APPENDIX C

Leave a Reply Cancel reply