ARE FLYING SAUCERS REAL?   By J. Allen Hynek


For years the Air Force has dismissed them as hoaxes,
hallucinations or misidentifications. Now the Air Force's own
scientific consultant on unidentified flying objects declares
that many of the sightings cannot be so easily explained.

On August 25, 1966, an Air Force officer in charge of a missile
crew in North Dakota suddenly found that his radio transmissions
was being interrupted by static. At the time, he was sheltered
in a concrete capsule 60 feet below the ground. While he was
trying to clear up the problem, other Air Force personnel on the
surface reported seeing a UFO--an unidentified flying object
high in the sky. It had a bright red light, and it appeared to
be alternately climbing and descending. Simultaneously, a radar
crew on the ground picked up the UFO at 100,000 feet.

So begins a truly puzzling UFO report--one that is not
explainable as it now stands by such familiar causes as a
balloon, aircraft, satellite or meteor.  "When the UFO climbed,
the static stopped," stated the report made by the base's
director of operations. "The UFO began to swoop and dive. It
then appeared to land ten to fifteen miles south of the area.
Missile-site control sent a strike team (well-armed Air Force
guards) to check. When the team was about ten miles from the
landing site, static disrupted radio contact with them. Five to
eight minutes later the glow diminished, and the UFO took off.
Another UFO was visually sighted and confirmed by radar. The one
that was first sighted passed beneath the second. Radar also
confirmed this. The first made for altitude toward the north,
and the second seemed to disappear with the glow of red."

This incident, which was not picked up by the press, is typical
of the puzzling cases that I have studied during the 18 years
that I have served as the Air Force's scientific consultant on
the problem of UFO's. What makes the report especially arresting
is the fact that another incident occurred near the base a few
days earlier. A police officer--a reliable man---saw in broad
daylight what he called "an object on its edge floating down the
side of a hill, wobbling from side to side about ten feet from
the ground. When it reached the valley floor, it climbed to
about one hundred feet, still tipped on its edge, and moved
across the valley to a small reservoir."

The object which was about 30 feet in diameter, next appeared to
flatten out, and a small dome became visible on top. It hovered
over the water for about a minute, then moved to a small field,
where it appeared to be landing. It did not touch the ground,
however, but hovered at a height of about 10 feet some 250 feet
away from the witness, who was standing by his parked patrol
car. The object then tilted up and disappeared rapidly into the
clouds. A fantastic story, yet I interviewed the witness in this
case and am personally satisfied that he is above reproach.

During the years that I have been its consultant, the Air Force
has consistently argued that UFO's were either hoaxes,
hallucinations or misinterpretations of natural phenomena. For
the most part I would agree with the Air Force. As a
professional astronomer--I am chairman of the department of
astronomy at Northwestern University--I have had no trouble
explaining the vast majority of the reported sightings.

But I cannot explain them all. Of the 15,000 cases that have
come to my attention, several hundred are puzzling, and some of
the puzzling incidents, perhaps one in 25, are bewildering. I
have wanted to learn much more about these cases than I have
been able to get from either the reports or the witnesses.

These special cases have been reported by highly respected,
intelligent people who often had technical training --
astronomers, airport -tower operators, anthropologists, Air
Force officer, FBI personnel, physicians, meteorologists,
pilots, radar operators, test pilots and university professors.
I have argued for years within the Air Force that these unusual
cases needed much more study than they were getting. Now,
finally, the Air Force has begun a serious scientific
investigation of the UFO phenomena. (J.C. The Colorado, Condon
Committee)

The public, I am certain, wants to know what to believe--what
can be believed--about the "flying saucer" stories that seem to
be growing more sensational all the time. With all loyalty to
the Air Force, and with a deep appreciation of its problems, I
now feel it my duty to discuss the UFO mystery fully and
frankly. I speak as a scientist with unique experience. To the
best of my knowledge, I am the only scientist who has spent
nearly 20 years monitoring the UFO situation in this and other
countries and who has also read many thousands of reports and
personally interviewed many sighters of UFO's.

Getting at the truth of "flying saucers" has been
extraordinarily difficult because the subject automatically
engenders such instantaneous reactions and passionate beliefs.
Nearly all of my scientific colleagues, I regret to say, have
scoffed at the reports of UFO's as so much balderdash, although
this was a most unscientific reaction since virtually none of
them had ever studied the evidence. Until recently my friends in
the physical sciences wouldn't even discuss UFO's with me. The
subject, in fact, rarely came up. My friends were obviously
mystified as to how I, a scientist, could have gotten mixed up
with "flying saucers" in the first place. It was a little as
though I had been an opera singer who had suddenly taken it into
his head to perform in a cabaret. It was all too embarrassing to
bring up in polite conversation.

While the scientists were chuckling at UFO's, a number of groups
of zealous citizens were telling the public that "flying
saucers" did indeed exist. The believers in UFO's charged the
Air Force with concealing the existence of "flying saucers" to
avoid a public panic. Since I was the Air Force's consultant,
these groups accused me of selling out as a scientist, because I
did not admit that UFO's existed. I was the Air Force's stooge.,
its tame astronomer, a man more concerned with preserving his
consultant's fee than with disclosing the truth to the public.

I received many letters attacking me for not attacking the Air
Force. One typical writer pointed out that as a scientist my
first allegiance was to "fact." he went on to state, "Any person
who has closely followed the UFO story knows that many reports
have been 'explained away' in a manner that can only be called
ludicrous."

Another typical letter declared: "In spite of the fact that the
[Air Force} claims (or is instructed to claim) that UFO's do not
exist, I think that common sense tells most of us that they do.
There have been too many responsible people through the years
that have had terrifying experiences involving UFO's. I think
our Government insults the intelligence of our people in keeping
information regarding UFO's from them."

The question of UFO's has developed into a battle of faiths. One
side, which is dedicated to the Air Force position and backed up
by the "scientific establishment," knows that UFO's do not
exist; the other side knows that UFO's represent something
completely new in human experience. And then we have the rest of
the world, the great majority of people who if they think about
the subject at all, don't know what to think.

The question of whether or not UFO's exist should not be a
battle of faiths. It must be a subject for calm, reasoned,
scientific analysis.

In 1948, when I first heard of the UFO's, I though they were
sheer nonsense, as any scientist would have. Most of the early
reports were quite vague: "I went into the bathroom for a drink
of water and looked out of the window and saw a bright light in
the sky. It was moving up and down and sideways. When I looked
again, it was gone."

At the time, I was director of the observatory at Ohio State
University in Columbus. One day I had a visit from several men
from the technical center at Wright-Patterson Air Force base,
which was only 60 miles away in Dayton. With some obvious
embarrassment, the men eventually brought up the subject of
"flying saucers" and asked me if I would care to serve as
consultant to the Air Force on the matter.

The job didn't seem as though it would take too much time, so I
agreed. When I began reviewing cases, I assumed that there was a
natural explanation for all of the sighting--or at least there
would be if we could find out enough data about the more
puzzling incidents. I generally subscribed to the Air Force view
that the sightings were the results of misidentification, hoaxes
or hallucinations.

During the next few years I had no trouble explaining or
discarding most of the cases referred to me, but a few were
baffling enough to make me wonder--cases that the Air Force
would later carry as "unidentified." Let me emphasize the point
that the Air Force made up its own mind on each case; I merely
submitted an opinion. I soon found that the Air Force had a
tendency to upgrade its preliminary explanations while compiling
its yearly summaries; a "possible" aircraft often became a
"probable" aircraft. I was reminded of the Greek legend of
Procrustes, who tried to fit all men to his single bed. If they
were too long, he chopped them off; if they were too short, he
stretched them out.

Public statements to the contrary, the Air Force has never
really devoted enough money or attention to the problem of UFO's
to get to the bottom of the puzzling cases. The Air Force's UFO
evaluation program, known as "Project Blue Book," is housed in
one room at Wright-Patterson. For most of its history Project
Blue Book has been headed by a captain. This fact alone will
tell anyone familiar with military procedures the relative
position of Project Blue Book on the Air Force's organization
chart. The staff, which has usually consisted of two officers
and a sergeant, has had to try to decide, on the basis of
sketchy statements, the causes of all UFO sightings reported to
the Air Force. From 1947 through 1965, Project Blue Book
reviewed 10,147 cases. Using the Air Force's criteria, the
project identified 9,501, leaving over 600 that were carried as
unidentified.

By 1952 my feeling that the Air Force was not investigating the
reports seriously enough led me to write a paper suggesting that
the subject deserved much closer study. In 1953 the Air Force
did give UFO's more attention, although not nearly enough, to my
mind. A panel of some of the top scientists in the country was
assembled under the direction of Howard P. Robertson, a
distinguished physicist from Cal Tech. The Robertson panel
discussed UFO's for four days. Most of the cases, incidentally,
were not as puzzling as some of the ones we have now. What was
more, the panel was given only 15 reports for detailed study out
of the several hundred that had been made up to that time,
although it did quickly review many others. This was akin to
asking Madame Curie to examine a small fraction of the
pitchblende she distilled and still expecting her to come out
with radium.

I was listed as an associate member of the panel, but my role
was really more that of an observer.  After completing its brief
survey, the panel concluded that "the evidence presented on
unidentified flying objects showed no indication that these
phenomena constitute a direct physical threat to the national
security," and that "we firmly believe there is no residuum of
cases which indicate phenomena which are attributable to foreign
artifacts capable of hostile acts, and that there is no evidence
that the phenomena indicated a need for revision of current
scientific concepts." It is interesting to note the phrase "we
firmly believe," a phrase more appropriate to the cloth than to
the scientific fraternity.

The Robertson report immediately because the main justification
of the Air Force's position--there is nothing to worry
about--and it so remains to this day. I was not asked to sign
the report, but I would not have signed if I had been asked. I
felt that the question was more complicated than the panel
believed and that history might look back someday and say that
the panel had acted hastily. The men took just four days to make
a judgment upon a perplexing subject that I had studied for more
than five years without being able to solve to my satisfaction.

In 1953, the year of the Robertson report, there occurred one of
the most puzzling cases that I have studied. It was reported
first in Black Hawk, S. Dak., and then in Bismarck, N. Dak.,
during the night of August 5 and the early morning of August 6.
A number of persons in Black Hawk reported seeing several
strange objects in the sky. What made these reports particularly
significant was the fact that these people were trained
observers--they were part of the national network of civilians
who were keeping watch for enemy bombers.

At approximately the same time, unidentified blips showed up on
the radarscope at Ellsworth Air Force Base, which is near Black
Hawk. An airborne F-84 fighter was vectored into the area and
reported seeing the UFO's. The pilot radioed that one of the
objects appeared to be over Piedmont S. Dak., and was moving
twice as fast as his jet fighter. It was "brighter than the
brightest star" he had ever seen. When the pilot gave chase, the
light "just disappeared." Five civilians on the ground, who had
watched the jet chase the light, confirmed the pilot's report.

Later a second F-84 was sent aloft and directed toward the UFO,
which still showed on ground radar. After several minutes, the
pilot reported seeing an object with a light of varying
intensity that alternated from white to green. While the pilot
was pursuing the UFO, he noted that his gunsight light had
flashed on, indicating that his plane's radar was picking up a
target. The object was directly ahead of his aircraft but at a
slightly greater altitude. It then climbed very rapidly. When
the pilot saw he was hopelessly losing ground, he broke off the
chase. Radar operators on the ground tracked the fighter coming
back from the chase, while the UFO continued on out of range of
the scope.

As the object sped off to the north, Ellsworth Air Force Base
notified the spotter's control center in Bismarck, 220 miles to
the north, where a sergeant then went out on the roof and saw a
UFO. The Air Force had no planes in Bismarck that could be sent
after the UFO, which finally disappeared later that night.

I investigated this reported sighting myself and was unable to
find a satisfactory explanation. In my report, I noted that "the
entire incident, in my opinion, has too much of an Alice in
Wonderland flavor for comfort."

It was about this time that some firm believers in UFO's became
disgusted with the Air Force and decided to take matters into
their own hands, much like the vigilantes of the Old West; they
organized "to do the job the Air Force was mishandling." These
groups composed of people with assorted backgrounds, were often
the recipients of intriguing reports that never came to the
official attention of Project Blue Book. The first group of this
kind in the United States was the APRO (Aerial Phenomena
Research Organization), founded in 1952 and still going strong,
as is NICAP (National Investigations Committee on Aerial
Phenomena) which was organized several years later.

As the years went by, I learned more and more about the global
nature of UFO sightings. At first I had assumed that it was a
purely American phenomenon, like swallowing goldfish. But
reports of sightings kept coming in from around the world until
70 countries were on the list. As a scientist, I naturally was
interested in correlating all of the data; a zoologist studying
red ants in Utah, say, wants to find out about a new species
found along the Amazon. But when I suggested to the Air Force
that the air attaches abroad be used to gather reports on
foreign sightings, I was turned down. No one in a position of
authority seemed to want to take up the time of the officers
with such an embarrassing subject.

Gradually, I began to accumulate cases that I really couldn't
explain, cases reported by reliable, sincere people whom I often
interviewed in person. I found that the persons making these
reports were often not acquainted with UFO's before their
experience, which baffled and thoroughly frightened them.
Fearing ridicule, they were often reluctant to report the
sighting and did so only out of a sense of duty and a tremendous
desire to get a rational explanation for their irrational
experience. One typical letter to me concluded with the
sentence: "Hoping you don't think I'm nuts but not caring if you
do, Sincerely," . . .

Continued in "Hynek 12/17/66 Sat. Eve. Post article.2"
Hynek 12/17/66 Sat. Eve. Post article - Pt. 2

ARE FLYING SAUCERS REAL? - continued
By J. Allen Hynek

We had many reports from people of good repute, yet we had no
scientifically incontrovertible evidence--authenticated movies,
spectrograms of reported lights, "hardware"--on which to make a
judgment. There are no properly authenticated photographs to
match any of the vivid prose descriptions of visual sightings.
Some of the purported "photographs" are patent hoaxes. Others
show little detail; they could be anything. Some show a
considerable amount of detail, but cannot be substantiated.

The evidence for UFO's, then, was entirely without physical
proof. But were all of the responsible citizens who made reports
mistaken or victims of hallucinations? It was an intriguing
scientific question, yet I couldn't find any scientists to
discuss it with.

The general view of the scientists was that UFO's couldn't
exist, therefore they didn't exist, therefore let's laugh off
the idea. This, of course, is a violation of scientific
principles, but the history of science is filled with such
instances. Some scientists refused to look through Galileo's
telescope at sunspots, explaining that "since the sun was
perfect, it couldn't have spots, and therefore it was no use
looking for them." Other scientists refused to believe in the
existence of meteorites; who would be foolish enough to think
that a stone could fall from the sky?

>From time to time I would urge the Air Force to make a more
thorough study of the phenomenon, but nothing ever came of it. I
began to feel a very real sense of frustration. As the years
went by, I continued to find cases that puzzled me while I
examined reports for Project Blue Book. People who were afraid
that the Air Force would scoff at their reports began sending me
letters that were often detailed and well written about their
experiences. The Air Force never attempted to influence my view
on any case, but occasionally the service would disregard my
evaluations. What was more, I was not consulted on some key
cases. (One of the most recent was the well-publicized incident
involving two policemen in Ravenna, Ohio, last spring.)

Then, from 1958 through 1963, the UFO reports began to diminish
in quality as well as quantity, and I felt that perhaps the
"flying-saucer" era was at last on the wane and would soon
vanish. But since 1964 there has been a sharp rally in the
number of puzzling sightings. The more impressive cases seem to
fit into a pattern. The UFO's had a bright red glow. They
hovered a few feet off the ground, emitting a high-pitched
whine. Animals in the vicinity were terrified, often before the
UFO's became visible to the people who later reported the
incident. When the objects at last began to disappear, they
vanished in a matter of seconds.

A very real paradox was now beginning to develop. As the Air
Force's consultant, I was acquiring a reputation in the public
eye of being a debunker of UFO's. Yet, privately, I was becoming
more and more concerned over the fact that people with good
reputations, who had no possible hope of gain from reporting a
UFO, continued to describe "out-of-this-world" incidents.

In July, 1965, I wrote a letter to the Air Force calling again
for a systematic study of the phenomenon. "I feel it is my
responsibility to point out," I said, "that enough puzzling
sightings have been reported by intelligent and often
technically competent people to warrant closer attention than
Project Blue Book can possible encompass at the present time."

Then, in March of this year, came the reports of the
now-celebrated "swamp-gas" sightings in Michigan. On two
separate nights, at spots separated by 63 miles, nearly 100
people reported seeing red, yellow, and green lights glowing
over swampy areas. When I received the first accounts of the
UFO's, I recognized at once that my files held far better, more
coherent and more articulate reports than these. Even so, the
incident was receiving such great attention in the press that I
went to Michigan with the hope that here was a case that I could
use to focus scientific attention on the UFO problem. I wanted
the scientists to consider the phenomenon.

But when I arrived in Michigan, I soon discovered that the
situation was so charged with emotion that it was impossible for
me to do any really serious investigation. The Air Force left me
almost completely on my own, which meant that I sometimes had to
fight my way through the clusters of reporters who were
surrounding the key witnesses whom I had to interview.

The entire region was gripped with near-hysteria. One night at
midnight I found myself in a police car racing toward a reported
sighting. We had radio contact with other squad cars in the
area. "I see it" from one car, "there it is" from another, "it's
east of the river near Dexter" from a third. Occasionally even I
thought I glimpsed "it."

Finally several squad cars met at an intersection. Men spilled
out and pointed excitedly at the sky. "See--there it is! It's
moving!"

But it wasn't moving. "It" was the star Arcturus, undeniably
identified by its position in relation to the handle of the Big
Dipper. A sobering demonstration for me.

In the midst of this confusion, I got a message from the Air
Force: There would be a press conference, and I would issue a
statement about the cause of the sightings. It did me no good to
protest, to say that as yet I had no real idea what had caused
the reported sightings in the swamps. I was to have a press
conference, ready or not.

Searching for a justifiable explanation of the sightings, I
remembered a phone call from a botanist at the University of
Michigan, who called to my attention the phenomenon of burning
"swamp gas." This gas, caused by decaying vegetation, has been
known to ignite spontaneously and to cast a flickering light.
The glow is well-known in song and story as "jack-o'-lantern,"
"fox fire," and "wil-o'-the-wisp." After learning more about
swamp gas from other Michigan scientists, I decided that it was
a "possible" explanation that I would offer to the reporters.

The press conference, however, turned out to be no place for
scholarly discussion: it was a circus. The TV cameramen wanted
me in one spot, the newspaper men wanted me in another, and for
a while both groups were actually tugging at me. Everyone was
clamoring for a single, spectacular explanation of the
sightings. They wanted little green men. When I handed out a
statement that discussed swamp gas, many of the men simply
ignored the fact that I said it was a "possible" reason. I
watched with horror as one reported scanned the page, found the
phrase "swamp gas," underlined it, and rushed for a telephone.

Too many of the stories the next day not only said that swamp
gas was definitely the cause of the Michigan lights but implied
that it was the cause of other UFO sightings as well. I got out
of town as quickly and as quietly as I could.

I supposed that the swamp-gas incident, which has become a
subject fro cartoons that I greatly enjoy, was the low point of
my association with UFO's. The experience was very obvious proof
that public excitement had mounted to the point that it was
ridiculous to expect one professor, working alone in the field,
to conduct a scholarly investigation. We had quite clearly
reached a new state in the UFO problem.

Three weeks after the Michigan incident I appeared before a
hearing into UFO's that was conducted by the House Committee on
Armed Services. I pointed out to the committee that I had a
dossier of "twenty particularly well-reported UFO cases which,
despite the character, technical competence and number of
witnesses, I have not been able to explain. Ten of these reports
were made by scientists or by highly trained individuals, five
were made by members of the armed services or police, and five
were made by other reliable people. The committee urged the Air
Force to give continued attention to the subject and was assured
by Air Secretary Dr. Harold Brown that it would.

A serious inquiry into the nature of UFO's would be justified,
in my opinion, just on the basis of the puzzling cases that have
been reported during the last two years. It seems to me that
there are now four possible explanations for the phenomena:

First, they are utter nonsense, the result of hoaxes or
hallucinations. This, of course, is the view that a number of my
scientific colleagues have taken. I think that enough evidence
has piled up to shift the burden of proof to the critics who cry
fraud. And if the UFO's are merely hallucinations, they still
deserve intensive study; we need to learn how the minds of so
many men so widely separated can be so deluded over so many
years.

Second, the UFO's are some kind of military weapon being tested
in secret. This theory is easily dispensed with. Secret devices
are usually tested in very limited geographical areas. Why
should the United States, or any other country, test them in
scores of nations? The problem of preventing a security leak
would be impossible.

Third, the UFO's are really from outer space. I agree with the
Air Force. There is no incontrovertible evidence, as far as I
can see, to say that we have strange visitors. But it would be
foolish to rule out the possibility absolutely.

Solely for the sake of argument, let me state the case in its
most favorable light. We all suffer from cosmic
provincialism--the notion that we on this earth are somehow
unique. Why should our sun be the only star in the universe to
support intelligent life, when the number of stars is a 1
followed by twenty zeros?

Stars are born, grow old and die, and it now seems that the
formation of planetary systems is part of this evolutionary
process. You would expect to find planets around a star just as
you find kittens around a cat or acorns around an oak. Suppose
that only one star in 10 is circled by a planetary system that
has life; that means that the number of life-supporting stars in
the universe would be a 1 followed by 19 zeros.

We also know that some stars are many millions of year older
than our sun, which means that life elsewhere in the universe
may have evolved many millions of years beyond our present
state. That could mean that other planets in other solar systems
may have solved the problem of aging, which we are beginning to
grapple with even now. If a life span reached 10,000 years, let
us say, a space journey of 200 to 300 years would be relatively
short. In that time it would be possible to get from some
distant planetary systems to ours.

A highly advanced civilization, such as the one I am
postulating, would naturally keep an eye on the progress of life
elsewhere in its galaxy. Any signs of unusual scientific
progress might be reason enough to send a reconnaissance vehicle
to find out what was going on. It so happens that in recent
years we have made a very important advance of this kind; the
development of the use of nuclear energy.

This is still "science fiction," of course, but let me take the
story a step further. Some skeptics who scoff at reported UFO
sightings often ask why the "flying saucers" don't try to
communicate with us. One answer might be; Why should they? We
wouldn't try to communicate with a new species of kangaroo we
might find in Australia; we would just observe the animals.

Is there any connection between the reported UFO sightings and
the scientific probability of life elsewhere in our galaxy? I
don't know. I find no compelling evidence for it, but I don't
rule it out automatically.

The fourth possible explanation of UFO's is that we are dealing
with some kind of natural phenomenon that we as yet cannot
explain or even conceive of. Think how our knowledge of the
universe has changed in 100 years. In 1866 we not only knew
nothing about nuclear energy, we didn't even know that the atom
had a nucleus. Who would have dreamed 100 years ago that
television would be invented? Who can say what startling facts
we will learn about our world in the next 100 years?

All of these possibilities deserve serious consideration and
now, at long last, they will get it. In October the Air Force
announced that a thorough investigation of UFO's will be
conducted at the University of Colorado by a team of
distinguished scientists, headed by Dr. Edward Condon, the
former director of the National Bureau of Standards.

I cannot help but feel a small sense of personal triumph and
vindication. The night the appointment was announced, my wife
and I went out and had a few drinks to celebrate.

I am particularly pleased that the Condon committee will have
time to work into the problem because I cannot consider anyone
qualified to speak authoritatively on the total UFO phenomenon
unless he has read at least a few thousand original (not
summarized) reports, and is thoroughly acquainted with the
global nature of reported UFO sightings. The truly puzzling and
outstanding UFO reports are few in number compared to the welter
of poor reports.

Recently I had dinner with several members of the Condon
committee. What a pleasure it was to sit down with men who were
open-minded about UFO's, who did not look at me as though I were
a Martian myself. For the first time other scientists, who
apparently have been wondering all along, have openly talked
about the reports. One leading scientist wrote me the other day:
"For some time now I have been convinced of the reality of this
phenomenon based on reports in the general news media. It has
seemed to me that even with a heavy discount there is a core of
reliable observations which we cannot shrug off. Twice in recent
weeks I have stated my views on the subject in small
conversational groups of respectable, scholarly friends, and
found that they were amazed that I should take these matters
seriously. So I know that it took some courage for you to speak
out."

I would like to suggest two more steps to help solve the UFO
problem:

First of all the valuable data that we have accumulated--good
reports from all over the world--must be computerized so that we
can rapidly compare new sightings with old and trace patterns of
UFO behavior.

Second, we need good photographs of UFO's. Although the Air
Force has probably spent less on UFO's so far than it has on
wastebaskets. I realize that it is impractical to expect the
service to set up a costly "flying-saucer" surveillance system
across the country. When a UFO is spotted, the terrified witness
usually picks up the phone at once and calls the local police,
who have missed dozens of opportunities in the past to record
the phenomena on film. I recommend that every police chief in
the country make sure that at least one of his squad cars
carries in its glove compartment a camera loaded with color
film. The cameras, which could also be used for regular police
work, might be furnished by civic or service groups. (I carry a
camera in my briefcase at all times.)

Finally, I would like to emphasize my views on a controversial
subject. During all of my years of association with the Air
Force, I have never seen any evidence for the charge about UFO's
most often leveled against the service: that there is deliberate
cover-up of knowledge of space visitors to prevent the public
from panicking. The entire history of the Air Force and the
UFO's can be understood only if we realize that the Pentagon has
never believed that UFO's could be anything novel, and it still
doesn't. The working hypothesis of the Air Force has been that
the stimulus behind every UFO report (apart from out and out
hoaxes and a few hallucinations) is a misidentification of a
conventional object or a natural phenomenon. It is just as
simple as that.

Now after a delay of 18 years, the Air Force and American
science are about to try for the first time, really, to discover
what, if anything we can believe about "flying saucers."

End Sat. Eve. Post article:

To Summary of the preceding article:
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1998/dec/m15-009.shtml
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Those of us familiar with the Colorado Condon Study know what
occurred back then.

Click here if you're not familiar with same:
http://www.li.net/~rjcohen/condon.html

Click below for extracts of a letter he wrote to his boss
in the Air Force explaining things that were wrong with
Project Blue Book  http://www.li.net/~rjcohen/ocr.5a.html

The opinion Hynek expressed in the next to last paragraph
changed somewhat with the releases of certain FOIA documents
by the government in 1979 & 1981.

To see this, click below for several quotes
from Hynek at various times throughout his career.
http://www.li.net/~rjcohen/ocr.3b.html#anchor75480
 

December 1998
Return to UFO Folklore !