BEHAVIOR WHATEVER HAPPENED TO UFO'S?

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP81R00560R000100010011-9
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 9
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 12, 2001
• Sequence Number: 11
• Publication Date: June 26, 1971
• Content Type: MAGAZINE

Approved For Release 2001/04/02 CIA-RDP .00560RO OIDWIM44-9---
Extraterresttrial apno acids
The coincidence
ly from thos
ss in living cell
the finds is furthe
Last December' report by a gI p and pyrimidin were created
nd rally in snafre. Although he c
a
l
te
a
/ --
Space Admi p istration's Ames ,Research specu
Center o 'finding indigenous amino that the%existence of identical comple
As of amino acids and pyrim
tt
"
er
N: Pd
acids i the Murchison meteorite (
dims in two meteorites could mean that
12/5 0, p. 429) has sparked intense
b t is is a basic phase in the chemical
sci tific interest. The finding was su
quently confirmed by groups from the process leading to.?life. The findings in-
f Houston .(SN- 3/20/71, crease the likelihood of life elsewhere
__:_.__ :..,
o
e
e
s
.
p. 195) and Arizona State University in the uni
In both meteorites, six of the amino
(SN: 3/27/71, p. 210)?
acids are pinong those that are com
, Drs
ts
ti
.
,
s
The Arizona State scien
John R. Cronin and Carleton B. Moore, monly linked together tp form pro-
inkliving cells; the other 12 are
r
i
ns
e
also reported detecting the same amino
acids only occasionally found.
in
e
acids in an intact piece of a similar am
meteorite that fell near Murray, Ky., in They are thus not Lilly to result from
1950~NoW the leader of the NASA group, acids arelof antalinost equal mixture of
ht-
i
g
abundance of amino acids in the ivlur-/, r
ray meteorite. Dr. Ponnamperuma~told tures. Earth aminonacids.proThe du mixonly~
e
h
s
,yp
--
of Sciences last week that the groups of
use of gas chromatography c~nibined biological origin and is strong evidence
with mass spectrometry detected all 18 for extraterrestrial chemical: origin.
of the amino acids in Murray that they Members of the Ames team also in
earlier found in Murchis They also eluded Drs. Jr a es La Folsomewless, Keith
ss Ett
~
droxypyrimidine and~4-hydroxymetnyi- Peter s.+? S
art
'
Th
.
p
e
pyrimidine-in ea, h meteorite.
Cyclops: Eye on the universe
f visiting professor at Stanford, and
ford University, is called Projec
Cyclops. Its aim is to examine che` ply enough to make the id a
feasibilities and' to educate, not to it ownlthe" cost of d?oin li this, ays
recommend -policy, There is no in- , d g
For//a. total of 150 hours rom o
May/through July of 1960 the 85- Dr. John Billingham, chief of the
foot"antenna at the National Radio biotechnology division/at Ames,
Astronomy Observatory in Green believe it is not to early for a
Bank, W.Va., monitored radio fuller study of the' echnology nec-
emissions from the nearby stars essary to detect rtifact signals.
Tau Ceti and Epsilon Eridini for Basically, C clops envisions an
any evidence of signals from intel- interconnecte array of 1,000 to
ligent extraterrestrial civilizations. 10,000 oredio telescope perhaps
is 10
The search, 'Project Ozma, turned spread
up nothing unusual. But it was the miles across. Such an array sholtild,
first time man had tried to detect according to one estimate, be, able
signals from any unknown counter- to detect beamed signals froze any
parts; on other planetary systems. Norization radio within 1, g0'lighomethe
Last week engineers and scien-
tists gathered at the National Acro-,' regular transmissions of advanced
nautics and Space Administration's technological civilizations might be
Ames Research Center in Moun- detectable of ostsperhaps 100 high - such an tain View, Calif., to explore' the years.
technological possibilities of:a prof- would have to'be justified by tjae
ect that would be orders of mag- signal search,. itself, but the ar-. ay
to9f bf for
One excgoal ellent
nitude more sophisticated than. would also' e an
Ozma. The 11-week -study, spon- radio aso~
sored jointly by Ames and Stan- study i to explore ways in hied
t the /i ishes could be /produ
n
d lv
study co-directors, Dr. Bernar.
t establish tl
_I_ ---I- nl;"Pr c%V- "It ML A
.,
project at this time. Decades mg
pass before it is possible. But/the "its mission ~would b ' to add a
ew dimension to co `urology," Dr.
i
tention ot% inaugurauug auL1.
As for the Cyclops a,r y itself,
h
n onl
Whatever happened to UFO's?-
On May 31 two New Hampshire
farmers looked across a field and saw a
spherical, flat-bottomed object hovering
above the ground. As they watched, the
object rose vertically, arced and headed
into the wind on a horizontal path.
This is one of several incoming reports
of unidentified flying objects received re-
cently by the National ITnvestigations
Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP)
in Washington. NICAr secretary-treas-
urer Stuart Nixon says he believes the
reports may be the start of a recur-
rence of saucer sightings or at least the
reporting of saucer sightings. NICAP has
been a long time waiting. Since 1968
the number of UFO sightings has dropped
off, along with public interest in them.
Last week a Wall Street Journal
article reported that a probable reason
for the decline is the negative social
climate produced by publication in 1968
of the Condon report, the 810-page sci-
entific study of UFO sightings commis-
sioned by the U.S. Air Force and di-
rected by Dr. Edward U. Condon of
the University of Colorado. It conclud-
ed that "nothing has come from the
study of UFO's in the last 21 years that
has added to scientific knowledge."
And "that further extensive study of
UFO's probably cannot be justified in
the expectation that science will be ad-
vanced thereby."
This scientific debunking of the UFO
phenomena and the subsequent, though
not necessarily connected, decline in
sightings presents an interesting be-
havioral pattern. Dr. Ernest R. Hil-
gard, a Stanford University psycholo-
gist who served on the National Acad-
emy of Sciences panel that reviewed the
Condon report, believes the report it-
self is not wholly responsible for the
falling off of flying saucer interest. "I
would like to feel that the report quiet-
ed the saucer interest," he says, "but
I do not think so." People probably
just lost interest, he suggests. "These
fads go in cycles," he explains, and
many persons who would have been in-
terested in extraterrestrial phenomena
have turned to other things: drugs, as-
trology, Oriental religions and various
subjective and philosophic fields. As so-
ciety becomes more affluent man has
time to reflect on his position in the uni-
verse. As he does so he attempts to in-
tegrate himself into and make himself a
more important part of that universe.
Belief in other worldly things is one
method of doing so, points out Dr. Hil-
gard. But national and international
events of the past few years have tend-
ed to make people look inside rather
than outside themselves for answers to
universal questions. This fad too will
r pass, says Dr. Hilgard, who predicts
P-1 ROO56OR000100010011-9 435
 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R005
that the uFO's will reappear when it
does. At NICAP Nixon says ECU re-
ports usually run in five-year cycles
and 1972 should be the start of another
cycle.
Dr. Donald I. Warren of the School
of Social Work at the University of
Michigan in Ann Arbor has another be-
havior theory on UFO'S. In his view
UFO's provide a form of escape. "One
expression of this escape," he says, "is
the possibility of other lives, other plan-
ets, other beings like or unlike oneself."
UFO's "present the opportunity to es-
cape the system without threatening
one's gains in the immediate social en-
vironment." Dr. Warren, however,
based his conclusions on a person's dis-
satisfaction with his socioeconomic
status. A well-educated person earning
a relatively small salary might not be
content in his situation and would there-
fore, suggests Dr. Warren, be a likely
person to attach importance to himself
For soq'e years scientists have ze
in on drug action at the most ity
stand the molecular basis/of acti`on
for several drugs, it is only now'that
the/three-dimensional structure' of a
drt(g has been correlated with its bio-
logical action.
Dr. Henry M. Sobell of, the Univer-
y of Rochester reported last week
by using -the technique of X-ray
by believing in and sighting flying
saucers.
This theory may have some credi-
bility, but an article by Dr. Warren in
SCIENCE last November advancing these
views received a critical response from
scientists. The controversy, brought on
by a lack of adequate psychological and
behavioral information on the subject,
points out, as does Dr. Warren, "that
this phenomenon has been inadequately
studied by the behavioral sciences."
In an attempt to coordinate existing
information, NICAP has instituted Project
ACCESS (Automated Clearinghouse for
Collection and Exchange of Sighting
Statistics). All available sighting data
(people, places, times, etc.) will be
stored in a computer and made avail-
able to interested parties. If, these in-
puts- are scientific and objective, as
NICAP's Nixon insists they will be, Proj-
ect ACCESS will be a useful tool for
behavioral scientists. ^
crys'llogragh'y, he has pinpointed ex-
actly htiw he antibiotic actinomycin D
interacts with DNA. In fact, since the'
Crick-Watson model for DNA was pro-
posed 18 years ago, this is the first
time scientists know visually how any-
thing sticks'to DNA.
Dr. Sobell, a physician-turned-crys-
tallographer, says he crystallized actino-
mycin.with deoxyguanosine, one of the
four bases of DNA. The three-dimension-
al structure of the complex immedi-
ately suggested how actinomycin binds
to DNA. Dr. Sobell believes that the flat
portion of the drug molecule fits in
Univ. of Rochester
Sobelll and drug-DNA molecule model.
0R000100010011-9
The A mic Energy Commissipn last
week nounced new, stricter/ criteria
for iclear power plant safety. Prime
basis in the new standards is the
need for back-up systems in case cool-
ing water systems for reactors fail.
Such an accident could conceivably re-
sult in overheati6g of reactor cores,
melting of shielding and release of ra-
dioactivity. Most affected by the new
criteria are' five plants licensed before
1968. They will have to install the
back-up systems within three years. ^
California's AEC ties
The huge University of California
system has been heavily involved in de-
fense and weapons research since World
War lle?artly in response to student-
faculty criticisms (SN: 1/16/71, p. 50)
the UC regents last week recommended
changes in the contractual arrangement
Oietween UC and the Atomic Energy
Commission tinder which the Lawrence
Radiation Laboratory is operated. The
laboratory consists of two units, the
non-secret facility on the hill behind
the Berkeley campus and the more
closely guarded facility at Livermore.
Under the recommendations, the ad-
ministrative ties between the two units
would be severed. And the director of
the Berkeley laboratory would report
directly to the president of the univer-
sity rather than, as now, to the chan-
cellor of UC at Berkeley.. 0
Doctorate oversupply
A new National Science Foundation
study on the supply of and demand for
doctoral scientists, projected to 19?0,
indicates an even greater imbalance of
supply over demand than in., a study
done two years ago. Over-all projections
show a supply of about 325,000 doc-
toral scientists in 1980-against an ex-
pected demand for about 285,000. The
greatest imbalance is, in engineering,
with a projected 40 percent oversupply.
Next greatest is in social sciences, with
a 20 percent oversupply. The life sci-
ences situation is somewhat better,_,with
a 9 percent oversupply predicted:'Math-
ematics will see an oversupply of around
10 percent. Only in the physical sciences
will supply and demand be essentially
in balance. ^
Oldest mummy..
Possibly the,:oldest (5,000 years) in-
tact mummy..'ever found has been un-
earthed in a tomb in Sakkara, 15 mite's
southeast of Cairo. The ancient court
.musician Nofre died in the sixth year
of the reign of King Nie Ossen Ra. The
discovery was called histofically and
between the nucleotide base sequence, , of the American Society of Biological
pC, while the,'protein subunits of the, Chemists.
antibiotic make a hydrogen bond with The medical implications of Dr. So-
guanine residues on either strand' of bell's work may be far-reaching. Ac-.
DNA. Actinomycin has two-fold - sym- tinomycin's repressor-action on DNA, as
metry relating to the protein subunits. revealed in the crystal model, might
This enables the drug to bind to a base explain why. actinomycin works as an
sequence in DNA with two-fold sym- antitumor drug. However, the drug is
metry. This pattern of .recognition was too toxic for lavish clinical control of
first conceived several years ago by tumors, precisely because of its strin-
Dr. Jacques Monod who shared the gent action at the molecular level. But
1965 Nobel Prize with Drs. Francois now that scientists understand how
Jacob and Andre. Lwoff for their work actinomycin binds to Dt4A, Dr. Sobell
in biological regulation. Dr. Sobell's believes they can probably synthesize
report of the first visual sighting of the
drug-gene contact was made in San
Francisco at the 62nd annual meeting
new antibiotics or drugs that would act,," scientifically Are im_p rtant than the
on tumor cells or viruses, but not on findings of the ankhamen tomb in
cells, in the rest of the body. 11 1922. L 0
4proved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 ROO56OR000100dI'W6ce1 n?'S' vol. 99
 ) 1 X ff l?Ap 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R0001 00010011-9
OF THE PROBLEM
To gain a fresh and objective per-
spective on the UFO problem, the
UFO Subcommittee of the AIAA,
from its inception in 1967, decided to
place specific, well-defined questions
to UFO experts of high scientific qual-
ifications but strongly divergent views.
Surprisingly, the factual answers the
Subcommittee obtained in a series of
interesting interviews were strikingly
similar. Differences occurred in cer-
tain, quantitative estimates and in the
degree of emphasis,' but not in prin-
ciple.
It was at the next step where the
views began to diverge: subjective
judgment as to the scientific signifi-
cance of the problem and the need to
pursue and explore it. Obviously, such
opinion depends on the criteria applied
by the individual, and much of the dis-
cord appears to be due to a lack of
analysis of these criteria. It is at this
stage where guesses and Speculations
creep into the discussion and lead to
controversy.
In the opinion of the UFO Subcom-
mittee, such speculations are entirely
premature and no position is absolute-
ly defensible at this point in time. This
applies specifically to statements that
the extraterrestrial hypothesis
("ETH") is "the least probable" or
"the least unprobable" explanation
(National Academy of Sciences, Re-
view of the "Condon Report"; James
E. McDonald's statements). There is
no scientific basis for assessing such
probabilities at this time.
The Subcommittee was greatly per-
turbed by the paucity of thorough sci-
entific and technological analysis ap-
plied to practically all observations be-
fore the Condon study. The few, often
courageous, efforts by individuais to
come to grips with this problem
should be viewed more from an aspect
of focusing attention on the problem
rather than of solving it, since there is
little doubt that it takes more than a
personal effort to investigate fully a
problem of such complexity.
In the opinion of the committee, the
Colorado University study, "Scientific
Study of Unidentified Flying Ob-
jects," (the "Condon Report," Ban-
tam Books, New York, 1969) at this
time represents the most scientifically
oriented investigation published on the
UFO problem. Attacks directed
against the study seem to overlook the
almost insurmountable difficulties
A Statement by the UFO Subcommittee of the AIAA
disciplinary, unbiased talent, accumu-
lating practical experience, collecting
hard information, sorting out the sig-
nal from the noise, applying the best
analytical methods, and writing and
editing a report in less than two years.
To understand the Condon. report,
which is difficult to read, due in part
to its organization, one must study the
bulk of the report. It is not enough to
read summaries, such as those by Sul-
livan and by Condon, or summaries of
summaries, on which the vast majority
of readers and news media seem to
rely. There are differences in the opin-
ions and conclusions drawn by the au-
thors of the various chapters, and
there are differences between these
and Condon's summary. Not all con-
clusions contained in the report itself
are fully reflected in Condon's sum-
mary. For example the optical/radar
chapter contains the following state-
ment on the Lakenheath case (1956):
The apparently rational, intelligent behav-
ior of the UFO suggests a mechanical de-
vice of unknown origin as the most prob-
able explanation of this sighting. However,
in view of the inevitable fallibility of wit-
nesses, more conventional explanations of
this report cannot be entirely ruled out.
On Colorado Springs case (1967):
In view of the meteorological situation, it
would seem that AP (anomalous propaga-
tion) was rather unlikely. Besides, what is
the probability that an AP return would
appear only once and at that time appear
to excute a perfect practice ILS approach.
Condon's own conclusions have
been widely misquoted. He says:
' ... Scientists are no respecters of author-
ity. Our conclusion that study of UFO re-
ports is not likely to advance science will
not be uncritically accepted by them. Nor
should it be, nor do we wish it to be. For
scientists, it is our hope that the detailed
analytical presentation of what we were
able to do, and of what we were unable to
do, will assist them in deciding whether or
not they agree with our conclusions. Our
hope is that the details of this report will
help other scientists in seeing . what the
problems are and the difficulties of coping
with them.
"If they agree with our conclusions, they
will turn their valuable attention and talents
elsewhere. If they disagree, it will be be-
cause our report has helped them reach a
clear picture of wherein existing studies are
faulty or incomplete and thereby will have
stimulated ideas for more accurate studies.
If they do get such ideas and can formulate
them clearly, we have no doubt that sup-
port will be forthcoming to carry on with
such clearly defined, specific studies. We
think that such ideas for work should be
supported.
Therefore we think that all of the
agencies of the federal government, and the
private foundations as well ou ht to be
an open-minded, unprejudiced basis. While
we do not think at present that anything
worthwhile is likely to come of such re-
search each individual case ought to be
carefully considered on its own merits."
Condon's chapter, "Summary of
the Study," contains more than its
title indicates; it discloses many of his
personal conclusions. Making value
judgements was no doubt one reason
why Condon was asked to handle the
project. One is happy to obtain the
judgement of so experienced and re-
spected a man; but one need not agree
with it. The UFO Subcommittee did
not find a basis in the report for his
prediction that nothing of scientific
value will come of further studies.
In reviewing the material accumu-
lated to date, the Subcommittee found
an exceedingly low signal-to-noise ra-
tio, as illustrated by the statistics of
the Air Force's Project "Bluebook"
quoted in the University of Colorado
study, which showed 3.3% unidentified
observations (253 out of 7741 avail-
able at that time*). This figure is
frequently disputed, but its order of
magnitude (5%) appears to be correct,
taking all available reports into ac-
count. The fact that the Condon study
itself arrives at a much higher per-
centage of unexplained cases-name-
ly, at about 30% (35 out of 117)-is
primarily due to the preselection of
specific cases for investigation. The
precise figure is hard to assess, for the
Condon report does not lend itself eas-
ily to this type of analysis, the same
cases being treated often in different
sections and under different identi-
fications. (*The final figures, according
to our information, appear to be 701
It has been variously estimated that
the reported cases, approximately
20,000, represent only 5 to 15% of the
total observations, since most observ-
ers either, do not go to the trouble of
an official report or fear ridicule. In
turn, various polls suggest that 3 to
5% of the U.S. population claim to
have seen UFOs. It follows, then, that
the available reports which can be
classified as "unidentified" represent a
very small percentage of all UFO
sightings on the one hand, but not a
negligible number of observations on
the other.
It is interesting that, contrary to
public opinion, the estimated per-
centage of "hoaxes" is likewise small
this type face: building ur the mutt flea a o0g20h041 others bmitted to them N1 o t0ty of
November 1970
U sightiinngllcan be eexx-
 while 15 to 20% contain in- tion extracted by McDonald is added
sufficient data. In other words, what to some of the cases. In fact, the Sub-
may appear to the untrained observer committee finds that the opposite con-
as strange and unexplainable is in
most cases known and explainable.
Taking all evidence which has come
to the Subcommittee's attention into ac-
count, we find it difficult to ignore the
small residue of well-documented but
unexplainable cases which form the hard
core of the UFO controversy. They
represent only a small fraction of the
"unidentified" cases and are charac-
terized by both a high degree of credi-
bility and a high abnormality
("strangeness" in Hynek's terminolo-
gy). Although none of them offers to
our knowledge quantitative recordings
by calibrated instruments for per-
manent inspection, they are often
called "hard cases."
The Subcommittee has tried to ex-
plore the nature of this hard-core resi-
due and found estimates to vary be-
tween 10 and several hundred cases,
depending in part on a subjective judg
ment as to the criteria for a "hard
case." High credibility is generally ac-
cepted for observations by multiple in-
dependent witnesses of known and re-
liable background or by multiple inde-
pendent sensing systems (reported by
multiple independent operators) or
both; high abnormality or strangeness,
when no known natural phenomena
whatsoever seem to fit the observa-
tions. It is clear, then, that the hard-
core residue represents less than 1% of
the total available reports.
Those used to working under con-
trolled laboratory conditions find it
difficult to consider seriously any ob-
servation which is not available in
recorded form for quantitative in-
spection. As a matter of fact, they
make this a criterion for a "hard
case." On the other hand, there are
those, including some members of this
Subcommittee, familiar with the in-
tricacies of research in the complex
and uncontrolled laboratory of the at-
mosphere, who find this less of.a de-
terrent. They discover parallels be-
tween the UFO problem and certain
atmospheric phenomena which fall in
the class of rare events. A rare event
always involves at first a question of
the reality of a qualitative observation.
Later, scientific investigation, usually
combining statistics and physics, re-
solves this question one way or the
other.
Although the University of Colora-
do report deals only with a very small
fraction of the existing observational
material (less than 1%), it offers itself
mveab hRaletasec2001104/O2ediQA-RQP, 9 RQQA60Rt0DQr4QQiQt1,QOextr.terrestrial
clusion could have been drawn from
its content, namely, that a phenom-
enon with such a high ratio of unex-
plained cases (about 30%) should
arouse sufficient scientific curiosity to
continue its study.
The issue seems to boil down to the
question: Are we justified to extrap-
olate from 0.99 to 1.00, implying that
if 99% of all observations can be ex-
plained, the remaining 1% could also
be explained; or do we face a severe
problem of signal-to-noise ratio (order
of magnitude 10-1)?
In the opinion of the Subcommittee,
this question must be asked critically
and objectively in each individual case.
In cases which do not fit the extrap-
olation alternative, the further ques-
tion should be explored: "Do they evi-
dence common attributes?" It appears
to the Subcommittee that the Univer-
sity of Colorado group has made no
serious attempt in this direction.
If it is already difficult to reach a
consensus on what constitutes a hard
case, it appears even more difficult to
find agreement on the advisability and
importance of continued research. As
mentioned earlier, it is at this point
where the controversy often becomes
heated because criteria for such assess-
ment are not well-defined.
Earlier, Condon's statement was
quoted that "clearly defined, specific
studies . . . should be considered and
supported." In this connection he calls
attention to "important areas of at-
mospheric optics, including radiowave
propagation, and of atmospheric elec-
tricity in which present knowledge is
quite incomplete. These topics came to
our attention in connection with the
interpretation of some UFO reports,
but they are also of fundamental sci-
entific interest, and they are relevant
to practical problems related to the
improvement of safety of military and
civilian flying."
The Subcommittee finds this state-
ment of the Condon report a better
criterion for support of UFO-related
studies than the claim by some ETH
exponents that UFO research deserves
maximum support as long as there is a
ghost of a chance that UFOs are ex-
traterrestrial vehicles, or the opposite
claim that proof for the ETH must be
provided before serious consideration
of the UFO problem is justified. Both
opinions strike the Subcommittee as
unwarranted.
We have already expressed our dis-
origin of UFOs, since there is not suf-
ficient scientific basis at this time to
take a position one way or another.
However, in view of the infancy of our
scientific and technoloogical knowledge
(approximately one century). the Sub-
committee would agree with this state-
ment by Condon: "We must not as-
sume that we are capable of imagining
now the scope and extent of future
technological development of our own
or any other civilization, and so we
must guard against assuming that we
have any capacity to imagine what a
more advanced society would regard
as intelligent conduct." On the other,
hand, we find no convincing basis for
his statement, "It is safe to assume that
no ILE (intelligent life elsewhere)
from outside of our solar system has
any possibility of visiting Earth in the
next 10,000 years." Men does one
start counting?)
The question arises: whether there is
a need at all to speculate on a specific
hypothesis, such as ETH, in order to.
decide on the significance of a scien-
tific problem, or whetter any known
phenomenon in nature is worth in-
vestigating. We think it is, but we. rec-
ognize at the same time that the UFO
problem may require expensive tools
of technology. Therefore, the question
of cost, priority, and relative impor-
tance of this problem within the total
spectrum of research cannot be over-
looked. -
The UFO Subcommittee feels that
the ETH, tantalizing though it may
be, should not be dragged into this,
consideration as it introduces an unas-
sessable element of speculation; but the
Subcommittee also strongly feels that,
from a scientific and engineering
standpoint, it is unacceptable to sim-
ply ignore substantial numbers of
unexplained observatitas and to close
the book about them on the basis of
premature conclusionse
There is an interesting parallel be-
tween the history of the UFO problem
and the history of weather modi-
fication ("rainmaking")- After almost
20 years of taboo by the scientific
community, weather modification has
now achieved scientific recognition
due to the fact that some courageous,
high-caliber scientists entered the are-
na. This has resulted in a revision of
the viewpoint of the National Acade-
my of Science.
The immediate question is how to
attack the UFO problem without the
pitfalls of past attempts. There is little
doubt that the short-time, one-shot ap
proach of an ad hoc team is neither
enough substance of the described enchantment with arguments about promising nor econorrilcal. This is es-
stApproved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100QU,QAI -% Aeronautic,
 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100010011-9
BACKGROUND
At the suggestion of the AIAA management, the Tech-
nical Committee on Atmospheric Environment and the
Technical Committee on Space and Atmospheric Phys-
ics jointly formed a UFO Subcommittee in 1967.
The Subcommittee was asked to arrive at an un-
biased assessment of the present situation and to serve
as a focal point in the AIAA for questions regarding the
UFO problem. In appointing the Subcommittee, special
care was taken to insure that none of its members was
committed one way or another on this issue.
In its attempt to get to the heart of the matter, the
Subcommittee naturally found the UFO problem com-
plicated and often buried in what appeared to be a
maze of preconceptions, emotions, bias, hasty conclu-
sions, and excessive and misleading publicity.
The Subcommittee soon recognized that it is much
too early to expect a meaningful interpretation of UFO
phenomena. Rather than enter the arena of specula-
tion, it directed its efforts toward finding out whether
or not a scientific problem exists at all. The acccom-
panying report describes the approach the Subcom-
mittee took and the results it obtained. -J.P.K.
Chairman: Joachim P. Kuettner
Environmental Research Laboratories,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, Cote.
Members: Jerold Bidwell
Martin-Marietta, Denver, Colo.
Glenn A. Cato
TRW Systems, Redondo Beach, Calif.
Bernard N. Charles
Hughes Aircraft, El Segundo, Calif.
Murray Dryer
NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories
Howard D. Edwards
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Ga.
Paul MacCready Jr.
Meteorology Research Inc., Altadena, Calif.
Andrew J. Masley
McDonnell Douglas Missile & Space Systems, Santa Monica, Calif.
Robert Rados
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.
Secretary: Vernon J. Zurich
NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories
pecially true if the' study team 'de-
cides-as the University of Colorado
group did-to concentrate on current
rather than past observations. As the
UFO statistics show, this results in the
devotion of precious time to in-
vestigating the noise, rather than the
signal. It was mentioned earlier that
the Colorado University study faced
formidable odds because of the short
on improved data collection by objec-
tive means and on high-quality scien-
tific analysis. This would eliminate the
difficult problem of witness credibility.
An economic and technically sound
approach involving available remote-
sensing capabilities and certain soft-
ware changes will require some think-
ing on the side of the aerospace engi-
neering community. Proposals along
this line are already in the hands of
the Subcommittee. The financial sup-
port should be kept at a moderately
low level (It is estimated that a small
fraction of the costs of the University
of Colorado study would be required
initially) until reevaluation of the situ-
ation allows another assessment.
Without such an effort the controversy
can be expected to suffer further pol-
arization and confusion.
The Subcommittee feels that a
strictly scientific-technological view of
the UFO problem leads to this con-
clusion and that, for a technical com-
mittee, there is no need to stress the
public and social aspects of the UFO
controversy, which may have subsided
only temporarily. and will continue to
clamor for a more conclusive and con-
vincing answer. The. Subcommittee is
aware of several books on UFOs to be
published in the near future. What is
needed now is a moratorium in the
UFO discussion-with an objective,
wait-and-see attitude on the part of
the scientific and engineering commu-
nity, the government, and the public.
The approach recommended by this
committee requires not only the.atten-
tion of the scientist and engineer, but
also a readiness of government
agencies to consider sound proposals in
this field without bias or fear of ridi-
cule and repercussion-or, as Condon
expresses it, "on an openminded, un-
prejudiced basis." This perhaps is our
most important conclusion.
Finally, the Subcommittee believes
the decision by the Air Force to di-
vorce itself from the UFO problem
should be completed by allowing the
files to be archived by a civilian
agency, either government or univer-
sity, after proper safeguards for the
protection of witnesses and their
names as well as full declassification
mendation of the O'Brien committee procedures.
to negotiate multiple contracts for This Subcommittee intends to pub-
continuing investigations had been fol- lish additional information on the
lowed, this difficulty would perhaps UFO problem in the AIAA journals
have been avoided. There is also little to give the members of AIAA an op-
hope to expect a solution of this ex- portunity to form their own opinion.
tremely complex problem ' by the ef- This information will include typical
forts of a single individual. ' examples of the so-called "hard-core
The Subcommittee sees the only. residue" and some potential engineer-
promising approach as a continuing, -
duration af,{t.
s t EP RWItasL:it2 fE 'IYt lblfortCTA'-R if ROO O1 OO0100010011-9
November 1970
 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R0001 00010011-9
E. U. CONDON
Professor Condon conducted a
study of Unidentified Flying Objects,
from late 1966 to the summer of
1968, at the request of the U.S. Air
Force. The full report has been pub-
lished ' under the title, "Scientific
Study of Unidentified Flying Ob-
jects," in paperback by Bantam
Books, and in hardback by E. P. Dut-
ton and Co. This article is based on
a talk presented before the Ameri-
can Philosophical Society last April.
The author is professor of physics at
the University of Colorado.
Throughout human history men
have been seeing strange and terrifying
apparitions in the sky. The literature
dealing with such experiences is enor-
mous. The word "spectre" is used
generically to describe phenomena of
this type. This word's earliest use,
cited in the Oxford English Diction-
ary (OED), is in the title of a book by
Z. Jones published in 1605, "A Trea-
tise of Specters or straunge Sights, Vi-
sions and Apparitions appearing sensi-
bly unto men." The word "spectrum"
is cited first in 1611 in a passage which
said, "Walsingham hath written of a
fatal Spectrum or Apparition
-where sundry monsters of diuers
colours . . . were seen." Sixty years
later, Isaac Newton used the word to
describe his decomposition of sunlight
with a glass prism in these words,
"The Sunbeams ... passing through a
glass prism to the opposite Nall, ex-
hibited there a Spectrum of divers
colours."
From these two uses of the word
"spectrum" comes naturally the two
meanings which the OED gives for
the word "spectrology": (1) The sci-
ence or study of spectres, and (2) The
scientific study of spectra. The OED
cites as an example of the first mean-
ing an 1820 quote from Washington
Irving's "Sketchbook": "The gloom of
religious abstraction, and the wildness
of their situation . . . had filled their
imaginations with the frightful chi-
meras of witchcraft and spectrology."
And of the second, an 1862 quote
from the "American Journal of Sci-
ye
U
Loved and
ence": "The attention of the French
scientific world is wholly fixed on spec-
trology, for thus do they designate the
experiment with the spectroscope of
Bunsen and Kirchhoff."
I am the second man in human his-
tory to have written a book on spec-
trology in both of these two distinct
meanings. Donald Menzel was the
first.
FLYING SAUCERS
Modern interest in UFOs stems
mainly from the observations of Ken-
neth Arnold, a Boise, Idaho, business-
man on June 24, 1947. While flying
near Mt. Rainier in Washington he
reported seeing sonic objects skimming
along which he described in a manner
that led newspapermen to call them
"flying saucers." Although not all ob-
jects later reported are saucer-shaped,
this term is often used generically, but
the term UFO is preferable. The Air
Force studies anything seen flying in
the sky which might present a defense
hazard, and thus has been concerned
with the thousands of reports of sight-
ings of UFOs that have come to them
in the nearly 22 years since this first
modern report.
From such study they concluded
long ago that no defense problem was
involved in these reports from the
public. The amount of attention which
the Air Force gave to the problem
after the first four or five years has
been minimal.
In the early '50s the story of UFOs
began to appear in sensational pseudo-
science magazine. articles and paper-
back books. These have had a large
sale. The book by Frank Edwards,
"Flying Saucers-Serious Business,"
probably holds the record with more
than 1,300,000 copies sold. Several
other titles have sold more than 200,-
000 copies. The so-called Condon re-
port was given an initial printing of
200,000 copies. In the last three years
40,000 school children have written
the Air Force asking for UFO data.
The principal source of the wide-
spread interest is the contention of
some writers that at least some of the
things seen may represent flying craft
from other civilizations, either else-
where in the solar system, or even
from a planetary system associated
with some other star.
We must be'extremely careful about
our language. Some UFOs may be
such visitors, it may be postulated, and
some writers go so far as to say that
they actually are. To discover clear, un-
ambiguous evidence on this point
would be a scientific discovery of the
first magnitude, one which I would be
quite happy to make. We found no
such evidence, and so state in our re-
port. But it is not true to say that we
"proved that flying saucers do not
come from outer space." All that can
be said is that, of the cases we looked
into carefully, we found no evidence in
support of the hypothesis of their ex-
tra-teyrestrial origin.
We concluded that it is not worth-
while to carry on a continuing study
of UFOs in the manner which has
been done thus far: that of going out
into the field to interview persons who
say they have seen something peculiar.
The difficulty about using objective
means of study lies in the rarity of the
apparitions, their short duration, and
the tendency of observers not to report
their experience until long after it has
ended. When a known object is the
source of many reports, as in the case
of the Zond IV re-entry of March 3,
1968, there is extraordinary disagree-
ment among the descriptions of what
was seen by different observers of the
same event. This result shows that no
great certainty attaches to the specific
details of any of the reports.
These difficulties led us to conclude
that it is quite unproductive of results
of scientific value to study UFOs in
the traditional manner. But, contrary
to popular belief, we do not rule out
all future study. We say: "Although
we conclude after nearly two years of
intensive study, that we do not see any
fruitful lines of advance from the study
of UFO reports, we believe that any
scientist with adequate training and
Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100010011-9
 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R0001 00010011-9
credentials who does come up with a
clearly defined, specific proposal for
study should be supported."
This conclusion has been bitterly de-
nounced by the flying saucer buffs who
have been making money from sensa-
tional writing and lecturing to gullible
audiences, and collecting dues from the
membership of their pseudo-science
organizations. One prominent profes-
sor of atmospheric physics has been
giving speeches in which he advocates
that the federal government spend on
UFO study amounts of money which
would "dwarf" that spent on the space
program.
Even though nearly a year has gone
by since my work in this field ended, I
continue to be astonished at the fervor
with which many people hold views
that are totally unsupported by objec-
tive evidence of any kind. Many peo-
ple seem quite incapable of recogniz-
ing any distinction between what
might be so and what actually is so.
Some of these are charlatans, in my
opinion, who profess belief in order to
collect royalties from writing and fees
from lecturing. But others are deeply
sincere.
THE CULTISTS
We ran into many more interesting
cases than we could include in the re-
port, already criticized by many for
being too thick. There was a young
airman, second class, at an Air Force
base in New Mexico whose 19-year-old
wife died suddenly of a heart attack.
They were members of a flying saucer
cult which gathered around and de-
cided that the woman's spirit had gone
to Venus on a flying saucer, and that
she would want her body back when
she returned. So they wrapped it in a
sheet and stored it in a barn rather
than having it properly buried. The
police learned of this by a mysterious
postcard from a woman in Spokane,
Washington. At first they thought the
card was a hoax, but investigation
proved that the young woman's body
had been by this time stored in that
barn for about three weeks. The young
airman had seen lots of flying saucers
but had not reported any of them, say-
ing: "I didn't know the Air Force was
interested!"
In the spring of 1967 I was visited
several times by a well-mannered man
who claimed to be acting as agent for
the Third Universe (we are the First,
and the Second is inhabited by beings
that resemble polar bears, he said). He
said he was authorized to negotiate a
contract with the U.S. government by
which they would teach us to make
inter-stellar flying saucers for $3 bil-
lion. The first billion was to be paid
after a demonstration to government
officials at ,Dulles airport, the second
after a major national laboratory had
been built and our scientists and tech-
nologists had learned how to make fly-
ing saucers, and the third after they
had trained our flight crews in inter-
stellar navigation. He was specific
down to the point of naming the bank
in Arlington, Virginia, where the $3
billion was to be deposited.
He wanted me, in the interim, to
pay him $3,000 as "earnest money" to
be deposited in a particular bank in
Western Colorado to the account of
his organization, which was called the
"Omnific Intelligence Continuum."
Inquiry to that bank revealed that
there really was such an account.
banker cautiously said, "Small sums go
in and out." Asked about membership
of the organization the banker told
me, "So far as I know Mr. X is the
only member." Since part of Mr. X's
story is thus verified, ought we now to
believe everything he tells us?
REAL OR PSEUDO-SCIENCE
The most vivid lesson that I learned
from such experiences is what a nar-
row, wobbly line there is between real
science and pseudo-science. So far as
the public is concerned most of the
science which they know about they
do not understand. Very few people
can state clearly the grounds for belief
that the Earth goes around the Sun,
rather than vice versa, or for that mat-
ter, for our belief that the Earth is a
ball rather than flat. Coming to more
modern instances, who among the
many investors in the profitable semi-
conductor industries have the slightest
idea how a transistor works really?
In the given circumstances most of
the scientific ideas that are accepted
by the public are accepted entirely on
faith. To most people, completely
lacking any basic understanding of un-
derlying principles, the proposition
that the configuration of the planets
and stars at the time of our birth de-
termines the course of events in our
lives, seems no more unlikely or pre-
posterous than many of the well-estab-
lished,truths of science which they do
accept without understanding them.
There are some 10,000 astrologers in
America who make their living practic-
ing astrology and only about 2,000
astronomers who live by practicing as-
tronomy. If celestial matters were de-
cided democratically by the members
of both professions lumped together,
then the "real" astronomers, would al-
ways end up as a depressed minority.
Flying saucers and astrology are not
the only pseudo-sciences which have a
considerable following among us.
There used to be spiritualism, there
continues to be extrasensory percep-
tion, psychokinesis, and a host of oth-
ers. Hanson W. Baldwin in the "New
York Times" has told how the Ma-
rines at Camp Pendleton are trained
for Vietnam in the use of dowsers
made of bent wire coathangers as a
means of locating tunnels and other
underground works of the Viet Cong.
Recently a visitor from a Navy re-
search installation told me that some
Approved For Release 2001/04/02 CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100010011-9
 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R0001 00010011-9
admirals had purchased from an' in-
ventor a wholly worthless invention
which it was claimed could detect sub-
merged submarines by a radar-like re-
flection of electromagnetic waves. This
could not possibly work because of the
conductivity of sea water, and it did
not work when expensively tested. A PJblie Policy
mirals and certain congressmen. A
Russian spy in the same Navy labora-
tory got hold of the invention and our
test results and sent them to Russia.
The Russians did more work on the
invention. Although they understood
at once that it must be foolish, they
thought they might be wrong because
MARGARET MEAD
nd BDUe-,havioral Science
the Americans had spent so much I am testifying out of long experi-
time and money studying this crackpot ence in the application of anthropol-
invention. We know about this be- ogY to contemporary national and in-
cause an American spy in their labora- ternational problems. During World
tory sent to us the story of their work. War II, I worked within the context
These and many other examples of the National Research Council on
that could be given show that we have problems of nutrition, national morale,
failed rather miserably to give even to civilian defense, and cross national
so-called educated people some feeling communication with Great Britain. I
for the way in which science investi- was one of the group that developed
gates a subject, and the way in which anthropological work on cultures at a
scientists subject their observational distance-notably Germany and Japan
material to critical evaluation before -and after World War II, I partici-
reaching conclusions. The thing that . pated in and directed a series of studies
most people are least able to do is to on behalf of the Office of Naval Re-
refrain from drawing conclusions when search, Rand and MIT, including
there is not enough evidence at hand studies on the Soviet Union, China
to warrant drawing conclusions. and France. These were interdiscipli-
In ancient times, the future was nary team activities (summarized in
foretold in many ways that have gone "The Anthropology of, Human Con-
out of favor, such as by examining the flict," Mead and Metraux in "The Na-
entrails of sacrificed animals, or basing tore of Human Conflict," edited by
omens on the study of the flight of Elton B. McNeil, Prentice Hall, Inc.
flocks of birds. (Cicero practiced this 1965). Since 1952 I have devoted my-
latter method.) Before you smile, bear self to the study of technical assistance
in mind that these views have never and political implications of culture
really had as much scientific study as change, education, cross national and
have the UFO reports. Perhaps we international order and control of war-
need a National Magic Agency to fare, population control, environmen-
make a large and expensive study of all tal control, urbanization, cross ideo-
these matters, including the future sci- logical communication, and recently to
entific study of UFOs, if any. the world wide implications of the
Where corruption of children's generation gap.
minds is at stake, I do not believe in I am here to discuss the possible
freedom of the press or freedom of contributions that the behavioral sci-
speech. In my view, publishers who ences together, and anthropology in
publish or teachers who teach any of particular, can contribute to national
the pseudo-sciences as established and international affairs.
truth should, on being found guilty, During World War II we made a
be publicly horsewhipped, and forever fine start in the utilization of this
banned from further activity in these group of young sciences on a whole
usually honorable professions. Truth series of problems ranging from ob-
and children's minds are too precious taining a better understanding of the
for us to allow them to be abused by national cultures of our opponents,
charlatans. our allies and ourselves, to the deter-
Physical scientists have been vocal
and highly influential in Washington
in the shaping of public policy on a
number of fronts since the end of
World War H. But what has become
of the influence of behavioral scien-
tists in Congress and on Capitol Hill?
Margaret Mead discusses the ques-
tion in this excerpt from her testimony
before the U.S. Senate Foreign Re-
lations Committee June 20, 1969 in
Oa hearing on the psychological as-
pects of public policy. Dr. Mead is
Curator of Ethnology at the Ameri-
can Museum of Natural History and
Adjunct Professor of Anthropology at
Columbia University.
mination of specific policies within the
armed forces and within the nation,
from the prediction of how Japan
would respond to our treatment of the
Emperor, to a clarification of relation-
ships between the United States and
our principal allies, to an illumination
of the ambiguities in the responses of
the various occupied countries to prob-
lems of civilian morale, to the main-
tenance of the health of the nation, to
an unprecedented mobilization of our
industrial resources, and to a deploy-
ment of resources in post war rehabili-
tation of a badly wounded world.
These successes were accomplished un-
der a set of conditions which can be
clearly specified: a state of prepared
ness, mobilization and post war activ-
ity made possible by almost total com-
mitment to a war which could be seen
as a moral effort against almost over-
whelming power and risk; a willingness
of the community of behavioral scien-
tists to give unstintingly of time and
effort, within and without government,
Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100010011-9
 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-ROP81 R00560R0001 00010011-9
14 February 1969, Volume 163, Number 3868
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR
THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE
Science serves its readers as a forum for the
presentation and discussion of important issues
related to the advancement of science, including
the presentation of minority or conflicting points
of view, rather than by publishing only material
on which a consensus has been reached. Accord-
ingly, all articles published in Science-including
editorials, news 'and comment, and book reviews
-are signed and reflect the individual views of the
authors and not official points of view adopted by
the AAAS or the institutions with which the
authors are affiliated.
Editorial Board
1969
EMIL HAURY KENNETH S. PITZER
WILLARD F. LIBBY ALEXANDER RICH
EVERETT I. MENDELSOHN CLARENCE M. ZENER
JOHN R. PIERCE
1970
GUSTAF O. ARRHENIUS RICHARD C. LEWONTIN
FRED R. EGGAN ALFRED O. C. NIER
HARRY F. HARLOW FRANK W. PUTNAM
MILTON HARRIS
Editorial Staff
Editor
PHILIP H. ABELSON
Publisher Business Manager
DAEL WOLFLE HANS NUSSBAUM
Managing Editor: ROBERT V. ORMES
Assistant Editors: ELLEN E. MURPHY, JOHN E.
RINGLE
Assistant to the Editor: NANCY TEIMOURIAN
News Editor: JOHN WALSH
Foreign Editor: DANIEL S. GREENBERG?
News and Comment: LUTHER J. CARTER, BRYCE
NELSON, PHILIP M. BOFFEY, PETER THOMPSON,
MARTI MUELLER, ANNE H. LARUS -
Book Reviews: SYLVIA EBERHART
Editorial Assistants: SUSAN AXELRAD, JOANNE
BELK, ISABELLA BOULDIN, ELEANORE BuTz, HELEN
CARTER, GRAYCE FINGER, NANCY HAMILTON, OLIVER
HEATWOLE, ANNE HOLDSWORTH, PAULA LECKY,
KATHERINE LIVINGSTON, LEAH RYAN, Lois SCHMITT,
BARBARA SHEFFER, RICHARD SOMMER, YA Li SWIGART,
ALICE THEILE
European Office: 22 Mulberry Walk, London, S.W.
3, England (Telephone: [phone])
Advertising Staff
Director Production Manager
EARL J. SCHERAGO KAY GOLDSTEIN
Advertising Sales Manager: RICHARD L. CHARLES
Sales: New York, N.Y., 11 W. 42 St. (212-PE-
6-1858), ROBERT S. BUGBEE; Scotch Plains, N.J.,
12 Unami Lane (201-889-4873), C. RICHARD
CALLIS; Medfield, Mass. 02052, 4 Rolling Lane
(617-359-2370), RICHARD M. EzEQUELLE; Chicago,
Ill. 60611, 919 N. Michigan Ave., Room 426
(312-DE-7-4973), HERBERT L. BURKLUND; Los
Angeles 45, Calif., 8255 Beverly Blvd. (213-653-
9817), WINN NANCE.
EDITORIAL CORRESPONDENCE: 1515 Massa-
chusetts Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20005. Phone:
202-387-7171. Cable: Advancesci, Washington.
Copies of "Instructions for Contributors" can be
obtained from the editorial office. See also page
1709, Science, 29 December 1967. ADVERTISING
CORRESPONDENCE: Rm. 1740, 11 W. 42 St.,
New York, N.Y. 10036. Phone: 212-PE-6-1858.
SCIENCE
Beings from Outer Space-Corporeal and Spiritual
Since World War II, concern with UFO's from outer space, controlled
by intelligent beings, bears much resemblance to concern with the
so-called physical phenomena of psychic research after World War I.
Spiritualistic mediums claimed they could produce movements of objects
by supernormal forces, including the production of ectoplasmic emana-
tions from their bodies. Today this nonsense is pretty much forgotten
but these manifestations reverberated in the press during the 1920's
and 1930's and were regarded by many as proof of communication with
beings from another world in the form of spirits of deceased persons.
Belief in this sort of thing involved many professional people including
some distinguished scientists, clergymen, physicians, writers, and men
of affairs, and the psychic research societies published numerous sup-
porting papers of a pseudoscientific nature.
A famous case was that of a Boston medium in the 1920's, who had
a wide following. She was the wife of an eminent surgeon and claimed
communication with her dead brother. The old Scientific American
magazine had offered a prize of $5000 to anyone who could demonstrate
supernormal physical phenomena to a committee of its choosing. At her
request, she was investigated in 1924 by this committee, composed of
several Harvard and M.I.T. professors along with Harry Houdini, the
magician. The committee reported that evidence for her supernormal
powers was inconclusive, although Houdini denounced her as fraud-
ulent. Following wide press publicity, a group at Harvard, of which I
was one, later_investigated -her in_a-series_of seances in the psychological
laboratories and found not only that the phenomena were due to trickery,
but also how the tricks were done. Our findings, published in an article
by me in the Atlantic Monthly of November 1925, resulted in violent
recriminations and denunciations of us in published pamphlets and
press statements by her followers. Our exposure enhanced her publicity,
and she gained more adherents. She was skillful in modifying her mode
of operation, depending upon the gullibility of her audience and other
circumstances. On several subsequent occasions she was also exposed
by other scientists, but at no time until her death did she lose a
diminishing circle of devoted believers.
The basic difficulty inherent in any investigation of phenomena such
as those of psychic research or of UFO's is that it is impossible for
science ever to prove a universal negative. There will be cases which
remain unexplained because of lack of data, lack of repeatability, false
reporting, wishful thinking, deluded observers, rumors, lies, and fraud.
A residue of unexplained cases is not a justification for continuing an
investigation after overwhelming evidence has disposed of hypotheses
of supernormality, such as beings from outer space or communications
from the dead. Unexplained cases are simply unexplained. They can
never constitute evidence for any hypothesis. Science deals with prob-
abilities, and the Condon investigation adds massive additional weight
to the already overwhelming improbability of visits by UFO's guided
by intelligent beings. The Condon report rightly points out that further
investigations of UFO's will be wasteful. In time we may expect that
UFO visitors from outer space will be forgotten, just as ectoplasm as
evidence for communication with the dead is now forgotten. We may
also anticipate, however, that many present believers will continue to
believe for their own psychological reasons, which have nothing to do
with science and the rules of evidence.-HUDSON HOAGLAND, President
Emeritus, Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology, and Member,
AAAS Board of Directors
Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100010011-9