Documents / Hearing transcript
This NICAP extract reproduces the statement of Dr. Robert M. L. Baker, Jr., a Computer Sciences Corporation scientist and UCLA engineering faculty member, to the House Committee on Science and Astronautics symposium on unidentified flying objects on July 29, 1968. Baker reviews his analyses of the Utah, Montana, Venezuela and Vandenberg films. He argues that current radar and optical sensors are poorly suited to detecting anomalistic phenomena and urges a well-funded, long-term interdisciplinary research program. The extract ends with panel discussion including Hynek and Hall.
“The Advance”14 pages
Committee), British Astronomical Society (Fellow), American Astronomical Society, American Physical Society, and Meteoritical Society. His active security clearance is top secret. STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT M. L. BAKER, JR., SENIOR SCIENTIST, COMPUTER SCIENCES CORP., El SEGUNDO, CALIF., AND FACULTY, DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING, UCLA Dr. Baker. Fine, thank you, Mr. Roush. I should like to preface my remarks by stating my preference for the term "anomalistic observational phenomena," as opposed to the term "unidentified flying objects." Mr. Roush. I observed you were going to say that and I wonder about some of my Hoosiers back home using those terms. Dr. Baker. It comes trippingly off the tongue. Mr. Roush. It might not only cause some Hoosiers but some laymen some problems. It might be easier to say UFO's. You may go ahead. Dr. Baker. I call it AOP. From the data that I have reviewed and analyzed since 1954, it is my belief that there does exist substantial evidence to support the claim that an unexplained phenomenon -- or phenomena -- is present in the environs of the earth, but that it may not be "flying," may not always be "unidentified," and, perhaps, may not even be substantive "objects." In the following statement I will -- (1) Present a summary of the analyses that I have accomplished to date -- those that have led me to believe that anomalistic phenomena exist; (2) Explain the probable inadequacy of our current terrestrial sensors in observing and/or defining the characteristics of the anomalistic phenomena; (3) Suggest a number of tentative hypothetical sources for the phenomena, and the justification for their scientific study; (4) And, finally, I will make specific recommendations concerning the necessity for new types of closely related observational and study programs which might be implemented in a fashion that would permit the detection and quantitative analysis of the anomalistic phenomena. [[126]] Several appendices accompany this report. The first two are in response to Congressman Roush's invitational letter of July 10, 1968, and consist of my biographical sketch and a listing of my bibliography, respectively. The third appendix relates directly to my specific recommendations, and was included with the kind permission of Dr. Sydney Walker III. The fourth appendix presents three reprints of articles (Baker (1968a) and (1968b) and Walker (1968)) that are pertinent to the subject matter of this report. PART 1. ANALYSES OF ANOMALISTIC OBSERVATIONAL PHENOMENA UTAH AND MONTANA FILMS My initial contact with anomalistic observational phenomena -- AOP -- came in 1954 when I was a consultant to Douglas Aircraft Co. in Santa Monica, Calif., serving as special assistant to Dr. W. B. Klemperer, director of Douglas' research staff. The data consisted of two short film clips: one taken in Montana -- termed by us as the Montana film -- and one taken in Utah -- called by us the Utah film. These films were provided to us by the Air Technical Intelligence Center -- ATIC,
Hearing transcript, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 68 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.