Baker report, 1968 congressional hearings

there seems to be sufficient unexplained anomalous hard-and-soft data to warrant an experimental program. Several
experiments suggest themselves and might include geological studies, searches for scraps of material evidence, psychiatric-
medical studies of witnesses, or radar/optical arrays.
In broad outline, one recommended experiment would involve a large aperture tracing radar that would slave two
cinetheodolite-type optical trackers if and when an anomalous object appeared. The radar "lock-on" and tracking-data-
analysis program would be especially designed to avoid satellites and, if possible, common meteors and airplanes, but
would, for example, detect comet or macrometeorite entry, ball lightning, and any erratic or anomalous object within its
range (a range that would probably be limited to 500 km or less). Thus, the system might at least provide accurate
positional information that would provide useful meteoritic data and meteorological data in the absence of more bizarre
phenomena. The cameras (preferably using Schmidt-type, Maskutov, or Baker catadioptric type optics and, perhaps,
computer-enhanced digitalized pictorial data [11]) would be on a 5 to 10 km base line (the "lock-on" program for the active
skin-tracking radar might follow the modified Leuschner differential-correction system suggested on pp. 114 and 115 of
reference [1] and the system would need to be reliable enough to operate unattended for weeks at a time. As shown by
studies of meteorite and comet flux, such as Hartmann's [12], Shoemaker and Lowery [13], McCrosky [14], and Lamar's
[5], a waiting period of a year or so is necessary in order to have significant probability of detecting and tracking such
natural extraterrestrial objects.
The question of the proper geographical location of the experimental site would almost be as important as the specification
of the radar/optical and computer/communications complex itself. The meteoriticist would probably prefer an area with
good atmospheric seeing and of low population density such as the "... Tucson area..." [15]. The geologist would prefer a
location near dry lakes [16] in order to facilitate the possible recovery of meteoritic or other material, or timely study of
manifestations of cometary impact or sub-end-point meteoritic debris [17]. The psychiatrist would be concerned with the
psychiatric-medical credence levels of eye witness (soft data) associated with any hard data that might be obtained by the
experimental array [18] as well as the general psychological analysis of the "... tendency all over the world to believe in
saucers and to want them real, ..." [19]. Thus, he would tend to prefer a site in a moderate population density area. The
physicist interested in ball lightning might wish for a site in which atmospheric electrical disturbances were
[[183]]
frequent. As Singer noted [20], "The specific properties of ball lightning, which present particular difficulty in
experimental duplication, are formations of the sphere in air (at near-atmospheric pressure and at a distance from the
source of energy) and its extensive motion. It is evident that additional clarification of both theoretical and experimental
aspects of this phenomenon is needed." Often marsh gas exhibits bizarre observational data and a location near a marsh
might be useful in the examination of such phenomena. Clearly, an overall reconcilement of these diverse and
interdisciplinary requirements must be accomplished during the site (or, perhaps, sites) selection process.
In summary, then, four points are to be made:
1. That we have not now nor have we been able in the past to achieve a complete or even partially complete
surveillance of space in the vicinity of the Earth, which would betray the presence of any anomalistic phenomena.
2. That so-called hard data on anomalistic observational phenomena do, in fact, exist; but that they are of poor
quality due to the equipment employed in obtaining them.
3. That it follows from the scientific method that an experiment or experiments be devised to define better the
anomalistic data.
4. That, in order to justify such an experiment or experiments, it is not necessary to presuppose the existence of
intelligent extraterrestrial life operating in the environs of the Earth or to make very dubious speculations [9], [10]
either concerning "their" advanced scientific and engineering capabilities or "their" psychological motivations and
behavioral patterns.
ROBERT M. L. BAKER, JR.
The Senior Scientist of System Sciences Corporation,
a subdivision of Computer Sciences Corporation,
650 N. Sepulveda Boulevard,
El Segundo, California, 90245 and the