Re: Declaration in Bryant V CIA

~ g
Approved for Release: 202§[06/11 C07083374
~45‘ -
~=;t>-- .
UFOS
chairman; Samuel A. Goudsmit, a
nuelmr physicist from the Broolthavcn
National Laboratories; Luis Alvarez, a
high-energy physicist; Thornton Page,
the deputy director of the johns Hop-
ltins Operations Research Qliice and
an expert on radar and electronics; and
Lloyd Berlcner, a director of the
Btookhaven National Laboratories and
a specialist in geophysics.”
The charge to the panel was to review
the available evidence on,UFOs and
to consider the possible dangers'oF the
phenomena to US national security.
The panel met from 14 to 17 Ianuary
1953. ltreviewed Air Force data on
UFO case histories and, after spend-_
ing I2 hours studying the
phenomena, declared that reasonable
explanations could be suggested For
most. if not all, sightings. For exam-
ple, after reviewing motion-picture
film taken of a UFO sighting neat
Tretnonton, Utah, on 2 July 1952
and one near Great Falls, Montana, -
on I5 August 1950. the panel con-
cluded that the images on the
Tremonton film were caused by sun-
light reflecting of? Seagulls and that
the images at Great Falls were sun-
light reilcctingolit’ the surface of two
Air Force interceptors.“
The panel concluded unanimously
that there was no evidence of a direct
threat to national security in the UFO
sightings. Nor could the panel find
any evidence that the objects sighted
might be extratctrcstrials. it did find
that continued emphasis on UPC
reporting might threaten “the orderly
Functioning“ of the government by
clogging the channels oF communica-
tion with irrelevant reports and by
inducing “hysterical mass behavior"
UFO phenomena and use them to dis-
rupt US air defenses.”
To meet these problems, the panel rec-
ommended that the National Security
Council debunk UFO reports and
institute a policy of public cclumtion
to reassure the public of the laclc of
evidence behind UFOs. It suggested
using the mass media, advertising,
business clubs, schools, and ‘even the
Disneyoorporation to get the message
across. Reporting at the height of
McCarthyism, the panel also recom-
mended that such private UFO
groups as the Civilian Flying Saucer
Investigators in Los Angeles and the
Aerial Phenomena Research Organiza-
tion in Wisconsin be monitored for
subversive activities.”
The Robertson panel's conclusions
were strikingly similar to those of the
earlier Air Force project reports on
SIGN and GRUDGE and to those of
the Cl.-\'s own OSI Study Group. All
investigative groups found that UFO
reports indicated no direct threat to
national security and no evidence of
visits by extraterrestrials.
Following the Robertson panel lind-
ings, the Agency abandoned efforts to
draft an NSCID on UFOs.” The Sci-
entific Advisory Panel on UFOs- (the
Robertson panel) submitted its report
to the LAC. the Secretary of Defense,
the Director ofthc Federal Civil
Defense Administration, and the
Chairman of the National Security
Resources Board. CIA officials said
no htrthet consideration of the sub-
ject appeared wartantcd. although
they continued to monitor sightings
in the interest 0F national security.
Philip Strong and Fred Durant from
harmful to constituted authority. A. _
_ "__OS[ also briefed the Office of
_ .Tl\¢,Pant_l_ also worried that potcnti§:_l;:»r,. National Estimates on the findings.”
' -'¢ -"~“’e'ticmict-contemplating an attack o'ii'7"-“"7 1731A ofiicials wantediknowledge of
the United States might exploit the
72 ,
any Agency interat in the subject of
flying saucers catefiilly restricted, not-
ing not only that the Robertson panel
report was classified but also that any
mention of-Cl_A sponsorship of the
panel was F0 rbidden. This attitude
would later cause the Agency major
problems relating to its credibility.”
The 19505: Fading CIA Interest in
UFOs
After the report of the Robertson
panel, Agency oliicials put the entire
issue of UFOs on the back burner. In
May 1953. Chadwcll transferred chief
responsibility For keeping abreast of
UFOs to O$I's Physics and Electronic
Division, while the Applied Science
Division continued to provide any nec-
essary support.” Todos M. Odarenlto,
chief of the Physic and Electronics
Division, did not want to rake on the
problem, contending that it would
require too much oi" his divi;ion's ana-
lytic and clerical time. Given the
findings of the Robertson panel, he
proposed to consider the project “inac-
tive” and to devote only one analyst
part-time and a file clerk to maintain a
reference file of the activities of the Air
Force and other agencies on UFOs.
Neither the Navy not the Army
showed much interest in UFOs,
according to Odarenko.”
A nonbeliever in UFOs, Odarenko
sought to have his division relieved of
the responsibility For monitoring UFO
reports. in I955. For example, he rec-
ommended that the entire project be
terminated because no new informa-
tion concerning UFOs had surfaced.
Btsides, he argued, his division waft fac-
ing a serious budget reduction and
could not spare the resources.” Chad-
well and other Agency officials,
however, continued to worry..ab0ut_v
UFOs. Of special coneern'wei_€Yf?\_>ciri‘-i“
seas reports of UFO sightings and
~:-
Approved for Release: 2025/06/11 C07083374
5-I’:-‘:* -.=,¢...,--..~.;; ;.+.:s V .. .. . .
'
ii
- 3‘: -'~~-~'.. ~».-':=~";~ vi‘--.1;-..-=_ 3-;,-§*-*{_*'-.=_2-".I’-'3$§"I;;'-»£7;"¥;:L';=-E§*.t~i‘L'¢»z~ _-,'-_',i=,=-s.:'~~:'r».=;-V,-;~_...'i,¢-;.,,-»_-»-,-$1.. _\-;;y-H ,,i-._--, . . ._ _..,. .
I
> - > ~ ~ i ' ~ ~ ~ -- I 1-. ~,;*:.‘,'.'.:*.\':; .»: ;_~.1-1-.‘.T.-_.~.;-..-_>,._;__r_;_:,,.__,>,.,__ _,,,_.,,,_,,,»..,:‘,.‘__.w{w