The National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (Nicap)

# Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81R00560R000100010001-0 investigators, impatient with NICAP's "conserv from reviewing the methods of investigation a

Some UFO investigators, impatient with NICAP's "conservative" policy of starting from the beginning and building up a solid case, have argued that investigation of the landing reports may be the only way to conclusively prove the extraterrestrial hypothesis. Perhaps they are right, but we believe that such an investigation will not be possible until the UFO problem generally attains scientific recognition.

Some borderline cases which have neither been proved nor disproved, are worth mentioning as possibly authentic close-up observations of seeming vehicles or craft. They are selected solely as examples of cases in which preliminary investigation turned up no derogatory information about the witnesses, and no glaring errors in their stories. We readily concede that cases of claimed contact with, or close-up observation of, beings in landed vehicles demand the closest scrutiny and the most painstaking investigation, which has seldom been possible to date.

These cases should not be taken out of context and used to imply either that NICAP accepts them at face value, or that we are gullible. On the contrary, we have been criticized by other UFO groups for our often voiced skepticism and demand for strong objective evidence in landing cases. It is a fact of human nature, we believe, that the more sensational or unorthodox a claim is, the stronger the evidence will have to be to convince people generally of its truth. We do not uncritically accept all reports without careful investigation and meaningful evidence. Rather, when the reports come from seemingly reputable people and are made with reasonable objectivity, we believe only that they deserve serious attention and far more thorough investigation.

## Close-up Observations:

June 27, 1959 New Guinea

Witnesses: Rev. William B. Gill and local natives

Color: Brightly lit, shaft of blue light shining upward from center.

Dimensions: About 35 feet diameter.

Distance: About 450 feet.

July 13, 1959 New Zealand

Witness: Mrs. Frederick Moreland

Color: Silhouetted, orange and green body lights.

Dimensions: About 20 feet diameter, 4-5 feet high.

Distance: About 40-50 yards.

September 20, 1961 New Hampshire

Witnesses: Mr. & Mrs. Barney Hill

Color: Silhouetted, bluish-white fluorescent glow from windows, red light on each side.

Dimensions: About as large as a 4-engine airliner.

Distance: About 100 feet.

## RECOMMENDATIONS

Summarizing the main problems and dangers associated with the UFO phenomenon, these points stand out:

* Doubt about the scientific adequacy of the Air Force investigation; lack of access to the specific detailed cases in Air Force files.

* The dangers of having a basically military organization responsible for overall evaluation of a scientific problem; the intrusion of military secrecy preventing the scientific community

from reviewing the methods of investigation and reasoning employed by Air Force investigators.

* The possibility of ignoring, or rationalizing away, facts which may have important effects on the human race, for good or ill.

* Continued exploitation of the public by con-men and opportunists who thrive because of the confusion and doubt.

* As previously pointed out by NICAP, the danger of accidental war resulting from misinterpretation of objects on radar scopes, a possibility made more likely by the general confusion and doubt surrounding the subject of UFOs.

* The threats to society posed by an unprepared and ill-informed public; the psychological preparation, and general planning for any eventuality needed if UFOs are in fact manifestations of extraterrestrial life.

One solution to all these problems would be a scientific and political review of the entire UFO situation. The main purposes would be clarification of the facts, and evaluation of those facts. This would require a program designed to (1) study the accumulated facts to date (including the detailed reports in Air Force files); (2) taking steps to insure that future reports are quickly and scientifically evaluated (encouraging citizens, and particularly scientists, engineers and pilots, to make immediate and full reports without fear of ridicule or reprisal; frank and full reporting of all data and evaluations to the public; open and serious treatment of UFO reports generally, as phenomena worthy of careful scientific attention).

The framework for a scientific review of UFOs could take many forms, and would not necessarily require huge appropriations of funds. (Some government grants to encourage specific evaluations might prove to be desirable.) Judging by public interest in UFOs displayed in letters to NICAP, there are hundreds of competent personnel who would almost certainly contribute their talents to a program of this nature.

VA simple directive to scientists and engineers at White Sands, Cape Kennedy and other government establishments could require personnel manning tracking equipment to attempt to track and record on instruments any UFOs observed in the vicinity. If something unexplained is tracked accidentally, this too should be reported. (Reports could be sent to some central office, such as the NASA Office of Life Sciences, or a university science department, and made available to any interested scientists).

Cooperation of existing astronomical societies, and such instrument programs as Smithsonian Institution's meteorite camera network in the western U. S., could be requested.

All reports from military sources, particularly pilots, could be sent to the central agency after deletion of legitimately classified portions of the intelligence reports.

$ \surd $ Commercial airlines; General Mills, Inc., balloon trackers; etc., all could be encouraged to report sightings.

The Air Force, of course, has a legitimate interest in anything that flies or anything with a threat potential to the country. Air Force liaison with this program would be desirable, and in fact civilian scientists (perhaps a special panel for the particular purpose) could assist the Air Force in an immediate evaluation of threat potential - in secret if necessary.

However, once it is determined that a given UFO report is not evidence of an attack on the country, all except legitimate security data on the case should be made public immediately. If the object or phenomenon is definitely explainable, the explanation and all evidence and reasoning leading thereto, should be reported. If the phenomenon is not immediately explainable, the report should be released as unevaluated data which any and all investigators could then evaluate independently.

Interpretation of the accumulating unexplained reports could then be accomplished (without any "aura of mystery") through the normal channels of scientific endeavor: scientific journals and papers. (A "special status" is given to UFO reports when they are not evaluated through normal scientific channels). Perhaps this program would cause a 24-hour sensation in the popular press, but it would soon become a matter of routine. Any conclusions reported by an individual scientist, or scientific agency, would then be the responsibility of that individual or agency and subject to the review (for accuracy and sound logic) of the entire scientific community.

If the evidence mounted, and a scientific consensus gained sway indicating UFOs might be space ships, initiation of a full government program - indeed an international program - would