Documents / FOIA release
This CIA release, approved in 2001, reprints two 1967 and 1968 publications. The first is a set of Science letters from December 1967 answering Markowitz's article on UFO physics. The writers argue that his case against extraterrestrial control of UFOs is weak, and one criticizes his use of the Chiles-Whitted and Tombaugh sightings. The second is John G. Fuller's LOOK article "Flying Saucer Fiasco" on the University of Colorado UFO study. It covers Robert Low's "trick" memo, the firing of Saunders and Levine, and NICAP's break with the project.
Read from the scan by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word.
# A statement from the director of NICAP After 17 months, NICAP has broken with the University of Colorado UFO Project. We join LOOK and John G. Fuller in disclosing the facts as a public service. At first, NICAP was dubious about an AF-financed project. After Dr. Condon pledged a fair study, we briefed scientists, trained field teams, loaned verified reports by pilots, aerospace engineers and other capable observers. Later, news stories quoted Condon as strongly biased, rejecting all evidence. When we found that barely one half of one percent of NICAP's cases were investigated (and none by Condon himself), we stopped transmitting. Administrator Low's disturbing proposals and the firing of Drs. Saunders and Levine led to our final break. Maj. Donald E. Keyhoe, USMC, Ret., Director NICAP will submit plans to the President and Congress for a new official investigation, free of military or civilian agencies, with majority-vote controls, frequent public reports and other safeguards. We welcome suggestions (confidential, if desired) from scientists and other citizens seeking a full, open evaluation. Meantime, to offset the Colorado failure, our investigations will be intensified-NICAP is the world's largest UFO fact-finding organization, with over 300 scientific and technical advisers, trained investigators and thousands of nationwide members. To help increase factual evidence, we urge that all verified sightings be reported to us. Names will be kept confidential, if requested. National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena 1536 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20036 Condon accused him of being disloyal and treacherous, and Levine replied that loyalty to a scientific goal might take precedence over personal loyalty. Condon asked why Levine didn't invite him to come over and investigate the important cases. Levine indicated that he did not feel it was his place to invite the chief scientist of the project over. The questioning lasted about an hour. Condon dismissed Levine abruptly. Mrs. Armstrong had joined the project at its inception with no convictions whatever about uro's. By February, 1967, she was convinced that the study was being gravely misdirected. When, on February 7, 1968, Condon told her that he was going to fire Saunders and Levine the next day, Mrs. Armstrong's first impulse was to resign immediately. But she then decided first to confront Condon with what she regarded as clear, unassailable documentation of the factors behind the disagreement and low morale of the staff. She talked to Condon on February 22, 1968, at his office. She told him frankly that there appeared to be an almost unanimous lack of confidence in the project coordinator and his scientific direction of the project. She pointed out that Low had indicated little interest in talking to those who carried out the investigations or in reading their reports. She said that her long, close association with Low gave strong evidence that he was trying very hard to say as little as possible in the final report, and to say that in the most negative way possible. At Condon's request, she wrote a follow-up letter in which she added that the tone of the memo indicated that Low was not unbiased from the beginning. Condon then wrote her: "My position is that that letter is a confidential matter between the two of us and that for you to disclose it to anyone else would be gravely unethical." But after long consideration, Mrs. Armstrong felt that it was more important to the public interest to state her feelings clearly. The others who left the project also felt they had an obligation to speak out, and when Condon failed to respond positively to his outspoken letter of criticism, McDonald brought the matter before the executive officers of the National Academy of Sciences in a vigorous written protest. Saunders and Levine cleared their desks at Woodbury Hall and left. Asked about the near-mutiny in the investigating staff, Condon said that he would make no comment. Low stated that he had absolutely "zero comment" to make about the dismissals. Thurston E. Manning, vice president and dean of the faculties of the University of Colorado, delivered word through his secretary that he had nothing to say. Scott Tyler, in charge of public relations for the university, said that he had no comment. The hope that the establishment of the Colorado study brought with it has dimmed. All that seems to be left is the $500,000 trick. END --- Everybody knows somebody who needs a more effective deodorant. We think we've got it. Mennen Pushbutton Deodorant. Spray for spray, Mennen delivers more of the protective ingredient than the aerosol deodorant your friend is probably using. Send him (or her) a can. If you'd rather, send us a dollar and we'll send the can. Delivered in a plain brown wrapper. They'll never know who to thank. "Send A Can" Offer. P.O. Box PB-68-L, Kenvil, N.J. 07847 I know somebody who needs Mennen Pushbutton Deodorant. Here is a dollar. Will you send a can to:
FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. The text was read from the page images by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word. 7 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.