Documents / Document
This is the prepared statement James E. McDonald, a senior physicist at the University of Arizona's Institute of Atmospheric Physics, submitted to the House Committee on Science and Astronautics for its July 29, 1968 Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects. He draws on hundreds of witness interviews and weighs eight hypotheses. His conclusion is that UFOs are probably extraterrestrial surveillance devices. He argues that scientists have wrongly neglected the subject and urges much more scientific investigation and further Congressional hearings.
INTRODUCTION:.................................................................................................................................................................. 1 SCOPE AND BACKGROUND OF PRESENT COMMENTS:........................................................................................ 2 THE UNCONVENTIONAL NATURE OF THE UFO PROBLEM:................................................................................ 3 SOME ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESES:............................................................................................................................. 3 SOME REMARKS ON INTERVIEWING EXPERIENCE AND TYPES OF UFO CASES ENCOUNTERED:....... 5 WHY DON'T PILOTS SEE UFOs?....................................................................................................................................10 WHY ARE UFOs ONLY SEEN BY LONE INDIVIDUALS, WHY NO MULTIPLE-WITNESS SIGHTINGS? .....16 WHY AREN'T UFOs EVER SEEN IN CITIES? WHY JUST IN OUT-OF-THE-WAY PLACES?...........................22 WHY DON'T ASTRONOMERS EVER SEE UFOs? .......................................................................................................27 METEOROLOGISTS AND WEATHER OBSERVERS LOOK AT THE SKIES FREQUENTLY. WHY DON'T THEY SEE UFOs?................................................................................................................................................................30 DON'T WEATHER BALLOONS AND RESEARCH BALLOONS ACCOUNT FOR MANY UFOs?......................34 WHY AREN'T UFOs EVER TRACKED BY RADAR?....................................................................................................38 WHY AREN'T THERE NUMEROUS PHOTOS OF UFOs IF THEY REALLY EXIST? ..........................................42 IF UFOs ARE REAL, SHOULDN'T THEY PRODUCE SOME REAL PHYSICAL EFFECTS? ............................45 IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE OF HAZARD OR HOSTILITY IN THE UFO PHENOMENA?.................................46 MISAPPLICATIONS OF ATMOSPHERIC PHYSICS IN PAST UFO EXPLANATIONS:......................................49 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:.....................................................................................................................52 REFERENCES:.....................................................................................................................................................................53 (Note: The above table of content is not part of the original paper and has been added for convenience only.) STATEMENT ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS submitted to the House Committee on Science and Astronautics at July 29, 1968, Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects, Rayburn Bldg., Washington, D.C., by James E. McDonald. by James E. McDonald, Senior Physicist, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, and professor, Department of Meteorology, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona. Prepared statement submitted to the House Committee on Science and Astronautics at July 29, 1968, Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects, Rayburn Bldg., Washington, D.C., by James E. McDonald. INTRODUCTION: I should like first to commend the House Committee on Science and Astronautics for recognizing the need for a closer look at scientific aspects of the long-standing puzzle of the Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs). From time to time in the history of science, situations have arisen in which a problem of ultimately enormous importance went begging for adequate attention simply because that problem appeared to involve phenomena so far outside the current bounds of scientific knowledge that it was not even regarded as a legitimate subject of serious scientific concern. That is precisely the situation in which the UFO problem now lies. One of the principal results of my own recent intensive study of the UFO enigma is this: I have become convinced that the scientific community, not only in this country but throughout the world, has been casually ignoring as nonsense a matter of extraordinary scientific importance. The attention of your Committee can, and I hope will, aid greatly in correcting this situation. As you will note in the following, my own present opinion, based on two years of careful study, is that UFOs are probably extraterrestrial devices engaged in something that might very tentatively be termed "surveillance."
Document, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 55 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.