nas re1

We concur with these evaluations and -recommendations.
IV. PANEL CONCLUSION
The range or topics in the Report is extensive and its various
chapters, dealing with many aspects or the subject, should prove of
value to scholars in many fields. Its analyses and findings are pertinent
and useful in any fUture assessment of activity in this field. We
concur in the recommendation suggesting that no high priority in UFO
investigations is warranted by data or the past two decades.
We are unanimous in the opinion that this has been a very credi-
table effort to apply objectively the relevant techniques of science
to the solution of the UFO problem. The Report recognizes that there
remain UFO sightings that are not easily explained. The Report does
suggest, however, so many reasonable and possible directions in which
an explanation may eventually be found, that there seems to be no reason
to attribute them to an extraterrestrial source without evidence that
is much more convincing. The Report also shows how difficult it is
to apply scientific methods to the occasional transient sightings with
any chance of success. While further study of particular aspects of
the topic (e.g., atmospheric phenomena) may be useful, a study of UFOs
in general is not a promising way to expand scientific understanding
of the phenomena. On the basis of present knowledge the least likely
explanation of UFOs is the hypothesis of extraterrestrial visitations
by intelligent beings.
--Gerald H. Clemence, chairman; H. R. Crane, David H. Dennison, Wallace
0. Fenn, H. Keffer Hartline, E. R. Hilgard, Mark Kec, Francis W. Reschelderier,
William W. Rubey, C. D. Shane, Oswald G. Villar, Jr.
Attachments:
--List of Panel Members
Attachment 2, pg 9