Robertson Panel Report

Approved For Re.se 2001/08/07: CIA-RDP81R00560R~00030027-0
··•"""'$liiit:tl~~~'1~~,,.,,"""'"">:50 'E'""e""rf'" ,. '"· ·">If<·
~&:~).~
1000 man-hours of professional and sub-professional time in the
preparation of graph plots of individual frames of the film, show-
ing apparent and relative motion of objects and variation in their
light intensity. It was the opinion of the P.I.L. representatives
that the objects sighted were not birds, balloons or aircraft, were
nnot reflections because there 1ras no blinking while passing through
60° of arc" and were, therefore, 11self-luminous". Plots of motion
and variation in light intensity of the objects were displayed,
While the Panel Members were impressed by the evident enthusiasm,
industry and extent of effort of the P.I.L. team, they could not
accept the conclusions reached. Some of the reasons for this were
as follows: •
a. A semi-spherical object can readily produce a reflection
of sunlight without ''blinking" through 60° of arc travel.
b. Although no data was available on the ttalbedo" of birds or
polyethylene ballons in bright sunlight, the apparent
motions, sizes and brightnesses of the objects vrere
considered strongly to suggest birds, particularly after
the Panel viewed a short film sho\nng high reflectivity
of seagulls in bright sunlight.
c. P.I.L. description of the objects sighted as "circular,
bluish-white" in color would be expected in cases of
spectacular reflections of sunlight from convex surfaces
where the brilliance of the reflection would obscure other
portions of the object.
~~.!lW'~fllli:!-<t~
-"D"""'·l5't-"C"' "l'f',..l!i "'"''!"~~~..,.,.~ ..
.-~~..~~~.~~~·~·~1\ "'' .. ·. •.• -
Approved For Release 2001/08/07 :-efA--RDP81R00560R000100030027-0