Symposium on unidentified flying objects: hearings before the Committee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, Ninetieth Congress, second session, July 29, 1968.

5
of the almost total lack of quantitative data—of all those things which
are part and parcel of the working environment of the scientist.
I was aware that in order to interest scientists, hard-core data were
needed, and, while the store of unquestionably puzzling reports from
competent witnesses continued to grow the wherewithal to obtain
such hard-core data which would, once and for all, clinch the matter,
was not forthcoming. Thus my scientific reticence was based on a
carefully weighed decision.
In attempting analysis of the UFO problem today, I pay particu-
lar attention to reports containing large amounts of information
which are made by several witnesses, if possible, who as far as I can
ascertain, have unimpeachable reputations and are competent. For
example, I might cite a detailed report I received from the associate
director of one of the Nation's most important scientific laboratories,
and his family.
Reports such as these are obviously in a different category from re-
ports which, say, identify Venus as a hovering spaceship, and thus
add to the frustrating confusion.
On the other hand, when one or more obviously reliable persons re-
ports—as has happened many times—that a brightly illuminated
object hovered a few hundred feet above their automobile, and that
during the incident their car motor stopped, the headlights dimmed or
.went out, and the radio stopped playing, only to have these functions
return to normal after the disappearance of the UFO, it is clearly
another matter.
By'what right can we summarily ignore their testimony and imply
that they are deluded or just plain liars? Would we so treat these same
people if they were testifying in court, under oath, on more mundane
matters?
Or, if it is reported, as it has been in many instances over the world
by reputable and competent persons, that while they were sitting
quietly at home they heard the barnyard animals behaving in a greatly
disturbed and atypical manner and when, upon investigating, found
not only the animals in a state of panic but reported a noiseless—or
sometimes humming—brightly illuminated object hovering nearby,
beaming a bright red light down onto the surroundings, then clearly
we should pay attention. Something very important may be going on.
Now, when in any recognized field of science an outstanding event
takes Place, or a new phenomenon is discovered, an account of it is
quickly presented at a scientific meeting or is published in a respected
appropriate journal. But this is certainly not the case with unusual
UFO reports made by competent witnesses.
There appears to be a scientific taboo on even the passive tabulation
of UFO reports. Clearly no serious work can be undertaken until such
taboos are removed. There should be a respectable mechanism for the
publication,for instance, of a paper on reported occurrences of electro-
magnetic phenomena in UFO encounters.
It would be foolhardy to attempt to present such a paper on UFO's
to the American Physical Society or to the American Astronomical
Society. The paper would be laughed down, if all that could be pre-
sented as scientific data were the anecdotal, incomplete, and nonquan-
titative reports available. Consequently reports of unexplainable UFO
cases are, likely to be found, if at all, in pulp magazines and paper-