Documents / Hearing transcript

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.

U.S. House of Representatives · 1968-07-29 · 256 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is the printed record of a July 29, 1968 symposium on unidentified flying objects held by the Committee on Science and Astronautics of the U.S. House of Representatives, chaired by Rep. J. Edward Roush. The committee heard statements from six scientists: J. Allen Hynek, James E. McDonald, Carl Sagan, Robert L. Hall, James A. Harder and Robert M. L. Baker. It also printed papers from Donald Menzel, Stanton Friedman, Frank Salisbury and others. Hynek argued that puzzling UFO reports from competent witnesses deserve serious scientific study.

11
like
a
permanent
echo.
It stayed
on
the scope for
1
1
/
2
minutes.
These
pips
were
at
no
time caused
by
malfunction
of the
radar
set.
It
was
daylight
when
it
(
the
object)
seemed
to
fade
both
visually
outdoors
and
electronically
indoors."
And
another sighting—in Northern
Michigan—on
July
29
of
last
year,
a
pilot
chased
a
brilliant
multicolored
object
close
to
the
horizon,
and
due
north.
He
flew
at
21,000
feet,
followed
the
object
for over
a
half-hour
but
could
not
gain
on
it.
Radar
operator reported contact
with
the
object
for
about
thirty
seconds.
And
ground
control
interceptor
station
reported
blips
too.
In
this
case,
it
seems
certain
that
our
harried
pilot
was
pursuing Capella! Reference
to
a
star
map
will
show
that
at
his
latitude,
at
the
time
of
his sighting,
Capella
was
at
lower
culmination, that
is,
at
the
lowest
point
of
its
swing around
the
pole
just
skirting
the
horizon.
I
have
seen
it
at
that
position
myself
in
Canada,
and,
can
vouch
for
the
fact
that
its
blue,
yellow,
and
red
twinkling
can
be
spectacular.
Unfortunately,
neither
Capella
nor
any
other
star
can
explain
many
other
nocturnal
meandering
lights.
But
there
is
no
question
in
my
mind,
just to
make
this
point
exceedingly
clear,
that
there
exists
a
relatively
simple,
naturalexplanation for
them,
perhaps even
ordinary
aircraft
under
special
test
condi-
tions.
The
chief
point
here,
is
to
suggest that nothing
constructive
is
accom-
plished
for
the
public
at
large—and
therefore
for
science
in the
long
run—
by
mere
ridicule
and
the
implication
that
sightings
are the products
of
"bird-
brains"
and
"intellectual
flyweights."
In
short,
it
would
appear
that the
flying
saucer
situation
has always
been
a
problem
in
science
-public
-relations,
and
that
fine
chance
has
consistently
been
missed
to
demonstrate
on
a
national
scale
how
scientists
can go
about
analyzing
a
problem.
A
lot
is
said
about
theproper
interpretation
of
science
to
the
public,
but
the
only
answer
they
receive
to
a
question
about which
they are
more
widely concerned
than
perhaps
any
other
in
this
century,
is
ridicule.
Ridicule
is
not
a
part
of the
scientific
method
and
the
public
should not
be taught
that
it
is.
Let
me
quote
an
additional
report, to
show
that the
original
flying
disks,
as
distinct
from
wandering
lights,
are
still
with
us.
On
the
day
that
our
pilot
chased
Capella,
a
radio
from
Seattle
announced
that
flying
saucers
were
seen
heading
toward Montana.
At
an
airport in
Mon-
tana
several
pilots
gathered
outside
the
hangars
to
wait
and
watch.
A
perfect
set-up
for suggestibility—and
yet,
quoting
from
one
of the
many
signed
state-
ments, "Objects
were
seen that resembled
flat
disks
reflecting
sun's rays.
One
of the
objects
hovered
from
three to
four
minutes, while the
other three
circled
around
it
like
satellites.
Then
the
stationary object
moved
southeast
to
dis-
appear, while the
three
satellites
moved due
west
and
disappeared—at
very
high speeds
!"
And
from
another observer:
"After watching
for approximately
five
minutes
I was
able
to
see
what
appeared
to
be
a
disk,
white or metal
in
color
approach-
ing
from
the west.
As
it
moved
directly
overhead
it
turned
generally
north
at
a
90
0
turn,
then slowing
down
and
then
making
several
more
90°
turns
and
proceeding
east.
After
seeing
this
I knew what I was
looking for
and
was
able
to
pick
up
at
least
five
more
of these
objects.
Being
skeptical,
I
did
my
best
to
see
them
as
either
dandelion seeds or other
small
particles close to
the
sur-
face of the earth rather
than
large
objects
at
extreme
distance.
However,
after
keeping
them
in sight
long
enough
to
study
their
appearance they
definitely
seemed
to
be very
high.
I
won't
make
an
estimate of the height since
I
did
not
know
their
size.
All
of
these
appeared
in
the
west
and
proceeded east at
what
appeared
to
be
an
extremely high
rate of speed."
I
submit
that
this
Air Force
lieutenant
was
not
incompetent,
but
rather
that
his
manner
of
reporting—as far as
it
went—was
commendable and
that
his report,
made
in
good
faith, is
therefore
entitled
to
a
hearing without
prejudice
or
ridicule,
but
also,
without
fanfare,
hysteria,
and
fantastic
news-
paper
publicity.
I
cautioned against the then prevalent
attitude
of
ridicule,
pointing
out that the
UFO
phenomenon, which had
generated vast publicinterest,
represented
an
unparalleled opportunity to demonstrate to the
public the operation of the
scientific
method
in attacking
a problem,
and
that "ridicule
is
not a
part of the
scientific
method and
the public
should not be taught that
it is."
In
those years
and
the following ones
I
repeatedly asked for the
upgrading of the method of reporting
UFO's
to the Air Force.
In

Cases discussed

About this file

Hearing transcript, from the govinfo collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 256 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.