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.

212
Air
Force
(and
a
few
scientists)
in
their
proclamations
of
"non-existence."
The
public
has
been
led
to
believe
that
everything
has
been
done
to
either
prove
or
disprove
the
existence
of
UFO's—rubbish!
Available
information
of
a
truly
reliable
nature should tend
to increase
activity,
not
place
it
in
neglect,
or
worse,
in
ridicule.
Classified
(or
"unavailable")
reports,
mostly
by
the
military,
rob the
public
and
scientific
parties
who
are
interested
in
and
willing
to
participate
in
the
UFO
investigations.
How
can
we
even
begin to
evaluate
for
ourselves
if
we
must
depend
nearly
100
percent
on
information
doled
out
by
the
news
media
alone?
Many
scientists
communicate
with
each
other
on
the
subject,
often
at
scientific
meetings
(aside),
but
this
route
is
hardly
sufficient
to
establish
a
recognized
basis
for
realistic
study of
the
problem.
The
current
USAF
trend
seems
to
be
merely
a
statement that
UFO's
do
not
pose
a
threat to
the
security
of
the
United
States,
and
therefore
warrant
neither
credence
nor
further concern. Similar
words
come
from
some
of the
few
Congress-
men
with
whom
I
have
communicated.
The
discovery
of Noah's
Ark
in
Times
Square would
not
necessarily
pose
a
threat to national
security
either,
but
it
would
certainly
be
a
find
worthy
of the
most
intensive investigation
whether
certain individuals
accepted
its
existence
or
not.
REQUIRED
INFORMATION
Is
it
not
obvious
that
what
we
need to
establish
the
existence
or
non-existence
of
UFO's
is
not merely
a
review
of
sighting
incidents,
but
an
implemented
plan
to
acquire
hard
facts?
Rapid,
accurate
reporting
of
sightings
is
obviously
a
valuable
tool
in
studying
UFO
phenomena,
but-
many
of the
most
creditable
observers (military personnel
and
airline
pilots,
for
example)
are not
only
hesitant to
do
so,
they
are
understandably
adamant when
facing the
alternatives
of
silence
versus
inviting
ridicule,
and
possibly
jeopardizing
their
positions.
The
obvious
addition to gathering interview
data
is
to
enlist
the
aid
of
the
impersonal
machine.
Evaluate, compile,
and
catalog reported
data
according to:
time of
day
and
year; atmospheric
conditions
(cloudy,
humid,
temperature,
calm,
and
other
easily
recountable gross
observations).;
geographic
location;
approximate
size,
shape,
altitude, velocity,
heading,
-
maneuvers;
-and
phenomena
reportedly asso-ciated
with
the
UFO
presence.
This
can be
done
with
existing
information.
Up-
date
and
upgrade the
files
with
new
data
by
soliciting
information
(particularlymilitary
and
commercial
pilots).
Then
prepare
a
plan designed
by
scientists,
engineers,
pilots,
and
perhaps
psychologists,
on means
to acquire
instrument
observations
of
UFO's
hopefully
coupled to
visual observations.
Field
-instrument
packages
could
easily
be
placed in
areas
where
UFO
sightings
are
most
concentrated,
perhaps
according
to
the
time of
day
or
year,
atmospheric
conditions,
or
some
factor suspected to
be
related
to
sighting
activity.
Such
packages
might be composed
largely
of
military
"surplus" instrumentation
such
as
an
infrared
scanner,
an
active
rf
unit,
a
wide
-band
electromagnetic
detector,
-a
directional
radiation
counter
and
ionization
gauge,
a
high-speed
photographic
camera,
a
three
-component magnetometer,
and
recording
environmental
devices
(temperature, humidity, barometric
pressure,
etc.).
If
it
became
advantageous
to include
a
higher degree
of
sophistication,
such items as
a
tracking
television
camera,
a
communications
telemetry
system,
a
sensitive
audio
recorder
with
a
directional
antenna might be added.
Deployment and
maintenance of
the
field
package
could
easily
be performed
by
military, university,
or
industrial techni-
cians,
but
all
data
reduction
and
interpretation
should be
done
-by
competent
scientists
familiar
with the
respective
measuring
techniques.
We
should
anticipate
gathering
sufficient
data
leading to proof of the
existence
or
non-existence
of
UFO's, and,
if
they are
real,
the
size
(s), shape
(s),
flight
characteristics
(speed, rates
of turn
and
climb, preferred
direction
of
travel,etc.),
possible
means
of propulsion
and
navigation,
perhaps the
establishment
of communications,
and
eventually their origin.
Questions of expense
and management
responsibilities
immediately
come
to
mind, but
I
think the government would be
surprised
how many
qualified scien-
tists,
engineers,
and
technicians
would be
willing to participate
on
a
low-dollat,
volunteer,
"as can"
basis in support of such
a program.
At
least
an
inexpensive
newsletter could be
distributed to
the
scientific
and
pilot
groups for
comments,
as a
start.
Because of the
history
of wasted funds and unwieldy
publicity asso-
ciated
with the
UFO
problem, the public
may
not be very receptive to such a
pro-