Documents / Hearing transcript
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.
“Nevers”43 pages
16 Scientific inquiry has paid off, even though pioneers like . Faraday, Curie, Hahn, Pasteur, Goddard, and many others little realized where the paths they blazed would lead. As far as UFO's are concerned, I believe we should investigate them for the simple reason that we want to know what lies behind this utterly baffling phenomenon—or even more simply, we want to find out what it's all about. Thank you. Mr. RousH. Thank you, Dr. Hynek. Although we have reserved the latter part of the afternoon for our roundtable discussion, the Chair is well aware the Members of Con- gress, because of other duties, may not find it possible to be here during that time. If any of my colleagues do have questions and can keep them brief, which I realize is impossible, I will entertain those questions at this time. But keep in mind that we have two more papers this morning, and three this afternoon. Mr. HECHLER. Mr. Chairman. Mr. RousH. Mr. Hechler. Mr. HECHLER. First I would like to commend you, Mr. Roush, for your initiative in setting up this symposium. I would like to ask you, Dr. Hynek, whether you consider this sci- entific board of inquiry which you outlined as a sort of a one-shot thing which would make its report, or do you consider this to be a con-tinuing body that could examine, as the Air Force has, reports and analyze them? And with this question, I would like to ask if yourassumption is that the Air Force, because of its emphasis on national security, has really not measured up to a thorough scientific analysis of UFO's? Dr. HYNEK. Well, in answer to the first part of that question, sir, I would say I don't believe in a problem as complex as this the one- shot approach would be sufficient. I think there should be this board of inquiry which should be a continuing board in the same sense that we have, I presume, boards of study for world population problems, of pollution problems, of world health, and so forth. The letter that came with the invitation to speak here, strongly stated that we would not discuss the Air Force participation in these matters, and I would like to therefore not speak to that point. Mr. Roust'. Mr. Rumsfeld. Mr. Ru - msFELD. Because of the fact it does look as though we will have a busy afternoon on the floor, I very likely will not be present for the remainder of the discussion. I would like to express the hope the other members of the panel might at some point comment on the two recommendations that Dr. Hynek has set forth in his paper. Fur- ther, I would hope that each member of the panel, during the after- noon session, might address himself to the questions of priorities. . Assuming that there is some agreement with Dr. Hynek's conclu- sion that this is an area worthy of additional study, then the question for . Congress,. of course, becomes what is the priority? This is a rather unique situation in that it is a scientific question that has reached thepublic prior to the time that anything beneficial can even be imagined. In many instances a scientific effort is not widely known to the publicuntil it is successful.
Hearing transcript, from the govinfo collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 256 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.