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.

  • p. 18 …Some of these statements which lead to mis- conceptions are: —(1) Only UFO "buffs" report UFO…
  • p. 19 …One great misconception is that only UFO buffs report UFO's; quite the opposite is the…
  • p. 25 …saw their very impressive and sur- prising UFO files, the pattern of which is entirely different…
  • p. 39 …files and modes of operation of both private and official (i.e., Project Bluebook) UFO investigative…
  • p. 41 …Misinter- preted natural phenomena (Hypothesis 3) do explain many sincerely -submitted UFO reports; but, as I…
  • p. 45 …It summarizes about 750 UFO cases in the NICAP files up to about
  • p. 46 …Reference 7 is another now -accessible source of extremely significant UFO documentation; it is unfortunate that…
  • p. 54 …Longview, Wash., July 8, 1949 Many of the UFO cases I am citing are drawn intentionally…
  • p. 60 54 terrestrial hypothesis for UFOs, incomprehensibility must be expected as almost inevitable. Hence there is more…
  • p. 63 …NICAP files. The article, by Post reporter Jimmie Woods, represents one of those rare UFO feature…
  • p. 68 …5) remarks that an astronomer working under con- tract to the official UFO investigatory program interviewed…
  • p. 70 …UFO sightings by meteorologists could be extended very con- siderably by drawing on my file of…
  • p. 72 …the UFO problem in the ensuing two-year period. Many details from the official file on…
  • p. 75 …In my files are many other "balloon" cases from the past twenty years, cases that ought…
  • p. 76 …The third target was spotted visually by myself," Hemphill's signed statement in the case -file…
  • p. 78 …25), who evidently drew his information from the official files. Ruppelt (Ref. 5) states that when…
  • p. 79 …unknowns in official files to be ignored. A famous case in UFO annals involved a B…
  • p. 86 …explanations for classic UFO cases that have been made in the official files in the last…
  • p. 91 …Official file on October 15, 1948 Fukuoka case, Project Bluebook. 43. Melbourne (Australia) Sun, December 16…
  • p. 120 …During that night, and several succeeding nights, there were many reports of UFO's over northern…
  • p. 128 …THE UFO PROPULSION PROBLEM By way of introducing the propulsion problem of UFO's, I will…
  • p. 185 179 rod N.T.TuDE tOURIE 3• MOTION OF UFO SYSTIM a..„. — 73 2.3 2…
  • p. 206 …for a UFO. This viewpoint is absolutely nonsense and the Air Force files bear witness to…
  • p. 207 …But such behavior does not imply, as the UFO addicts argue, the presence of an intelligence…
  • p. 208 …He watches the UFO for a minute or two until it finally disappears. He cannot be…
  • p. 218 …UFO presence. This can be done with existing information. Up- date and upgrade the files with…
  • p. 224 …claimed to have observed a UFO. Interestingly enough the official files con- tain fewer than 12…
  • p. 239 …Indeed, at present the scientific study of the UFO problem is greatly hampered by the circumstance…
  • p. 244 …The dotted line represents "re- liable" sightings in the files of the Aerial Phenomena Research Organization…
  • p. 245 …Many radar sightings of UFO's are on file. In a few cases, a UFO has…
  • p. 247 …He states that he has on file more than 300 UFO sightings prior to the 20th…
25
eluded some of the leading citizens in the town. It was reported
nationally at that time but was soon forgotten.
I have interviewed one of the witnesses in a Washington State
sighting, at Longview, Wash., July 3, 1949. An air show was being
held and someone spotted the UFO because there was a sky-writing
aircraft overhead that some people were watching. They spotted the
first of three disc-like objects that came over Longview that morning.
The person whom I interviewed is a former Navy commander, Moul-
ton B. Taylor. He was the manager of the air show, so he got on the
public address system and got everybody to look at this object before
it crossed the skies. It was fluttering as it went across the sky. There
were pilots, engineers, police officers, and Longview residents in the
audience. Many had binoculars. Taylor estimated it to be about 10
minutes of arc in diameter. Because the aircraft was still skywriting
people continued to watch the sky. Two successive objects of the
same type flew over in the next 20 minutes. A total of three objects
came over, and they were from three different directions: one from
the north, one from the northwest, and one almost from the west,
quite clearly ruling out an explanation like balloons, which became
the official explanation. There were no balloon stations anywhere near
Longview, Wash., as a matter of fact, and the balloon explanation is
quite inadequate.
Here we have a case of over a hundred witnesses to the passage of
a wingless object moving at relatively high velocity. When the second
and third objects went over, someone had the presence of mind to
time the fluttering rate—it was 48 per minute.
Here again we have a multiple-witness case, a daytime sighting case,
and one which you can't quickly write off.
If time permitted I would talk about a number of radar cases. One
of the most famous is the Washington National Airport sighting. On
July 19, 1952, CAA radars and Andrews Air Force radars tracked un-
knowns moving at variable speeds from 100 miles an hour to over 800
miles an hour, and a number of airline 'pilots in the air saw these, and
were in some instances vectored in by the CAA radar people, and then
saw luminous objects in the same area that they showed on radar up
near Herndon and Martinsburg.
I talked to five of these CAA people. One can still go back and check
these old cases, I emphasize. I also talked to four of the airline pilots
who were in the air at the time. I have gone over the quantitative as-
pects of the official explanation that this was ducting or trapping of the
radar beams. That is quite untenable. I have gone over the radiosonde,
computed the radar refractive index gradient, and it is nowhere near
the ducting gradient.
Also it s very important that at one time three different radars,
two CA i
A and one Andrews Air Force Base radar, all got compatible
echos. That is extremely significant.
And finally from a radar-propagation point of view, the angles of
propagation, radar and visual, were far above any values that would
permit trapping, which makes this a case which is not an explained
case. It was an instance of unidentified aerial objects over our Capital,
I believe.
One could go on with many cases. I want to just briefly touch two
categories of atmospheric explanations that have been rather widely
discussed, and close with that.

Cases discussed

About this file

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.