Introduction. Page I iii Abstract. Explanation of nicap and its policies

Some UFO investigators, impatient with NICAP's "conservative" policy of starting from the beginning and building up a solid case, have argued that investigation of the landing reports may be the only way to conclusively prove the extraterrestrial hypothesis. Perhaps they are right, but we believe that such an investigation will not be possible until the UFO problem generally attains scientific recognition.

Some borderline cases which have neither been proved nor disproved are worth mentioning as possibly authentic close-up observations of seeming vehicles or craft. They are selected solely as examples of cases in which preliminary investigation turned up no derogatory information about the witnesses, and no glaring errors in their stories. We readily concede that cases of claimed contact with, or close-up observation of, beings in landed vehicles demand the closest scrutiny and the most painstaking investigation, which has seldom been possible to date.

These cases should not be taken out of context and used to imply either that NICAP accepts them at face value, or that we are gullible. On the contrary, we have been criticized by other UFO groups for our often voiced skepticism and demand for strong objective evidence in landing cases. It is a fact of human nature, we believe, that the more sensational or unorthodox a claim is, the stronger the evidence will have to be to convince people generally of its truth. We do not uncritically accept all reports without careful investigation and meaningful evidence. Rather, when the reports come from seemingly reputable people and are made with reasonable objectivity, we believe only that they deserve serious attention and far more thorough investigation.

Close-up Observations:

June 27, 1959 New Guinea

July 13, 1959 New Zealand

September 20, 1961 New Hampshire

RECOMMENDATIONS

Summarizing the main problems and dangers associated with the UFO phenomenon, these points stand out:

* Doubt about the scientific adequacy of the Air Force investigation; lack of access to the specific detailed cases in Air Force files.

* The dangers of having a basically military organization responsible for overall evaluation of a scientific problem; the intrusion of military secrecy preventing the scientific community from reviewing the methods of investigation and reasoning employed by Air Force investigators.

* The possibility of ignoring, or rationalizing away, facts which may have important effects on the human race, for good or ill.

* As previously pointed out by NICAP, the danger of accidental war resulting from misinterpretation of objects on radar scopes, a possibility made more likely by the general confusion and doubt surrounding the subject of UFOs.

* Continued exploitation of the public by con-men and opportunists who thrive because of the confusion and doubt.

* The threats to society posed by an unprepared and ill- informed public; the psychological preparation, and general planning for any eventuality needed if UFOs are in fact manifestations of extraterrestrial life.

One solution to all these problems would be a scientific and political review of the entire UFO situation. The main purposes would be clarification of the facts, and evaluation of those facts. This would require a program designed to (1) study the accumulated facts to date (including the detailed reports in Air Force files); (2) taking steps to insure that future reports are quickly and scientifically evaluated (encouraging citizens, and particularly scientists, engineers and pilots, to make immediate and full reports without fear of ridicule or reprisal; frank and full reporting of all data and evaluations to the public; open and serious treatment of UFO reports generally, as phenomena worthy of careful scientific attention).

The framework for a scientific review of UFOs could take many forms, and would not necessarily require huge appropriations of funds. (Some government grants to encourage specific evaluations might prove to be desirable.) Judging by public interest in UFOs displayed in letters to NICAP, there are hundreds of competent personnel who would almost certainly contribute their talents to a program of this nature.

* A simple directive to scientists and engineers at White Sands, Cape Kennedy and other government establishments could require personnel manning tracking equipment to attempt to track and record on instruments any UFOs observed in the vicinity. If something unexplained is tracked accidentally, this too should be reported. (Reports could be sent to some central office, such as the NASA Office of Life Sciences, or a university science department, and made available to any interested scientists).

* Cooperation of existing astronomical societies, and such instrument programs as Smithsonian Institution's meteorite camera network in the western U.S. could be requested.

* All reports from military sources, particularly pilots, could be sent to the central agency after deletion of legitimately classified portions of the intelligence reports.

* Commercial airlines; General Mills, Inc., balloon trackers; etc., all could be encouraged to report sightings.

The Air Force, of course, has a legitimate interest in anything that flies or anything with a threat potential to the country. Air Force liaison with this program would be desirable, and in fact civilian scientists (perhaps a special panel for the particular purpose) could assist the Air Force in an immediate evaluation of threat potential - in secret if necessary

However, once it is determined that a given UFO report is not evidence of an attack on the country, all except legitimate security data on the case should be made public immediately. If the object or phenomenon is definitely explainable, the explanation and all evidence and reasoning leading thereto, should be reported. If the phenomenon is not immediately explainable, the report should be released as unevaluated data which any and all investigators could then evaluate independently.

Interpretation of the accumulating unexplained reports could then be accomplished (without any "aura of mystery") through the normal channels of scientific endeavor: scientific journals and papers. (A "special status" is given to UFO reports when they are not evaluated through normal scientific channels). Perhaps this program would cause a 24-hour sensation in the popular press, but it would soon become a matter of routine. Any conclusions reported by an individual scientist, or scientific agency, would then be the responsibility of that individual or agency and subject to the review (for accuracy and sound logic) of the entire scientific community.

If the evidence mounted, and a scientific consensus gained sway indicating UFOs might be space ships, initiation of a full government program - indeed an international program - would be fully justified.

182

In addition to putting existing tracking equipment to work to help provide a final solution to the UFO problem, precedents exist which would make civilian participation feasible (and desirable in restoring confidence that the problem is receiving serious attention and is being adequately investigated). A program, which NICAP could organize to supplement the investigation, could be patterned after the Ground Observer Corps aircraft spotting and Moonwatch satellite tracking networks - manned by civilian volunteers. Minimum standards of experience and/or training could be established. A Moonwatch telescope grid, sound detection equipment, field investigation units, etc., could be manned 24 hours a day.

If existing government and military facilities, combined with a civilian volunteer network, were coordinated in a positive effort to gather and evaluate reliable data, this would be a crucial scientific experiment. The data gathered very likely would prove or disprove the reality of UFOs as a unique phenomenon. Regardless of what the answer proved to be, the data no doubt would be extremely useful to science (atmospheric physics, meteorology, etc.) and national defense (a constant watch on the sky, and no doubt - with experience - ability to more rapidly identify and weed out reported phenomena which are not enemy weapons).

Politically, it would be necessary to examine and review the current UFO program and to take any action or pass any legislation necessary to give a legal foundation to this, or a similar program designed to end the UFO controversy and establish the facts.

Contact and Communication

As we come nearer to making manned space voyages, the question of communicating with extraterrestrials takes on increasing importance. NICAP therefore endorses such programs as an enlarged Project Ozma (attempt to intercept intelligent communications from space), and studies of the language system of porpoises as a model for efforts to translate the language of alien beings.

In general, a great deal more thought should be given to such questions as Space Law; moral questions such as raised in the Justice Department letter involving behavior toward extraterrestrial beings; and problems raised by the increasing likelihood of eventual contact with extraterrestrial societies.

By our standards, these societies might be "advanced" or "backwards" technologically, politically, morally, or any combination of these parameters. In some cases, physical and intellectual contact might be disastrous, either to our society or theirs. In other cases, contact might be unilaterally or mutually beneficial. Some might lead to interplanetary war, others to association with extremely intelligent and wise beings who could help us solve our problems of war, hunger and ignorance. In short, the possibilities are endless. But they are well worth exploring for many reasons -- including the possibility that the first such contact may be imminent.

Detection of UFOs

Dr. James C. Bartlett, Jr., (experienced amateur astronomer, member of Association of Lunar and Planetary Observers) a NICAP Adviser, was asked to suggest ways in which scientists might be able to determine the extent and nature of UFO activity:

"It seems to me that an important first step would be a willingness to recognize the UFO problem for what it really is, namely a universally reported phenomenon for which an impartial scientific investigation is required.

"Now the primary objection to UFO reports, as most scientists think of such things, is that the raw data almost never permit of measurement. It should be carefully noted, however, that this is not the same as saying that the data are therefore worthless as evidence; though such is the position commonly taken by those scientists who reject them. Rather it is to be expected as the necessary consequence of chance sightings which are completely unpredictable as to time and place.

"Scientists could make a real contribution therefore by working in collaboration with a program designed to eliminate the element of surprise, and at the same time provide means of measuring apparent position, size, and velocity, and especially parallax. Such a program is entirely feasible, though admittedly difficult.

"The suggested technique is the division of the celestial sphere into sectors, each sector to be assigned to a team of qualified observers who would keep watch over their sector for a specified period of time each day or night. Instrumentation adequate to the task might consist of high power prism binoculars, a theodolite, a 3-inch refractor using a straight view with erecting eyepiece, a camera, and a magnetic compass.

"The source of observing personnel, it is suggested, is to be found in the more or less worldwide distribution of astronomical societies and groups which are quite capable of furnishing both the instrumentation and observers qualified to make the necessary measurements. Moreover, memberships are sufficiently large to make the personnel problem manageable.

"Ideally, a 24-hour patrol of all sectors covering 360 degrees of the celestial sphere is indicated; but in practice this would be impossible. Consequently, many UFOs could still go undetected; but in any sustained program of regular observation, as outlined above, it is certain that some would be "caught" and the required measurements obtained.

"The work of professional observatories then would be to scientifically evaluate the measured data, which could hardly be rejected on the commonly assigned ground of vagueness. Perhaps a given professional group could act as evaluation center for the entire project in any given country.

"Such a program is feasible, though it will require immense labor to set up; but certainly the game is worth the candle. It might or might not discover what UFOs really are; but at minimum it could certainly determine what they are not. We could at least hope to be relieved of the profoundly learned nonsense which hitherto has characterized alleged "scientific" evaluations, and which thinks it quite natural that experienced airline pilots should mistake a mirage for a cigar-shaped craft with lighted cabins and jet exhaust."

Discussing ways in which we might attempt to detect extraterrestrial life, Prof. Ronald Bracewell, Stanford University radio astronomer, "suggests that the nearest [intelligent] community may well be over 100 light-years away. In this event, he feels that advanced societies might send probes, instead of just signals, to likely stars. These probes would presumably contain transmitting and receiving apparatus, designed either to listen for us or to make contact with us, and would go into orbit about target stars. Upon some positive detection, a signal with information would be transmitted back to the home star. We might, then, look and listen for probes within our own solar system." [4.]

In any normal situation, no one would question the sanity and reliability of the group of witnesses named in this report. But the UFO problem because it is controversial, and because mystical or crackpot UFO groups are publicized all out of proportion, appears to be a special case. Unthinking skeptics often take the easy way out by assuming that there must be "something wrong" with people who report UFOs. (Another type of skeptic refuses to come to grips with the UFO problem because he unconsciously fears his system of beliefs might be upset if UFOs are real). The notion that UFO reports originate with a small group of cultists, or crackpots, or any other small and uniform segment of our society, is refuted by the reports in this document.

One skeptical school of thought holds that UFO witnesses do not really see what they think they see. Through careless or inexpert observation, they are fooled by conventional objects, or phenomena. The observed performance of UFOs, obviously beyond earthly capabilities if true, is illusory. But radar in many cases has recorded unidentified objects exceeding the performance of earthly devices. Photographs in some cases have shown unidentifiable objects also observed visually. And, perhaps more significant than may be realized at first, reputable persons from all walks of life and all types of backgrounds (technical and non-technical, religious and non-religious, pilots, businessmen, police officers, celebrities, and the man on the street) all have seen and reported very much the same thing consistently for at least the past 17 years. If delusion is the answer to UFOs, then our whole society is deluded.

183

NOTES

1. New York World Telegram & Sun; June 23, 1960.

2. Lasswell, Harold D., "Men In Space" Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol 72, Article 4; April 10, 1958.

3. Jung, Carl G., Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth Of Things Seen In The Skies. (Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1959).