1874 lines
76 KiB
Plaintext
1874 lines
76 KiB
Plaintext
SUBJECT: THESIS ON UFOs AND EXTRATERRESTRIAL LIFE FILE: UFO1563
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AIR AND STAFF COLLEGE
|
|
|
|
UFOs AND EXTRATERRESTRIAL LIFE
|
|
|
|
Darrell L. Stanley, FR 66348,1931-
|
|
|
|
Captain, USAF
|
|
|
|
A Thesis Submitted to the Air Command and Staff College of
|
|
Air University in Partial Fulfillment of
|
|
The Requirements for Graduation
|
|
|
|
June 1968
|
|
|
|
Thesis directed by Lieutenant Colonel Dale E. Downing
|
|
|
|
AIR UNIVERSITY
|
|
|
|
MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE, ALABAMA
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
ABSTRACT
|
|
|
|
Over the years, the evidence on UFO has con-
|
|
tinued to mount. Many sightings are eventually
|
|
explained, but an impressive number are not. This
|
|
study examines the evidence, showing that its
|
|
credibility has grown as the "unknowns" have accumu-
|
|
lated. The study also examines the likelihood of
|
|
extraterrestrial life, and attempts to draw inferences
|
|
about technological achievements on other worlds. It
|
|
concludes that there is a growing case for the reality
|
|
of UFOs, and that intelligent extraterrestrial life
|
|
almost certainly exists. Recommendations involve ex-
|
|
panded and more aggressive means of obtaining UFO
|
|
evidence--including thoughts on physical seizure.
|
|
|
|
ii
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
|
Page
|
|
ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
|
|
|
|
Chapter
|
|
|
|
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
|
|
|
|
II. CONCERNING THE EVIDENCE . . . . . . . . 8
|
|
|
|
III. THE QUESTION OF ORIGIN . . . . . . . . . 21
|
|
|
|
IV. LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE . . . . . . . . . . 32
|
|
|
|
V. EXTRATERRESTRIAL TECHNOLOGY . . . . . . . 40
|
|
|
|
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . 46
|
|
|
|
FOOTNOTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
|
|
|
|
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
|
|
|
|
iii
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
CHAPTER I
|
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION
|
|
|
|
Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) may constitute
|
|
one or the most peculiar mysteries, if not the greatest,
|
|
in all or recorded history, The mystery is peculiar
|
|
because its incidents are both current and repetitious.
|
|
To be sure, there are other great mysteries or the
|
|
world, such as how the Pyramids or Egypt were built,
|
|
or why the dinosaurs perished in prehistoric time, or
|
|
how man himself emerged on this planet. But these like
|
|
many other perplexing riddles are obscured by time. The
|
|
mystery of UFOs, on the other hand, prevails as a current
|
|
issue, even though sightings may date back almost in
|
|
definitely.
|
|
At the bottom of the mystery, of course, is the
|
|
question or whether UFOs are fact or fiction, real or
|
|
imaginary, material objects or illusionary effects.
|
|
Equally intriguing is the variety in the nature of
|
|
observations and the circumstances surrounding the
|
|
sightings. This gives rise to some difficulty when
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
attempting to generalize about the phenomena. A
|
|
still greater difficulty apparently arises when one
|
|
attempts to neatly classify the objects observed as
|
|
real but explainable, real but inexplicable, apparitions,
|
|
or figments of the imagination. This difficulty stems
|
|
not from a shortage of written works on the subject;
|
|
to the contrary, the great abundance of material tends
|
|
to cloud the issue, deepen the mystery, and widen the
|
|
diverging points or view. In the midst of the voluminous
|
|
material on the subject, a distracting element or sen-
|
|
sationalism also often appears, Other publications,
|
|
some with an air seriousness, properly belong in
|
|
the realm or science fiction, which contributes little
|
|
in serious research on the subject.
|
|
Despite the research difficulties, the question
|
|
as to the credibility of UFO evidence is a valid one
|
|
which surely demands a timely answer. For if there
|
|
is sufficient, credible evidence to indicate the
|
|
material existence of UFOs, a new and perhaps more
|
|
disturbing problem emerges: What is the origin of the
|
|
mysterious objects? Yes, they could be some secret
|
|
development or earthly origin. The other alternative
|
|
is that UFOs are extraterrestrial. If there is a
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
logical case for the latter, we as a nation should
|
|
be pointedly concerned, This is not because or any
|
|
direct threat or attack, although maybe this should
|
|
not be entirely discounted, but because extraterres-
|
|
trial vehicles on or near our planet surely mean the
|
|
product of an advanced technology is in our presence.
|
|
As developed as our technology might seem, it has not
|
|
yet progressed to the point of sending manned space
|
|
vehicles to planets in our own solar system, let alone
|
|
those of other stars. Accordingly, the UFO may hold
|
|
secrets of great technological significance, particu-
|
|
larly as they might apply to aircraft or spacecraft pro-
|
|
pulsion and the attendant potential worth in the area
|
|
or national defense. Disclosure of such secrets, it
|
|
can be reasoned, might well represent the most import-
|
|
ant technological breakthrough of this century, It
|
|
follows that there is a positive need to examine and
|
|
assess the ever increasing number of UFO sightings.
|
|
The problem must be squarely faced if there is sufficient
|
|
evidence to show that UFOs are believable, and if their
|
|
origin can credibly be established as foreign to this
|
|
world.
|
|
|
|
Objectives
|
|
|
|
The main objective of this thesis is to deter-
|
|
mine whether or not the expanding amount of evidence
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
means an increasing level of credibility that UFOs
|
|
are more than legend, more than imagination, more than
|
|
incorrect interpretations or commonplace things under-
|
|
taking of this objective involves the exploration and
|
|
analysis of numerous published accounts on evidence,
|
|
along with an examination of the most logical points
|
|
of origin. An additional objective is to assess the
|
|
possibilities and probabilities or intelligent life
|
|
in the extraterrestrial environment. Another objective,
|
|
closely related to the foregoing, is to speculate on
|
|
the level or technology that extraterrestrial societies
|
|
might achieve. As the thesis is developed, the reason-
|
|
ing intends to imply that the reality of UFOs is quite
|
|
compatible with the theories or abundant extraterres-
|
|
trial intelligence.
|
|
|
|
Assumptions
|
|
|
|
With the undertaking of this study several assump-
|
|
tions are made, first, to clear up a technicality, it
|
|
is assumed that if UFOs are real, they are dispatched
|
|
or controlled by some form or intelligence. By real,
|
|
it is implied that the objects are material, artificial,
|
|
and not natural phenomena such as meteors. Secondly,
|
|
it is assumed that the origin or UFOs will not be in-
|
|
disputably divulged either by some form of coherent
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
communication or by captive observation. In other
|
|
words, any absolute confirmation that UFOs are real
|
|
and extraterrestrial would largely obviate the purpose
|
|
of some of the theoretical reasoning presented in this
|
|
writing. Additionally, it is assumed that no new and
|
|
vigorous action will be taken by the U. S. Government
|
|
to initiate more aggressive methods or obtaining UFO
|
|
evidence. Any such action would tend to preempt re-
|
|
commendations and conclusions set forth later in this
|
|
study.
|
|
|
|
Definitions
|
|
|
|
At first glance, the term UFO may seem to need
|
|
no further definition. However, in some articles a
|
|
contradiction in usage appears. Consider this hypo-
|
|
thetical statement: "Many UFOs are actually aircraft,
|
|
weather balloons...." The point here is that once
|
|
identified, the object can no longer be properly
|
|
called a UFO, but rather would be more correctly
|
|
called an "identified flying object" (IFO). The term
|
|
UFO as used herein means a flying object which has
|
|
not or cannot be identified as worldly air/space craft
|
|
or natural phenomena. The term "Flying Saucer" is
|
|
sometimes used synonymously with UFO, although there
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
is some apparent distinction. UFOs, for example,
|
|
are not always configured in the shape or a saucer.
|
|
|
|
Research Limitations
|
|
|
|
Research will be limited to the sources available
|
|
at Maxwell Air Force Base and the Montgomery, Alabama
|
|
area. As another limiting factor, research will be
|
|
concentrated more heavily on recent publications,
|
|
especially on matters such as accumulated statistics.
|
|
Additionally, no complete historical analysis will be
|
|
attempted, due to the great volume or material avail-
|
|
able on the subject,
|
|
|
|
Organization
|
|
|
|
The next Chapter will outline the nature of the
|
|
evidence, its improving credibility, and assess the
|
|
reaction in the scientific community and government
|
|
circles. Chapter III includes a discussion on the
|
|
likelihood that UFOs are secret devices originating
|
|
right on earth. Further discussions will reason on
|
|
the proposition that UFOs originate on other planets
|
|
in our solar system. Chapter IV deals with the
|
|
possibilities of advanced social life on other planets.
|
|
Chapter V outlines a discussion of the inferences which
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
can be drawn about the technology of extraterrestrial
|
|
societies. The last Chapter will present conclusions
|
|
and recommendations which can be drawn from the text.
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
CHAPTER II
|
|
|
|
CONCERNING THE EVIDENCE
|
|
|
|
The phenomenon of UFOs seems not to be anything
|
|
very new. Reports on evidence or UFO sightings may
|
|
date back as far as man's history itself. The Old
|
|
Testament of the Bible, for example, includes passages
|
|
about the landing of a strange craft, which could be
|
|
interpreted as a UFO sighting, in the Year 597 B.C. [1]
|
|
Through the middle ages there are also reports of
|
|
observed phenomena in the sky. During World War II
|
|
many allied pilots observed strange and unidentified
|
|
objects while flying missions; these phenomena were
|
|
referred to as "foo-fighters", In any event, mys-
|
|
terious aerial sightings are not limited to any
|
|
specific time frame. Neither are they restricted
|
|
to any particular area. Rather, the phenomena have
|
|
been of an international nature.[2] With due respect
|
|
to the diversity in both time and location, the earlier
|
|
historical recordings of such incidents show a char-
|
|
acter of vagueness, Perhaps like many other early
|
|
historical events, the sheer passage or time has
|
|
caused obscurity. Then too, there is the matter of
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
provincial perception and later interpretation. Before
|
|
the eighteenth century, such phenomena were probably
|
|
viewed strongly from the religious or superstitious
|
|
standpoint. As a matter of illustration, strange obser-
|
|
vations could have earlier been attributed to comets,
|
|
meteors or even an eclipse of the moon might then have
|
|
drawn the same attention as a modern UFO sighting.
|
|
Today, of course, much more is understood as far
|
|
as natural aerial phenomena are concerned. Meteors,
|
|
as a case in point, are understood and accepted for
|
|
what they are, as a matter or elementary science. In
|
|
contrast, the astronomers and other scientists in the
|
|
nineteenth century did not accept the idea of "stones"
|
|
falling from the sky, It was only after an unusually
|
|
heavy siege or meteors over France in 1802 that the
|
|
scientific viewpoint changed.[3] But with all the pro-
|
|
gress in modern science, the UFO remains unexplained
|
|
and up until recently was not very seriously viewed.
|
|
Nevertheless, intriguing reports have continued to
|
|
mount in recent times. Although the number or sight-
|
|
ings varies from year to year, the rate, if anything,
|
|
appears to have increased during the modern era of UFOs.
|
|
In approaching some or the evidence on UFOs, it
|
|
may be well to first define what might be called the
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
modern UFO era, as this is largely the time span to
|
|
be considered. This period started in 1947 after a
|
|
sighting of nine UFOs near Mount Rainier in Washington
|
|
State, Incidentally, the term "Flying Saucers" was
|
|
coined as a result of press coverage of that incident,
|
|
More importantly, this particular sighting marked the
|
|
beginning of an official tabulation of UFOs. Since
|
|
that time, the U.S. Air Force has been charged with
|
|
the responsibility of evaluating and recording UFO
|
|
or alleged UFO reports.[4] These of course are limited
|
|
to those occurring in or near the United States. Yet,
|
|
after two decades of accumulating data, the tabulations
|
|
and attendant evidence hardly settle the issue--whether
|
|
or not UFOs are real.
|
|
While the issue remains unsettled in the minds
|
|
or many and controversial among others, the situation
|
|
has changed somewhat since 1947, and other changing
|
|
outlooks may be in the offing. For one thing, there
|
|
is now the considerable accumulation of evidence in
|
|
the reports of visual observations, Additionally,
|
|
as of late there is a certain recognition of the
|
|
riddle as a matter for serious scientific inquiry.[5]
|
|
With all the evidence and apparently some tendency
|
|
toward a changing scientific attitude, where does the
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
case for UFOs rest today? Is there now sufficient
|
|
evidence from which to draw conclusions, or at least
|
|
tentative conclusions?
|
|
Although early historical reports of sightings
|
|
cannot be totally ignored, the most credible and
|
|
persuasive evidence has surely evolved and has been
|
|
accumulated in the modern era. During this period,
|
|
in the United States alone, there have been over
|
|
11,000 sightings of mysterious aerial objects. Of
|
|
those, about 650 are on the record as UFOs--according
|
|
to Project Blue Book, the U.S. Air Force agency con-
|
|
cerned with UFO affairs.[6] At first glance these often
|
|
cited statistics might appear to be rather straight
|
|
forward, but as often is the case with statistics they
|
|
can be misleading. In the first place, the objects
|
|
which can be identified, or IFOs, should have little
|
|
to do with the UFOs, in the sense that a comparison of
|
|
the figures for each would reveal anything worthwhile.
|
|
Any serious and logical treatment should surely exclude
|
|
identified objects, for these are no longer a puzzle--
|
|
assuming the evaluation was correct. It could also
|
|
be argued that the motive of the statistics was to cast
|
|
doubt on the UFO case simply by the ratio involved.
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
The whole point here is that there have been over
|
|
650 reported UFO sightings in the past twenty years.
|
|
Also, there is every indication that if any case
|
|
could have been explained it would have been. For
|
|
this reason, and because or some erroneous explanations
|
|
of UFOs, the figure of 650 should be taken as minimal.
|
|
Understandably, the matter or faulty explanations has
|
|
represented a sizable share of the overall controversy.
|
|
Casting still greater doubt on certain sightings cata-
|
|
loged as IFOs is the allegation that the Air Force
|
|
has been the most persistent and consistent debunker
|
|
of the UFO, not an entirely ill-founded charge.[7]
|
|
While caution and prudence are necessary in such
|
|
inquiries or evaluations, some or the Air Force's
|
|
explanations discounting UFO sightings turned out to
|
|
be wrong, as mentioned earlier, which suggests more
|
|
than bad statistics. There is for example, the UFO
|
|
sighting which was "explained"--and registered as an
|
|
IFO--as certain stars in the constellation Orion.
|
|
Later it was discovered that Orion was below the hori-
|
|
zon in that season at the latitude of the sighting.
|
|
There are also cases that were dismissed and attributed
|
|
to military refueling aircraft, when none were actually
|
|
near the particular area.[8] These errors or hasty
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
judgments have not only cast doubt on the categorical
|
|
tabulations but have also allowed for the inference
|
|
to be drawn that information is being withheld or
|
|
distorted. As a possible consequence, some of the
|
|
more recent incidents which were discredited offi-
|
|
cially as UFOs could be and have been viewed with
|
|
suspicion. Consider the puzzling observation of
|
|
lights near Dexter, Michigan, in the spring of 1966.
|
|
Despite the overwhelming amount of testimony from
|
|
eye witnesses--including many such as police officers,
|
|
who were completely reliable, the phenomenon was
|
|
attributed to marsh gas. Oddly enough, at one point
|
|
in time the explanation involved military aircraft;
|
|
then later it was determined that no such aircraft
|
|
were in the area during the majority of reported ob-
|
|
servations.[9] Thus as the evidence has mounted, so
|
|
apparently has the criticism of the official findings
|
|
and classifications. While a good deal of the criti-
|
|
cism appears justified, it is not the intent here to
|
|
make disparaging remarks about the agency making the
|
|
evaluations--whether incorrect unintentionally or
|
|
otherwise. Rather, these inconsistencies are pointed
|
|
out to show the number or solid UFO cases may be con-
|
|
siderably greater than the figure of 659.
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
There are several other aspects in the area of
|
|
statistics that should be considered from the stand
|
|
point of inferential data. It is not often mentioned,
|
|
but surely not all UFO sightings, or what people
|
|
thought were UFOs, are reported. Take the case of
|
|
four hunters who supposedly saw a UFO land at a
|
|
remote, mountainous region in Utah, seven years ago.
|
|
By mutual agreement, none of them reported the myste-
|
|
rious affair until after the Air Force announced that
|
|
the University of Colorado would undertake an independ-
|
|
ent, government-financed project to investigate UFOs.[10]
|
|
This apparently might signal a change to the previous
|
|
reluctance of many people to report sightings for
|
|
fear of ridicule or simple to avoid any publicity,
|
|
sometimes adverse. However, this hardly changes the
|
|
UFO count which is probably low for this reason as well
|
|
as those mentioned above. Dr. Edward Condon who heads
|
|
the scientific investigation at the University or Colo-
|
|
rado, has said that he expects for every reported
|
|
sighting there are ten to twenty that have not been
|
|
reported.[11] His opinion, although alone worthy of con-
|
|
siderable weight, does not lack support. A Gallup
|
|
poll, for instance, indicates that 5,000,000 adult
|
|
people in the United States have seen a UFO, or what
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
they believed was a UFO.[12] Furthermore, according to
|
|
the same poll, 46 per cent of the adult Americans
|
|
believe that UFOs are something real.
|
|
The number or solid UFO cases or unexplained
|
|
observations is then surely greater than the official
|
|
figure of 659, itself significant. With some so
|
|
called "explained" cases belonging in the UFO category,
|
|
plus the proposition ten or more times that many have
|
|
gone unreported, the statistics take on a more impressive
|
|
scope than might otherwise be noted by the casual reader.
|
|
Extrapolating the implied data further to include all
|
|
land area on the earth is more impressive, even sur-
|
|
prising. Using this line or reasoning the number or
|
|
UFO sightings is incredibly high.
|
|
In contrast to the rather abundant evidence in
|
|
the form of testimony be first hand witnesses--whether
|
|
or not the "low" official figure is used, physical
|
|
evidence or hardware is another matter. Such evidence
|
|
in the narrowest sense would involve either a part of
|
|
a UFO or a UFO itself. Some "non-believers" it seems
|
|
would settle for nothing short of the latter, in the
|
|
laboratory for authentication and capable or many re-
|
|
markable demonstrations. This would no doubt settle
|
|
the issue, but for now there is no such material
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
evidence; if there are pieces or parts or UFOs, such
|
|
evidence has either been suppressed, undiscovered, or
|
|
not reported. Granted, the most significant short-
|
|
coming in solving the mystery is the lack of physical
|
|
evidence. However, maybe our rules of scientific evi-
|
|
dence simply do fit the phenomenon of the UFO. If
|
|
that is possible, it would be logical to fit the in-
|
|
vestigations to the phenomenon, This means for the
|
|
time being that any assessments can only be made from
|
|
the type evidence on hand.
|
|
What type of evidence is there? There is more
|
|
than just the voluminous array of first-hand witness
|
|
accounts; but first, a discussion of these accounts
|
|
is in order. Specifically, the quality and worth of
|
|
these will be considered. Witness reports are good
|
|
evidence, although circumstantial in nature; prominent
|
|
scientists concede that there is an abundance of good
|
|
circumstantial evidence indicating UFOs are real.[13]
|
|
There are problems, however, in handling such evidence,
|
|
i.e., witness reports. The greatest of these would
|
|
appear to be in determining the veracity of the witness
|
|
or witnesses. More simply it is the degree of credi-
|
|
bility which could be attributed to an observation or
|
|
to collective observations. In dealing with one or
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
only a few cases, there would remain the possibility
|
|
that a witness was lying, was mistaken in what he
|
|
thought he saw, or had seen something that existed
|
|
only in his mind. But when considering the immense
|
|
number of well corroborated and documented reports
|
|
by many credible witnesses, the evidence becomes very
|
|
convincing. The caliber of many witnesses, perhaps
|
|
as much as the sheer number, lends the greatest cre-
|
|
dence to the total evidence. There have been hoaxes,
|
|
and the crackpot element along with publicity seekers.
|
|
On the other hand, as the observations increase, so
|
|
does the cross section of population of witnesses.
|
|
Numerous sighting, for example, have been reported by
|
|
respected, intelligent people with technical training--
|
|
astronomers, control-tower operators, physicians,
|
|
meteorologists and pilots.[14]
|
|
Besides the eye witness reports, there are other
|
|
forms of evidence, although these are scarcely any
|
|
more scientific. These include photographs, radar
|
|
confirmation of UFOs viewed separately by other ob-
|
|
servers, and ground marking supposedly left by a UFO.
|
|
Since most UFO sightings are aerial in nature, ground
|
|
marks of scorched vegetation corresponding to observation
|
|
are fairly rare, but their worth would seem to add
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
heavily as suggestive evidence, although not conclusive.
|
|
Likewise, radar sighting which corroborate visual ob-
|
|
servation surely lend a high degree of credence.
|
|
Photography, as promising as it might seem, may
|
|
create more problems than it solves. For one thing,
|
|
authentication or photographs--especially Prints--is
|
|
most difficult, Flaws in the film or lens can create
|
|
spots; unless there is some background other than the
|
|
sky, little can be judged as to the size and distance
|
|
or a UFO. And no doubt, the general knowledge of
|
|
trick photography impedes the acceptance of photographs
|
|
otherwise very convincing. One way around this or
|
|
course is to have a witness of the picture taking pro-
|
|
cess. This gets back to the matter of credibility.
|
|
Accordingly, photographs remain generally at least as
|
|
controversial as witness reports, and the motives of
|
|
the photographer might be questioned unduly, for a
|
|
film is a quick means to publicity, Yet, there are
|
|
hundreds or photographs, several of which constitute
|
|
quite persuasive evidence. Some of the clearest nega-
|
|
tives or a UFO ever obtained were taken by a farmer in
|
|
Oregon in 1950. These photographs are similar to UFO
|
|
pictures taken in France in 1954. The likeness of the
|
|
objects in both sets or pictures is the most striking
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
and suggestive aspect, although rough similarities
|
|
are not uncommon in other photographs. One of the
|
|
most convincing set of photographs was taken in
|
|
daylight from an airliner over Brazil. The pictures,
|
|
taken from above the UFO, show the ground below as
|
|
well as a shadow of the UFO. The geometry of the
|
|
situation stands up under scrutiny; this plus the
|
|
presence of witnesses in the plane is surely as near
|
|
to scientific evidence as is available. This case
|
|
is to be studied further by the team from the Univer-
|
|
sity of Colorado.[15]
|
|
Although the evidence available is empirical and
|
|
circumstantial, it certainly appears to point over
|
|
whelmingly to the reality and materialistic nature of
|
|
UFOs, Even though hardware is not available to sat-
|
|
isfy the rigid rules of scientific evidence--such as
|
|
reproducibility--there are certain indications of
|
|
acceptance of the evidence in the scientific community.
|
|
For one thing, UFO articles now appear in scientific
|
|
journals. Another significant vote of confidence on
|
|
the evidence so far accumulated is the government
|
|
financed project by the University of Colorado to
|
|
conduct a scientific investigation. The cost: $313,000.
|
|
Probably more impressive is the changing attitude of
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
scientists. Not a few in prominent positions now ap-
|
|
parently regard it as cause for serious inquiry. Speci-
|
|
fically, Dr. Allen Hynek, Director or Northwestern
|
|
University's Dearborn Observatory, and the Air Force's
|
|
longtime consultant on UFOs, now advocates a view of
|
|
seriousness and open-mindedness to fellow scientists.
|
|
Yet, in his early days as a consultant, Dr. Hynek ad-
|
|
mits that he thought UFOs were sheer nonsense.[16] In
|
|
light of the evidence, many other scientists favor in-
|
|
vestigation; a few others have boldly suggested that
|
|
UFOs are purposefully dispatched vehicles from outer
|
|
space, a conclusion which presupposes the reality of
|
|
UFOs. James E. McDonald, University of Arizona atmo-
|
|
spheric physicist, after studying the evidence concluded:
|
|
"The amount of evidence is overwhelmingly real..the
|
|
evidence points to no other acceptable hypothesis than
|
|
the extraterrestrial."[17]
|
|
In the face of such evidence, and its growing
|
|
credibility, the next logical question involves origin.
|
|
As will be pointed out in the next chapter, the reality
|
|
or UFOs does not necessarily solve the entire riddle,
|
|
although proof that they were fabricated devices of
|
|
extraterrestrial origin would rather definitely settle
|
|
the question of reality.
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
CHAPTER III
|
|
|
|
THE QUESTION OF ORIGIN
|
|
|
|
Unless there is some degree of acceptance that
|
|
UFOs are real, the question of origin is hardly de-
|
|
serving of discussion. For if UFOs could be written
|
|
off as figments of the human imagination or some
|
|
natural phenomenon of the earth's atmosphere, such
|
|
conclusions would forego the necessity of any further
|
|
examination. As it is however, the evidence has
|
|
grown and gained enough credence to suggest that the
|
|
matter or origin should be addressed seriously.
|
|
The very question of origin has probably been
|
|
a stumbling block to an objective view of the evi-
|
|
dence. This is true because even any tentative ac-
|
|
ceptance about the material existence or UFOs raises
|
|
the equally difficult tasks of facing the alternatives
|
|
of origin. Some of these, as the later discussions
|
|
will show, are amenable in the scientific world while
|
|
others are quite controversial.
|
|
With contrast to the general acceptability re-
|
|
garding origin, the categorical placement or definition
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
of alternatives is somewhat more straight forward.
|
|
Alternatives in the simplest terms are that UFOs
|
|
originate either from this planet or elsewhere
|
|
(terrestrial or extraterrestrial, respectively).
|
|
However, the latter category as infinitely larger
|
|
than the first; thus for the purpose or this thesis,
|
|
the classification of extraterrestrial is subdivided
|
|
into interplanetary and extrasolar sources.
|
|
The possibility that UFOs originate right on
|
|
our own planet will be considered first. This classi-
|
|
fication probably has the widest and most immediate de-
|
|
gree of acceptance. When even the severest critic is
|
|
impressed by the evidence and tends to concede the
|
|
reality of UFOs, the first reaction is apt to be that
|
|
the objects are some secret but earthly hardware de-
|
|
velopment.[1] It is surely evident that space activities
|
|
have generated reports that were later shown to be
|
|
missile tests, satellite reentry after orbit decay,
|
|
advanced conventional aircraft and so on. Yet, there
|
|
are several arguments against the theory that UFOs
|
|
are secret devices from our own planet. First, it
|
|
would seem that the lengthy record of UFO sightings
|
|
would cast doubt on such a theory. Whatever country
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
or countries making such a mysterious and impressive
|
|
development should hardly test it for so long, with
|
|
out some practical applications which would remove
|
|
the shroud of secrecy. But the strongest argument
|
|
against earthly origin involves the broad scattering
|
|
of UFO reports. [2] As mentioned in Chapter I, the
|
|
phenomenon of UFOs is worldwide, although certain
|
|
parts of the world have had the so called flying
|
|
saucer waves which come and go, Ir the UFOs were an
|
|
advanced technological development of some country,
|
|
testing would not logically include so many areas of
|
|
the globe; rather, testing--or any operation for that
|
|
matter--would most likely be confined to the country
|
|
itself, in a specific area. Global operations as
|
|
represented by UFO sightings would be a careless
|
|
gesture, regardless of the basic intentions. While
|
|
the UFO may well represent a quantum jump in techno-
|
|
logy, there would be some risk in operating such craft
|
|
in foreign air space. The device could malfunction
|
|
or fall victim to disabling attacks from conventional
|
|
weapons, allowing capture. The most likely candidates
|
|
for developing an advanced vehicle resembling UFOs are
|
|
the Soviet Union and the United States. Yet it seems
|
|
highly unlikely that either country could for so long
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
possess an advanced and superior flight system without
|
|
some reflection or it in the terms or national policy.
|
|
From a somewhat prejudiced point of view, this would
|
|
seem especially true when speaking of the Soviet Union,
|
|
for it has not been their practice to withhold or play
|
|
down the potential of hardware developments that might
|
|
offer a military advantage. To the contrary, such
|
|
things as Soviet ICBMs, for example, were seemingly
|
|
well advertised by that nation. Of greater importance
|
|
perhaps is the Russian view or the UFO situation as
|
|
of late, There are persuasive clues to indicate that
|
|
the Soviets have recently undertaken a serious scientific
|
|
study of UFOs, (This may or may not be a simple co-
|
|
incidence to the U.S. Government's greater UFO in-
|
|
terest manifested by the study by the University of
|
|
Colorado.) Such studies, along with other inferences,
|
|
very sharply diminish the likelihood that the U.S.S.R.
|
|
is the point of origin. The same reasoning more or
|
|
less applies to the United States. To believe that
|
|
UFOs are the products of U.S. technology, stretches
|
|
the imagination more than a little. If so, never
|
|
before has there been a secret so well kept for so long.
|
|
Most convincing perhaps is the interest stressed by
|
|
members of Congress. Some members long ago demanded
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
repeatedly that formal UFO investigations were in
|
|
order.[4] It seems unlikely then that Congressmen
|
|
along with other high officials in government would
|
|
be unaware or any advanced craft which could account
|
|
for UFO activity. Finally, the most telling argument
|
|
against terrestrial origin is rather well expressed
|
|
in a statement by Major Donald E. Kehoe, USMC (Retired),
|
|
Director of NICAP, and author or several books about
|
|
UFOs: "If the Soviet Union or the United States had
|
|
'these things' they would scarcely be fooling around
|
|
with the crude objects they are now putting into space,"
|
|
If UFOs are not from this world, what about the
|
|
possibility of interplanetary origin, i.e., from other
|
|
planets in our solar system? "Solar system", used here
|
|
in the traditional sense, refers to the earth, the
|
|
eight other planets, the sun--around which the planets
|
|
orbit--and the natural satellites orbiting the planets.
|
|
The discussion here obviously excludes our own planet
|
|
as a point of origin, because that has already been
|
|
discussed.
|
|
In many ways, the proposition of interplanetary
|
|
origin has certain appeal. For one thing the distances
|
|
from earth are plausible for space travel as we under-
|
|
stand it, For another, our own programs in space lend
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
reality to the whole idea: The U,S. has sent space
|
|
probes to both Mars and Venus. This surely sharpens
|
|
the receptivity or the idea that the other planets
|
|
could reciprocate, not only with probes but eventually
|
|
with manned interplanetary vehicles. The current U. S.
|
|
technology certainly envisions such interplanetary
|
|
travel, if not something more ambitious. As early as
|
|
1962, the mission or the U. S. National Aeronautics
|
|
and Space Administration (NASA) was formally revised
|
|
to include "the search for extraterrestrial life." [6]
|
|
Note that extrasolar searches are not excluded although
|
|
the "state or the art" on Earth almost surely excludes
|
|
for the time being any ventures outside the planets
|
|
around our own sun.
|
|
As promising as our technology may be for ex-
|
|
ploration of the solar system, the knowledge already
|
|
accumulated is somewhat discouraging about the existence
|
|
of life on neighboring planets, particularly intelligent
|
|
life capable of launching interplanetary vehicles to the
|
|
earth. Mars and Venus are generally considered as the
|
|
only likely candidates on which some forms of life
|
|
could exist. Since these are the closest planets to
|
|
the earth, their observation by astronomers has allowed
|
|
fairly persuasive predictions as to their ability to
|
|
support life.
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
While Venus is the closer of the two, its sur-
|
|
face is shrouded by what appears to be clouds. Com-
|
|
pounding the difficulty in viewing Venus is its orbit
|
|
inside that of the earth. In other words, when it is
|
|
closest to Earth we see the dark side; only when it is
|
|
quite far away in orbit does the planet appear "full."
|
|
Despite these difficulties in making observations,
|
|
scientists for some time had postulated that Venus was
|
|
a hot (around 500 F.), inhospitable planet, enveloped
|
|
by a dense atmosphere of carbon dioxide. In mid-
|
|
October 1967, the earlier determinations were confirmed
|
|
when the U. S 's Mariner 5 space probe transmitting
|
|
data back to Earth passed within 2,500 miles of the
|
|
planet's surface.[7] While such data would certainly
|
|
diminish the likelihood of any past or present life
|
|
on Venus, detection of hydrogen and some nitrogen
|
|
brought up new speculation. The atmospheric mixtures
|
|
are hauntingly similar to that of the earth several
|
|
billion years ago.[8] Does this mean that Venus is
|
|
evolving more slowly but otherwise the same as the
|
|
earth did? Whatever Venus might become someday is
|
|
outside the discussion here, but the implications
|
|
are relevant to discussions later about life on extra-
|
|
solar planets.
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Although farther away than Venus, slightly smaller
|
|
Mars is a better subject for observation. With an orbit
|
|
outside the earth's, it never obscures its illuminated
|
|
side; thus when Mars is in the closest approach to the
|
|
earth, it appears full. Equally important, the tenuous
|
|
atmosphere of Mars can hardly obscure the surface from
|
|
observation by earthbound astronomers. But with all the
|
|
advantages in observing Mars, the basic question of life
|
|
will probably remain doubtful until man personally ex-
|
|
plores the surface. Photographs taken of Mars, in July
|
|
1965 and transmitted back to Earth by the U. S.'s
|
|
Mariner 4 probe have created doubt about the existence
|
|
of "canals" on the surface;[9] of course, only a small
|
|
fraction of the surface was photographed. The so-
|
|
called "canals" as reported by astronomers in the late
|
|
1800's could serve as a strong argument supporting the
|
|
theory of intelligent life. Even earlier, several
|
|
essential features were discovered; white caps appear-
|
|
ing on either pole depending on the season, and alter-
|
|
ations in color from season to season.[10] The Martian
|
|
atmosphere is believed to be only a fraction as dense
|
|
as the earth's and contains very small quantities of
|
|
water vapor. The reasoning followed that the "canals"
|
|
necessarily provided water from the polar regions of
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Mars to the arid, desert-like areas in the lower
|
|
latitudes.
|
|
Furthermore, it could be contended that the geo-
|
|
metric design of the "canals" meant massive construction
|
|
by an advanced civilization. But as astronomers gained
|
|
increasing knowledge of the planet and or the likely
|
|
requirements for life, they became increasingly more
|
|
skeptical of the proposition of "canals"; besides,
|
|
only a few notable astronomers persisted in observing
|
|
the canals clearly.[11] Thus today, many astronomers hold
|
|
little hope of finding intelligent life on Mars. Many
|
|
feel that simple forms of plant life may well prevail;[12]
|
|
others have not entirely ruled out the existence of
|
|
intelligent life ,
|
|
If UFOs were from Mars or Venus--despite the dis-
|
|
couraging surface conditions--there would be advantage-
|
|
ous times, or locations in their respective orbits,
|
|
to launch space probes or manned interplanetary vehicles.
|
|
These optimum times correspond to planetary positions
|
|
where a spacecraft can be launched so that it will
|
|
travel along a minimum-energy path. The U. S. Mariner
|
|
launches were obviously planned to take place during
|
|
favorable times. Likewise it would be logical to
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
predict that vehicles from either Mars or Venus would
|
|
be launched according to this principle, although the
|
|
calendar dates would be different from optimum launch
|
|
periods for objects from Earth to those planets. In
|
|
any case, the favorable launch times from the two
|
|
planets can be and have been computed, arrival time
|
|
at Earth estimated, and the results compared with UFO
|
|
activity. The findings revealed that there was a
|
|
poor correlation, adding to the other discouraging
|
|
evidence.[13]
|
|
In summary, the possible points or UFO origin were
|
|
categorized. These, in the broadest sense are inter-
|
|
solar or extrasolar; the former is subdivided into
|
|
terrestrial and interplanetary, and both were dis-
|
|
cussed in this chapter. The case for terrestrial
|
|
origin of UFOs, while maybe the easiest to accept,
|
|
is confronted by several obstacles: the wide scatter-
|
|
ing of UFO sightings, the longevity or the phenomena,
|
|
and the indication that both the U. S. and the Soviet
|
|
Union--the countries most likely to achieve a scienti-
|
|
fic breakthrough--have undertaken government financed
|
|
UFO investigations. :
|
|
Examination of whether UFOs originate from other
|
|
planets in the solar system was approached by assessing
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
the features or the planets. In turn, these features
|
|
were discussed in view or the probability of certain
|
|
planets being able to sustain the higher forms of life.
|
|
As was shown, Mars is the only other planet with con-
|
|
ditions reasonably conducive to life as we know it.
|
|
However, further discussions indicated a greatly dimin-
|
|
ishing likelihood of any life except that of simple
|
|
plants. Additionally, UFO sighting trends relate poorly
|
|
to predictable arrival on Earth of any interplanetary
|
|
trips from either planet. Thus the prospect that UFOs,
|
|
if real, originate in our Solar System is quite dis-
|
|
couraging, although it cannot be definitely excluded.
|
|
What about points of origin outside the solar system?
|
|
This will be dealt with next.
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
CHAPTER IV
|
|
|
|
LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE
|
|
|
|
The question which arises next has to do with
|
|
probable origination of UFOs from outside the solar
|
|
system. It might be contended, on the basis of data
|
|
in earlier chapters, that UFOs "had to be" extra-
|
|
solar; however, all possibilities of closer points
|
|
of origin were not by any means eliminated. Along
|
|
with those earlier discussions, that surely tend to
|
|
indicate extrasolar origin, the intent here is to
|
|
assess such a hypothesis from another viewpoint,
|
|
Specifically, this viewpoint deals with the likelihood
|
|
of the development and existence of intelligent life
|
|
on planets of other stars in our own galaxy, the Milky
|
|
Way. For if highly developed beings are fairly common-
|
|
place in the galaxy, it could be reasoned that their
|
|
technology could be greatly in advance of anything on
|
|
Earth, and capable of staggering achievements, space
|
|
travel notwithstanding.
|
|
Attempting to predict the occurrence of an in-
|
|
telligent life in the galaxy, or for that matter the
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
existence of suitable planets, is quite speculative
|
|
for several reasons. First, man has had no oppor-
|
|
tunity to study first hand any forms of life that
|
|
may exist on other worlds, including those which
|
|
may exist in our own solar system; hence, our
|
|
understanding of biological life may be rather
|
|
constrained. Secondly, given that such life may
|
|
well exist, estimation or the eventual technological
|
|
capabilities seems impossibly difficult, and bounded
|
|
only by the imagination. Nevertheless, from using
|
|
known data, some fairly well reasoned conclusions
|
|
will be attempted.
|
|
Considering our own galaxy first, it would not
|
|
seem to be anything out of the ordinary. Of the 100
|
|
odd billion galaxies detectable in the universe, the
|
|
Milky Way--our own galaxy--certainly does not seem
|
|
unique in any way.[1] Rather, it is a typical spiral
|
|
type galaxy, and these fall into several common classes.
|
|
The Milky Way consists of somewhere between 150 and 200
|
|
billion stars, one of which is the sun. Many of these
|
|
apparently would be suitable for life while others
|
|
would not. The latter category would include stars
|
|
not in the main sequence; these should be excluded
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
because either the life span or the star is judged
|
|
insufficient for life to develop or because the
|
|
luminosity is so low that planets, if any would
|
|
have to orbit in a very restrictive band around the
|
|
star. Further, not all stars in the main sequence
|
|
should be considered as suitable places for planets
|
|
with life to evolve, Double star systems, for example
|
|
while individually suitable, probably would cause
|
|
unacceptable extremes of temperature on any planets.
|
|
After these exclusions and certain others, the re-
|
|
maining independent main sequence stars which are
|
|
likely abodes of higher forms of life, number about
|
|
six billion; the sun incidentally, is rather typical
|
|
of this special group of stars in our galaxy.[2] Per-
|
|
haps it should be emphasized that the six billion
|
|
figure is just for our galaxy, one of about a hundred
|
|
billion.
|
|
Regardless or suitability, however, this approach
|
|
depends on the existence of planets around these stars.
|
|
While the preceding paragraph dealt with observable
|
|
data about stars, there is scant information regarding
|
|
extrasolar planets, as even fairly large ones could
|
|
not be seen if they in fact did orbit the nearest star.
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
The meager information available involves the solar
|
|
system, i.e., the sun with nine orbiting planets.
|
|
This admittedly is a small sample when addressing
|
|
the probability of planets around six billion stars;
|
|
but there is additional data about stars which implies
|
|
that planetary systems are the rule rather than the
|
|
exception. Billions of stars, for example, show an
|
|
unexplained slow angular motion; unexplained, that is
|
|
unless such motion is accounted for by the presence
|
|
or planets (the sun has slow angular motion [3]). Still
|
|
another theory has evolved which may indicate that
|
|
planets indeed are verY common. This involves the
|
|
observed wavering of many stars from a more or less
|
|
straight line path through the sky. This motion
|
|
according to astronomers can only be accounted for by
|
|
dark companions orbiting around such stars.[4] Thus
|
|
in addition to the great number of suitable stars,
|
|
there would appear to be a tremendous quantity of planets.
|
|
Many astronomers assume that the fraction of suitable
|
|
stars with planet systems is close to one.[5] In other
|
|
words, practically all suitable stars of the main
|
|
sequence variety have planets.
|
|
The next question is how many suitable stars with
|
|
planetary systems contain one or more ideal planets
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
(development of higher forms or life). We know that
|
|
the sun has one such planet, the earth, and Mars may
|
|
be just on the outside or the fringe. Again, this is
|
|
a small sample and extrapolations from it would seem
|
|
to produce an optimistically high figure. Many astro-
|
|
nomers would accept a probability for such an ideal
|
|
planet at around 0.5, although this is based on quite
|
|
limited empirical evidence. Using this figure, remem-
|
|
bering that the suitable stars numbered six billion
|
|
and most all probably had Planetary systems, the re-
|
|
sults show a figure approaching three billion stars
|
|
with an ideal abode for life in the Milky Way alone.
|
|
For sake of illustration, suppose the probability
|
|
was 0.1 instead or 0.5; the result would still be a
|
|
staggering 600 million. To say the least, conditions
|
|
for life elsewhere in the universe seem quite abundant.
|
|
The extent to which life evolves and inhabits these
|
|
is obviously an open subject.
|
|
Leading scientists and astronomers generally
|
|
ridiculed the notion that life as we know it could
|
|
exist elsewhere in the universe and they stubbornly
|
|
adhered to this belief until the early 195O's when a
|
|
gradual change in thinking began to occur. In the
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
1960's, scientists--some who had earlier scoffed at
|
|
the thought--have subscribed seriously to the concept
|
|
of extraterrestrial life. Many recently published
|
|
works, as manifested by titles in the Bibliography
|
|
hereto, treat the subject as almost a self-evident
|
|
truth, and dwell instead on the extent, characteristics
|
|
and capability of such extraterrestrial life; as
|
|
mentioned earlier NASA long ago incorporated the
|
|
"search for extraterrestrial life" into its mission,
|
|
an official U. S. action which apparently presupposes
|
|
the existence of extraterrestrial life.
|
|
In summary, this chapter has dealt with the proba-
|
|
bility associated with the occurrence of intelligent
|
|
life outside or our own solar system. In the last
|
|
chapter, it was reasoned that there was little prospect
|
|
of even lower forms of life on other planets around
|
|
the sun. The reasoning for such a judgment is based
|
|
on observations and generally accepted data. Attempt-
|
|
ing to predict the occurrence of intelligent life on
|
|
planets of other stars is a far more difficult task.[8]
|
|
This is because of a much smaller amount of observable
|
|
scientific data, in lieu of which theory must be sub-
|
|
stituted.
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Based on the limited data and theories, this
|
|
chapter--in contrast to the preceding, points per
|
|
suasively to a great abundance of life in the galaxy.
|
|
In short, the Milky Way consists of 150 billion stars,
|
|
six billion of which are suitable for life bearing
|
|
planets. The sun is the only one which we are certain
|
|
has a life bearing satellite. But there is evidence
|
|
of planets around other stars. Using modest figures
|
|
for computation, the planets ideally suited for life
|
|
may number as high as 3 billion. Thus, if life evolves
|
|
only in a few places where favorable conditions prevail,
|
|
intelligent life in the galaxy may be unbelievably
|
|
commonplace.
|
|
Further, it was shown that the idea of other
|
|
intelligent life was not long ago heatedly rejected.
|
|
Today, many noted scientists as well as other pro-
|
|
fessional disciplines face the theory openly. Last
|
|
year at the annual meeting of the American Association
|
|
for the Advancement of Science, discussions indicated
|
|
that life elsewhere in the universe almost certainly
|
|
exists.[9]
|
|
With persuasive prospects for countless abodes for
|
|
advanced forms of life, can any assessment be made of
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
intelligence that would emerge? Specifically, could
|
|
their technology be greatly advanced, accounting for
|
|
UFOs? These questions will be assessed in the final
|
|
chapter.
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
CHAPTER V
|
|
EXTRATERRESTRIAL TECHNOLOGY AND UFOs
|
|
|
|
The purpose of this chapter is to discuss and
|
|
ponder the technology that extraterrestrial societies
|
|
might attain. It stands to reason that if UFOs are
|
|
in fact vehicles from outer space worlds, the tech-
|
|
nology of the beings sending them is superior to our
|
|
own. But the fallacy here is that we do not have any
|
|
such certain information. Nevertheless, by extending
|
|
the reasoning of the foregoing chapter, some better
|
|
perspective of the possibilities of extraterrestrial
|
|
technologies may be visualized.
|
|
Earlier , it was shown that the probability of life
|
|
on planets around other stars was rather good. So good
|
|
in fact, that many scientists accept extraterrestrial
|
|
life as almost a certainty. Bearing this in mind and
|
|
remembering other points of origin are excluded by per-
|
|
suasive argument, there is a subtle connection between
|
|
intelligent life elsewhere and the UFO. For certain,
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
the former hypothesis is quite compatible with the
|
|
UFO evidence. Putting it another way, the connection
|
|
is amply illustrated in a statement by Dr. Allen Hynek,
|
|
accepting the possibility that UFOs are extraterres-
|
|
trial: "As long as there are 'unidentifieds', the
|
|
question must obviously remain open."[2]
|
|
Conceding that extrasolar life may abound, could
|
|
their eventual technological achievements be so far
|
|
superior to that on Earth, that it would scarcely be
|
|
understood here? One way to judge this is to look at
|
|
the age of the earth and its expected longevity. The
|
|
solar system is about 4.5 billion years old; the sun's
|
|
total life expectancy, similar to other main sequence
|
|
stars, is about 10 million years. With a presumed wide
|
|
distribution of age among the suitable main sequence
|
|
stars, the odds are that the majority of these would
|
|
indeed be farther advanced societies than on Earth.
|
|
The extent to which their technology would excel is
|
|
difficult even to ponder; however, perhaps it is no
|
|
more difficult than predicting what our earthly techno-
|
|
logy might represent, say 4 billion years from now.
|
|
Five hundred years from now boggles the imagination,
|
|
especially when realizing that a scant hundred years
|
|
ago most of our current technology would probably have
|
|
seemed fanciful. For example, had scientists even
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
fifty years ago been exposed to disciplines of modern
|
|
nuclear physics, there would probably have been pessi-
|
|
mists and "doubters". Looking a little farther back
|
|
might also improve perspective. Remember that less
|
|
than 500 years ago men were burned at the stake for
|
|
advocating that the earth rotated around the sun, as
|
|
earlier proposed by Copernicus. The popular view in
|
|
his time held that the earth was not only flat but
|
|
also the center of the universe.
|
|
There is another way of approaching the technologi-
|
|
cal aspect, although it contains an obvious assumption.
|
|
Nevertheless, some authors have expressed the idea
|
|
that clues of the originating technology could be found
|
|
in the behavior of UFOs. The curious pendulum motion,
|
|
or oscillation reported in some UFO sightings is most
|
|
often used to discount observation as natural phenomenon.
|
|
However, this trait may suggest a propulsion system
|
|
far beyond our earthly understanding. The apparent
|
|
acceleration capability gives further rise to questions
|
|
on what type of power plant might propel UFOs, although
|
|
speed and acceleration traits are elusive because it
|
|
would seem that these could not be accurately judged
|
|
without knowing the size of the object and its distance--
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
--a common shortcoming even when witnesses are reli-
|
|
able. Hovering is another trait, which appears to
|
|
suggest some extraordinary means or propulsion. A
|
|
popular view, although quite speculative, proposes
|
|
that UFOs are not aerodynamic but are propelled by a
|
|
gravity force (G-field).[5] Such a theory could indeed
|
|
account for the UFOs maneuverability and other traits
|
|
which apparently defy what we recognize as basic laws
|
|
of physics. One subscriber to this theory overcomes
|
|
the inherent difficulties in two ways.
|
|
The first is by way of an analogy, about the so
|
|
called universal laws or forces. Newton's laws of
|
|
motion were not proven inaccurate by Einstein's the-
|
|
ories; rather the latter's merely extended the appli-
|
|
cation of Newtonian principles.[6] Following this
|
|
logic, it could be reasoned that Einstein's theories
|
|
do not represent the ultimate in the disciplines of
|
|
physics. Additionally, to quiet the pessimists, his-
|
|
tory often reveals poor judgment of what technology
|
|
may attain. Not so many years ago authoritative
|
|
people claimed the airplane could never fly across
|
|
the Atlantic Ocean. The error stemmed from their use
|
|
of calculations based on the known and accepted ef-
|
|
ficiencies then in existence.[7] The deeper and common
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
fallacy, which has repeatedly been ignored, is attempt-
|
|
ing to interpret the unknown based on scientific know-
|
|
ledge possessed at the time.
|
|
Chapter III dealt with the prospect of UFOs being
|
|
either terrestrial or interplanetary, concluding that
|
|
these points of origin were unlikely. Using a different
|
|
approach, the possibilities of extrasolar origin were
|
|
assessed in Chapter IV. In this chapter an attempt
|
|
was made to assess the chances for highly advanced
|
|
technologies. First, if life emerges in the galaxy
|
|
as often as the conditions prevail, intelligent life
|
|
may be unbelievably commonplace. Following this pre-
|
|
mise, it is most likely that there are literally millions
|
|
of societies with technological achievements beyond
|
|
those known or even understood on Earth. To illustrate
|
|
the problems of extrasolar technological assessments,
|
|
one can ponder what these might amount to on Earth in
|
|
the year 4,000,001,968 A. D. As further illustrations,
|
|
previous resistance to new scientific concepts was
|
|
cited. Further, using some of the UFO traits as a basis
|
|
of discussion, some of the technological implications
|
|
were presented. The reasoning was aimed at showing
|
|
that propulsion as we on Earth know it, may be quite
|
|
inferior to what propels the UFO, or what might be
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
achieved by extraterrestrial civilizations. It was
|
|
also shown that estimates of our own technology have
|
|
frequently been too pessimistic. In short, we may
|
|
be too quick to assume that all basic principles of
|
|
knowledge have been attained; and therefore imprudently
|
|
degrade possible achievements of extraterrestrial
|
|
societies--which surely exist in great numbers. Dr.
|
|
Allen Hynek, longtime adviser to the Air Force and
|
|
previous UFO skeptic, summarized the foregoing idea
|
|
quite appropriately in this statement:
|
|
|
|
I have begun to feel that there is a ten-
|
|
dency in the 20th century to forget that there
|
|
will be a 21st century science, and indeed a
|
|
30th century science, from which vantage points
|
|
our knowledge of the universe may appear quite
|
|
different, We suffer perhaps, from temporal
|
|
provincialism, a form of arrogance that has
|
|
always irritated posterity.[8]
|
|
|
|
Having discussed the evidence on UFOs, the as-
|
|
pects of their origin, and the likelihood of extra-
|
|
terrestrial intelligence, it is now time to look
|
|
for conclusions which may be drawn, This will be
|
|
undertaken in the next and final chapter, along with
|
|
a presentation of recommendations.
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
CHAPTER VI
|
|
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
|
|
|
|
Conclusions
|
|
|
|
1. Over the years, the evidence on UFOs has
|
|
continued to mount; and as it has, the reality of
|
|
UFOs as material, foreign, artificial objects has
|
|
become increasingly more credible.
|
|
2. UFOs are evidently not of terrestrial
|
|
origin; i.e., it was reasoned persuasively that
|
|
UFOs are not some secret, advanced development from
|
|
the U. S., the Soviet Union, or any other nation on
|
|
our planet.
|
|
3. Other planets in our solar system are un-
|
|
suitable for life as we on earth know it. Therefore,
|
|
if UFOs are real objects, fabricated by intelligence
|
|
of some form. (as opposed to earthly creations or
|
|
natural phenomenon), they most probably originate
|
|
from outside the solar sYstem.
|
|
4. Based on empirical evidence, suitable abodes
|
|
for intelligent life in the galaxy are surprisingly
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
abundant. Extension of this reasoning strongly implies
|
|
that there are countless extraterrestrial societies
|
|
older than those on Earth.
|
|
5. Because of the probable great number of older,
|
|
predictably more advanced societies, their technologies
|
|
could theoretically be expected to greatly surpass our
|
|
own. It is further concluded that as the sophistication
|
|
of technology (in general) increases, so does the means
|
|
to overcome barriers to space travel.
|
|
6, As evidenced by the U, S. and the Soviet Union's
|
|
ventures in space technology, extraterrestrial beings
|
|
could be expected to eventually develop sophisticated
|
|
technologies, and to explore space when these had
|
|
advanced sufficiently.
|
|
7. The UFO evidence and the theory of extra-
|
|
terrestrial life is entirely compatible.
|
|
8. It does not appear possible in the near future
|
|
to disprove that UFOs originate from outer space.
|
|
|
|
Recommendations
|
|
|
|
1. The United States Government should promulgate
|
|
greatly increased measures to gain more information about
|
|
UFOs. Specifically, the aim should be to secure data
|
|
sufficient to ascertain whether or not UFOs are real,
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Purposefully constructed objects, as the mounting evi-
|
|
dence tends to indicate.
|
|
2. It is further recommended that these measures
|
|
include more active means of dealing with UFO sightings.
|
|
As it stands now, the U. S. Air Force agency designated
|
|
to do so, evaluates sightings after the fact; likewise,
|
|
the independent work being done by the University of
|
|
Colorado, under government contract, is largely devoted
|
|
to evaluating second hand information, i.e., reports
|
|
which long ago grew "cold". By active measures, the
|
|
author means a rapid, airborne response system poised
|
|
to deal specifically, although perhaps not exclusively,
|
|
with UFO sightings when they occur. The aircraft in-
|
|
volved could be assigned on an area basis, but possibly
|
|
staged into other or specific localities when warranted
|
|
by a rash of reported activity. The aircraft should be
|
|
equipped with special photographic and timing instru-
|
|
ments. Aircraft thus equipped, and working in pairs
|
|
with predesignated intercept techniques could perform
|
|
triangulation reconnaissance and photography. Data
|
|
obtained in this manner would reveal the size, speed
|
|
and range of a UFO, information heretofore decidedly
|
|
lacking, It would also overcome the ever-present
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
problem of witness credibility when evaluating second
|
|
hand reports or previous occurrences.
|
|
3. In line with active measures for dealing with
|
|
UFOs, recommend that research be conducted to discover
|
|
feasible means of capturing a UFO. While this recommen-
|
|
dation may seem to lack specificity, it should be noted
|
|
that hovering is a commonly observed UFO characteristic,
|
|
and one which invites the idea as a possibility. Means
|
|
to capture one should ideally, although not necessarily,
|
|
rule out destructive tactics. This is because the basic
|
|
reason for capture is for the potential discovery of a
|
|
higher order of technology.
|
|
4. That the Air Force Project Blue Book be recon-
|
|
stituted under NASA, with a much larger staff--including
|
|
scientists of many disciplines. This should afford the
|
|
wherewithal to give more study in depth and variety to
|
|
the passive aspects of analyzing, correlating, and re-
|
|
cording data on UFO reports. In addition, expanded
|
|
independent studies, such as the smaller scale contract
|
|
with the University or Colorado, should be continued.
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
FOOTNOTES
|
|
|
|
Chapter II
|
|
|
|
1. Chapters I and II, Verses 4, 6, 10, 13-19,
|
|
Book of Ezekiel, the Old Testament.
|
|
|
|
2. B. Trench, The Flying Saucer Story (London:
|
|
Neville Spearman Ltd., 1967), p.48.
|
|
|
|
3. "Fresh Look at Flying Saucers," Time, Vol.
|
|
90, 4 August 1967, p. 32.
|
|
|
|
4. David C. Whitney, "Flying Saucers," Look
|
|
Special, 1967, p. 17.
|
|
|
|
5" Ibid., p. 9
|
|
|
|
6. "Fresh Look at Flying Saucers," op. cit., p, 32.
|
|
|
|
7. Whitney, op. cit., p. 7.
|
|
|
|
8, Warren Rodgers, "Flying Saucer," Look, Vol.
|
|
31, 21 March 196?, p. 76.
|
|
|
|
9. J. G. Fuller, Incident at Exeter (New York:
|
|
G. P. Putman's and Sons, Inc., 1966) p. 137.
|
|
|
|
10. Whitney, op. cit., p. 21.
|
|
|
|
11. Whitney, op. cit., p. 15.
|
|
|
|
12. J. G. Fuller, "A Communication Concerning the
|
|
UFOs," Saturday Review, Vol. 50, 4 February 1967, p. 71.
|
|
|
|
13. "Disputed Central Intelligence Agency Document
|
|
on UFOs," Saturday Review, Vol. 49, 3 September 1966,
|
|
p. 46.
|
|
|
|
14. J. Allen Hynek, "Flying Saucers, Are They Real?,
|
|
Readers Digest, Vol. 90, 5 March 1967, p. 65.
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
15. "Fresh Look at Flying Saucers," op. cit.,
|
|
p. 33.
|
|
|
|
16. Hynek, op. cit., p. 65.
|
|
|
|
17: "Fresh Look at Flying Saucers," op. cit.,
|
|
p. 33.
|
|
|
|
Chapter III
|
|
|
|
1. Richard H. Hall (Ed.), The UFO Evidence, Wash-
|
|
ington: National Investigations Committee on Aerial
|
|
Phenomena, 1964, p. 6.
|
|
|
|
2. Ibid., p, 5.
|
|
|
|
3. J, Allen Hynek, "The UFO Gap," Playboy, Vol.
|
|
14, No. 12, December 1967, P. 144.
|
|
|
|
4. "Trade Winds: USAF Reaction to Recent Sightings,"
|
|
Saturday Review, Vol. 49, 16 April 1966, p. 23.
|
|
|
|
5. David C. Whitney (Ed.), "Flying Saucers," Look
|
|
Special, 1967, p. 16.
|
|
|
|
6, John A,Keel, "Flap Dates," True, Vol. 2, 1967
|
|
p. 15.
|
|
|
|
7. "Greenhouse Planets," Newsweek, Vol. 70, No. 18,
|
|
30 October 1967, p. 52.
|
|
|
|
8. "Crazy, Mixed-Up Planets," Newsweek, Vol. 70,
|
|
No. 19, 6 November 1967, p. 61.
|
|
|
|
9, Walter Sullivan, "We Are Not Alone" (New York:
|
|
McGraw-Hill Book Company), p. 150.
|
|
|
|
10. Ibid., p. 153.
|
|
|
|
11. Roger A. MacGowen and Frederick I. Ordway, III,
|
|
"Intelligence in the Universe" (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.:
|
|
Prentice Hall, Inc., 1966), p. 316.
|
|
|
|
12. Ibid., pp. 318-320.
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
13. Charles H. Smiley, Dr., "The 9:05 From Mars
|
|
is Late," True, Vol. 2, 1967, p. 30.
|
|
|
|
Chapter IV
|
|
|
|
1. Roger A. MacGowen and Frederick I. Ordway,
|
|
III, "Intelligence in the Universe", (Englewood Cliffs,
|
|
N, J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1956), p. 361.
|
|
|
|
2. Ibid., p. 362.
|
|
|
|
3. Walter Sullivan, "We Are Not Alone", (New York:
|
|
McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1966) , p. 48.
|
|
|
|
4. Ibid., p. 51,
|
|
|
|
5. MacGowen, op. cit., p. 368.
|
|
|
|
6. Ibid., p. 369.
|
|
|
|
7. John A. Keel, "Flap Dates," True, Vol. 2.,
|
|
1967, p. 16.
|
|
|
|
8. Dr. C. Sagan, Intelligent Life in the Universe
|
|
(San Francisco: Holden Day, Inc., 1966), p. 39.
|
|
|
|
9. Advertiser-Journal, Montgomery, Alabama, 5
|
|
December 1967, p. 7.
|
|
|
|
Chapter V
|
|
|
|
1. Advertiser-Journal, Montgomery, Alabama, 5
|
|
December 1967, p, 7. In an anonymous article on the
|
|
editorial page, titled, "Other Planets, Other Voices?,"
|
|
this statement was reported:
|
|
|
|
....recent discussions of scientists at the
|
|
annual meeting or the American Association for
|
|
the Advancement or Science indicated that life
|
|
almost certainly exists elsewhere in the
|
|
universe....
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
2. J. Allen Hynek, "Flying Saucers, Are They
|
|
Real?," Readers Digest, Vol. 90, 5 March 1967, P. 65.
|
|
|
|
3. Dr. C. Sagan, "Intelligent Life in the Universe"
|
|
(San Francisco: Holden Day Inc., 1966), p. 391.
|
|
|
|
4. Walter Sullivan, "We Are Not Alone" (New York:
|
|
McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1966, p. 150.
|
|
|
|
5. Leonard G. Cramp, "Space, Gravity and the Flying
|
|
Saucer" (New York, N.Y.: British Book Centre, Inc.,
|
|
1955) pp. 80-104.
|
|
|
|
6. Ibid., p. 49.
|
|
|
|
7. Ibid., p. 88.
|
|
|
|
8. J. Allen Hynek, "There'll Be a 21st Century
|
|
Science Too," True, Vol. 2, 1967, p, 67.
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
BIBLIOGRAPHY
|
|
|
|
Books
|
|
|
|
Adamski, George. "Inside the Space Ships. New York:
|
|
Schuman, 1955.
|
|
|
|
Aime', Michael, "Flying Saucers and the Straight Line
|
|
Mystery". New York, N.Y.; Criterion Books, 1958.
|
|
|
|
Constance, Arthur. "The Inexplicable Sky". New York,
|
|
N.Y.: Citadel Press, 1957.
|
|
|
|
Cramp, Leonard G. "Space, Gravity and the Flying Saucer",
|
|
New York, N.Y.: British Book Centre, Inc., 1955.
|
|
|
|
Davidson, Leon. "An Analysis of the Air Force Project
|
|
Bluebook". Ramsey, N.J.: Ramsey Wallace, 1966.
|
|
|
|
Edwards, Frank. "Flying Saucers-Serious Business", New
|
|
York, N.Y.: Lyle Stuart, l966.
|
|
|
|
Firsoff, V. A. "Life Beyond the Earth." New York, N.Y.:
|
|
Basic Books,-Inc., 1963.
|
|
|
|
Fuller, John G. "The Interrupted Journey." New York, N.Y.,
|
|
Dial Press, 1966.
|
|
|
|
_________. "Incident at Exeter." New York, N.Y.: Putman, 1966
|
|
|
|
Girvan, Waverly. "Flying Saucers and Common Sense." New
|
|
York, N.Y.: Citadel Press, 1956.
|
|
|
|
Glasstone, Samuel, "Sourcebook on the Space Sciences."
|
|
Princeton, N.J.: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1965.
|
|
|
|
Hall, Richard H. "The UFO Evidence." Washington D.C.:
|
|
NICAP, 1964.
|
|
|
|
Jessup, Morris K. "The Expanding Case for the UFO." New
|
|
York, N.Y. : Citadel Press, 1957.
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
_________. "UFOs and the Bible. New York, N.Y.:
|
|
Citadel Press, 1966.
|
|
|
|
_________. "The Case for the UFO. New York, N.Y.:
|
|
Citadel Press, 1955.
|
|
|
|
Jung, Carl Gustav. "Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth of
|
|
Things Seen in the Sky," London: Routledge and
|
|
Paul, 1959.
|
|
|
|
Keyhoe, Donald E. "The Flying Saucer Conspiracy," New
|
|
York, N.Y.: Holt, 1955.
|
|
|
|
_________. "Flying Saucers from Outer Space," New York,
|
|
N.Y.; Holt, 1953.
|
|
|
|
_________. "Flying Saucers: Top Secret." New York, N.Y.:
|
|
Putman, 1960.
|
|
|
|
Lorenzen, Coral. "The Great Flying Saucer Hoax; Facts
|
|
and Interpretations." New York, N.Y.: William-
|
|
Frederick Press, 1962.
|
|
|
|
MacGowen, R. and Ordway, F, "Intelligence in the Uni-
|
|
verse. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, Inc.,
|
|
1966.
|
|
|
|
Menzel, Donald H. and Boyd, Lyle G. "The World or Flying
|
|
Saucers: A Scientific Examination of a Major Myth of
|
|
the Space Age." Garden City, New York: Doubleday, l963.
|
|
|
|
Menzel, Donald H. :Flying Saucers." Cambridge, Mass:
|
|
Harvard University Press, 1963.
|
|
|
|
Reeve, Bryant. "Flying Saucer Pilgrimage." Amherst
|
|
Wisconsin: Amherst Press, 1957.
|
|
|
|
Ruppelt, Edward J. "The Report on UFO." Garden City,
|
|
New York: Doubleday, 1956.
|
|
|
|
Sagan, Carl, Dr. "Intelligent Life in the Universe,"
|
|
San Francisco , California: Holden Day, Inc., 1966.
|
|
|
|
Skully, Frank. "Behind the Flying Saucers," New York,
|
|
N.Y.: Holt, 1950.
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Sullivan, Walter. "We Are Not Alone." New York, N.Y.:
|
|
McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1966.
|
|
|
|
Thacker, Lawrence J. "Flying Saucers and the USAF."
|
|
Princeton, N.Y.: Van Nostrand, 1960.
|
|
|
|
Trench, B. "The Flying Saucer Story." London: Neville
|
|
Spearmon Ltd., 1967.
|
|
|
|
Twitchell, Cleve. "The UFO Saga." Lakemont, Georgia:
|
|
CSA Press, 1966.
|
|
|
|
Unger, George. "Flying Saucers: Physical and Spiritual
|
|
Aspects." East Grinstead, England: New Knowledge
|
|
Books, 1958.
|
|
|
|
U. S. Congress, Committee on Armed Services. "Hearings
|
|
on Unidentified Flying Objects." Washington, D. C,
|
|
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
|
|
|
|
Vallee, Jacques. "Challenge to Science." Chicago,
|
|
Illinois: Regnery, 1966.
|
|
|
|
_________. "Anatomy of a Phenomenon." Chicago, Illionis:
|
|
Regnery, 1965.
|
|
|
|
Wilkins, Harold T. "Flying Saucers Uncensored." New
|
|
York, N.Y.: The Citidel Press, 1955.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Articles and Periodicals
|
|
|
|
Asimov, I. "UFO's--What I Think." Science Digest,
|
|
Vol. 59, 7 June 1967, P. 44.
|
|
|
|
Booth, Leon (Colonel). "Flying Saucers," Ordnance, Vol.
|
|
51, July-August 1967, pp. 30-31.
|
|
|
|
Cohen, David.- "Should We Be Serious About UFO's?,"
|
|
Science Digest, Vol. 77, June 1965, pp, 41-44.
|
|
|
|
"Crazy, Mixed-Up Planets," Newsweek, Vol. 70, No. 19,
|
|
6 November 1967, p. 61.
|
|
|
|
"Disputed Central Intelligence Agency Document on UFO's,
|
|
Saturday Review Vol. 49, 3 September 1967, PP.45-50.
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Durham, A. "Visual Perception or UFO's," Flying
|
|
Saucer Review, Vol. 12, No. 3, May-June l967,
|
|
pp. 27-29.
|
|
|
|
"Flatus Season: Sightings at Ann Arbor and Hillsdale,"
|
|
Time, Vol. 87, 1 April 1967, p. 25.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Flying Saucers: Illusions or Reality," Senior School,
|
|
Vol. 89, 16 September 1966, pp. 4-7.
|
|
|
|
"Flying Saucers from Earth," Science News, Vol. 91.
|
|
13 May 1967, p. 452.
|
|
|
|
"Fresh Look at Flying Saucers," Time, Vol. 90, 4
|
|
August 1967, pp.
|
|
|
|
Fuller, J. G. "A Communication Concerning UFOs,"
|
|
Saturday Review, Vol. 50, 4 February 1967, pp. 70-72.
|
|
|
|
"Greenhouse Planet," Newsweek, Vol. 70, No. 18, 30
|
|
October 1967, p. 52.
|
|
|
|
"Gullible Experiment," Time, Vol. 87, 8 April 1966,
|
|
p. 70.
|
|
|
|
"Hard Look at Flying Saucers," U.S. News, Vol. 60,
|
|
11 April 1966, pp, 14-15.
|
|
|
|
Hellan, H. "A New Look at the UFO Enigma," Science
|
|
Digest, Vol. 80, No. 5., November 1967, pp. 9-15.
|
|
|
|
Hynek, J. Allen, Dr. "Flying Saucers, Are They Real?,"
|
|
Readers Digest, Vol. 90, 5 March 1967. pp. 61-67.
|
|
|
|
_________. "The UFO Gap," Playboy, Vol. 14, No. 12,
|
|
December 1967, p. 144.
|
|
|
|
_________. "There'll Be a 21st Century Science Too,"
|
|
True, Vol., 2, 1967, p. 36.
|
|
|
|
Keel, John A, "Flap Dates," True, Vol. 2., 1967, p, 15.
|
|
|
|
Lear, J. "Research in America--What are the Unidentified
|
|
Aerial Objects?," Saturday Review Vol. 49, 6
|
|
August 1966, pp. 41-52.
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Mallan, Lloyd, "Gloom at the Top," True, Vol. 2, 1967,
|
|
pp, 18-21.
|
|
|
|
Mallan, Lloyd, "Saucers Right in SAC's Backyard,"
|
|
True, Vol. 2., 1967, p. 32.
|
|
|
|
_________. "There's More (And Less) to Saucers Than
|
|
Meets the Eye," True, Vol. 2, 1967, p. 27.
|
|
|
|
Markowitz, W. "Physics and Metaphysics of Unidentified
|
|
Flying Objects," Science, Vol. 157, 15 September
|
|
1967, pp. 1274-1284.
|
|
|
|
"New Light on Flying Saucers," U. S. News and World
|
|
Report, Vol. 62, 20 March 1967, p. 16.
|
|
|
|
Ogles, George O,, Major. "Air Force Takes the Stand:
|
|
'Just the Facts, Sir'," True, Vol. 2, 1967, p. 5.
|
|
|
|
_________. "The Airman, Vol. XI, No. 7, July 1967, "What
|
|
Does the Air Force Really Know About Flying Saucers?,"
|
|
Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office,
|
|
1967.
|
|
|
|
"Other Planets, Other Voices?' Advertiser-Journal,
|
|
Montgomery, Alabama, 5 December 1967, p. 7.
|
|
|
|
"Outer Space Ghost Story," Readers Digest, May 1966,
|
|
pp. 72-74.
|
|
|
|
Phillips, Charles. "How Not to Murder Your Pilot,"
|
|
True, Vol. 2, 1967, p. 23.
|
|
|
|
Rodgers, Warren. "Flying Saucers," Look, Vol. 31, No.
|
|
6, 21 March 1967, pp. 76-80.
|
|
|
|
Ruddy, J. "Look--There's a Flying Saucer," MacLean's
|
|
(Canada), Vol. 80, No. 11, November 1967, pp. 34-37.
|
|
|
|
"Saucers Out of Sight, But Not Out of Mind," true, Vol.
|
|
2, 1967, p.38.
|
|
|
|
Smiley, Charles H. (Dr.). "The 9:05 from Mars is Late,"
|
|
True, Vol. 2, 1957, P. 31.
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Solomon, Leslie. "This Faster Than Light Bit," True,
|
|
Vol. 2, 1967, p. 25.
|
|
|
|
Stine, G. H. "Prowling Mind or Henry Conda," Flying,
|
|
Vol. 8O, 8 March l967, pp. 64-68.
|
|
|
|
"Trade Winds: USAF Reactions to Recent Sightings,"
|
|
Saturday Review, Vol. 69, 16 April 1966, p. 10.
|
|
|
|
"UFOs and the Law of Physics," Saturday Review, Vol.
|
|
50, 7 October 1967, p. 59.
|
|
|
|
"UFO Photographs, Anyone?." Science Digest, Vol. 62,
|
|
September 1967, P. 73.
|
|
|
|
"Well Witnessed Invasion by Something," Life, LX, 1
|
|
April 1966, pp. 24-31.
|
|
|
|
Whitney, David C, "Flying Saucers," Look Special,
|
|
1967, pp- 3-67.
|
|
|
|
"Who's Minding the Store?," Flying Saucer Reports,
|
|
Vol. 1, 1967, p. 62.
|
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
=============================================================================
|
|
|
|
**********************************************
|
|
* THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *
|
|
********************************************** |