Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 9, 2016
Document Release Date: 
March 12, 2001
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
June 26, 1971
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP81R00560R000100010011-9.pdf1.14 MB
Approved For Release 2001/04/02 CIA-RDP .00560RO OIDWIM44-9--- Extraterresttrial apno acids The coincidence ly from thos ss in living cell the finds is furthe Last December' report by a gI p and pyrimidin were created nd rally in snafre. Although he c a l te a / -- Space Admi p istration's Ames ,Research specu Center o 'finding indigenous amino that the%existence of identical comple As of amino acids and pyrim tt " er N: Pd acids i the Murchison meteorite ( dims in two meteorites could mean that 12/5 0, p. 429) has sparked intense b t is is a basic phase in the chemical sci tific interest. The finding was su quently confirmed by groups from the process leading to.?life. The findings in- f Houston .(SN- 3/20/71, crease the likelihood of life elsewhere __:_.__ :.., o e e s . p. 195) and Arizona State University in the uni In both meteorites, six of the amino (SN: 3/27/71, p. 210)? acids are pinong those that are com , Drs ts ti . , s The Arizona State scien John R. Cronin and Carleton B. Moore, monly linked together tp form pro- inkliving cells; the other 12 are r i ns e also reported detecting the same amino acids only occasionally found. in e acids in an intact piece of a similar am meteorite that fell near Murray, Ky., in They are thus not Lilly to result from 1950~NoW the leader of the NASA group, acids arelof antalinost equal mixture of ht- i g abundance of amino acids in the ivlur-/, r ray meteorite. Dr. Ponnamperuma~told tures. Earth aminonacids.proThe du mixonly~ e h s ,yp -- of Sciences last week that the groups of use of gas chromatography c~nibined biological origin and is strong evidence with mass spectrometry detected all 18 for extraterrestrial chemical: origin. of the amino acids in Murray that they Members of the Ames team also in earlier found in Murchis They also eluded Drs. Jr a es La Folsomewless, Keith ss Ett ~ droxypyrimidine and~4-hydroxymetnyi- Peter s.+? S art ' Th . p e pyrimidine-in ea, h meteorite. Cyclops: Eye on the universe f visiting professor at Stanford, and ford University, is called Projec Cyclops. Its aim is to examine che` ply enough to make the id a feasibilities and' to educate, not to it ownlthe" cost of d?oin li this, ays recommend -policy, There is no in- , d g For//a. total of 150 hours rom o May/through July of 1960 the 85- Dr. John Billingham, chief of the foot"antenna at the National Radio biotechnology division/at Ames, Astronomy Observatory in Green believe it is not to early for a Bank, W.Va., monitored radio fuller study of the' echnology nec- emissions from the nearby stars essary to detect rtifact signals. Tau Ceti and Epsilon Eridini for Basically, C clops envisions an any evidence of signals from intel- interconnecte array of 1,000 to ligent extraterrestrial civilizations. 10,000 oredio telescope perhaps is 10 The search, 'Project Ozma, turned spread up nothing unusual. But it was the miles across. Such an array sholtild, first time man had tried to detect according to one estimate, be, able signals from any unknown counter- to detect beamed signals froze any parts; on other planetary systems. Norization radio within 1, g0'lighomethe Last week engineers and scien- tists gathered at the National Acro-,' regular transmissions of advanced nautics and Space Administration's technological civilizations might be Ames Research Center in Moun- detectable of ostsperhaps 100 high - such an tain View, Calif., to explore' the years. technological possibilities of:a prof- would have to'be justified by tjae ect that would be orders of mag- signal search,. itself, but the ar-. ay to9f bf for One excgoal ellent nitude more sophisticated than. would also' e an Ozma. The 11-week -study, spon- radio aso~ sored jointly by Ames and Stan- study i to explore ways in hied t the /i ishes could be /produ n d lv study co-directors, Dr. Bernar. t establish tl _I_ ---I- nl;"Pr c%V- "It ML A ., project at this time. Decades mg pass before it is possible. But/the "its mission ~would b ' to add a ew dimension to co `urology," Dr. i tention ot% inaugurauug auL1. As for the Cyclops a,r y itself, h n onl Whatever happened to UFO's?- On May 31 two New Hampshire farmers looked across a field and saw a spherical, flat-bottomed object hovering above the ground. As they watched, the object rose vertically, arced and headed into the wind on a horizontal path. This is one of several incoming reports of unidentified flying objects received re- cently by the National ITnvestigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) in Washington. NICAr secretary-treas- urer Stuart Nixon says he believes the reports may be the start of a recur- rence of saucer sightings or at least the reporting of saucer sightings. NICAP has been a long time waiting. Since 1968 the number of UFO sightings has dropped off, along with public interest in them. Last week a Wall Street Journal article reported that a probable reason for the decline is the negative social climate produced by publication in 1968 of the Condon report, the 810-page sci- entific study of UFO sightings commis- sioned by the U.S. Air Force and di- rected by Dr. Edward U. Condon of the University of Colorado. It conclud- ed that "nothing has come from the study of UFO's in the last 21 years that has added to scientific knowledge." And "that further extensive study of UFO's probably cannot be justified in the expectation that science will be ad- vanced thereby." This scientific debunking of the UFO phenomena and the subsequent, though not necessarily connected, decline in sightings presents an interesting be- havioral pattern. Dr. Ernest R. Hil- gard, a Stanford University psycholo- gist who served on the National Acad- emy of Sciences panel that reviewed the Condon report, believes the report it- self is not wholly responsible for the falling off of flying saucer interest. "I would like to feel that the report quiet- ed the saucer interest," he says, "but I do not think so." People probably just lost interest, he suggests. "These fads go in cycles," he explains, and many persons who would have been in- terested in extraterrestrial phenomena have turned to other things: drugs, as- trology, Oriental religions and various subjective and philosophic fields. As so- ciety becomes more affluent man has time to reflect on his position in the uni- verse. As he does so he attempts to in- tegrate himself into and make himself a more important part of that universe. Belief in other worldly things is one method of doing so, points out Dr. Hil- gard. But national and international events of the past few years have tend- ed to make people look inside rather than outside themselves for answers to universal questions. This fad too will r pass, says Dr. Hilgard, who predicts P-1 ROO56OR000100010011-9 435 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R005 that the uFO's will reappear when it does. At NICAP Nixon says ECU re- ports usually run in five-year cycles and 1972 should be the start of another cycle. Dr. Donald I. Warren of the School of Social Work at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor has another be- havior theory on UFO'S. In his view UFO's provide a form of escape. "One expression of this escape," he says, "is the possibility of other lives, other plan- ets, other beings like or unlike oneself." UFO's "present the opportunity to es- cape the system without threatening one's gains in the immediate social en- vironment." Dr. Warren, however, based his conclusions on a person's dis- satisfaction with his socioeconomic status. A well-educated person earning a relatively small salary might not be content in his situation and would there- fore, suggests Dr. Warren, be a likely person to attach importance to himself For soq'e years scientists have ze in on drug action at the most ity stand the molecular basis/of acti`on for several drugs, it is only now'that the/three-dimensional structure' of a drt(g has been correlated with its bio- logical action. Dr. Henry M. Sobell of, the Univer- y of Rochester reported last week by using -the technique of X-ray by believing in and sighting flying saucers. This theory may have some credi- bility, but an article by Dr. Warren in SCIENCE last November advancing these views received a critical response from scientists. The controversy, brought on by a lack of adequate psychological and behavioral information on the subject, points out, as does Dr. Warren, "that this phenomenon has been inadequately studied by the behavioral sciences." In an attempt to coordinate existing information, NICAP has instituted Project ACCESS (Automated Clearinghouse for Collection and Exchange of Sighting Statistics). All available sighting data (people, places, times, etc.) will be stored in a computer and made avail- able to interested parties. If, these in- puts- are scientific and objective, as NICAP's Nixon insists they will be, Proj- ect ACCESS will be a useful tool for behavioral scientists. ^ crys'llogragh'y, he has pinpointed ex- actly htiw he antibiotic actinomycin D interacts with DNA. In fact, since the' Crick-Watson model for DNA was pro- posed 18 years ago, this is the first time scientists know visually how any- thing sticks'to DNA. Dr. Sobell, a physician-turned-crys- tallographer, says he crystallized actino- mycin.with deoxyguanosine, one of the four bases of DNA. The three-dimension- al structure of the complex immedi- ately suggested how actinomycin binds to DNA. Dr. Sobell believes that the flat portion of the drug molecule fits in Univ. of Rochester Sobelll and drug-DNA molecule model. 0R000100010011-9 The A mic Energy Commissipn last week nounced new, stricter/ criteria for iclear power plant safety. Prime basis in the new standards is the need for back-up systems in case cool- ing water systems for reactors fail. Such an accident could conceivably re- sult in overheati6g of reactor cores, melting of shielding and release of ra- dioactivity. Most affected by the new criteria are' five plants licensed before 1968. They will have to install the back-up systems within three years. ^ California's AEC ties The huge University of California system has been heavily involved in de- fense and weapons research since World War lle?artly in response to student- faculty criticisms (SN: 1/16/71, p. 50) the UC regents last week recommended changes in the contractual arrangement Oietween UC and the Atomic Energy Commission tinder which the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory is operated. The laboratory consists of two units, the non-secret facility on the hill behind the Berkeley campus and the more closely guarded facility at Livermore. Under the recommendations, the ad- ministrative ties between the two units would be severed. And the director of the Berkeley laboratory would report directly to the president of the univer- sity rather than, as now, to the chan- cellor of UC at Berkeley.. 0 Doctorate oversupply A new National Science Foundation study on the supply of and demand for doctoral scientists, projected to 19?0, indicates an even greater imbalance of supply over demand than in., a study done two years ago. Over-all projections show a supply of about 325,000 doc- toral scientists in 1980-against an ex- pected demand for about 285,000. The greatest imbalance is, in engineering, with a projected 40 percent oversupply. Next greatest is in social sciences, with a 20 percent oversupply. The life sci- ences situation is somewhat better,_,with a 9 percent oversupply predicted:'Math- ematics will see an oversupply of around 10 percent. Only in the physical sciences will supply and demand be essentially in balance. ^ Oldest mummy.. Possibly the,:oldest (5,000 years) in- tact mummy..'ever found has been un- earthed in a tomb in Sakkara, 15 mite's southeast of Cairo. The ancient court .musician Nofre died in the sixth year of the reign of King Nie Ossen Ra. The discovery was called histofically and between the nucleotide base sequence, , of the American Society of Biological pC, while the,'protein subunits of the, Chemists. antibiotic make a hydrogen bond with The medical implications of Dr. So- guanine residues on either strand' of bell's work may be far-reaching. Ac-. DNA. Actinomycin has two-fold - sym- tinomycin's repressor-action on DNA, as metry relating to the protein subunits. revealed in the crystal model, might This enables the drug to bind to a base explain why. actinomycin works as an sequence in DNA with two-fold sym- antitumor drug. However, the drug is metry. This pattern of .recognition was too toxic for lavish clinical control of first conceived several years ago by tumors, precisely because of its strin- Dr. Jacques Monod who shared the gent action at the molecular level. But 1965 Nobel Prize with Drs. Francois now that scientists understand how Jacob and Andre. Lwoff for their work actinomycin binds to Dt4A, Dr. Sobell in biological regulation. Dr. Sobell's believes they can probably synthesize report of the first visual sighting of the drug-gene contact was made in San Francisco at the 62nd annual meeting new antibiotics or drugs that would act,," scientifically Are im_p rtant than the on tumor cells or viruses, but not on findings of the ankhamen tomb in cells, in the rest of the body. 11 1922. L 0 4proved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 ROO56OR000100dI'W6ce1 n?'S' vol. 99 ) 1 X ff l?Ap 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R0001 00010011-9 OF THE PROBLEM To gain a fresh and objective per- spective on the UFO problem, the UFO Subcommittee of the AIAA, from its inception in 1967, decided to place specific, well-defined questions to UFO experts of high scientific qual- ifications but strongly divergent views. Surprisingly, the factual answers the Subcommittee obtained in a series of interesting interviews were strikingly similar. Differences occurred in cer- tain, quantitative estimates and in the degree of emphasis,' but not in prin- ciple. It was at the next step where the views began to diverge: subjective judgment as to the scientific signifi- cance of the problem and the need to pursue and explore it. Obviously, such opinion depends on the criteria applied by the individual, and much of the dis- cord appears to be due to a lack of analysis of these criteria. It is at this stage where guesses and Speculations creep into the discussion and lead to controversy. In the opinion of the UFO Subcom- mittee, such speculations are entirely premature and no position is absolute- ly defensible at this point in time. This applies specifically to statements that the extraterrestrial hypothesis ("ETH") is "the least probable" or "the least unprobable" explanation (National Academy of Sciences, Re- view of the "Condon Report"; James E. McDonald's statements). There is no scientific basis for assessing such probabilities at this time. The Subcommittee was greatly per- turbed by the paucity of thorough sci- entific and technological analysis ap- plied to practically all observations be- fore the Condon study. The few, often courageous, efforts by individuais to come to grips with this problem should be viewed more from an aspect of focusing attention on the problem rather than of solving it, since there is little doubt that it takes more than a personal effort to investigate fully a problem of such complexity. In the opinion of the committee, the Colorado University study, "Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Ob- jects," (the "Condon Report," Ban- tam Books, New York, 1969) at this time represents the most scientifically oriented investigation published on the UFO problem. Attacks directed against the study seem to overlook the almost insurmountable difficulties A Statement by the UFO Subcommittee of the AIAA disciplinary, unbiased talent, accumu- lating practical experience, collecting hard information, sorting out the sig- nal from the noise, applying the best analytical methods, and writing and editing a report in less than two years. To understand the Condon. report, which is difficult to read, due in part to its organization, one must study the bulk of the report. It is not enough to read summaries, such as those by Sul- livan and by Condon, or summaries of summaries, on which the vast majority of readers and news media seem to rely. There are differences in the opin- ions and conclusions drawn by the au- thors of the various chapters, and there are differences between these and Condon's summary. Not all con- clusions contained in the report itself are fully reflected in Condon's sum- mary. For example the optical/radar chapter contains the following state- ment on the Lakenheath case (1956): The apparently rational, intelligent behav- ior of the UFO suggests a mechanical de- vice of unknown origin as the most prob- able explanation of this sighting. However, in view of the inevitable fallibility of wit- nesses, more conventional explanations of this report cannot be entirely ruled out. On Colorado Springs case (1967): In view of the meteorological situation, it would seem that AP (anomalous propaga- tion) was rather unlikely. Besides, what is the probability that an AP return would appear only once and at that time appear to excute a perfect practice ILS approach. Condon's own conclusions have been widely misquoted. He says: ' ... Scientists are no respecters of author- ity. Our conclusion that study of UFO re- ports is not likely to advance science will not be uncritically accepted by them. Nor should it be, nor do we wish it to be. For scientists, it is our hope that the detailed analytical presentation of what we were able to do, and of what we were unable to do, will assist them in deciding whether or not they agree with our conclusions. Our hope is that the details of this report will help other scientists in seeing . what the problems are and the difficulties of coping with them. "If they agree with our conclusions, they will turn their valuable attention and talents elsewhere. If they disagree, it will be be- cause our report has helped them reach a clear picture of wherein existing studies are faulty or incomplete and thereby will have stimulated ideas for more accurate studies. If they do get such ideas and can formulate them clearly, we have no doubt that sup- port will be forthcoming to carry on with such clearly defined, specific studies. We think that such ideas for work should be supported. Therefore we think that all of the agencies of the federal government, and the private foundations as well ou ht to be an open-minded, unprejudiced basis. While we do not think at present that anything worthwhile is likely to come of such re- search each individual case ought to be carefully considered on its own merits." Condon's chapter, "Summary of the Study," contains more than its title indicates; it discloses many of his personal conclusions. Making value judgements was no doubt one reason why Condon was asked to handle the project. One is happy to obtain the judgement of so experienced and re- spected a man; but one need not agree with it. The UFO Subcommittee did not find a basis in the report for his prediction that nothing of scientific value will come of further studies. In reviewing the material accumu- lated to date, the Subcommittee found an exceedingly low signal-to-noise ra- tio, as illustrated by the statistics of the Air Force's Project "Bluebook" quoted in the University of Colorado study, which showed 3.3% unidentified observations (253 out of 7741 avail- able at that time*). This figure is frequently disputed, but its order of magnitude (5%) appears to be correct, taking all available reports into ac- count. The fact that the Condon study itself arrives at a much higher per- centage of unexplained cases-name- ly, at about 30% (35 out of 117)-is primarily due to the preselection of specific cases for investigation. The precise figure is hard to assess, for the Condon report does not lend itself eas- ily to this type of analysis, the same cases being treated often in different sections and under different identi- fications. (*The final figures, according to our information, appear to be 701 It has been variously estimated that the reported cases, approximately 20,000, represent only 5 to 15% of the total observations, since most observ- ers either, do not go to the trouble of an official report or fear ridicule. In turn, various polls suggest that 3 to 5% of the U.S. population claim to have seen UFOs. It follows, then, that the available reports which can be classified as "unidentified" represent a very small percentage of all UFO sightings on the one hand, but not a negligible number of observations on the other. It is interesting that, contrary to public opinion, the estimated per- centage of "hoaxes" is likewise small this type face: building ur the mutt flea a o0g20h041 others bmitted to them N1 o t0ty of November 1970 U sightiinngllcan be eexx- while 15 to 20% contain in- tion extracted by McDonald is added sufficient data. In other words, what to some of the cases. In fact, the Sub- may appear to the untrained observer committee finds that the opposite con- as strange and unexplainable is in most cases known and explainable. Taking all evidence which has come to the Subcommittee's attention into ac- count, we find it difficult to ignore the small residue of well-documented but unexplainable cases which form the hard core of the UFO controversy. They represent only a small fraction of the "unidentified" cases and are charac- terized by both a high degree of credi- bility and a high abnormality ("strangeness" in Hynek's terminolo- gy). Although none of them offers to our knowledge quantitative recordings by calibrated instruments for per- manent inspection, they are often called "hard cases." The Subcommittee has tried to ex- plore the nature of this hard-core resi- due and found estimates to vary be- tween 10 and several hundred cases, depending in part on a subjective judg ment as to the criteria for a "hard case." High credibility is generally ac- cepted for observations by multiple in- dependent witnesses of known and re- liable background or by multiple inde- pendent sensing systems (reported by multiple independent operators) or both; high abnormality or strangeness, when no known natural phenomena whatsoever seem to fit the observa- tions. It is clear, then, that the hard- core residue represents less than 1% of the total available reports. Those used to working under con- trolled laboratory conditions find it difficult to consider seriously any ob- servation which is not available in recorded form for quantitative in- spection. As a matter of fact, they make this a criterion for a "hard case." On the other hand, there are those, including some members of this Subcommittee, familiar with the in- tricacies of research in the complex and uncontrolled laboratory of the at- mosphere, who find this less of.a de- terrent. They discover parallels be- tween the UFO problem and certain atmospheric phenomena which fall in the class of rare events. A rare event always involves at first a question of the reality of a qualitative observation. Later, scientific investigation, usually combining statistics and physics, re- solves this question one way or the other. Although the University of Colora- do report deals only with a very small fraction of the existing observational material (less than 1%), it offers itself mveab hRaletasec2001104/O2ediQA-RQP, 9 RQQA60Rt0DQr4QQiQt1,QOextr.terrestrial clusion could have been drawn from its content, namely, that a phenom- enon with such a high ratio of unex- plained cases (about 30%) should arouse sufficient scientific curiosity to continue its study. The issue seems to boil down to the question: Are we justified to extrap- olate from 0.99 to 1.00, implying that if 99% of all observations can be ex- plained, the remaining 1% could also be explained; or do we face a severe problem of signal-to-noise ratio (order of magnitude 10-1)? In the opinion of the Subcommittee, this question must be asked critically and objectively in each individual case. In cases which do not fit the extrap- olation alternative, the further ques- tion should be explored: "Do they evi- dence common attributes?" It appears to the Subcommittee that the Univer- sity of Colorado group has made no serious attempt in this direction. If it is already difficult to reach a consensus on what constitutes a hard case, it appears even more difficult to find agreement on the advisability and importance of continued research. As mentioned earlier, it is at this point where the controversy often becomes heated because criteria for such assess- ment are not well-defined. Earlier, Condon's statement was quoted that "clearly defined, specific studies . . . should be considered and supported." In this connection he calls attention to "important areas of at- mospheric optics, including radiowave propagation, and of atmospheric elec- tricity in which present knowledge is quite incomplete. These topics came to our attention in connection with the interpretation of some UFO reports, but they are also of fundamental sci- entific interest, and they are relevant to practical problems related to the improvement of safety of military and civilian flying." The Subcommittee finds this state- ment of the Condon report a better criterion for support of UFO-related studies than the claim by some ETH exponents that UFO research deserves maximum support as long as there is a ghost of a chance that UFOs are ex- traterrestrial vehicles, or the opposite claim that proof for the ETH must be provided before serious consideration of the UFO problem is justified. Both opinions strike the Subcommittee as unwarranted. We have already expressed our dis- origin of UFOs, since there is not suf- ficient scientific basis at this time to take a position one way or another. However, in view of the infancy of our scientific and technoloogical knowledge (approximately one century). the Sub- committee would agree with this state- ment by Condon: "We must not as- sume that we are capable of imagining now the scope and extent of future technological development of our own or any other civilization, and so we must guard against assuming that we have any capacity to imagine what a more advanced society would regard as intelligent conduct." On the other, hand, we find no convincing basis for his statement, "It is safe to assume that no ILE (intelligent life elsewhere) from outside of our solar system has any possibility of visiting Earth in the next 10,000 years." Men does one start counting?) The question arises: whether there is a need at all to speculate on a specific hypothesis, such as ETH, in order to. decide on the significance of a scien- tific problem, or whetter any known phenomenon in nature is worth in- vestigating. We think it is, but we. rec- ognize at the same time that the UFO problem may require expensive tools of technology. Therefore, the question of cost, priority, and relative impor- tance of this problem within the total spectrum of research cannot be over- looked. - The UFO Subcommittee feels that the ETH, tantalizing though it may be, should not be dragged into this, consideration as it introduces an unas- sessable element of speculation; but the Subcommittee also strongly feels that, from a scientific and engineering standpoint, it is unacceptable to sim- ply ignore substantial numbers of unexplained observatitas and to close the book about them on the basis of premature conclusionse There is an interesting parallel be- tween the history of the UFO problem and the history of weather modi- fication ("rainmaking")- After almost 20 years of taboo by the scientific community, weather modification has now achieved scientific recognition due to the fact that some courageous, high-caliber scientists entered the are- na. This has resulted in a revision of the viewpoint of the National Acade- my of Science. The immediate question is how to attack the UFO problem without the pitfalls of past attempts. There is little doubt that the short-time, one-shot ap proach of an ad hoc team is neither enough substance of the described enchantment with arguments about promising nor econorrilcal. This is es- stApproved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100QU,QAI -% Aeronautic, Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100010011-9 BACKGROUND At the suggestion of the AIAA management, the Tech- nical Committee on Atmospheric Environment and the Technical Committee on Space and Atmospheric Phys- ics jointly formed a UFO Subcommittee in 1967. The Subcommittee was asked to arrive at an un- biased assessment of the present situation and to serve as a focal point in the AIAA for questions regarding the UFO problem. In appointing the Subcommittee, special care was taken to insure that none of its members was committed one way or another on this issue. In its attempt to get to the heart of the matter, the Subcommittee naturally found the UFO problem com- plicated and often buried in what appeared to be a maze of preconceptions, emotions, bias, hasty conclu- sions, and excessive and misleading publicity. The Subcommittee soon recognized that it is much too early to expect a meaningful interpretation of UFO phenomena. Rather than enter the arena of specula- tion, it directed its efforts toward finding out whether or not a scientific problem exists at all. The acccom- panying report describes the approach the Subcom- mittee took and the results it obtained. -J.P.K. Chairman: Joachim P. Kuettner Environmental Research Laboratories, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, Cote. Members: Jerold Bidwell Martin-Marietta, Denver, Colo. Glenn A. Cato TRW Systems, Redondo Beach, Calif. Bernard N. Charles Hughes Aircraft, El Segundo, Calif. Murray Dryer NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories Howard D. Edwards Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Ga. Paul MacCready Jr. Meteorology Research Inc., Altadena, Calif. Andrew J. Masley McDonnell Douglas Missile & Space Systems, Santa Monica, Calif. Robert Rados NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. Secretary: Vernon J. Zurich NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories pecially true if the' study team 'de- cides-as the University of Colorado group did-to concentrate on current rather than past observations. As the UFO statistics show, this results in the devotion of precious time to in- vestigating the noise, rather than the signal. It was mentioned earlier that the Colorado University study faced formidable odds because of the short on improved data collection by objec- tive means and on high-quality scien- tific analysis. This would eliminate the difficult problem of witness credibility. An economic and technically sound approach involving available remote- sensing capabilities and certain soft- ware changes will require some think- ing on the side of the aerospace engi- neering community. Proposals along this line are already in the hands of the Subcommittee. The financial sup- port should be kept at a moderately low level (It is estimated that a small fraction of the costs of the University of Colorado study would be required initially) until reevaluation of the situ- ation allows another assessment. Without such an effort the controversy can be expected to suffer further pol- arization and confusion. The Subcommittee feels that a strictly scientific-technological view of the UFO problem leads to this con- clusion and that, for a technical com- mittee, there is no need to stress the public and social aspects of the UFO controversy, which may have subsided only temporarily. and will continue to clamor for a more conclusive and con- vincing answer. The. Subcommittee is aware of several books on UFOs to be published in the near future. What is needed now is a moratorium in the UFO discussion-with an objective, wait-and-see attitude on the part of the scientific and engineering commu- nity, the government, and the public. The approach recommended by this committee requires not only the.atten- tion of the scientist and engineer, but also a readiness of government agencies to consider sound proposals in this field without bias or fear of ridi- cule and repercussion-or, as Condon expresses it, "on an openminded, un- prejudiced basis." This perhaps is our most important conclusion. Finally, the Subcommittee believes the decision by the Air Force to di- vorce itself from the UFO problem should be completed by allowing the files to be archived by a civilian agency, either government or univer- sity, after proper safeguards for the protection of witnesses and their names as well as full declassification mendation of the O'Brien committee procedures. to negotiate multiple contracts for This Subcommittee intends to pub- continuing investigations had been fol- lish additional information on the lowed, this difficulty would perhaps UFO problem in the AIAA journals have been avoided. There is also little to give the members of AIAA an op- hope to expect a solution of this ex- portunity to form their own opinion. tremely complex problem ' by the ef- This information will include typical forts of a single individual. ' examples of the so-called "hard-core The Subcommittee sees the only. residue" and some potential engineer- promising approach as a continuing, - duration af,{t. s t EP RWItasL:it2 fE 'IYt lblfortCTA'-R if ROO O1 OO0100010011-9 November 1970 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R0001 00010011-9 E. U. CONDON Professor Condon conducted a study of Unidentified Flying Objects, from late 1966 to the summer of 1968, at the request of the U.S. Air Force. The full report has been pub- lished ' under the title, "Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Ob- jects," in paperback by Bantam Books, and in hardback by E. P. Dut- ton and Co. This article is based on a talk presented before the Ameri- can Philosophical Society last April. The author is professor of physics at the University of Colorado. Throughout human history men have been seeing strange and terrifying apparitions in the sky. The literature dealing with such experiences is enor- mous. The word "spectre" is used generically to describe phenomena of this type. This word's earliest use, cited in the Oxford English Diction- ary (OED), is in the title of a book by Z. Jones published in 1605, "A Trea- tise of Specters or straunge Sights, Vi- sions and Apparitions appearing sensi- bly unto men." The word "spectrum" is cited first in 1611 in a passage which said, "Walsingham hath written of a fatal Spectrum or Apparition -where sundry monsters of diuers colours . . . were seen." Sixty years later, Isaac Newton used the word to describe his decomposition of sunlight with a glass prism in these words, "The Sunbeams ... passing through a glass prism to the opposite Nall, ex- hibited there a Spectrum of divers colours." From these two uses of the word "spectrum" comes naturally the two meanings which the OED gives for the word "spectrology": (1) The sci- ence or study of spectres, and (2) The scientific study of spectra. The OED cites as an example of the first mean- ing an 1820 quote from Washington Irving's "Sketchbook": "The gloom of religious abstraction, and the wildness of their situation . . . had filled their imaginations with the frightful chi- meras of witchcraft and spectrology." And of the second, an 1862 quote from the "American Journal of Sci- ye U Loved and ence": "The attention of the French scientific world is wholly fixed on spec- trology, for thus do they designate the experiment with the spectroscope of Bunsen and Kirchhoff." I am the second man in human his- tory to have written a book on spec- trology in both of these two distinct meanings. Donald Menzel was the first. FLYING SAUCERS Modern interest in UFOs stems mainly from the observations of Ken- neth Arnold, a Boise, Idaho, business- man on June 24, 1947. While flying near Mt. Rainier in Washington he reported seeing sonic objects skimming along which he described in a manner that led newspapermen to call them "flying saucers." Although not all ob- jects later reported are saucer-shaped, this term is often used generically, but the term UFO is preferable. The Air Force studies anything seen flying in the sky which might present a defense hazard, and thus has been concerned with the thousands of reports of sight- ings of UFOs that have come to them in the nearly 22 years since this first modern report. From such study they concluded long ago that no defense problem was involved in these reports from the public. The amount of attention which the Air Force gave to the problem after the first four or five years has been minimal. In the early '50s the story of UFOs began to appear in sensational pseudo- science magazine. articles and paper- back books. These have had a large sale. The book by Frank Edwards, "Flying Saucers-Serious Business," probably holds the record with more than 1,300,000 copies sold. Several other titles have sold more than 200,- 000 copies. The so-called Condon re- port was given an initial printing of 200,000 copies. In the last three years 40,000 school children have written the Air Force asking for UFO data. The principal source of the wide- spread interest is the contention of some writers that at least some of the things seen may represent flying craft from other civilizations, either else- where in the solar system, or even from a planetary system associated with some other star. We must be'extremely careful about our language. Some UFOs may be such visitors, it may be postulated, and some writers go so far as to say that they actually are. To discover clear, un- ambiguous evidence on this point would be a scientific discovery of the first magnitude, one which I would be quite happy to make. We found no such evidence, and so state in our re- port. But it is not true to say that we "proved that flying saucers do not come from outer space." All that can be said is that, of the cases we looked into carefully, we found no evidence in support of the hypothesis of their ex- tra-teyrestrial origin. We concluded that it is not worth- while to carry on a continuing study of UFOs in the manner which has been done thus far: that of going out into the field to interview persons who say they have seen something peculiar. The difficulty about using objective means of study lies in the rarity of the apparitions, their short duration, and the tendency of observers not to report their experience until long after it has ended. When a known object is the source of many reports, as in the case of the Zond IV re-entry of March 3, 1968, there is extraordinary disagree- ment among the descriptions of what was seen by different observers of the same event. This result shows that no great certainty attaches to the specific details of any of the reports. These difficulties led us to conclude that it is quite unproductive of results of scientific value to study UFOs in the traditional manner. But, contrary to popular belief, we do not rule out all future study. We say: "Although we conclude after nearly two years of intensive study, that we do not see any fruitful lines of advance from the study of UFO reports, we believe that any scientist with adequate training and Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100010011-9 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R0001 00010011-9 credentials who does come up with a clearly defined, specific proposal for study should be supported." This conclusion has been bitterly de- nounced by the flying saucer buffs who have been making money from sensa- tional writing and lecturing to gullible audiences, and collecting dues from the membership of their pseudo-science organizations. One prominent profes- sor of atmospheric physics has been giving speeches in which he advocates that the federal government spend on UFO study amounts of money which would "dwarf" that spent on the space program. Even though nearly a year has gone by since my work in this field ended, I continue to be astonished at the fervor with which many people hold views that are totally unsupported by objec- tive evidence of any kind. Many peo- ple seem quite incapable of recogniz- ing any distinction between what might be so and what actually is so. Some of these are charlatans, in my opinion, who profess belief in order to collect royalties from writing and fees from lecturing. But others are deeply sincere. THE CULTISTS We ran into many more interesting cases than we could include in the re- port, already criticized by many for being too thick. There was a young airman, second class, at an Air Force base in New Mexico whose 19-year-old wife died suddenly of a heart attack. They were members of a flying saucer cult which gathered around and de- cided that the woman's spirit had gone to Venus on a flying saucer, and that she would want her body back when she returned. So they wrapped it in a sheet and stored it in a barn rather than having it properly buried. The police learned of this by a mysterious postcard from a woman in Spokane, Washington. At first they thought the card was a hoax, but investigation proved that the young woman's body had been by this time stored in that barn for about three weeks. The young airman had seen lots of flying saucers but had not reported any of them, say- ing: "I didn't know the Air Force was interested!" In the spring of 1967 I was visited several times by a well-mannered man who claimed to be acting as agent for the Third Universe (we are the First, and the Second is inhabited by beings that resemble polar bears, he said). He said he was authorized to negotiate a contract with the U.S. government by which they would teach us to make inter-stellar flying saucers for $3 bil- lion. The first billion was to be paid after a demonstration to government officials at ,Dulles airport, the second after a major national laboratory had been built and our scientists and tech- nologists had learned how to make fly- ing saucers, and the third after they had trained our flight crews in inter- stellar navigation. He was specific down to the point of naming the bank in Arlington, Virginia, where the $3 billion was to be deposited. He wanted me, in the interim, to pay him $3,000 as "earnest money" to be deposited in a particular bank in Western Colorado to the account of his organization, which was called the "Omnific Intelligence Continuum." Inquiry to that bank revealed that there really was such an account. banker cautiously said, "Small sums go in and out." Asked about membership of the organization the banker told me, "So far as I know Mr. X is the only member." Since part of Mr. X's story is thus verified, ought we now to believe everything he tells us? REAL OR PSEUDO-SCIENCE The most vivid lesson that I learned from such experiences is what a nar- row, wobbly line there is between real science and pseudo-science. So far as the public is concerned most of the science which they know about they do not understand. Very few people can state clearly the grounds for belief that the Earth goes around the Sun, rather than vice versa, or for that mat- ter, for our belief that the Earth is a ball rather than flat. Coming to more modern instances, who among the many investors in the profitable semi- conductor industries have the slightest idea how a transistor works really? In the given circumstances most of the scientific ideas that are accepted by the public are accepted entirely on faith. To most people, completely lacking any basic understanding of un- derlying principles, the proposition that the configuration of the planets and stars at the time of our birth de- termines the course of events in our lives, seems no more unlikely or pre- posterous than many of the well-estab- lished,truths of science which they do accept without understanding them. There are some 10,000 astrologers in America who make their living practic- ing astrology and only about 2,000 astronomers who live by practicing as- tronomy. If celestial matters were de- cided democratically by the members of both professions lumped together, then the "real" astronomers, would al- ways end up as a depressed minority. Flying saucers and astrology are not the only pseudo-sciences which have a considerable following among us. There used to be spiritualism, there continues to be extrasensory percep- tion, psychokinesis, and a host of oth- ers. Hanson W. Baldwin in the "New York Times" has told how the Ma- rines at Camp Pendleton are trained for Vietnam in the use of dowsers made of bent wire coathangers as a means of locating tunnels and other underground works of the Viet Cong. Recently a visitor from a Navy re- search installation told me that some Approved For Release 2001/04/02 CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100010011-9 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R0001 00010011-9 admirals had purchased from an' in- ventor a wholly worthless invention which it was claimed could detect sub- merged submarines by a radar-like re- flection of electromagnetic waves. This could not possibly work because of the conductivity of sea water, and it did not work when expensively tested. A PJblie Policy mirals and certain congressmen. A Russian spy in the same Navy labora- tory got hold of the invention and our test results and sent them to Russia. The Russians did more work on the invention. Although they understood at once that it must be foolish, they thought they might be wrong because MARGARET MEAD nd BDUe-,havioral Science the Americans had spent so much I am testifying out of long experi- time and money studying this crackpot ence in the application of anthropol- invention. We know about this be- ogY to contemporary national and in- cause an American spy in their labora- ternational problems. During World tory sent to us the story of their work. War II, I worked within the context These and many other examples of the National Research Council on that could be given show that we have problems of nutrition, national morale, failed rather miserably to give even to civilian defense, and cross national so-called educated people some feeling communication with Great Britain. I for the way in which science investi- was one of the group that developed gates a subject, and the way in which anthropological work on cultures at a scientists subject their observational distance-notably Germany and Japan material to critical evaluation before -and after World War II, I partici- reaching conclusions. The thing that . pated in and directed a series of studies most people are least able to do is to on behalf of the Office of Naval Re- refrain from drawing conclusions when search, Rand and MIT, including there is not enough evidence at hand studies on the Soviet Union, China to warrant drawing conclusions. and France. These were interdiscipli- In ancient times, the future was nary team activities (summarized in foretold in many ways that have gone "The Anthropology of, Human Con- out of favor, such as by examining the flict," Mead and Metraux in "The Na- entrails of sacrificed animals, or basing tore of Human Conflict," edited by omens on the study of the flight of Elton B. McNeil, Prentice Hall, Inc. flocks of birds. (Cicero practiced this 1965). Since 1952 I have devoted my- latter method.) Before you smile, bear self to the study of technical assistance in mind that these views have never and political implications of culture really had as much scientific study as change, education, cross national and have the UFO reports. Perhaps we international order and control of war- need a National Magic Agency to fare, population control, environmen- make a large and expensive study of all tal control, urbanization, cross ideo- these matters, including the future sci- logical communication, and recently to entific study of UFOs, if any. the world wide implications of the Where corruption of children's generation gap. minds is at stake, I do not believe in I am here to discuss the possible freedom of the press or freedom of contributions that the behavioral sci- speech. In my view, publishers who ences together, and anthropology in publish or teachers who teach any of particular, can contribute to national the pseudo-sciences as established and international affairs. truth should, on being found guilty, During World War II we made a be publicly horsewhipped, and forever fine start in the utilization of this banned from further activity in these group of young sciences on a whole usually honorable professions. Truth series of problems ranging from ob- and children's minds are too precious taining a better understanding of the for us to allow them to be abused by national cultures of our opponents, charlatans. our allies and ourselves, to the deter- Physical scientists have been vocal and highly influential in Washington in the shaping of public policy on a number of fronts since the end of World War H. But what has become of the influence of behavioral scien- tists in Congress and on Capitol Hill? Margaret Mead discusses the ques- tion in this excerpt from her testimony before the U.S. Senate Foreign Re- lations Committee June 20, 1969 in Oa hearing on the psychological as- pects of public policy. Dr. Mead is Curator of Ethnology at the Ameri- can Museum of Natural History and Adjunct Professor of Anthropology at Columbia University. mination of specific policies within the armed forces and within the nation, from the prediction of how Japan would respond to our treatment of the Emperor, to a clarification of relation- ships between the United States and our principal allies, to an illumination of the ambiguities in the responses of the various occupied countries to prob- lems of civilian morale, to the main- tenance of the health of the nation, to an unprecedented mobilization of our industrial resources, and to a deploy- ment of resources in post war rehabili- tation of a badly wounded world. These successes were accomplished un- der a set of conditions which can be clearly specified: a state of prepared ness, mobilization and post war activ- ity made possible by almost total com- mitment to a war which could be seen as a moral effort against almost over- whelming power and risk; a willingness of the community of behavioral scien- tists to give unstintingly of time and effort, within and without government, Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100010011-9 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-ROP81 R00560R0001 00010011-9 14 February 1969, Volume 163, Number 3868 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE Science serves its readers as a forum for the presentation and discussion of important issues related to the advancement of science, including the presentation of minority or conflicting points of view, rather than by publishing only material on which a consensus has been reached. Accord- ingly, all articles published in Science-including editorials, news 'and comment, and book reviews -are signed and reflect the individual views of the authors and not official points of view adopted by the AAAS or the institutions with which the authors are affiliated. Editorial Board 1969 EMIL HAURY KENNETH S. PITZER WILLARD F. LIBBY ALEXANDER RICH EVERETT I. MENDELSOHN CLARENCE M. ZENER JOHN R. PIERCE 1970 GUSTAF O. ARRHENIUS RICHARD C. LEWONTIN FRED R. EGGAN ALFRED O. C. NIER HARRY F. HARLOW FRANK W. PUTNAM MILTON HARRIS Editorial Staff Editor PHILIP H. ABELSON Publisher Business Manager DAEL WOLFLE HANS NUSSBAUM Managing Editor: ROBERT V. ORMES Assistant Editors: ELLEN E. MURPHY, JOHN E. RINGLE Assistant to the Editor: NANCY TEIMOURIAN News Editor: JOHN WALSH Foreign Editor: DANIEL S. GREENBERG? News and Comment: LUTHER J. CARTER, BRYCE NELSON, PHILIP M. BOFFEY, PETER THOMPSON, MARTI MUELLER, ANNE H. LARUS - Book Reviews: SYLVIA EBERHART Editorial Assistants: SUSAN AXELRAD, JOANNE BELK, ISABELLA BOULDIN, ELEANORE BuTz, HELEN CARTER, GRAYCE FINGER, NANCY HAMILTON, OLIVER HEATWOLE, ANNE HOLDSWORTH, PAULA LECKY, KATHERINE LIVINGSTON, LEAH RYAN, Lois SCHMITT, BARBARA SHEFFER, RICHARD SOMMER, YA Li SWIGART, ALICE THEILE European Office: 22 Mulberry Walk, London, S.W. 3, England (Telephone: 352-9749) Advertising Staff Director Production Manager EARL J. SCHERAGO KAY GOLDSTEIN Advertising Sales Manager: RICHARD L. CHARLES Sales: New York, N.Y., 11 W. 42 St. (212-PE- 6-1858), ROBERT S. BUGBEE; Scotch Plains, N.J., 12 Unami Lane (201-889-4873), C. RICHARD CALLIS; Medfield, Mass. 02052, 4 Rolling Lane (617-359-2370), RICHARD M. EzEQUELLE; Chicago, Ill. 60611, 919 N. Michigan Ave., Room 426 (312-DE-7-4973), HERBERT L. BURKLUND; Los Angeles 45, Calif., 8255 Beverly Blvd. (213-653- 9817), WINN NANCE. EDITORIAL CORRESPONDENCE: 1515 Massa- chusetts Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20005. Phone: 202-387-7171. Cable: Advancesci, Washington. Copies of "Instructions for Contributors" can be obtained from the editorial office. See also page 1709, Science, 29 December 1967. ADVERTISING CORRESPONDENCE: Rm. 1740, 11 W. 42 St., New York, N.Y. 10036. Phone: 212-PE-6-1858. SCIENCE Beings from Outer Space-Corporeal and Spiritual Since World War II, concern with UFO's from outer space, controlled by intelligent beings, bears much resemblance to concern with the so-called physical phenomena of psychic research after World War I. Spiritualistic mediums claimed they could produce movements of objects by supernormal forces, including the production of ectoplasmic emana- tions from their bodies. Today this nonsense is pretty much forgotten but these manifestations reverberated in the press during the 1920's and 1930's and were regarded by many as proof of communication with beings from another world in the form of spirits of deceased persons. Belief in this sort of thing involved many professional people including some distinguished scientists, clergymen, physicians, writers, and men of affairs, and the psychic research societies published numerous sup- porting papers of a pseudoscientific nature. A famous case was that of a Boston medium in the 1920's, who had a wide following. She was the wife of an eminent surgeon and claimed communication with her dead brother. The old Scientific American magazine had offered a prize of $5000 to anyone who could demonstrate supernormal physical phenomena to a committee of its choosing. At her request, she was investigated in 1924 by this committee, composed of several Harvard and M.I.T. professors along with Harry Houdini, the magician. The committee reported that evidence for her supernormal powers was inconclusive, although Houdini denounced her as fraud- ulent. Following wide press publicity, a group at Harvard, of which I was one, later_investigated -her in_a-series_of seances in the psychological laboratories and found not only that the phenomena were due to trickery, but also how the tricks were done. Our findings, published in an article by me in the Atlantic Monthly of November 1925, resulted in violent recriminations and denunciations of us in published pamphlets and press statements by her followers. Our exposure enhanced her publicity, and she gained more adherents. She was skillful in modifying her mode of operation, depending upon the gullibility of her audience and other circumstances. On several subsequent occasions she was also exposed by other scientists, but at no time until her death did she lose a diminishing circle of devoted believers. The basic difficulty inherent in any investigation of phenomena such as those of psychic research or of UFO's is that it is impossible for science ever to prove a universal negative. There will be cases which remain unexplained because of lack of data, lack of repeatability, false reporting, wishful thinking, deluded observers, rumors, lies, and fraud. A residue of unexplained cases is not a justification for continuing an investigation after overwhelming evidence has disposed of hypotheses of supernormality, such as beings from outer space or communications from the dead. Unexplained cases are simply unexplained. They can never constitute evidence for any hypothesis. Science deals with prob- abilities, and the Condon investigation adds massive additional weight to the already overwhelming improbability of visits by UFO's guided by intelligent beings. The Condon report rightly points out that further investigations of UFO's will be wasteful. In time we may expect that UFO visitors from outer space will be forgotten, just as ectoplasm as evidence for communication with the dead is now forgotten. We may also anticipate, however, that many present believers will continue to believe for their own psychological reasons, which have nothing to do with science and the rules of evidence.-HUDSON HOAGLAND, President Emeritus, Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology, and Member, AAAS Board of Directors Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100010011-9