Page images
PDF
EPUB

Upon reaching the 600-mile orbit-and after some exploratory probings of Mars's atmosphere with unmanned rockets-the first of the three landing craft will be assembled. The torpedo nose will be unhooked, to become the fuselage of a rocket plane. The wings and set of landing skis will be attached, and the plane launched toward the surface of Mars.

The landing of the first plane will be made on the planet's snow covered polar capthe only spot where there is any reasonable certainty of finding a smooth surface. Once down, the pioneer landing party will unload its tractors and supplies, inflate its balloonlike living quarters, and start on a 4,000 mile overland journey to the Martian equator, where the expedition's Main base will be set up (it is the most livable part of the planetwell within the area that scientists want most to investigate). At the equator, the advance party will construct a landing strip for the other two rocket planes. (The first landing craft will be abandoned at the pole.)

In all, the expedition will remain on the planet 15 months. That's a long time—but it still will be too short to learn all that science would like to know about Mars.

When, at last, Mars and the earth begin to swing toward each other in the heavens, and it's time to go back, the two ships that landed on the equator will be stripped of their wings and landing gear, set on their tails and, at the proper moment, rocketed back to the 600-mile orbit on the flat leg of the return journey.

What curious information will these first explorers carry back from Mars? Nobody knows—and its extremely doubtful that anyone now living will ever know. All that can be said with certainty today is this: the trip can be made, and will be made...someday.

Document I-17

Document title: Statement by James C. Hagerty, The White House, July 29, 1955.

Source: NASA Historical Reference Collection, NASA History Office, NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C.

NSC 5520, "Draft Statement of Policy on U.S. Scientific Satellite Program," recommended the creation of a scientific satellite program as part of the International Geophysical Year (IGY) as well as the development of satellites for reconnaissance purposes. Based upon this report, the National Security Council approved the IGY satellite on May 26, 1955. However, it was not until July 28 that a public announcement was made during an oral briefing at the White House. The formal statement was dated July 29. This statement emphasized that the satellite program was intended to be the U.S. contribution to the IGY and that the scientific data was to benefit scientists of all nations.

July 29, 1955

The White House

Statement by James C. Hagerty

On behalf of the President, I am now announcing that the President has approved plans by this country for going ahead with launching of small unmanned earth-circling satellites as part of the United States participation in the International Geophysical Year which takes place between July 1957 and December 1958. This program will for the first time in history enable scientists throughout the world to make sustained observations in the regions beyond the earth's atmosphere.

The President expressed personal gratification that the American program will provide scientists of all nations this important and unique opportunity for the advancement of science.

Documents I-18 and I-19

Document title: F.C. Durant, "Report of Meetings of Scientific Advisory Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects Covered by Office of Scientific Intelligence, CIA, January 14-18, 1953," February 16, 1953.

Document title: "Air Force's 10 Year Study of Unidentified Flying Objects," Department of Defense, Office of Public Information, News Release No. 1083-58, November 5, 1957. Sources: NASA Historical Reference Collection, NASA History Office, NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C.

This CIA report on Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), which was declassified in December 1974, is frequently cited by UFO conspiracy theorists who claim that the government is covering up knowledge of extraterrestrial visits. Several studies of UFOs were conducted by the U.S. military throughout the 1950s and 1960s, partly out of Cold War concern that UFOs were actually Soviet spycraft, and partly in response to public outcry.

Document I-18

Report of Meetings of the

Office of Scientific Intelligence Scientific Advisory Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects

Covered by Office of Scientific Intelligence, CIA

January 14-18, 1953

[1] MEMORANDUM FOR: Assistant Director for Scientific Intelligence

FROM: F. C. Durant

SUBJECT: Report of Meetings of the Office of Scientific Intelligence Scientific Advisory Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects, January 14 - 18, 1953

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this memorandum is to present:

a. A brief history of the meetings of the O/SI Advisory Panel On Unidentified Flying Objects (Part I),

b. An unofficial supplement to the official Panel Report to AD/SI setting forth comments and suggestions of the Panel Members which they believed were inappropriate for inclusion in the formal report (Part II).

Part I: History of Meetings

General

After consideration of the subject of “unidentified flying objects" at the 4 December meeting of the Intelligence Advisory Committee, the following action was agreed:

"The Director of Central Intelligence will:

a. Enlist the services of selected scientists to review and appraise the available evidence in the light of pertinent scientific theories...."

Following the delegation of this action to the Assistant Director for Scientific Intelligence and preliminary investigation, [2] an Advisory Panel of selected scientists was assembled. In cooperation with the Air Technical Intelligence Center, case histories of reported sightings and related material were made available for their study and consideration.

Present at the initial meeting (0930 Wednesday, 14 January) were: Dr. H P. Robertson, Dr. Luis W. Alvares, Dr. Thornton Page, Dr. Samuel A. Goudsmit, Mr. Philip G. Strong, Lt. Col. Frederick C. E. Oder (P&E Division), Mr. David B. Stevenson (W&E Division), and the writer. Panel Member, Dr. Lloyd V. Berkner, was absent until Friday afternoon. Messrs. Oder and Stevenson were present throughout the sessions to familiarize themselves with the subject, represent the substantive interest of their Divisions, and assist in administrative support of the meetings. (A list of personnel concerned with the meetings is given in Tab A.)

Wednesday Morning

The AD/SI opened the meeting, reviewing CIA interest in the subject and action taken. This review included the mention of the O/SI Study Group of August 1952 (Strong, Eng, and Durant) culminating in the briefing of the DCI, the ATIC November 21 briefing, 4 December IAC consideration, visit to ATIC (Chadwell, Robertson and Durant), and O/SI concern over potential dangers to national security indirectly related to these sightings. Mr. Strong enumerated these potential dangers. Following this introduction, Mr. Chadwell turned the meeting over to Dr. Robertson as Chairman of the Panel. Dr. Robertson enumerated the evidence available and requested consideration of specific reports and letters be taken by certain individuals present (Tab B). For example, case histories involving radar or radar and visual sightings were selected for Dr. Alvares while reports of Green Fireball phenomena, nocturnal lights, and suggested programs of investigations were routed to Dr. Page. Following these remarks, the motion pictures of the sightings at Tremonton, Utah (2 July 1952) and Great Falls, Montana (15 August 1950) were shown. The meeting adjourned at 1200.

Wednesday Afternoon

The second meeting of the Panel opened at 1400. Lt. R. S. Neasham, USN, and Mr. Harry Woo of the USN Photo Interpretation Laboratory, Anacostia, presented the results of their analyses of the films mentioned above. This analysis evolved considerable discussion as elaborated upon below. Besides Panel members and CIA personnel, Capt. E. J. Ruppelt, Dr. J. Allen Nyack, Mr. Dewey J. Fournet, Capt. Harry B. Smith (2-e-2), and Dr. Stephen Possony were present.

Following the Photo Interpretation Lab presentation, Mr. E. J. Ruppelt spoke for about 40 minutes on ATIC methods of handling and evaluating reports of sighting and their efforts to improve the quality of reports. The meeting was adjourned at 1715.

Thursday Morning

The third and fourth meetings of the Panel were held Thursday, 15 January, commencing at 0900 with a two-hour break for luncheon. Besides Panel members and CIA personnel, Mr. Ruppelt and Dr. Hynak were present for both sessions. In the morning, Mr. Ruppelt continued his briefing on ATIC collection and analysis procedures. The Project STORK support at Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, was described by Dr. Hynek. A number of case histories were discussed in detail and a motion picture film of seagulls was shown. A two hour break for lunch was taken at 1200.

Thursday Afternoon

At 1400 hours Lt. Col. Oder gave a 40-minute briefing of Project TWINKLE the investigatory project conducted by the Air Force Meteorological Research Center at Cambridge, Mass. In this briefing he pointed out the many problems of setting up and manning 24-hour instrumentation watches of patrol cameras searching for sightings of U.F.O.'s. At 1615 Brig. Gen. William N. Garland joined the meeting with AD/SI. General Garland expressed his support of the Panel's efforts and stated three personal opinions:

a. That greater use of Air Force intelligence officers in the field (for follow-up investigation) appeared desirable, but that they required thorough briefing.

b. That vigorous effort should be made to declassify as many of the reports as possible. c. That some increase in the ATIC section devoted to U.F.O. analysis was indicated. This meeting was adjourned at 1700.

Friday Morning

The fifth session of the Panel convened at 0900 with the same personnel present as enumerated for Thursday (with the exception of Brig. Gen. Garland).

From 0900-100 [6] there was general discussion and study of reference material. Also, Dr. Hynek read a prepared paper making certain observations and conclusions. At 1000 Mr. Fournet gave a briefing on his fifteen months experience in Washington as Project Office for U.F.O.'s and his personal conclusions. There was considerable discussion of individual case histories of sightings to which he referred. Following Mr. Fournet's presentation, a number of additional case histories were examined and discussed with Messrs. Fournet, Ruppelt, and Hynek. The meeting adjourned at 1200 for luncheon.

Friday Afternoon

This session opened at 1400. Besides Panel members and CIA personnel, Dr. Hynek was present. Dr. Lloyd V. Berkner, as Panel Member, was present at this meeting for the first time. Progress of the meetings was reviewed by the Panel Chairman and tentative [6] conclusions reached. A general discussion followed and tentative recommendations considered. It was agreed that the Chairman should draft a report of the Panel to AD/SI that evening for review by the Panel the next morning. The meeting adjourned at 1715.

Saturday Morning

At 0945 the Chairman opened the seventh session and submitted a rough draft of the Panel Report to the members. This draft had been reviewed and approved earlier by Dr. Berkner. The next two and one-half hours were consumed in discussion and revision of the draft. At 1100 the AD/SI joined the meeting and reported that he had shown and

discussed a copy of the initial rough draft to the Director of Intelligence, USAF, whose reaction was favorable. At 1200 the meeting was adjourned.

Saturday Afternoon

At 1400 the eighth and final meeting of the Panel was opened. Discussions and rewording of certain sentences of the Report occupied the first hour. (A copy of the final report is appended as Tab C.) This was followed by a review of work accomplished by the Panel, and restatement of individual Panel Member's opinions and suggestions on details that were felt inappropriate for inclusion in the formal report. It was agreed that the writer would incorporate these comments in an internal report to the AD/SI. The material below represents this information.

Part VI: Comments and Suggestions of Panel

General

The Panel Members were impressed (as have been others, including O/SI personnel) in the lack of sound data in the great majority of case histories; also, in the lack of speedy follow-up due primarily to the modest size and limited facilities of the ATIC section concerned. Among the case histories of significant sightings discussed in detail were the following:

Bellefontaine, Ohio (1 August 1952); Tremonton, Utah (2 July 1952); Great Falls, Montana (15 August 1950); Yaak, Montana (1 September 1952); Washington, D.C. area (19 July 1952); and Haneda A.F.B., Japan (5 August 1952), Port Huran, Michigan (29 July 1952); and Presque Isle, Maine (10 October 1952).

After review and discussion of these cases (and about 15 others, in less detail), the Panel concluded that reasonable explanations could be suggested for most sightings and "by deduction and scientific method it could be induced (given additional data) that other cases might be explained in a similar manner." The Panel pointed out that because of the brevity of some sightings (e.g. 2-5 seconds) and the inability of the witnesses to express themselves clearly (sometimes) that conclusive explanations could not be expected for every case reported. Furthermore, it was considered that, normally, it would be a great waste of effort to try to solve most of the sightings, unless such action would benefit a training and educational program (see below). The writings of Charles Fort were referenced [8] to show that "strange things in the sky" had been recorded for hundreds of years. It appeared obvious that there was no single explanation for a majority of the things seen. The presence of radar and astronomical specialists on the Panel proved of value at once in their confident recognition of phenomena related to their fields. It was apparent that specialists in such additional fields as psychology, meteorology, aerodynamics, ornithology and military air operations would extend the ability of the Panel to recognize many more categories of little-known phenomena.

On Lack of Danger

The Panel concluded unanimously that there was no evidence of a direct threat to national security in the objects sighted. Instances of "Foo Fighters" were cited. These were unexplained phenomena sighted by aircraft pilots during World War II in both European and Far East theaters of operation wherein "balls of light" would fly near or with the aircraft and maneuver rapidly. They were believed to be electrostatic (similar to St. Elmo's fire) or electromagnetic phenomena or possibly light reflections from ice crystals in the

« PreviousContinue »