Unidentified flying object: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz
mNo edit summary
 
(164 intermediate revisions by 12 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
{{TOC|right}}
{{TOC|right}}
{{seealso|Extraterrestrial intelligence}}
{{seealso|Extraterrestrial intelligence}}
'''Unidentified flying objects''', commonly called '''UFOs''' or '''U.F.O.s''', are any aerial phenomena that cannot be initially identified. In many cases, even most, they are subsequently identified as being aircraft, birds, heavenly bodies, or other everyday objects; they can also be errors produced internally to a [[radar]], [[electro-optical tracking|electro-optical]], or other sensor.  Even so, a number of credible observations exist that, although something was clearly present, cannot be explained. Throughout the world, at least since 1947, they have been conflated with so-called "flying saucers" or other vehicles that many people believe might be directed by [[extraterrestrial intelligence]]s either from other planets in this [[Solar system]] or from other stars.
'''Unidentified flying objects''' ('''UFOs''' or '''U.F.O.s''') are aerial phenomena that cannot be readily explained. Most sightings of "UFO"s turn out to be explained by aircraft, birds, heavenly bodies, or other everyday objects. Some can be explained as errors produced by a [[radar]], [[electro-optical tracking|electro-optical device]], or other sensor, some arise from sensory illusions, and some are [[hoax]]es.
 
All investigators concede that some aerial sightings remain unexplained even after examination, but most dismiss the notion that there is any credible evidence that [[Earth]] is being, or has been, visited by creatures from other worlds.  
Sightings increased greatly following the [[Second World War]], and in 1947 the [[U.S. government]] began studying them, often in [[classified information|classified]] projects. There is, however, a distinct difference between unidentified aerial objects and these theoretical constructs.  All mainstream investigators and scientists readily concede that the explanation of some aerial sightings remains unidentified even after the most intense examination.  Most, or perhaps close to all of them, however, dismiss the notion that there is any concrete evidence that Earth is being, or has been, visited by creatures from other worlds.  The U.S. government is not known to have specific investigations underway, although there is a group for the study of '''unidentified aerospace phenomena''' in the French space agency, [[CNES]].<ref name=GEIPANISEPRA>{{citation
| url =http://www.cnes.fr/web/CNES-en/5866-geipan-uap-investigation-unit-opens-its-files.php
| title =  Le Geipan, the French [unidentified aerospace phenomena] UAP research and information group
| publisher = Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (CNES)}}</ref>
 
There is a movement, loosely called [[ufology]], that distrusts government investigations and publishes its own observations. Much of the reporting of these organizations is anecdotal and hard to put into a scientific framework, but some of the leadership of UFO research centers, such as [[Mark Rodeghier]] of the [[Center for UFO Studies]] (CUFOS) and [[Jacques Vallée]], do participate in much more technical discussions, such as the 1997 symposium on physical evidence from UFOs.
 
Other organizations, such as the [[Society for Scientific Exploration]] (SSE), do study UFOs but do not have them as their sole focus. [[Peter Sturrock]], now Emeritus Professor of Physics at [[Stanford University]], who directed the 1997 "Physical Evidence from UFO Reports" study, held with the encouragement of Laurance Rockefeller, "agreed that the problem is in a very unsatisfactory state of ignorance and confusion. I expressed the opinion that this
problem will be resolved only by extensive and open professional scientific
investigation, and that an essential prerequisite of such research is that more
scientists acquire an interest in this topic." <ref>{{citation
| url =http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_12_2_sturrock.pdf
| title = Physical Evidence from UFO Reports
| journal = Journal of Scientific Exploration |volume = 12 | issue = 2| pages = 179-229
| author = [[Peter Sturrock]] ''et al.''
| year = 1998}}</ref>  [[Philip Klass]] has written, however, that "SSE’s annual conferences typically feature several pro-UFO speakers, but no UFO-skeptics. For example, at SSE’s 1996 conference—held at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, which SUN’s editor attended—there were four pro-UFO speakers, but no skeptics: Dr. [[David Jacobs]], who spoke on UFO abductions; [[]Stanton Friedma]n, whose remarks covered crashed saucers and the [[MJ-12]] papers; Dr. Bruce Maccabee, who showed videos of UFOs, including one by Ed Walters (famous Gulf Breeze, Fla., UFO photographer) which seemingly showed a UFO’s ability to stop and reverse direction in a fraction of a second; and a talk by [[Mark Rodeghier]], director of the Hynek [[Center for UFO Studies]] (CUFOS)."  Jacobs, Friedman, and Maccabee were not selected to present physical evidence to the 1997 symposium.<ref>{{citation
| journal = The Skeptics UFO Newsletter
| author = Philip J. Klass
| date = 1 September 1998
| volume = 53
| url = http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/klass_files_volume_53/
| title = Best UFO Cases Fail To Provide Credible Evidence Of ET Visitors, According To Scientific Review Panel Convened By Pro-UFO Physicist
}}</ref>
 
In June 2010, James Carrion, formerly international director of the [[Mutual UFO Network]], resigned to create the Center for UFO Truth, with a mission to "answer one question – did the United States and its allies purposely create the UFO myth as part of a cold war deception operation? It makes sense to include the subject of CUT’s research efforts in its title." <ref>{{citation
| url = http://sharepoint.centerforufotruth.org:27894/Lists/Announcements/DispForm.aspx?ID=4
| title = Announcements: Frequently Asked Questions
| publisher = Center for UFO Truth
| date = 28 June 2010}}</ref>
==Criteria for reliable observation==
At the 1997 symposium, "Seven experienced UFO investigators were asked to review specific categories
of evidence. Dr. [[Richard Haines|Richard F. Haines]] of Los Altos, California, undertook
to review photographic evidence and also reviewed aircraft equipment anomalies;
Dr. [[Illobrand von Ludwiger]] of Feldkirchen-Westerham, Germany, discussed
radar evidence; Dr. [[Mark Rodeghier]] of the [[Center for UFO Studies]] in
Chicago discussed automobile engine anomalies; Mr. John F. Schuessler of
Houston discussed injuries to witnesses; Dr. [[Erling Strand]] from Ostfeld, Norway,
presented evidence involving video records and spectroscopic data; Dr.
[[Michael D. Swords]], Professor in the General Studies Science Department at
Eastern Michigan University discussed inertial anomalies; [[Jacques Vallée|Dr. Jacques F.
Vallée]] of San Francisco presented energy estimates and also discussed material
evidence; and M. [[Jean-Jacques Velasco]] of CNES, Toulouse, France, presented
evidence concerning radar events, ground traces, and injuries to vegetation."
===Visual light spectrum===
The 1997 symposium said "The panel expressed the opinion that detailed analysis of photographic evidence
was unlikely by itself to yield evidence sufficient to convince a neutral
scientist of the reality of a new strange phenomenon unless a number of additional
detailed conditions are met.... They also expressed concern
that, now that modern digital techniques are easily available in photo
laboratories, it may never be possible to rule out possible hoaxes without convincing,
corroborative eye-witness accounts."<ref>"Physical Evidence", p. 189</ref>
====Photography====
A paper by [[Richard Haines]] discusses the analysis of UFO photography, and observations on best photographic and interpretive practice. "...one must be careful to fully document seemingly unimportant details concerning the person taking the photograph, the social situation which surrounded the photograph(s), the camera-lens-film data, the developing-printing- enlarging activities and the manner in which the photograph came
to the attention of the investigator. Since such a photograph image is only as credible as the photographer who took it, one must exercise "due diligence" in each of the above areas. Many older UFO photographs remain useless artifacts of the UFO enigma because the investigator did not or could not
obtain all of the relevant background information. "<ref>{{citation
| journal = Journal of Scientific Exploration
| volume = 1 | issue = 2 | pages =  129-147 | year = 1987
| title = Analysis of a UFO Photograph
| author = Richard Haines
| url = http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_01_2_haines.pdf}}</ref>
====Luminosity====
Considerable attention was given to [[luminosity]] of objects, which were often described as very bright lights. This is especially important in the reports of the French astronomer and UFO researcher, Jacques Vallée. He described six visual sightings, with estimates of power into the megawatt range. "Vallée cautioned the panel that the estimates of luminosity
presented at the workshop are raw approximations derived from a comparison
of the estimated intensity in the visible band with the intensity of
known sources, such as the full moon and automobile headlights, and from assumptions
concerning the distance and perhaps size of the source.
The panel noted that the human eye is a very poor device for measuring absolute
luminosities: the state of dark adaptation of the eye affects the amount
of light reaching the retina, and different parts of the retina respond differently
to light. Furthermore, the above luminosity estimates were apparently based
on the assumption of isotropic emission. This may be a reasonable assumption
for a natural phenomenon, but could be inappropriate if a case involves a technological
device. For instance, aircraft landing lights are highly anisotropic. A
1 kW source that is beamed with a half-angle of 3.6 degrees has the same intensity
as a 1 Mw isotropic emitter. Furthermore, the distance estimates may
be quite dubious. Hence the power estimates derived for the above cases must
be considered quite uncertain."<ref>"Physical Evidence", pp. 190-191</ref>
 
===Radar===
{{seealso|Radar MASINT}}
Radar technology has improved constantly since 1947. Even the 1997 symposium warned against accepting radar reports without other confirmation. Military radar is far more informative about object analysis than is civilian air traffic control.
 
With UFOs, however, the challenge is having a radar within range of a sighting, and also getting full access to military records. In the 1990s, however, the Swiss and French militaries provided UFO researchers with  substantial access. Two incidents did provide correlated visual and radar information.
 
Even advanced military radars, however, may reject contacts that do not meet preprogrammed plausibility parameters.  While [[ballistic missile defense]], space launch and surveillance, and [[Radar MASINT]] systems have a wider tactical range, typical air defense radars will not display contacts that have speeds above Mach 4-6.
 
===Spectrometry===
{{seealso|Spectroscopic MASINT}}
In this context, spectrometry applies principally to the visible light spectrum, although prepared sensors should extend into the ultraviolet and infrared.  Very little spectrometric data has been available. The Hessdalen Project looked into spectrometry as part of their instrument design, but found that diffraction gratings may not work in the desired environment, and spectrometry is nontrivial.  Their work was in the 1990s, and there has been considerable development in multispectral scanning -- research on its use for UFOs, however, has not yet been found.
 
The key difficulty is that a spectrometer is a specialized instrument that must be used at the time of the sighting, but is unlikely to be available unless the UFO appears at a prepared location or a research center.
 
===Electromagnetic interference===
{{seealso|Geophysical MASINT}}
===Gravitational or inertial===
===Ground traces===
There are advanced techniques for searching an area for specific residues, such as those of [[chemical weapon]]s or industrial contaminants.  In searching for UFO evidence, however, what traces would be the object of the search?
 
To assess a modern chemical sensor, several parameters can be combined to create a figure of merit called the '''receiver operating characteristic (ROC)'''. These parameters are sensitivity, probability of correct detection, false positive rate and response time. Ideally, the device can have the parameters adjusted for specific situation. It may be more important that the device has a low false positive rate (i.e., is ''selective'', with a low rate of false negatives) or is maximally ''sensitive'', which means accepting false positives. ROC curves are commonly drawn to show sensitivity as a function of false positive rate for a given detection confidence and response time. Too high a false positive rate, without an operator that understands the context, can cause real alarms to be ignored. <ref name=Clarke2006>{{citation
  | first = Patrick E. | last = Clarke
  | title = Hunters of Chemical and Biological Threats
  | journal = Military Medical Technology
  | date = Jan 27, 2006
  | Volume= 10 
  | Issue = 1
  | url = http://www.military-medical-technology.com/article.cfm?DocID=1291
}}</ref>.
 
===Injuries to vegetation===
===Effects on witnesses===
Several reports are suggestive that the witnesses may have been subjected to radiation. "Sparse evidence" seems to be indicative of microwave, infrared, visible, and ultraviolet radiation, although a few cases seem to point towards high doses of
ionizing radiation such as X-rays or gamma rays. Most of the reported eye
problems (sometimes long lasting) may be attributed to strong UV radiation.
Superficial burns may be due to UV radiation, but deeper bums may be due to
microwaves. "a notable case that occurred near
Dayton, Texas, on December 29, 1980. This is
known as the "Cash-Landrum" case since it involved Betty Cash, then a 51
year old business woman, and Vickie Landrum, then a 57 year old employee in
a restaurant. It also involved Landrum's grandson Colby, then 7 years old.
According to their reports, they encountered a large diamond-shaped object
hovering above the road in front of them. Flames were belching from the bottom
of the craft. The interior of the car became hot, forcing them to leave the
vehicle. However, Colby and Landrum returned to the vehicle out of fear.
Cash remained outside the automobile for seven to ten minutes. The object
rose into the night sky and moved away. According to their reports, the object
was accompanied by 23 helicopters that Cash and Landrum assumed to be military.
The witnesses were initially affected mainly by the heat and the bright light,
and they developed headaches. During the night, Colby vomited repeatedly
and his skin turned red. The same happened to Landrum. Cash fared even
worse: large water blisters formed on her face and head, and by morning her
eyes had swollen shut. The three witnesses continued to have severe nausea:
even water would make them vomit; they developed diarrhea, and their health
deteriorated severely. Cash was taken to a hospital where she was treated as a
burn patient. This was the first of more than two dozen periods of hospital
confinement for Cash." <ref>Physical Evidence, pp. 207-208</ref>
 
While it is difficult to assess the nature of an ionizing radiation exposure purely from clinical presentation and laboratory analysis, there is some experience in doing so. These would require blood samples to be taken shortly after exposure.
 
The most basic screening is to take several [[complete blood count]]s (CBC) preferably within 8-12 hours of exposure, taken every 2-3 hours. Useful data can still be obtained from CBCs taken every 4-6 hours for at least two days, with special attention to changes in the [[lymphocyte]] count.  A 50% decline in absolute lymphocyte count within the first 24 hours after exposure, followed by a further, more severe decline within 48 hours, characterizes a potentially lethal exposure. If granulocyte counts show a transient increase before decline, termed an abortive rise, this may suggest the exposure is survivable. <ref name=Waselenko2004>{{citation
| title = Medical Management of the Acute Radiation Syndrome: Recommendations of the Strategic National Stockpile Radiation Working Group
| author = Waselenko,JK ''et al.''
| journal = Annals of Internal Medicine
| date = 15 June 2004
| volume=140
| issue=12
| pages=1037-1051
| url = http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/140/12/1037}}</ref>
===Analysis of debris===
{{seealso|Materials MASINT}}
==History==
Since the advent of aviation, there have been both instrumental and visual detections of things that could not be explained at the time. The term "gremlin" was used to describe, among other electronic phenomena, unexplained readings from World War II radar systems. There are also many misidentifications, such as the interpretation of the radar detection of the incoming [[Japan|Japanese]] force at the [[Battle of Pearl Harbor]] as incoming friendly [[B-17]] bombers.
 
When the [[AN-|AN/]][[FPS-50]] early warning radar, part of the [[Ballistic Missile Early Warning System]] (BMEWS), went into service in 1960, it soon reported a massive [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] missile attack on the U.S., which proved to be due to unexpected reflections of the radar beam from the [[Moon]].


===The Kenneth Arnold sighting ===
===The Kenneth Arnold sighting ===
 
UFOs became popularly known as flying saucers after a story in the ''East Oregonian'' newspaper, on June 26, 1947, reported salesman Kenneth Arnold's sighting of extremely fast-moving, "saucer-like objects" while flying a private plane.<ref>{{citation
UFOs became popularly known as flying saucers after a story in the East Oregonian newspaper, on June 26, 1947, reported salesman Kenneth Arnold's sighting of extremely fast-moving, "saucer-like objects" while flying a private plane.<ref>{{citation
  | url = http://www.project1947.com/fig/1947b.htm
  | url = http://www.project1947.com/fig/1947b.htm
  |date = 26 June 1947
  |date = 26 June 1947
  | title = Boise Flyer Maintains He Saw 'Em
  | title = Boise Flyer Maintains He Saw 'Em
  | author = Bill Bequette
  | author = Bill Bequette
  | publisher = Pendleton, Oregon East Oregonian}}</ref> A subsequent follow-up newspaper story coined the term "flying saucer" to describe the objects that Arnold reported sighting. According to the [[Mutual UFO Network]], there is conflict about both the UFO and flying saucer terms:
  | publisher = Pendleton, Oregon East Oregonian}}</ref> A follow-up newspaper story coined the term "flying saucer" to describe the objects that Arnold reported sighting. <ref>''Unidentified Flying Objects - Project Grudge, Technical Report No. 102-AC-49/15-100''. ''Unidentified Flying Objects'', [[United States Air Force]] Project Grudge, Technical Report No. 102-AC-49/15-100. {{citation
 
<blockquote>[[U.S. Air Force]] Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt says unequivocally that "UFO is the official term that I created to replace the words flying saucers"<ref>Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, Doubleday, 1956, p. 6</ref>. Presumably this would have been sometime between 1951, when Ruppelt took over Project Grudge (later renamed Blue Book), and September of 1953, when he left the agency and the Air Force. Elsewhere in the same book, however, Ruppelt says of Project Grudge's final 600-page report, released in December of 1949, that it was "officially titled ''Unidentified Flying Objects - Project Grudge, Technical Report No. 102-AC-49/15-100''. But it was widely referred to as the Grudge Report."<ref>''Unidentified Flying Objects'', [[United States Air Force]] Project Grudge, Technical Report No. 102-AC-49/15-100.</ref> This would mean that some long forgotten anonymous Air Force staffer coined the phrase at least two years before Ruppelt did. But perhaps Ruppelt was only claiming credit for coinage of the acronym UFO.<ref>{{citation
  | url = http://www.mufon.com/faq.htm#ufology  
  | url = http://www.mufon.com/faq.htm#ufology  
  | title = Frequently Asked Questions
  | title = Frequently Asked Questions
  | publisher = Mutual UFO Network (MUFON)}}</ref></blockquote>
  | publisher = Mutual UFO Network (MUFON)}}</ref>


Arnold self-published reports of the incident, which have been called hysteria by an affiliate of the ''Skeptical Inquirer''.<ref>{{citation
In the USA, sightings increased sharply after the [[Kenneth Arnold]] sighting, and most were conflated into claims of "flying saucers" or other "vehicles from outer space" that some believed were directed by [[extraterrestrial intelligence]]s—some skeptics called this "mass hysteria" or "mass delusion".<ref>{{citation
  | url = http://www.csicop.org/si/show/mass_delusions_and_hysterias_highlights_from_the_past_millennium/
  | url = http://www.csicop.org/si/show/mass_delusions_and_hysterias_highlights_from_the_past_millennium/
  | title = Mass Delusions and Hysterias: Highlights from the Past Millennium
  | title = Mass Delusions and Hysterias: Highlights from the Past Millennium
Line 178: Line 22:
  | volume=24.3 | date = May-June 2000
  | volume=24.3 | date = May-June 2000
  | publisher = Committee for Skeptical Inquiry}}</ref>
  | publisher = Committee for Skeptical Inquiry}}</ref>
In 1947 the [[U.S. government]] began studying them, often in [[classified information|classified]] projects. 
===The Roswell incident===
{|align="right" style="width:50%;"
|
<font color="darkblue"><b>
:''"The Air Force research did not locate or develop any information that the "Roswell Incident" was a UFO event nor was there any indication of a "cover-up" by the Government. Information obtained through exhaustive records searches and interviews indicated that the materials recovered near Roswell was consistent with a balloon devise of the type used in a then classified project. No records indicated or even hinted at the recovery of "alien" bodies or extraterrestrial materials."'' <ref name=NARA-UFO>{{citation
| url = http://www.archives.gov/foia/ufos.html#geninfo
| title = Unidentified Flying Objects - Project BLUE BOOK
| publisher = National Archives and Records Administration}}</ref><ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/roswell.html Government Records:
Results of a Search for Records Concerning the 1947 Crash Near Roswell, New Mexico (Letter Report, 07/28/95, GAO/NSIAD-95-187)] Government Accounting Office.</ref>
{{col-end}}
In July 1947, a press release, issued by the Roswell Army Air Field (RAAF) public information officer, stated that the field's 509th Bomb Group had recovered a crashed "flying disk" from a ranch near [[Roswell, New Mexico]]. The next day, the press reported the Commanding General of the Eighth Air Force as stating that, in fact, a radar-tracking balloon had been recovered by the RAAF personnel, not a "flying disc." A press conference was shown debris from the crashed object, which seemed to confirm the weather balloon description.
However, thirty years later, in 1978,  Major Jesse Marcel, who had been involved with the original recovery of the debris, was interviewed by a ufologist, Stanton T. Friedman. In that interview, Marcel claimed that the military had covered up the recovery of an alien spacecraft. The story was rapidly embellished with allegations of further cover-ups, autopsies of alien bodies, and intimidation of witnesses.


===Roswell incident===
After congressional pressure, the General Accounting Office directed the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force to conduct an investigation. This led to two reports. "The Roswell Report: Fact vs. Fiction in the New Mexico Desert"  concluded that the material recovered in 1947 was probably debris from a secret government program, 'Project Mogul', which used high altitude balloons  to detect sound waves generated by Soviet atomic bomb tests and ballistic missiles. The second report, released in 1997, concluded that reports of recovered alien bodies were probably a combination of mistaken memories of military accidents and of the recovery of anthropomorphic dummies in military programs, and hoaxes perpetrated by witnesses and UFO proponents.<ref>{{citation
In July 1947, there were reports of a flying saucer crash at [[Roswell, New Mexico]]. Some reports suggest it was a classified, balloon-borne sensor, developed by the U.S., and intended to gather intelligence on Soviet [[nuclear weapon]]s. Others, however, believe there was evidence of extraterrestrial origin, and possible government coverups.<ref>{{citation
  | url =http://www.nmsr.org/roswell.htm
  | url =http://www.nmsr.org/roswell.htm
  | publisher = New Mexicans for Science and Reason
  | publisher = New Mexicans for Science and Reason
  | title = The Roswell Incident}}</ref>   
  | title = The Roswell Incident}}</ref> The ''Center for UFO Studies'' (see below) disputes this report.<ref>
{{citation
  | title = The Center For UFO Studies Response To The Air Force’s 1997 Report, The Roswell Report: Case Closed
| author =  Mark Rodeghier
| publisher = J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS)
| url = http://www.cufos.org/Roswell_fs1.html}}</ref>


On September 8, 1994, the Secretary of the Air Force, [[Sheila Widnall]], announced that the United States Air Force had completed its study to locate records relating to the Roswell incident. "Pro-UFO researchers claim that an extraterrestrial spacecraft and its alien occupants were recovered near Roswell in July of 1947, and that this fact was kept from the public."
==Ufology==
{{main|Ufology}}
There is a movement, loosely called [[ufology]] or Ufology, that investigates and reports phenomena. Much of the reporting is anecdotal and unscientific, but some of the leadership of UFO research centers, such as [[Mark Rodeghier]] of the [[Center for UFO Studies]] (CUFOS), the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) and French born UFO researcher [[Jacques Vallée]], participate in much more technical discussions, such as the 1997 symposium on physical evidence from UFOs. Physicist Stanton Friedman is an established UFO researcher.<ref name="urlStanton Friedman - Biography">{{cite web
|url=http://www.stantonfriedman.com/index.php?ptp=stans_bio
|title=Stanton Friedman - Biography
|format=
|work=
|accessdate=2011-01-02
}}</ref>
<ref name="urlStanton Friedman - Google Search">{{cite web
|url=http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Stanton+Friedman%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=%22Stanton+Friedman%22&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=9zy&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=ivnsbo&source=univ&tbs=bks:1&tbo=u&ei=vDAgTcWRAYu6sQPAiPXyCg&sa=X&oi=book_group&ct=title&cad=bottom-3results&resnum=19&ved=0CI8BELADMBI&fp=28206023bf4210c4
|title="Stanton Friedman" - Google Search
|format=
|work=
|accessdate=2011-01-02
}}</ref>
Another is physicist Dr. Bruce Maccabee, who was a member of National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) and who later started the Fund for UFO Research. Maccabee has investigated numerous UFO sightings including the Kennet Arnold UFO sighting, the JAL UFO sighting, the Iran Jet case in 1976 and the Gulf Breeze UFO sightings.<ref name="urlDr. Bruce Maccabee Research Website">{{cite web
|url=http://brumac.8k.com/bio.html
|title=Dr. Bruce Maccabee Research Website
|format=
|work=
|accessdate=2011-01-02
}}</ref>
<ref name="url. Bruce Maccabee - Google Search">{{cite web
|url=http://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks%3A1&tbo=1&q=.+Bruce+Maccabee&btnG=Search+Books
|title=. Bruce Maccabee - Google Search
|format=
|work=
|accessdate=2011-01-02
}}</ref>


"At the request of Congressman Steven H. Schiff (R-NM), the [[General Accounting Office]] (GAO) initiated an audit in February of 1994, to locate all records relating to the "Roswell Incident" and to determine if such records were properly handled. The GAO audit was completed and the results published by the Headquarters, U.S. Air Force in 1995. The publication is entitled "The Roswell Report: Fact vs. Fiction in the New Mexico Desert." This publication may be obtained from most U.S. Government Depository Library. The call number is ISBN 0-16- 048023-X....Prior to the interviews, Secretary Widnall released those persons from any previous security obligations that may have restricted their statements.
Other organizations, such as the [[Society for Scientific Exploration]] (SSE), study UFOs, but not as their sole focus. [[Peter Sturrock]], now Emeritus Professor of Physics at [[Stanford University]], who directed the 1997 "Physical Evidence from UFO Reports" study,  "expressed the opinion that this problem will be resolved only by extensive and open professional scientific investigation, and that an essential prerequisite of such research is that more scientists acquire an interest in this topic." <ref>{{citation
| url =http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_12_2_sturrock.pdf
| title = Physical Evidence from UFO Reports
| journal = Journal of Scientific Exploration |volume = 12 | issue = 2| pages = 179-229
| author = [[Peter Sturrock]] ''et al.''
| year = 1998}}</ref>  However, [[Philip Klass]] has written that "SSE's annual conferences typically feature several pro-UFO speakers, but no UFO-skeptics. For example, at SSE's 1996 conference there were four pro-UFO speakers, but no skeptics.<ref>{{citation
| journal = The Skeptics UFO Newsletter
| author = Philip J. Klass
| date = 1 September 1998
| volume = 53
| url = http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/klass_files_volume_53/
| title = Best UFO Cases Fail To Provide Credible Evidence Of ET Visitors, According To Scientific Review Panel Convened By Pro-UFO Physicist
}}</ref>


"The Air Force research did not locate or develop any information that the "Roswell Incident" was a UFO event nor was there any indication of a "cover-up" by the Government. Information obtained through exhaustive records searches and interviews indicated that the materials recovered near Roswell was consistent with a balloon devise of the type used in a then classified project. No records indicated or even hinted that the recovery of "alien" bodies or extraterrestrial materials."<ref name=NARA-UFO>{{citation
In June 2010, James Carrion, formerly international director of the [[Mutual UFO Network]], set up the Center for UFO Truth, to "answer one question – did the United States and its allies purposely create the UFO myth as part of a cold war deception operation? It makes sense to include the subject of CUT's research efforts in its title." <ref>{{citation
  | url = http://www.archives.gov/foia/ufos.html#geninfo
  | url = http://sharepoint.centerforufotruth.org:27894/Lists/Announcements/DispForm.aspx?ID=4
  | title = Unidentified Flying Objects - Project BLUE BOOK
  | title = Announcements: Frequently Asked Questions
  | publisher = National Archives and Records Administration}}</ref>
  | publisher = Center for UFO Truth
| date = 28 June 2010}}</ref>


Reports also indicate that a govenment task force, called Majestic-12, may have been formed to manage the alien information. The Majestic code, however, has also been associated with classified [[continuity of government]], or "shadow government", programs that were confirmed in the Eisenhower Administration and may have existed in the Truman Administration.
==Project BLUE BOOK==
 
{|align="right" style="width:50%;"
==Government investigation==
|
After the [[Second World War]], the U.S. and other government investigated UFO reports.   
<font color="darkblue">
 
:A panel of the [[National Academy of Sciences]] reviewed the Condon report, and observed
===Project BLUE BOOK===
:''"there remain UFO sightings that are not easily explained ...[but]... there seems to be no reason to attribute them to an extraterrestrial source without evidence that is much more convincing. ... On the basis of present knowledge the least likely explanation of UFOs is the hypothesis of extraterrestrial visitations by intelligent beings."<ref>{{citation
The major [[U.S. Air Force]] activity was called Project Blue Book, and was in existence between 1947 and 1967. It was terminated after a study called the Condon Report, coordinated by the [[University of Colorado]], entitled, "Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects;" a review of the University of Colorado's report by the National Academy of Sciences; and  past UFO studies and Air Force experience investigating UFO reports during the 40s, '50s, and '60s, led the Secretary of the Air Force to determine there was no national security value to continuing investigations.
| url = http://www.project1947.com/shg/articles/nascu.html
  | publisher = National Academy of Sciences
| date = 1969
| title =Review of the University of Colorado Report on Unidentified Flying Objects by a Panel of the National Academy of Sciences  
}}</ref>
{{col-end}}


"From 1947 to 1969, a total of 12,618 sightings were reported to Project BLUE BOOK. Of these 701 remain "Unidentified." The project was headquartered at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, whose personnel no longer receive, document or investigate UFO reports.<ref name=NARA-UFO>{{citation
In 1947, the [[United States Air Force]] began 'Project Blue Book' to collate UFO sightings. It was terminated after the Condon Report (see later) led the Secretary of the Air Force to decide there was no national security value to continuing investigations. A total of 12,618 sightings were reported to the Project, of which 701 remained "Unidentified." <ref name=NARA-UFO2>{{citation
  | url = http://www.archives.gov/foia/ufos.html
  | url = http://www.archives.gov/foia/ufos.html
  | title = U.S. Air Force Fact Sheet Concerning UFO's and Project BLUE BOOK
  | title = U.S. Air Force Fact Sheet Concerning UFO's and Project BLUE BOOK
  | date = January 1985
  | date = January 1985
  | publisher = National Archives and Records Administration}}</ref> Note below that the CIA studied until 1990.
  | publisher = National Archives and Records Administration}}</ref>  
 
Records of the project are in the U.S. National Archives.<ref name=NARA-UFO/>  
Records of the project are in the U.S. National Archives.<ref name=NARA-UFO/>The National Archives searched for Majestic-12, and one document, a "Memorandum for General Twining, from Robert Cutler, Special Assistant to the President, Subject: "NCS/MJ-12 Special Studies Project" dated July 14, 1954. The memorandum, one page, refers to a briefing to take place on July 16. The memorandum does not identify MJ-12 or the purpose of the briefing." [[Nathan Twining]] was the [[Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff]]. There has been some speculation, by the Federation of American Scientists and others, that this ''may'' have some relationship to what has also been called the "Eisenhower 10" continuity of government project.<ref>[http://www.conelrad.com/pdf/conelrad_eisenhower_ten_020904.pdf President Eisenhower Designated Private Citizens to Take Control of the Government in the Event of a Nuclear Attack on the United States]</ref>
 
The National Archives, however, found several inconsistencies regarding the NCS/MJ-12 Project document. Cutler was out of the country on the date marked on the document. It does not bear a registration number appropriate to the record series, it is not on a letterhead and is on a type of carbon paper not used for any of Cutler's other documents, and it bears a classification marking not in use until the Nixon Administration.


Another Air Force report was issued in 1997.
[[Central Intelligence Agency]] (CIA) documents indicate that the agency monitored the UFO situation from 1952.<ref name=Haines>{{citation
The J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) (see below) disputes the Air Force report on the incident.<ref>
{{citation
| title = The Center For UFO Studies Response To The Air Force’s 1997 Report, The Roswell Report: Case Closed
| author =  Mark Rodeghier
| publisher = J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS)
| url = http://www.cufos.org/Roswell_fs1.html}}</ref>
===Condon Report===
Following publication of the BLUE BOOK report, in 1967, the Air Force issued a contract, to the [[University of Colorado]], for the study of unidentified flying objects. Brigadier General Edward B. Gillers, USAF, was the contract monitor, Dr. Thomas Rachford was the senior Air Force Scientist on the project, and the principal investigator from the University was Dr. E.U. Condon,  director of the [[National Bureau of Standards]] from 1946 to 1950. The project was able to get some support from the [[Central Intelligence Agency]].
 
This report was subsequently [[#National Academy of Science review|reviewed]], with approval, by the [[National Academy of Sciences]].
It was also reviewed by [[P.A. Sturrock]] at the Center for Space Science and Astrophysics,
Stanford University, who was active in the [[Society for Scientific Exploration]]. <ref>{{citation
| author = [[Peter Sturrock]]
| url = http://www.ufoskeptic.org/sturrock/toc.html
| year = 1987 | title = An Analysis of the Condon Report on the Colorado UFO Project
| journal = J. Scientific Exploration | volume = 1 | issue = 1 | page = 75}}</ref>
 
===Central Intelligence Agency===
[[Central Intelligence Agency]] (CIA) documents indicate that the agency monitoried the UFO situation starting in 1952.<ref name=Haines>{{citation
  | url = https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/97unclass/ufo.html  
  | url = https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/97unclass/ufo.html  
  | title = CIA's Role in the Study of UFOs, 1947-90: A Die-Hard Issue
  | title = CIA's Role in the Study of UFOs, 1947-90: A Die-Hard Issue
  | author =  Gerald K. Haines | journal = Studies in Intelligence, [[Central Intelligence Agency]]}}</ref>
  | author =  Gerald K. Haines | journal = Studies in Intelligence, [[Central Intelligence Agency]]}}</ref>
In 1952, the CIA reacted to the new rash of sightings by forming a special study group within the Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI) and the Office of Current Intelligence (OCI). Edward Tauss reported for the group that most UFO sightings could be easily explained, but recommended that the Agency continue
monitoring the problem, in coordination with the Air Force Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC).  He also urged that CIA conceal its interest from the media and the public, "in view of their probable alarmist tendencies".


====Early CIA interest====
Upon receiving the report, Deputy Director for Intelligence (DDI) [[Robert Amory]], Jr. assigned responsibility for the UFO investigations to OSI's Physics and Electronics Division.  Amory, who asked the group to focus on the national security implications of UFOs, was relaying DCI [[Director of Central Intelligence#Walter Bedell Smith|Walter Bedell Smith]]'s concerns. Smith wanted to know whether or not the Air Force investigation of flying saucers was sufficiently objective and how much more money and manpower would be necessary to determine the cause of the small percentage of unexplained flying saucers.  Smith believed "there was only one chance in 10,000 that the phenomenon posed a threat to the security of the country, but even that chance could not be taken." According to Smith, it was CIA's responsibility by statute to coordinate the intelligence effort required to solve the problem. Smith also wanted to know what use could be made of the UFO phenomenon in connection with US psychological warfare efforts.
Although it had monitored UFO reports for at least three years, CIA reacted to the new rash of sightings, in 1952, by forming a special study group within the Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI) and the Office of Current Intelligence (OCI) to review the situation.  Edward Tauss, acting chief of OSI's Weapons and Equipment Division, reported for the group that most UFO sightings could be easily explained.  Nevertheless, he recommended that the Agency continue
monitoring the problem, in coordination with the Air Force Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC).  He also urged that CIA conceal its interest from the media and the public, "in view of their probable alarmist tendencies" to accept such interest as confirming the existence of UFOs.


Upon receiving the report, Deputy Director for Intelligence (DDI) [[Robert Amory]], Jr. assigned responsibility for the UFO investigations to OSI's Physics and Electronics Division, with A. Ray Gordon as the officer in charge.  Each branch in the division was to contribute to the investigation, and Gordon was to coordinate closely with ATIC. Amory, who asked the group to focus on the national security implications of UFOs, was relaying DCI [[Director of Central Intelligence#Walter Bedell Smith|Walter Bedell Smith]]'s concerns. Smith wanted to know whether or not the Air Force investigation of flying saucers was sufficiently objective and how much more money and manpower would be necessary to determine the cause of the small percentage of unexplained flying saucers.  Smith believed "there was only one chance in 10,000 that the phenomenon posed a threat to the security of the country, but even that chance could not be taken."  According to Smith, it was CIA's responsibility by statute to coordinate the intelligence effort required to solve the problem. Smith also wanted to know what use could be made of the UFO phenomenon in
After the BLUE BOOK report, in 1967, the Air Force issued a contract, to the [[University of Colorado]], for the study of UFOs. The principal investigator from the University was Dr. E.U. Condon, director of the [[National Bureau of Standards]] from 1946 to 1950. The project gained some support from the [[Central Intelligence Agency]].<ref>{{cite web  
connection with US psychological warfare efforts.
 
====Meeting with Condon team====
In 1967, the Air Force issued a contract, to the [[University of Colorado]], for the study of unidentified flying objects. Brigadier General Edward B. Gillers, USAF, was the contract monitor, Dr. Thomas Rachford was the senior Air Force Scientist on the project, and the principal investigator from the University was Dr. E.U. Condon, eminent physicist and director of the [[National Bureau of Standards]] from 1946 to 1950.
 
"On 20 February 1967 at 0915 Dr. Condon and four members of his investigative team visited NPIC. With Dr. Condon were Dr. Richard Love, University of Colorado, Dr. David Saunders, University of Colorado, Dr. William Price, Executive Director of APRST, and Dr. Rachford, USAF. The purpose of this visit was to familiarize Dr. Condon and members of his team with selected photogrammetric and photographic analysis capabilities of the [[National Photographic Interpretation Center]] (NPIC). [[Art Lundahl]], the dean of [[imagery intelligence|photographic interpretation]] met with the investigators.<ref>{{cite web  
  | url = http://www.ufocrashsite.com/articles/foia/foia-cia-condonvisitsnpic.php  
  | url = http://www.ufocrashsite.com/articles/foia/foia-cia-condonvisitsnpic.php  
  | title = Visit of Dr. Condon to NPIC, 20 February 1967  
  | title = Visit of Dr. Condon to NPIC, 20 February 1967  
  | id = Condon 1967  
  | id = Condon 1967  
  | accessdate = 2007-10-29}}</ref>
  | accessdate = 2007-10-29}}</ref> The 'Condon Report' was published in 1969.<ref>{{citation
| author = [[Peter Sturrock]]
| url = http://www.ufoskeptic.org/sturrock/toc.html
| year = 1987 | title = An Analysis of the Condon Report on the Colorado UFO Project
| journal = J. Scientific Exploration | volume = 1 | issue = 1 | page = 75}}</ref>


The meeting was allowed to discuss classified material through the SECRET level. NPIC established ground rules:
== UFO Classification ==
:"Any work performed by NPIC to assist Dr. Condon in his investigation will not be identified as work accomplished by CIA. Dr. Condon was advised by Mr. Lundahl to  make no reference to CIA in regard to this work effort. Dr. Condon stated that if he felt it necessary to obtain an official CIA comment he would make a separate distinct entry into CIA not related to contacts he has with NPIC.


:"NPIC will not prepare any written comments, will not analyze information with the intent of drawing a conclusion, nor prepare written reports. NPIC personnel will be available to assist Dr. Condon by performing work of photogrammetric nature, such as attempting to measure objects imaged on photographs that may be part of Dr. Condon's analysis. Work performed by NPIC will be strictly of a technical nature using services and equipment generally not available elsewhere."
===Hynek's Classification ===
*Nocturnal Disks: Objects seen in the night sky. This is the most commonly reported UFO sighting.
*Daylight Disks:  UFOs that could be seen flying high in the sky or close to the ground. Oval or round disks are commonly seen with this type of UFO sighting.
*Radar Visual:  UFOs that are seen on radar screens while also being visually confirmed by eyewitnesses on the ground.
*Close Encounter of the First Kind:  UFOs that are seen within 200 yards of the witness. There is no interaction between the witness and the UFO.
*Close Encounter of the Second Kind: Electrical equipment such as a car ignition may operate strangely. Other electrical equipment may malfunction while the UFO is present. Other forms of interaction may include physical effects to plants, animals or human beings. There could be traces of burned grass for example in a Close Encounter of the Second Kind.
*Close Encounter of the Third Kind: Seeing humanoid like creatures associated with the UFO. There is usually no interaction between the human witness and the humanoid. In some reports there have been interactions reported between the UFO witness and the humanoids.<ref>http://www.cufos.org/HynekClass.html</ref>
*Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind: Interaction between the UFO witness and abduction by humanoid entities.<ref>http://jacquesvallee.net/bookdocs/classif.pdf</ref>


In summary, "At about 1235 the group adjourned to lunch and following lunch they left NPIC for a meeting with Brig.Gen Gillers at the Pentagon."
===Jacques Vallee's UFO Classification===
*AN1:  Viewing anomalous lights or explosions in the sky that do not affect the witness or the environment.
*AN2:  Reports that show lasting effects such as flattened grass, poltergeist activity or anomalous photographs.
*AN3:  Cases that include entities. This could include ghosts, yetis (Abominable Snowman), elves, spirits and cryptozoology.
*AN4:  The witness reports interaction with the entities within the reality of the entities themselves. This type of experience could include Near Death Experiences, religious visions and out-of-body experiences (OBEs).<ref>http://jacquesvallee.net/bookdocs/classif.pdf</ref>


:"Most all the discussion during the morning was of an unclassified nature dealing with primary basic fundamentals of photogrammetry, photographic analysis and problems related to the acquiring of enough information to conduct meaningful analyses."
===French Space Agency Classification===
 
In 1977 the French space agency, CNES, set up a unit to record witness accounts of abnormal phenomena observed in the sky. <ref name=GEIPANISEPRA>{{citation
Condon and the same group met again in May 1967 at NPIC to hear an analysis of UFO photographs taken at Zanesville, Ohio.  The analysis debunked that sighting. The committee was again impressed with the technical work performed, and Condon remarked that for the first time a scientific analysis of a UFO would stand up to investigation.
  | url =http://www.cnes.fr/web/CNES-en/5866-geipan-uap-investigation-unit-opens-its-files.php
 
  | title =  Le Geipan, the French [unidentified aerospace phenomena] UAP research and information group
===National Academy of Sciences review===
  | publisher = Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES)}}</ref>
A panel of the [[National Academy of Sciences]] reviewed the Condon Report in 1969. It was chaired by [[Gerald Clemence]] of [[Yale University]]; the other members were [[H.R. Crane]] ([[University of Michigan]]), [[Mark Kac]] ([[Rockefeller University]]), [[Francis Reichelderfer]] (former director of the U.S. Weather Service), [[Wallace Fenn]] ([[University of Rochester]]), [[William Rubey]] ([[University of California at Los Angeles]]), [[H. Keffer Hartline]] (Rockefeller University), [[C.D. Shane]] (Santa Cruz, CA), [[E.R. Hildgard]] and [[Oswald Villard]] ([[Stanford University]]) . They observed <blockquote>We are unanimous in the opinion that this has been a very creditable effort to apply objectively the relevant techniques of science to the solution of the UFO problem.  The Report recognizes that there remain UFO sightings that are not easily explained.  The Report does not suggest, however, so many reasonable and possible directions in which an explanation may eventually be found, that there seems to be no reason to attribute them to an extraterrestrial source without evidence that is much more convincing.  The Report also shows how difficult it is to apply scientific methods to the occasional transient sightings with any chance of success.  While further study of particular aspects of the topic (e.g., atmospheric phenomena) may be useful, a study of UFOs in general is not a promising way to expand scientific understanding of the phenomena.  On the basis of present knowledge the least likely explanation of UFOs is the hypothesis of extraterrrestrial visitations by intelligent beings.<ref>{{citation
<ref>{{citation
  | url = http://www.project1947.com/shg/articles/nascu.html
  | publisher = National Academy of Sciences
  | date = 1969
  | title =Review of the University of Colorado Report on Unidentified Flying Objects by a Panel of the National Academy of Sciences
}}</ref></blockquote>
===French space agemcy===
CNES, the French space agency, prefers to use "aerospace" and "phenomena" to be more inclusive than UFO, not assuming something is purely flying or purely a physical object. Approximately 9% of the 1600 reports in their archive are considered of good observational quality with no conventional explanation.  At various times, the group has been called GEIPAN or SEPRA, or the combined term GEIPANISEPRA.
 
Its archives began going online in 2007. <ref>{{citation
  | title = GEIPAN UAP investigation unit opens its files
  | title = GEIPAN UAP investigation unit opens its files
  | date = 26 March 2007
  | date = 26 March 2007
  |url = http://www.cnes.fr/web/CNES-en/5866-geipan-uap-investigation-unit-opens-its-files.php
  |url = http://www.cnes.fr/web/CNES-en/5866-geipan-uap-investigation-unit-opens-its-files.php
  | publisher = CNES}}</ref>
  | publisher = CNES}}</ref> They noted there is a perfectly normal explanation for the vast majority of “sightings”, such as the Moon rising, unusual clouds or space debris re-entering the atmosphere.  They classified 1600 sightings into four categories:  
 
*Type A: Complete identification of the phenomenon
"In 1977, the CNES Director General set up a unit to record witness accounts of supposedly abnormal phenomena observed in the sky, commonly known as UFOs (unidentified flying objects).
*Type B: Probable identification.
In fact, there is a perfectly normal explanation for the vast majority of “sightings”, such as the Moon rising, unusual clouds or space debris re-entering the atmosphere." They classify the 1600 sightings into four categories:  
*Type C: Inadequate information for analysis
*Type A: The phenomenon is fully and unambiguously identified.
*Type D: Observations are consistent and accurate but cannot be explained in terms of conventional phenomena. 9% of sightings were in this category.
*Type B: The nature of the phenomenon has probably been identified but some doubt remains.
*Type C: The report cannot be analyzed since it lacks precision, so no opinion can be formed.
*Type D: The witness testimony is consistent and accurate but cannot be interpreted in terms of conventional phenomena. 9% of the sightings are in this category.
 
== UFO Classification ==
Several groups interested in UFOs, however, have made efforts to catalog information on reports of them.  In the United States, there are two major and well known UFO groups in the United States. They are the J. Allen Hynek [[Center for UFO Studies]] (CUFOS) founded by J. Allen Hynek, who was the chairman of astronomy at [[Northwestern University]]; and the [[Mutual UFO Network]] (MUFON) lead by Allen Utke, Associate Professor of Chemistry at [[Wisconsin State University]]. There is also work by a French-born researcher, [[Jacques Vallée]].
 
Hynek originally doubted that the reports had any substance, but later changed his mind about UFOs during his research with [[#Project BLUE BOOK|Project BLUE BOOK]].<ref name=CUFOS>[http://www.cufos.org/org.html Center for UFO Studies]</ref>. CUFOS collects UFO reports, maintains a UFO research library, and offers two publications concerning the UFO phenomena.
 
There are two major systems for classifying the reports, first based on  shape and other visually observed characteristics, movement, and  interaction with the environment or possible entities. In addition, some large data bases categorize by shape or other aspects of visual observations.
 
Certain of these classifications, however, specifically assume not only an object that could not be explained, but also indications of a nonhuman intelligence, either extraterrestrial or terrestrial but paranormal. While mainstream science does work in a [[Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence]], its focus has been on intelligently generated radio signals, not physical visitation.
 
===Hynek's Classification ===
J. Allen Hynek was the chairman of astronomy at [[Northwestern University]] and offered technical assistance for the United States Air Force [[#Project BLUE BOOK|Project BLUE BOOK]]. He was a UFO skeptic but went onto to believe in the UFO phenomena. He later founded the Center for UFO Studies in Chicago, Illinois.


*Observational aspects
In the USA, there are two well known UFO groups: the [[Center for UFO Studies]] (CUFOS) founded by J. Allen Hynek, who was the chairman of astronomy at [[Northwestern University]], and the [[Mutual UFO Network]] (MUFON) lead by Allen Utke, Associate Professor of Chemistry at [[Wisconsin State University]]. Hynek originally doubted that the reports had any substance, but later changed his mind during his research with [[#Project BLUE BOOK|Project BLUE BOOK]].<ref name=CUFOS>[http://www.cufos.org/org.html Center for UFO Studies]</ref>. CUFOS collects UFO reports, maintains a UFO research library, and offers two publications concerning the UFO phenomena. There are two major systems for classifying the reports, first based on shape and other visually observed characteristics, movement, and interaction with the environment or possible entities. In addition, some large data bases categorize by shape or other aspects of visual observations. Some of these classifications assume not only an object that could not be explained, but also indications of a nonhuman intelligence. <ref>[http://www.cufos.org/HynekClass.html J.Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies]</ref><ref name=Vallee>{{citation
**Nocturnal Disks:  Objects seen in the night sky. This is the most commonly reported UFO sighting.
**Daylight Disks: UFOs that could be seen flying high in the sky or close to the ground. Oval or round disks are commonly seen with this type of UFO sighting.
**Radar Visual:  UFOs that are seen on radar screens while also being visually confirmed by eyewitnesses on the ground.
**(not listed in classification, but radar-only would seem needed)
*Behavioral aspects
**Close Encounter of the First Kind:  UFOs that are seen within 200 yards of the witness. There is no interaction between the witness and the UFO.
**Close Encounter of the Second Kind: Electrical equipment such as a car ignition may operate strangely. Other electrical equipment may malfunction while the UFO is present. Other forms of interaction may include physical effects to plants, animals or human beings. There could be traces of burned grass for example in a Close Encounter of the Second Kind.
**Close Encounter of the Third Kind: Seeing [[humanoid]] like creatures associated with the UFO. There is usually no interaction between the human witness and the humanoid. In some reports there have been interactions reported between the UFO witness and the humanoids.<ref>[http://www.cufos.org/HynekClass.html J.Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies]</ref>
**Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind: Interaction between the UFO witness and abduction by humanoid entities.<ref name=Vallee>{{citation
  | url = http://jacquesvallee.net/bookdocs/classif.pdf  
  | url = http://jacquesvallee.net/bookdocs/classif.pdf  
  | title = A System of Classification and Reliability Indicators for the Analysis of the Behavior of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena
  | title = A System of Classification and Reliability Indicators for the Analysis of the Behavior of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena
  | author = Jacques F. Vallée | date = April 2007}}</ref>
  | author = Jacques F. Vallée | date = April 2007}}</ref>


===Jacques Vallée's UFO Classification===
UFOs have been reported in varying shapes and colors. According to the 'National UFO Reporting Center' (as of July 2010), 12,023 lights have been reported by witnesses, 6,020 triangles, 5,181 circles and 4,784 disks .<ref>[http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/ndxshape.html ''Report Index by Shape of Craft'', National UFO Report Center] </ref> Reports in the database are transcriptions of witness self-reports and are not evaluated.<ref name="urlNational UFO Reporting Center Web Reports">{{cite web
[[Jacques Vallée|Jacques F. Vallée]] is a  French-born astronomer active in studies of UFOs. 
|url=http://www.nuforc.org/webreports.html
 
|title=National UFO Reporting Center Web Reports
*AN1:  Viewing anomalous lights or explosions in the sky that do not affect the witness or the environment.
|format=
*AN2:  Reports that show lasting effects such as flattened grass, [[poltergeist]] activity or anomalous photographs.
|work=
*AN3:  Cases that include entities. This could include [[ghost]]s, [[yeti]]s (Abominable Snowman), [[elf|elves]], [[spirit]]s and [[cryptozoology]].
|accessdate=2010-08-31
*AN4:  The witness reports interaction with the entities within the reality of the entities themselves. This type of experience could include [[near-death experience]]s, [[religious vision]]s and [[out-of-body experience]]s (OBEs).
}}</ref>
*MA1:  A UFO that drops, maneuvers, loops.
*MA2:  A UFO that includes a physical interaction with the environment while performing drops, maneuvers or loops. An example of this would be seeing a UFO near a [[power plant]].
*MA3:  Witnessing entities on board a UFO while performing the above mentioned maneuvers.
*MA4:  The UFO witness observes the listed actions and goes through a transformational experience during the event.
*MA5:  The UFO witness suffers serious or injury as a result of seeing a UFO in the sky.<ref name=Vallee/>
 
===UFO shapes===
UFOs have been reported in varying shapes and colors. According to the National UFO Reporting Center statistics, 12,023 lights were reported, 6,020 triangles were reported, 5,181 circles and 4,784 disks were reported as of July 2010.<ref>[http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/ndxshape.html ''Report Index by Shape of Craft'', National UFO Report Center] </ref> Reports in the database are transcriptions of witness self-reports and are not cross-indexed, correlated, or evaluated.


Categorizing shapes is considered a challenging problem in both visual perceptual psychology and computer vision.<blockquote>To recognize a previously seen object, the visual system must overcome the variability in the object's
The home page of the National UFO Reporting Center noted (with tongue firmly in cheek) 'Events across the United States and Canada on the evening of Sunday, July 04, 2010.'  
appearance caused by factors such as illumination and pose. Developments in computer vision suggest
<blockquote>
that it may be possible to counter the in£uence of these factors, by learning to interpolate between stored
"Over the last 48 hours, NUFORC has received almost 100 similar reports of very peculiar events, which have been witnessed across the U.S. and Canada on July 4th, and perhaps on July 3rd, as well.  The sightings are a phenomenon for which we have no ready explanation.  Many of the reports from both days have been submitted by seemingly serious-minded individuals, many of whom apparently witnessed the events with multiple other witnesses present. The reports are similar, in that the witnesses have described seeing strange red, orange, or yellow “fireballs,” which have been seen either to hover in the night sky, or to streak overhead, sometimes individually, and on some occasions in clusters.  In some instances, the objects were observed against a clear, cloudless sky, and in other cases, they were observed below solid or broken overcast."<ref>{{citation
views of the target object, taken under representative combinations of viewing conditions. Daily life situations, however, typically require categorization, rather than recognition, of objects. Due to the open-ended
character of both natural and arti¢cial categories, categorization cannot rely on interpolation between
stored examples.<ref name=Edelman>{{citation
| url = http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1692007/pdf/9304686.pdf
| title = A model of visual recognition and categorization
| author = Shimon Edelman and Sharon Duvdevani-Bar
| journal =Phil.Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B
| year = 1997 | volume = 352 | pages =  1191-1202}}</ref></blockquote>
 
Note that the cited study deals with recognition of previously seen objects. The categorization of objects of a type never before encountered is more difficult.
 
The home page of the National UFO Reporting Center notes <blockquote>'''Events across the United States and Canada on the evening of Sunday, July 04, 2010'''  
</blockquote><blockquote>
Over the last 48 hours, NUFORC has received almost 100 similar reports of very peculiar events, which have been witnessed across the U. S. and Canada on July 4th, and perhaps on July 3rd, as well.  The sightings are a phenomenon for which we have no ready explanation.  Many of the reports from both days have been submitted by seemingly serious-minded individuals, many of whom apparently witnessed the events with multiple other witnesses present.  
</blockquote><blockquote>
To date, we have received reports of the phenomenon from the following U. S. states and Canadian provinces:  California; Connecticut; Washington, D.C.; Florida; Georgia; Illinois; Indiana; Kentucky; Massachusetts; Manitoba; Michigan; Minnesota; Missouri; North Dakota; Nebraska; New Jersey; New York; Ohio; Oklahoma; Pennsylvania; Tennessee; Texas; Virginia; Vermont; and Washington State.
</blockquote><blockquote>
The reports are similar, in that the witnesses have described seeing strange red, orange, or yellow “fireballs,” which have been seen either to hover in the night sky, or to streak overhead, sometimes individually, and on some occasions in clusters.  In some instances, the objects were observed against a clear, cloudless sky, and in other cases, they were observed below solid or broken overcast.<ref>{{citation
  | url = http://www.nuforc.org/
  | url = http://www.nuforc.org/
  | date = 6 July 2010
  | date = 6 July 2010
Line 354: Line 191:
  | publisher = National UFO Reporting Center}}</ref> </blockquote>
  | publisher = National UFO Reporting Center}}</ref> </blockquote>


The center did not plot the events by time, by location, or correlate appearance and movement versus time or observer position.  It can be noted that on the nights of July 4 in the United States, there routinely is a high incidence of unusual lights in the sky; July 4 &mdash; U.S. Independence Day &mdash; is customarily greeted with [[firework]]s.  Indeed, an exceptionally high incidence of lights in the sky was reported on July 4, 2009, by the Mutual UFO Network.<ref>{{citation
Indeed, an exceptionally high incidence of lights in the sky had been reported on July 4, 2009, by the Mutual UFO Network.<ref>{{citation
  | title =UFOs spotted over 10 states during July 4th celebrations
  | title =UFOs spotted over 10 states during July 4th celebrations
  | date = 5 July 2009
  | date = 5 July 2009
  | url = http://www.examiner.com/x-2363-UFO-Examiner~y2009m7d5-UFOs-spotted-over-10-states-during-July-4th-celebrations
  | url = http://www.examiner.com/x-2363-UFO-Examiner~y2009m7d5-UFOs-spotted-over-10-states-during-July-4th-celebrations
  | journal = Boston Examiner}}</ref>
  | journal = Boston Examiner}}</ref>
It should be noted that bright lights of normal origin, against a dark sky, can produce visual afterimages of substantial duration. Point sources can appear to have trails of light.<ref>{{citation
| title = Cognitive psychology: connecting mind, research, and everyday experience
|author =  E. Bruce Goldstein
| url = http://books.google.com/books?id=XkBoSZ0O1bwC&pg=PT180&lpg=PT180&dq=%22Persistence+of+vision%22+trail&source=bl&ots=ljrPnzRt1S&sig=e7hlbECn-I8KXLEsyp5_fJHws4s&hl=en&ei=-SZJTNO6GoH-8Aaoh_XODg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=%22Persistence%20of%20vision%22%20trail&f=false
| publisher = Wadsworth | year = 2007
}}, pp. 143-145</ref>
This is not to suggest, however, that there were no unexplainable reports among these. It is, however, extremely difficult to correlate among the witness reports. The U.S. is not covered by precision radar and there may be no other non-visual sensors. Air Traffic Control uses [[transponder]], not [[radar]], tracking.


==Cultural effects==
==Cultural effects==
Characteristics of UFO reports have changed over time. Many from the late forties, at a time when aircraft speeds were approaching new levels such as the speed of sound, emphasize the speed of the object. Later reports, when high-performance aircraft became mundane, moved more to levitation and hovering. Kenneth Arnold emphasized that his objects moved as fast as 1200 mph, a speed unattainable in 1947 but routine today. "Does this prove UFOs are unreal phantoms that blend in with their times? No. Strictly, it only proves that there is a cultural dimension in our assumptions about what constitutes the behaviour of a flying saucer. People do not report everything that is present in the sky but select only what is presumed to be interesting. What is interesting changes year to year, decade to decade, century to century. We’ve forgotten that Kenneth Arnold was interesting for reasons that no longer interest us." <ref>{{citation
UFO reports have changed over time. In the late forties, when aircraft speeds were approaching new levels such as the speed of sound, reports emphasize the speed of the object: Kenneth Arnold emphasized that his objects moved as fast as 1200 mph, a speed unattainable in 1947 but routine today. Later, when high-performance aircraft became mundane, reports more often described levitation and hovering.  Does this demonstrate that UFOs are "unreal phantoms that blend in with their times?" <ref>{{citation
  | title = Why have UFOs changed speed over the years?
  | title = Why have UFOs changed speed over the years?
  | author = Martin S. Kottmeyer    | journal = The Philosopher's Magazine
  | author = Martin S. Kottmeyer    | journal = The Philosopher's Magazine
  | date = 16 July 2010 ⋅
  | date = 16 July 2010 ⋅
  | url =http://www.philosophypress.co.uk/?p=1380}}</ref> A recent ''New York Times'' editorial, for instance, titled "Out of This World, Out of Our Minds", complete with a full-color photograph of a purported 1964 flying saucer, observes that:
  | url =http://www.philosophypress.co.uk/?p=1380}}</ref> Probably, but not necessarily: it only proves that there is a cultural dimension in our assumptions about what constitutes unusual behaviour. A ''New York Times'' editorial titled "Out of This World, Out of Our Minds" observed that:


<blockquote>...our cultural love affair with little green men has gone through the stages of many passionate relationships—the fear and hopefulness of "The Day The Earth Stood Still" in 1951; the quirky cuddliness of Ray Walston as "My Favorite Martian" in the '60s. We laugh, we cry, and then we scream again.<br/><br/>
<blockquote>...But these days,... "The 'Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Sky' no longer resonates with the public the way it did when a tricorder or talking computers seemed miraculous," he said.<ref>"Out of This World, Out of Our Minds," by John Schwartz, ''The New York Times'', editorial page, July 2, 2010, at [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/04/weekinreview/04schwartz.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=+cellphone%20+UFO&st=cse]</ref></blockquote>


Off screen, however, we seem to have drifted apart: sightings rarely capture the popular imagination. Now that cellphone cameras are all but ubiquitous, there isn’t a moment that can’t be snapped—so if the truth really were out there, we’d see it. And we haven't.<br/><br/>
==Scientific consensus==
 
In 1975, Brinsley le Poer Trench inherited the title Lord Clancarty and took up his seat in the House of Lords. In 1979, he persuaded the House to debate the subject of UFOs, believing that the public should be prepared for imminent contact with extra-terrestrials. The debate covered such issues as whether the inhabitants of other worlds have immortal souls, and allowed members of the peerage opportunities to recount their own sightings. Lord Hewlett made one of the few who represented the scientific consensus in the debate. Explaining that he had been briefed by Sir Bernard Lovell, Fellow of the Royal Society and Nuffield Professor of Radio Astronomy at Manchester University Department of Radio Astronomy and director of the Jodrell Bank radio observatory, he said:
That isn't to say that the number of sightings has dwindled. Groups like the National UFO Reporting Center receive hundreds of reports each month, and The ''[[Weekly World News]]'' supplies the latest in otherworldly headlines. ("Alien Tells Larry King to Leave CNN," the newspaper reported on June 29.)<br/><br/>
<blockquote>
 
''"Of all the thousands of reports of sightings that have been made, whenever it has been possible to make an investigation they have been found to be natural phenomena, or ... pure myth. Over the United Kingdom, Jodrell Bank's radio telescope, the first and still one of the most powerful in the world, has observed thousands of possible subjects for identification as UFOs. but not a single one has proved other than natural phenomena...
...But these days, U.F.O. sightings rarely cause a stir outside of Mr. McGinness’s pages or Web sites for buffs, says [[John Pike]] of GlobalSecurity.org. "The 'Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Sky' no longer resonates with the public the way it did when a tricorder or talking computers seemed miraculous," he said.<ref>"Out of This World, Out of Our Minds," by John Schwartz, ''The New York Times'', editorial page, July 2, 2010, at [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/04/weekinreview/04schwartz.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=+cellphone%20+UFO&st=cse]</ref></blockquote>
</blockquote>
 
He explained that the great majority of reports can be attributed to the entry into the atmosphere of meteorites or more rarely, space debris.
While the public eye has been most attracted by close encounters, the [[Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence]] project emphasizes a systematic search for radio signals.
<blockquote>
"Just take a tiny country like Holland. One hundred rocks the size of your fist come through the atmosphere and hit that country in one year. Consider Holland in relation to the size of the whole of the world's surface and you must surely realise that we are under constant bombardment, not with UFOs but with meteorites." <ref>[http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1979/jan/18/unidentified-flying-objects#S5LV0397P0_19790118_HOL_432
] from the Hansard transcript of House of Lords debate on unidentified flying objects 18th January 1979</ref>
</blockquote>


== References==
== References==
{{reflist|2}}
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category:Suggestion Bot Tag]]

Latest revision as of 16:01, 2 November 2024

This article is developing and not approved.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Catalogs [?]
 
https://en.citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Unidentified_flying_object&printable=yes
This editable Main Article is under development and subject to a disclaimer.
See also: Extraterrestrial intelligence

Unidentified flying objects (UFOs or U.F.O.s) are aerial phenomena that cannot be readily explained. Most sightings of "UFO"s turn out to be explained by aircraft, birds, heavenly bodies, or other everyday objects. Some can be explained as errors produced by a radar, electro-optical device, or other sensor, some arise from sensory illusions, and some are hoaxes. All investigators concede that some aerial sightings remain unexplained even after examination, but most dismiss the notion that there is any credible evidence that Earth is being, or has been, visited by creatures from other worlds.

The Kenneth Arnold sighting

UFOs became popularly known as flying saucers after a story in the East Oregonian newspaper, on June 26, 1947, reported salesman Kenneth Arnold's sighting of extremely fast-moving, "saucer-like objects" while flying a private plane.[1] A follow-up newspaper story coined the term "flying saucer" to describe the objects that Arnold reported sighting. [2]

In the USA, sightings increased sharply after the Kenneth Arnold sighting, and most were conflated into claims of "flying saucers" or other "vehicles from outer space" that some believed were directed by extraterrestrial intelligences—some skeptics called this "mass hysteria" or "mass delusion".[3] In 1947 the U.S. government began studying them, often in classified projects.

The Roswell incident

"The Air Force research did not locate or develop any information that the "Roswell Incident" was a UFO event nor was there any indication of a "cover-up" by the Government. Information obtained through exhaustive records searches and interviews indicated that the materials recovered near Roswell was consistent with a balloon devise of the type used in a then classified project. No records indicated or even hinted at the recovery of "alien" bodies or extraterrestrial materials." [4][5]

In July 1947, a press release, issued by the Roswell Army Air Field (RAAF) public information officer, stated that the field's 509th Bomb Group had recovered a crashed "flying disk" from a ranch near Roswell, New Mexico. The next day, the press reported the Commanding General of the Eighth Air Force as stating that, in fact, a radar-tracking balloon had been recovered by the RAAF personnel, not a "flying disc." A press conference was shown debris from the crashed object, which seemed to confirm the weather balloon description.

However, thirty years later, in 1978, Major Jesse Marcel, who had been involved with the original recovery of the debris, was interviewed by a ufologist, Stanton T. Friedman. In that interview, Marcel claimed that the military had covered up the recovery of an alien spacecraft. The story was rapidly embellished with allegations of further cover-ups, autopsies of alien bodies, and intimidation of witnesses.

After congressional pressure, the General Accounting Office directed the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force to conduct an investigation. This led to two reports. "The Roswell Report: Fact vs. Fiction in the New Mexico Desert" concluded that the material recovered in 1947 was probably debris from a secret government program, 'Project Mogul', which used high altitude balloons to detect sound waves generated by Soviet atomic bomb tests and ballistic missiles. The second report, released in 1997, concluded that reports of recovered alien bodies were probably a combination of mistaken memories of military accidents and of the recovery of anthropomorphic dummies in military programs, and hoaxes perpetrated by witnesses and UFO proponents.[6] The Center for UFO Studies (see below) disputes this report.[7]

Ufology

For more information, see: Ufology.

There is a movement, loosely called ufology or Ufology, that investigates and reports phenomena. Much of the reporting is anecdotal and unscientific, but some of the leadership of UFO research centers, such as Mark Rodeghier of the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS), the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) and French born UFO researcher Jacques Vallée, participate in much more technical discussions, such as the 1997 symposium on physical evidence from UFOs. Physicist Stanton Friedman is an established UFO researcher.[8] [9] Another is physicist Dr. Bruce Maccabee, who was a member of National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) and who later started the Fund for UFO Research. Maccabee has investigated numerous UFO sightings including the Kennet Arnold UFO sighting, the JAL UFO sighting, the Iran Jet case in 1976 and the Gulf Breeze UFO sightings.[10] [11]

Other organizations, such as the Society for Scientific Exploration (SSE), study UFOs, but not as their sole focus. Peter Sturrock, now Emeritus Professor of Physics at Stanford University, who directed the 1997 "Physical Evidence from UFO Reports" study, "expressed the opinion that this problem will be resolved only by extensive and open professional scientific investigation, and that an essential prerequisite of such research is that more scientists acquire an interest in this topic." [12] However, Philip Klass has written that "SSE's annual conferences typically feature several pro-UFO speakers, but no UFO-skeptics. For example, at SSE's 1996 conference there were four pro-UFO speakers, but no skeptics.[13]

In June 2010, James Carrion, formerly international director of the Mutual UFO Network, set up the Center for UFO Truth, to "answer one question – did the United States and its allies purposely create the UFO myth as part of a cold war deception operation? It makes sense to include the subject of CUT's research efforts in its title." [14]

Project BLUE BOOK

A panel of the National Academy of Sciences reviewed the Condon report, and observed
"there remain UFO sightings that are not easily explained ...[but]... there seems to be no reason to attribute them to an extraterrestrial source without evidence that is much more convincing. ... On the basis of present knowledge the least likely explanation of UFOs is the hypothesis of extraterrestrial visitations by intelligent beings."[15]

In 1947, the United States Air Force began 'Project Blue Book' to collate UFO sightings. It was terminated after the Condon Report (see later) led the Secretary of the Air Force to decide there was no national security value to continuing investigations. A total of 12,618 sightings were reported to the Project, of which 701 remained "Unidentified." [16] Records of the project are in the U.S. National Archives.[4]

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) documents indicate that the agency monitored the UFO situation from 1952.[17] In 1952, the CIA reacted to the new rash of sightings by forming a special study group within the Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI) and the Office of Current Intelligence (OCI). Edward Tauss reported for the group that most UFO sightings could be easily explained, but recommended that the Agency continue monitoring the problem, in coordination with the Air Force Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC). He also urged that CIA conceal its interest from the media and the public, "in view of their probable alarmist tendencies".

Upon receiving the report, Deputy Director for Intelligence (DDI) Robert Amory, Jr. assigned responsibility for the UFO investigations to OSI's Physics and Electronics Division. Amory, who asked the group to focus on the national security implications of UFOs, was relaying DCI Walter Bedell Smith's concerns. Smith wanted to know whether or not the Air Force investigation of flying saucers was sufficiently objective and how much more money and manpower would be necessary to determine the cause of the small percentage of unexplained flying saucers. Smith believed "there was only one chance in 10,000 that the phenomenon posed a threat to the security of the country, but even that chance could not be taken." According to Smith, it was CIA's responsibility by statute to coordinate the intelligence effort required to solve the problem. Smith also wanted to know what use could be made of the UFO phenomenon in connection with US psychological warfare efforts.

After the BLUE BOOK report, in 1967, the Air Force issued a contract, to the University of Colorado, for the study of UFOs. The principal investigator from the University was Dr. E.U. Condon, director of the National Bureau of Standards from 1946 to 1950. The project gained some support from the Central Intelligence Agency.[18] The 'Condon Report' was published in 1969.[19]

UFO Classification

Hynek's Classification

  • Nocturnal Disks: Objects seen in the night sky. This is the most commonly reported UFO sighting.
  • Daylight Disks: UFOs that could be seen flying high in the sky or close to the ground. Oval or round disks are commonly seen with this type of UFO sighting.
  • Radar Visual: UFOs that are seen on radar screens while also being visually confirmed by eyewitnesses on the ground.
  • Close Encounter of the First Kind: UFOs that are seen within 200 yards of the witness. There is no interaction between the witness and the UFO.
  • Close Encounter of the Second Kind: Electrical equipment such as a car ignition may operate strangely. Other electrical equipment may malfunction while the UFO is present. Other forms of interaction may include physical effects to plants, animals or human beings. There could be traces of burned grass for example in a Close Encounter of the Second Kind.
  • Close Encounter of the Third Kind: Seeing humanoid like creatures associated with the UFO. There is usually no interaction between the human witness and the humanoid. In some reports there have been interactions reported between the UFO witness and the humanoids.[20]
  • Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind: Interaction between the UFO witness and abduction by humanoid entities.[21]

Jacques Vallee's UFO Classification

  • AN1: Viewing anomalous lights or explosions in the sky that do not affect the witness or the environment.
  • AN2: Reports that show lasting effects such as flattened grass, poltergeist activity or anomalous photographs.
  • AN3: Cases that include entities. This could include ghosts, yetis (Abominable Snowman), elves, spirits and cryptozoology.
  • AN4: The witness reports interaction with the entities within the reality of the entities themselves. This type of experience could include Near Death Experiences, religious visions and out-of-body experiences (OBEs).[22]

French Space Agency Classification

In 1977 the French space agency, CNES, set up a unit to record witness accounts of abnormal phenomena observed in the sky. [23] [24] They noted there is a perfectly normal explanation for the vast majority of “sightings”, such as the Moon rising, unusual clouds or space debris re-entering the atmosphere. They classified 1600 sightings into four categories:

  • Type A: Complete identification of the phenomenon
  • Type B: Probable identification.
  • Type C: Inadequate information for analysis
  • Type D: Observations are consistent and accurate but cannot be explained in terms of conventional phenomena. 9% of sightings were in this category.

In the USA, there are two well known UFO groups: the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) founded by J. Allen Hynek, who was the chairman of astronomy at Northwestern University, and the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) lead by Allen Utke, Associate Professor of Chemistry at Wisconsin State University. Hynek originally doubted that the reports had any substance, but later changed his mind during his research with Project BLUE BOOK.[25]. CUFOS collects UFO reports, maintains a UFO research library, and offers two publications concerning the UFO phenomena. There are two major systems for classifying the reports, first based on shape and other visually observed characteristics, movement, and interaction with the environment or possible entities. In addition, some large data bases categorize by shape or other aspects of visual observations. Some of these classifications assume not only an object that could not be explained, but also indications of a nonhuman intelligence. [26][27]

UFOs have been reported in varying shapes and colors. According to the 'National UFO Reporting Center' (as of July 2010), 12,023 lights have been reported by witnesses, 6,020 triangles, 5,181 circles and 4,784 disks .[28] Reports in the database are transcriptions of witness self-reports and are not evaluated.[29]

The home page of the National UFO Reporting Center noted (with tongue firmly in cheek) 'Events across the United States and Canada on the evening of Sunday, July 04, 2010.'

"Over the last 48 hours, NUFORC has received almost 100 similar reports of very peculiar events, which have been witnessed across the U.S. and Canada on July 4th, and perhaps on July 3rd, as well. The sightings are a phenomenon for which we have no ready explanation. Many of the reports from both days have been submitted by seemingly serious-minded individuals, many of whom apparently witnessed the events with multiple other witnesses present. The reports are similar, in that the witnesses have described seeing strange red, orange, or yellow “fireballs,” which have been seen either to hover in the night sky, or to streak overhead, sometimes individually, and on some occasions in clusters. In some instances, the objects were observed against a clear, cloudless sky, and in other cases, they were observed below solid or broken overcast."[30]

Indeed, an exceptionally high incidence of lights in the sky had been reported on July 4, 2009, by the Mutual UFO Network.[31]

Cultural effects

UFO reports have changed over time. In the late forties, when aircraft speeds were approaching new levels such as the speed of sound, reports emphasize the speed of the object: Kenneth Arnold emphasized that his objects moved as fast as 1200 mph, a speed unattainable in 1947 but routine today. Later, when high-performance aircraft became mundane, reports more often described levitation and hovering. Does this demonstrate that UFOs are "unreal phantoms that blend in with their times?" [32] Probably, but not necessarily: it only proves that there is a cultural dimension in our assumptions about what constitutes unusual behaviour. A New York Times editorial titled "Out of This World, Out of Our Minds" observed that:

...But these days,... "The 'Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Sky' no longer resonates with the public the way it did when a tricorder or talking computers seemed miraculous," he said.[33]

Scientific consensus

In 1975, Brinsley le Poer Trench inherited the title Lord Clancarty and took up his seat in the House of Lords. In 1979, he persuaded the House to debate the subject of UFOs, believing that the public should be prepared for imminent contact with extra-terrestrials. The debate covered such issues as whether the inhabitants of other worlds have immortal souls, and allowed members of the peerage opportunities to recount their own sightings. Lord Hewlett made one of the few who represented the scientific consensus in the debate. Explaining that he had been briefed by Sir Bernard Lovell, Fellow of the Royal Society and Nuffield Professor of Radio Astronomy at Manchester University Department of Radio Astronomy and director of the Jodrell Bank radio observatory, he said:

"Of all the thousands of reports of sightings that have been made, whenever it has been possible to make an investigation they have been found to be natural phenomena, or ... pure myth. Over the United Kingdom, Jodrell Bank's radio telescope, the first and still one of the most powerful in the world, has observed thousands of possible subjects for identification as UFOs. but not a single one has proved other than natural phenomena...

He explained that the great majority of reports can be attributed to the entry into the atmosphere of meteorites or more rarely, space debris.

"Just take a tiny country like Holland. One hundred rocks the size of your fist come through the atmosphere and hit that country in one year. Consider Holland in relation to the size of the whole of the world's surface and you must surely realise that we are under constant bombardment, not with UFOs but with meteorites." [34]

References

  1. ↑ Bill Bequette (26 June 1947), Boise Flyer Maintains He Saw 'Em, Pendleton, Oregon East Oregonian
  2. ↑ Unidentified Flying Objects - Project Grudge, Technical Report No. 102-AC-49/15-100. Unidentified Flying Objects, United States Air Force Project Grudge, Technical Report No. 102-AC-49/15-100. Frequently Asked Questions, Mutual UFO Network (MUFON)
  3. ↑ Robert E. Bartholomew and Erich Goode (May-June 2000), Mass Delusions and Hysterias: Highlights from the Past Millennium, vol. 24.3, Committee for Skeptical Inquiry
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Unidentified Flying Objects - Project BLUE BOOK, National Archives and Records Administration
  5. ↑ [http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/roswell.html Government Records: Results of a Search for Records Concerning the 1947 Crash Near Roswell, New Mexico (Letter Report, 07/28/95, GAO/NSIAD-95-187)] Government Accounting Office.
  6. ↑ The Roswell Incident, New Mexicans for Science and Reason
  7. ↑ Mark Rodeghier, The Center For UFO Studies Response To The Air Force’s 1997 Report, The Roswell Report: Case Closed, J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS)
  8. ↑ Stanton Friedman - Biography. Retrieved on 2011-01-02.
  9. ↑ "Stanton Friedman" - Google Search. Retrieved on 2011-01-02.
  10. ↑ Dr. Bruce Maccabee Research Website. Retrieved on 2011-01-02.
  11. ↑ . Bruce Maccabee - Google Search. Retrieved on 2011-01-02.
  12. ↑ Peter Sturrock et al. (1998), "Physical Evidence from UFO Reports", Journal of Scientific Exploration 12 (2): 179-229
  13. ↑ Philip J. Klass (1 September 1998), "Best UFO Cases Fail To Provide Credible Evidence Of ET Visitors, According To Scientific Review Panel Convened By Pro-UFO Physicist", The Skeptics UFO Newsletter 53
  14. ↑ Announcements: Frequently Asked Questions, Center for UFO Truth, 28 June 2010
  15. ↑ Review of the University of Colorado Report on Unidentified Flying Objects by a Panel of the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Sciences, 1969
  16. ↑ U.S. Air Force Fact Sheet Concerning UFO's and Project BLUE BOOK, National Archives and Records Administration, January 1985
  17. ↑ Gerald K. Haines, "CIA's Role in the Study of UFOs, 1947-90: A Die-Hard Issue", Studies in Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency
  18. ↑ Visit of Dr. Condon to NPIC, 20 February 1967. Retrieved on 2007-10-29.
  19. ↑ Peter Sturrock (1987), "An Analysis of the Condon Report on the Colorado UFO Project", J. Scientific Exploration 1 (1): 75
  20. ↑ http://www.cufos.org/HynekClass.html
  21. ↑ http://jacquesvallee.net/bookdocs/classif.pdf
  22. ↑ http://jacquesvallee.net/bookdocs/classif.pdf
  23. ↑ Le Geipan, the French [unidentified aerospace phenomena UAP research and information group], Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES)
  24. ↑ GEIPAN UAP investigation unit opens its files, CNES, 26 March 2007
  25. ↑ Center for UFO Studies
  26. ↑ J.Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies
  27. ↑ Jacques F. Vallée (April 2007), A System of Classification and Reliability Indicators for the Analysis of the Behavior of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena
  28. ↑ Report Index by Shape of Craft, National UFO Report Center
  29. ↑ National UFO Reporting Center Web Reports. Retrieved on 2010-08-31.
  30. ↑ Events across the United States and Canada on the evening of Sunday, July 04, 2010, National UFO Reporting Center, 6 July 2010
  31. ↑ "UFOs spotted over 10 states during July 4th celebrations", Boston Examiner, 5 July 2009
  32. ↑ Martin S. Kottmeyer (16 July 2010 ⋅), "Why have UFOs changed speed over the years?", The Philosopher's Magazine
  33. ↑ "Out of This World, Out of Our Minds," by John Schwartz, The New York Times, editorial page, July 2, 2010, at [1]
  34. ↑ [http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1979/jan/18/unidentified-flying-objects#S5LV0397P0_19790118_HOL_432 ] from the Hansard transcript of House of Lords debate on unidentified flying objects 18th January 1979
Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Unidentified_flying_object&oldid=992567"