The CIA UFO Papers

by Dan Wright

  NPIC's assumptions and conclusion:

  The UFO was a quarter-mile away.

  Measurements supplied by the officer were accurate.

  The photos were full-format.

  The object shot was circular with a plane of tail section perpendicular to the camera.

  Adjustments to the camera focal length were not necessary.

  An artist's conception offered approximate dimensions based on certain assumptions. “The quality of the photography, the crude estimation of the distance from the camera station to the object, the lack of original prints and precise camera data all tend to invalidate the answers.” No definite evidence of a hoax was present. “On the other hand, for one to assume that this object is a UFO is equally as dangerous.... [T]he photo analysis of this UFO photograph has resulted in inconclusive answers.”9

  A nearly illegible memo concerned the photographic analysis of five non-original prints. The NPIC conclusion: “None definite. To decide the authenticity of the image as being a UFO is not possible from the furnished prints. It is possible that an analysis of the original photograph would provide added information which would enable a definite conclusion.”10

  The Air Force's contract with the University of Colorado named General Edward Gillers [sic] as senior contact, Dr. Thomas Rachford [sic] as senior Air Force scientist, and Dr. Edward Condon as senior UC scientist. On February 20, 1967, Condon and four team members visited NPIC to familiarize the team with photogrammetric and photographic analysis capabilities. A clearance level of Secret was declared for the meeting. The center redoubled its sideline capacity: “Any work performed by NPIC to assist Dr. Condon in his investigation will not be identified as work accomplished by CIA.” NPIC would not prepare written comments, draw any conclusion, or prepare written reports. Its assistance would be strictly technical.11

  NPIC briefings at the February 20 session included: (a) what photo-grammetry is and what it can do; (b) problems encountered when basic information was not known, for example, camera focal length, camera make, unspecified enlargements; (c) microdensitometer and image analysis; (d) isodensitometer experiments; and (e) measuring instruments.

  The fourth edition of the Agency's [massive] topical index, called the Intelligence Subject Code, listed “UFO” and “Unidentified Flying Objects” in alphabetical order, both with the numerical code 657.260—seemingly added in March 1965. In the listing of “Subject Modifiers in Numerical Order,” 079 was shown as “Possible, Suspicious, Unusual Sites or Sightings, Activities or Events,” apparently added in February 1961.12

  As the third item of a non-sourced anonymous report, the writer stated that, on February 20, 1967, Dr. Edward Condon and his group toured the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC) and received a demonstration of photo analysis techniques. The sixth item, mensuration (geometric measurement) of unnamed photographic prints was closed with no conclusion reached regarding authenticity of the image. Note: All remaining items in the report were redacted.13

  In a March 1967 piece, Look magazine printed a stern assessment by Warren Rogers regarding the Air Force's handling of UFO cases. Air Force Intelligence and the CIA had jointly addressed UFOs beginning December 30, 1947. Months later code name Sign was changed to Grudge, then, on August 1, 1952, to Project Blue Book. Its two officers (later reduced to one) and one sergeant took reports from 100+ military bases plus the Pentagon. Very few cases were directly investigated. Largely the unit compiled data for annual reports to the USAF chief of information. “Every now and then ... the Pentagon was hit by a wave of flying- saucer stories, and mostly it was failing to cope.” By 1966 the Air Force was mocked by the press and the public and was ready to pass the baton.14

  The University of Colorado UFO study group employed five physicists and three psychologists. Over a hundred UC scientists were available for ad hoc assignments. Dr. Robert Low was effectively chief of staff. Condon claimed no preconceptions but declared, “I won't believe in outer-space saucers until I see one, touch one, get inside one, haul it into a laboratory, and get some competent people to go over it with me.” If unable to do that, Condon would inherit the Air Force problem, Rogers said, criticized by “the fanatics who have made them a religion, the hallucinated—the whole gamut of oddballs and hustlers.”15

  Dr. Carl Sagan, a Harvard astronomer, brought in a religious angle: “The saucer myths represent a neat compromise between the need to believe in a traditional paternal God and the contemporary pressures to accept the pronouncements of science.”16

  Condon realized the UFO problem meant trying to prove a negative. He believed 90 percent of reports were misidentified everyday objects but also that 10–20 times as many sightings were never reported. Blue Book bungled cases, spoke up only after major press coverage, or never spoke at all. Of 10,147 official reports between 1947 and 1965, Blue Book left 646 unidentified—303 in 1952 alone. The contract with the University of Colorado would expire in early 1968 with a formal report from Condon's group, which the National Academy of Sciences would review.

  Skeptic Philip Klass, Aviation Week & Space Technology editor, who initially dismissed all UFO reports as ball lightning, had by now expanded that into an identified flying objects (IFO) list including clouds of charged dust or ice particles, dust devils, or light shining on any of those. Astronomer J. Allen Hynek and physicist James E. McDonald both applauded the appointment of Condon to sort it all out.

  McDonald—de facto inheritor of Donald Keyhoe's mantle of chief critic—was back on the stump. In late April the University of Arizona atmospheric physicist told an assembly of newspaper editors that in 1953 the CIA had proposed a systematic “debunking of flying saucers” in order to reduce public interest. He said he stumbled upon and examined the classified report instructing the Air Force to challenge and disallow sightings by the public; the Agency later refused his request to declassify the sensitive declaration. That was “entirely understandable when seen from a solely national security viewpoint,” McDonald interjected.17

  In a speech to the American Meteorological Society, McDonald called the extraterrestrial hypothesis “the least unsatisfactory.” He said a flood of UFO reports to air bases in 1952 elevated UFOs to a security risk with the potential to clog channels of communication and strain investigative staff. Consequently, Air Force Regulation 200-2 forbade air bases from giving out information; sighting reports were to go through Blue Book; that would reduce public input. Of those reaching the Air Force, McDonald said most were “categorized as conventional objects with little attention to scientific principles.” Another regulation criminalized the release of UFO information by military personnel and even airline pilots. McDonald said these regulations “have not only cut off almost all useful reports from military pilots, tower operators, and ground crews, but even more serious from a scientific viewpoint, has been the drastic effect on the availability of military radar data on UFO's.”18

  McDonald said CIA officials initially suspected UFOs were from a hostile foreign power—a notion since discounted. He claimed the country was misled, while the problem was mishandled and Project Blue Book then downgraded to low priority. But he believed “scientific and official concern is beginning to change.” The University of Colorado/Condon study was a good start, he added, “but they have not taken the problem seriously enough to muster the scientific strength to do justice to the problem.” Air Force Major Hector Quintanilla, Blue Book chief, disputed McDonald's assertions. He said UFOs did not threaten national security, represent futuristic technology, or come from beyond Earth.19

  The Boston Herald expanded on Dr. McDonald's assertions in an April 24 editorial titled “UFO's and the CIA.” The charge by a science professor that the CIA ordered the Air Force to debunk UFO reports “raises again the question of the role of the CIA in domestic policy-making.” In summary, the editorial board observed, “The CIA is by law an intelligence-gathering agency restricted from interfering with the internal affairs of the country. In its activities w
ith student organizations and labor unions, however, and with its attempt to censor UFO reports, it has disregarded these restrictions.” Congress had to take actions to control it.20

  A particular division chief, (redacted), at NPIC summarized the testing of photographs taken at Zanesville, Ohio. [Note: A Zanesville barber and amateur astronomer concocted two fake daytime photos of a saucer-like object, which he initially claimed hovered over the town on November 13, 1966. He later confessed to the hoax.] Also present were Drs. Robert Lowe, University of Colorado (UC); William Hartman, University of Arizona; Charles Reed, National Research Council; J. Thomas Ratchford, USAF; and (redacted). All attendees were said to be enthusiastic. The examination included ground survey techniques, a new mathematical analysis, photo-grammetry, and densitometric traces. “Dr. Condon stated he had for the first time a scientific analysis of a UFO that would stand up to investigation.” The group questioned (redacted) and were said to be very impressed. Dr. Low at UC would contractually arrange his continued work for both UC and the Air Force. Dr. Condon wished to “keep a channel open into [NPIC].”21

  They all agreed the photogrammetric method needed more publicity. Analyzing all the strong NICAP photos was suggested. “This would put Dr. Condon in a position to say that he had reviewed and analyzed all the photography in NICAP files, and was now depending on the American public to furnish him new photography.” Also discussed was the prospect of making Polaroid cameras available to police, military posts, airline pilots, and others. The report on the Zanesville photos would be sent to Drs. Condon and Ratchford soon.22

  Two months later the Philadelphia (PA) Inquirer captured McDonald's remarks to Australian reporters. He was down under primarily to interview UFO eyewitnesses—among some 500 persons who related their accounts to him over time. The physicist told newsmen that scientific proof of flying saucers and the acceptance of their existence had been delayed by a deliberate debunking program arranged by many governments and CIA-backed. He said the Agency was “trying to sweep the problem under the carpet.”23

  Attached to a non-sourced note from (redacted) to “Walt” in the OSI (presumably Walter Pforzheimer, general counsel) was a letter (not shown) from “the Englishman” who had written to the Vice President. OSI's comments were sought. The letter had been shared with security staff. Dr. James McDonald in a lecture in Australia had issued the same charge—that the CIA was continuing to debunk UFO reports from the public.24

  A July 18 memo was sent to “Mr. Duckett” (presumably Carl E. Duckett, head of the CIA's Foreign Missile and Space Analysis Center) from an anonymous party. The communication concerned an upcoming meeting of a group calling itself “1,000” and confirmed those to be in attendance (all redacted). The writer had asked OSI for, and was assured a copy of, the 1953 Robertson Panel Report, which would be shared at the meeting.25

  The same day, John A. Larson of the Brookings Institution wrote to Vice Admiral Rufus L. Taylor, CIA Deputy Director. Larson thanked Taylor for hosting a lecture. He noted a question posed at the session regarding Russian belief in UFOs.26

  In a “Reply to Vice President's Letter from (redacted),” prepared July 19, 1967, for Mr. Duckett (presumably Carl E. Duckett), the writer recommended that the vice president be implored to ignore (redacted's) letter. If the VP did reply, it should be noncommittal, remarking that the person's letter was forwarded to the Air Force. Five earlier responses to the same letter writer had indicated the CIA was no longer involved with the UFO problem.

  The writer also mentioned that Dr. James McDonald was gaining press attention for lectures that accused the CIA of concealing the complete Robertson Panel Report. Did the Agency “wish to release the report and put out any further fires ...?”27

  An Information Report from inside the Soviet Union spoke of interactions with scientists there on the UFO subject. A radio astronomer knew of no anomalies, while an astronomer had heard of an incident in the Caucasus. “The general feeling one gets is that no official treatment of the UFO problem has been given in the USSR.... At the same time, there is almost a universal awareness of the history and characteristics of the phenomenon often associated with considerable interest.” The writer then offered a treatise on Soviet theories.28

  The Arizona Daily Star was the source of selected quotes from Dr. James McDonald's speech to the American Society of Newspaper Editors:

  “This is not a nonsense problem, as it has been made out. A lot of you have had fun, I suppose, writing feature stories about little green men and hoaxers and so on. Believe me, that is the wrong part of this problem to look at.”

  “The problem has been misrepresented by many interacting factors including yourselves and scientists such as myself.”

  “My examination of the problem strongly indicates that the Air Force expertise has had very little to do with Project Blue Book, and that this is the heart of the trouble.”

  “Project Blue Book ... tells you that there is nothing in the unidentified flying objects that defies present-day explanation in terms of science and technology, that's balderdash; it is utter rot, I assure you.”

  “People have suggested that maybe Blue Book is only a front organization and doesn't know that it's only a front organization.... I do not think it is a grand coverup. It is a grand foul-up.. .”

  “The swamp gas theory is nonsense.”

  “There are many radar sightings. This would be an immediate objective source of information ... There are a number of electromagnetic effects known in the evidence—car-stopping cases, for instance.”

  As to pilot sightings, Dr. McDonald asserted, “... Once the Air Force began to discredit—and they have, in some cases unmercifully discredited them—that source of information pretty much dried up.”29

  At the same conference, astronomer and astrophysicist Donald Menzel outlined many IFO sources, from physical to optical to hallucinatory.

  I think it is time for the Air Force to wrap up Project Blue Book. It has produced little of scientific value. Keeping it going only fosters the belief of persons that the Air Force must have found something to substantiate belief in the UFO's.... [I]t's time that we put an end to chasing ghosts, hobgoblins, visions, and hallucinations.30

  Further considerations pro and con: UFO accounts had no credence because they violated principles of science. Reported UFOs could not be under extraterrestrial control if the laws of physics were valid. Presumably, intelligent life forms existed elsewhere, some of them perhaps more advanced technically than humans. Hynek had asserted that some of the most coherent UFO reports arose increasingly from scientifically trained witnesses, many of whom were at close range, within roughly 500 feet, of the unconventional vehicle or aerial display. Newton explained the effects of gravitation, while Einstein developed equations for relativity at high speeds. A vehicle moved only if its thrust exceeded its mass. Acceleration increased as fuel/propellant was expelled and the mass reduced. Manned exploration of the planets would be difficult indeed with chemical rockets alone. Ion propulsion and nuclear engines were better suited. But to land and lift off again using, say, nuclear power, would produce substantial, detectable nuclear decay.

  The October 1967 issue of Flying Saucers, UFO Reports, comprising a dozen articles and 68 pages, was submitted. The articles are briefly summarized:

  “If Anyone Asks.” The author outlined landings at Cherry Creek, New York (8/19/65); Erie, Pennsylvania (8/1/66); and Pretoria, South Africa (9/65). Radar cases included Goose AFB, Newfoundland (6/19/52); Oneida AFB, Japan (8/5/52); Wichita, Kansas (8/1/65); Gulf of Mexico (12/6/52); and Custer, Washington (1/12/65).

  Astronomers with personal sightings included Frank Halstead, Walter Webb, and Clyde Tombaugh. Among pilot sightings, the Kenneth Arnold event, Mount Rainier, Washington, (6/24/47) was detailed. The author added, “Airline pilots have been the source of some of the most informative reports that are on record with the Air Force ...” The July 1952 radar, pilot, and ground sightings around Washington, D.C., were also re
viewed.

  “5 That Will Curl Your Hair.” A series of controversial/dubious accounts of Close Encounters of the Third Kind (entity sightings) was outlined.

  “Like the Flight of a Bat.” The alleged January 16, 1958, Trindade Island encounter by the crew of the Brazilian Navy ship Almirante Saldanha was portrayed.

  “I'm Still Climbing.” This account concerned the January 7, 1948, aerial pursuit and death of F-51 pilot Thomas Mantell. His plane exploded in mid-air, but the cause of the crash was listed as oxygen debt. The Air Force initially called his alleged target Venus then changed that to a Skyhook balloon. Note: Whether Mantell had an oxygen supply onboard has been long debated.

  “Maybe I've Seen the Devil.” Socorro, New Mexico, police officer Lonnie Zamora's CE-3 (entity encounter), April 24, 1964, was reviewed. Project Blue Book left his account unchallenged.

  “The Missing Hours between Indian Head and Ashland.” The account of a CE-4 (abduction) of Betty and Barney Hill on September 19-20, 1961, was outlined.

  “Flap in Michigan.” The Michigan events of March 20 and 21-22, 1966, on a Dexter farm and near a Hillsdale College dormitory, respectively, were detailed. Dispatched by the USAF's Project Blue Book hurriedly to the scenes, astronomer J. Allen Hynek's “swamp gas” conclusion was mocked by the 100+ witnesses including the Hillsdale coeds, police, and local government officials. Note: Seven years later, Hynek founded the Center for UFO Studies, which now bears his name.

  “Hello, Out There.” Speculations were offered on the prospect of intelligent life elsewhere and the chance of humankind making contact.

  “If You Can't Sight 'em—Coin 'em.” The article outlined hoax scenarios, using dinner plates and a garbage can lid.

  “Coming In for a Charge.” Electrical outages connected to UFO incidents were discussed. The Exeter, New Hampshire, incident of an object physically touching a power line was featured. In a November 1957 flap, NICAP recorded electrical outages at Levelland, Texas; Ararangua, Brazil; Kodiak, Alaska; Fort Olgethorpe, Georgia; Santa Fe, New Mexico; Hammond, Indiana; and Lemmon, South Dakota.