American Association for the Advancement of Science - 1969 Symposium

Hi all,

As a comparison to the recent blog posts on the former SIGMA and the current SIGMA2 of the French 3AF (click here and here) , I also drew readers' attention to the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics' three year study (1967-1970) of UAP (click here.)  One of the reasons for doing this, was to see if we had made any advances in methodology and findings, over the ensuing 44 years. I was then reminded that the American Association for the Advancement of Science (click here), held a symposium on UAP in 1969.

To refresh my own memory, and for the benefit of blog readers who may never have come across that Symposium, I turned to "UFOs:A Scientific Debate" edited by Carl Sagan (click here) and Thornton Page (click here.) The book was published by Cornell University Press, Ithica, in 1972. ISBN 0-8014-0740-0 (click here.)

"In the year preceding the publication of the Condon Report, the editors of this book approached the American Association for the Advancement of Science with the idea of organizing a general symposium at an annual meeting of the Association to discuss the UFO issue. The AAAS Board approved such a symposium for the December 1968 meeting in Dallas...the Symposium was postponed for a year and was finally held on December 26 and 27, 1969, at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Boston." (p.xii.)

The aim of the Symposium was:

"...to bring the various facts on UFOs to the attention of scientists and to show enthusiasts the implications of the very much better organized facts in the physical, biological and social sciences..." (p.3.)

The talks presented at the Symposium were:

Robert L Baker. "Motion Pictures of UFOs."
Frank D Drake. "On the Abilities and Limitations of Witnesses of UFOs and Similar Phenomenon."
Lester Grinspoon and Alan D Persky. "Psychiatry and UFO Reports."
Robert L Hall. "Sociological Perspectives on UFO Reports."
Kenneth R Hardy. "Unusual Radar Echoes."
William K Hartmann. "Historical Perspectives: Photos of UFOs."
J Allen Hynek. "Twenty-One Years of UFO Reports."
James E McDonald. "Science in Default:Twenty-Two Years of Inadequate UFO Investigations."
Donald H Menzel. "UFOs-the Modern Myth."
Philip Morrison. "The Nature of Scientific Evidence:A Summary."
Thornton Page. "Education and the UFO Phenomenon."
Douglass R Price-Williams. "Psychology and Epistimology of UFO Interpretations."
Franklin Roach. "Astronomers' Views on UFOs."
Carl Sagan. "UFOs: The Extraterrestrial and Other Hypotheses."
Walter Sullivan. "Influence of the Press and Other Mass Media."

I found some interesting quotes in the book:

""I can present only my own experiences, which has shown that in the UFO business one can trust nothing secondhand." William K Hartmann. (p.11.)

"I think it likely that there are many extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy, but I think the evidence of UFO sightings does not support the hypothesis of visitation by these extraterrestrials." Franklin Roach. (p.32.)

"The data that I have reviewed and analyzed since 1954 has led me to believe that there is substantial evidence to support the claim that an unexplained phenomenon - or phenomena - is present in the environs of the earth..." R M L Baker. (p.190.)

(Referring to witnesses of bright meteors.) "The first fact we learned was that a witness's memory of such exotic events fades quickly. After one day, about half of the reports were clearly erroneous...after five days, people report more imagination than truth. It became clear that later they were reconstructing in their imagination an event based on some dim memory of what happened. This is something that the UFO investigator rarely appreciates." Frank D Drake. (p.254.)

"No scientifically adequate investigation of the UFO problem has been carried out during the entire twenty-two year period between the first extensive wave of sightings of unidentified aerial objects in the summer of 1947, and the convening of this symposium." James E McDonald. (p.52.)

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics - UAP study

Hi all,

After posting two recent articles about SIGMA and SIGMA2 of the 3AF, I recalled a parallel story from forty seven years ago. To refresh my memory, I turned to my hard copy of  the book "The UFO Enigma," (1999) by Peter A Sturrock, (click here)  published by Warner Books, New York, (click here for a book review) for the story.


AIAA:

"...I learned that some positive action had been taken by one professional organization: the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) (click here to look at their website) In 1967, the Board of Directors of the AIAA asked two of its technical committees, namely the Atmospheric Environment Committee and the Space and Atmospheric Physics Committee, to form a subcommittee to arrive at an unbiased assessment of the status of the UFO problem.

Its chairman was Dr Joachim P Kuettner, a distinguished atmospheric scientist at the Environmental Research Laboratories of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in Boulder. Kuettner also had the distinction of holding some world records as a glider pilot (click here for further information on Kuettner.)

The other members of the subcommittee were Jerold Bidwell (Martin Marietta), Glenn A Cato (TRN Systems), Bernard N Charles (Hughes Aircraft), Murray Dryer (NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories), Howard D Edwards (Georgia Institute of Technology), Paul McCready Jr. (Meteorology Research Inc.). Andrew J Masley (McDonnell Douglas Missile and Space SDystems), Robert Rados (NASA Goddard Space Flight Center), Donald M Swingle (US Army Electronics Command), and Vernon J Zurich (NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories.)


The question:

The subcommittee addressed the very basic question: Does the UFO problem present a legitimate scientific problem deserving the attention of the scientific and engineering communities? They delved deeply into theoretical and philosophical aspects of the problem and Condon met with the subcommittee more than once.

The subcommittee published its report in 1970 in the widely read aerospace journal Astronautics and Astrophysics (Kuettner, 1970). Unlike the Condon report, this was a committee report, subscribed to by all members of the subcommittee. The subcommittee also arranged for publication of two notable radar-visual cases that had been considered by the Colorado Project. Articles by Gordon D Thayer (who had been a member of the Colorado Project) and by McDonald gave more detailed accounts of the 1956 "Lakenheath" case (Thayer, 1971) and the 1957 "RB-47" case (McDonald, 1971) respectively.

In referring to Condon's "summary of the study", the Kuettner subcommittee stated that "[we] did not find a basis in the report for his prediction that nothing of scientific value will come of further studies." On the contrary, they found that "a phenomenon with such a high ratio of unexplained cases (about 30%) should arouse sufficient scientific curiosity to continue its study."


Subcommittee finding:

It was the opinion of the subcommittee that "the only promising approach [would be] a continuing, moderate-level effort with emphasis on improved data collection by objective means and on high quality scientific analysis." (pp50-51.)


References given in Sturrock:

Kuettner, J P et al. (1970.) "UFO:An Appraisal of the Problem, A Statement by the UFO Subcommittee of the AIAA." Astronautics and Aeronautics, 8, No. 11, pp 49-51.

McDonald, J E (1971.) "UFO Encounter I, Sample Case Selected by the UFO subcommittee of the AIAA, Lakenheath, England: Radar-Visual Case, Aug 13-14, 1956." Astronautics and Aeronautics, 9 No 7, pp 66-70.

Thayer, G D (1971.) "UFO Encounter II, Sample Case Selected by the UFO Subcommittee of the AIAA, Lakenheath, England: Radar-Visual Case, August 13-14, 1956." Astronautics and Aeronautics, 9, No.9, pp.60-70.

Despite an Internet search, I could not locate digital copies of the above three Journal articles. If any blog reader has copies, I would appreciate hearing from you at keithbasterfield@yahoo.com.au

SIGMA2 of 3AF

Hi all,

Introduction:

Yesterday, I posted a piece ( click here to read) on the SIGMA technical committee of the French learned body, 3AF (click here). Last night I came across some additional information, which I thought I would share here.

The latest article, which I found on the 3AF website was titled "SIGMA2: a mandate, structure, work plan and action." It is written by Luc Dini, Manager of the SIGMA2 technical committee, and dated 21 July 2014.


Role:

"SIGMA2...will refer to the evidence and representations accompanied by physical data from databases, physical analysis, including new theories, focusing on observations of PANs likely to be exploited scientifically."

SIGMA2 will not conduct parallel field investigations like those by GEIPAN, but will instead focus on "unsolved cases." (GEIPAN type D.) It will also build technical and scientific networks in France and abroad, to examine possible causes. Lastly, SIGMA2 will also seek overseas cases, unlike GEIPAN.

A rough translation of GEIPAN's type 'D' is:

"The PAN D correspond to investigations that failed to advance an explanation for the observations reported, despite the quality and consistency of data and testimonials. These are, in the true sense, "unidentified aerospace phenomena.""


Work plan:

A three year work plan was set out in the article, which will include:

1. A literature review of works that offer a scientific analysis.

2. Gaining an understanding of the international environment, and making contact with new data or studies.

3. An operational database.

4. A 'contact group' whose main task will be to establish links with organisations able to "provide interesting case studies."

The article mentions that the GEIPAN database has 232 cases in their category 'D.' SIGMA2 have selected a few to study, which include:

* 28 January 1994. Flight AF3532 (details in French click here.)

* April 2007. Aircraft crew see UAP near the Channel Islands (details in English click here.)

Comment:

It is so refreshing to see serious research of this nature being carried out in France; as compared to no official government or learned body interest, here in  Australia.

To read the full article (in French) click here.

2017 update:

I checked the 3AF website on 1/10/2017. Sigma2 is still listed there, but the 'SIGMA2: a mandate, structure, work plan and action,' written by Luc Dini, Manager of the SIGMA2 technical committee, and dated 2014, as above, is no longer to be found.

The SIGMA technical committee of the French 3AF

Hi all,

3AF:

I have been taking a look at French organisations currently interested in UAP. One of these is a French learned body, know as 3AF.  3AF's full name is the Association Aeronautique et Astronautique de France. Its aims include, to bring together persons interested in the fields of aeronautics and astronautics; to develop specialised information on these fields, and to provide a forum for members to share information on these topics. It was formed in 1972. (Click here.)


SIGMA:

3AF has a number of technical committees, covering such topics as commercial aviation, drones, and space exploration. However, of particular interest to us is the "SIGMA" technical committee.  The 3AF website tells us that the activity of this particular technical committee is the "...study of unidentified aerospace phenomena."

A post on the website of "Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena (UAP) Observations Reporting Scheme" (click here) provides further insight into the history of SIGMA. Philippe Ailleris (click here) attended a meeting in Paris on 11 January 2013 at which there was a presentation by Alan Boudier of SIGMA - 3AF. Alan Boudier created the French Commission SIGMA in May 2008 within 3AF. Ailleris's notes include:

"Within this structure, the SIGMA Commission goal is to study Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena and in particular to:

a. Analyse official declassified documents (From France and other countries);
b. Organise meetings with relevant important institutions and researchers interested or associated with the PAN topic;
c. Perform some detailed analysis of evidence (e.g. pictures, films, testimony, samples.)

At its inception, the SIGMA commission comprised around 14 eminent scientists and military persons, ( e.g. Astrobiologist A Brack; Army General P Bescond; European astronaut J F Clervoy; GEIPAN Expert F Louange.)

In May 2010, the first progress report of the SIGMA commission was released..."


PROGRESS REPORT:

"The current situation in France" section reviews a number of official and non-official French bodies who at some stage have looked into the phenomenon. These include GEIPAN (click here); COMETA (click here); The General Secretariat of National defines (SGDN); the General Directorate of the National Gendarmerie (DGGN); and civilian UAP groups.

Between 2008 and 2010, SIGMA 3AF representatives met with several of these organisations as well as discussing the topic with many others.

Section 4 of the report lists the most significant French cases as:

1. Madagascar 16 Aug 1954.
2. Valensole 1 Jul 1965.
3. Trans en Provence 8 Jan 1981.
4. Nancy. 28 Oct 1982.
5. Biarritz/Strasbourg  5 Nov 1990.

The document reviews some of the characteristics of UAP, namely, high accelerations; low speed-very large objects; silent propulsion and high speeds.

The report rejects a terrestrial explanation for the phenomenon. The working hypothesis is that of a non-terrestrial origin. To read an English translation of the full report, click here.


SIGMA2:

In October 2013, the SIGMA committee of 3AF commenced a new phase of operations and changed its name to SIGMA2 to reflect this change. It set new, less ambitious goals, as it saw that a serious study of the phenomenon could not be achieved in a short time frame.  Luc Dini (click here) was appointed Manager off the new style commission. Dini is currently with Thales Air Systems as Business Development Director Missile Defense (for further details click here and here. )

Another important scientific meeting on UAP

Hi all,

On 31 July 2014, the Chilean government's "Committee for the Studies of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena" (CEFAA), (click here) sponsored a panel to look at whether or not UAP pose any danger to civilian and military air operations.

Participants were reported to have included two notable astronomers, a nucelar chemist, an aerospace medicine doctor, a physicist, and Army and Air Force psychologists.

There were also specialists from the Ministerial Department of Civil Aeronautics (DGAC), including the Director of the Meteorological Observatory; the Chief of Radar Operations Metropolitan Centre; the Head of Accident Investigations; the Head of Airport Security Operations. Police, Navy and Air Force representatives were also present.

The panel's conclusion was:

"Based on the evaluation at the meeting, the Committee concluded that UAP do not represent a threat or a danger to air operations. either civilian or military."

(Source: "Huffington Post" article by Leslie Kean 12 August 2014. For the full story click here.)

New book alert - Peters

Hi all,

My local library continues to surprise me by coming up with new books on UAP. The latest find was Ted Peters' "UFOs:God's Chariots? Spirituality, Ancient Aliens and Religious Yearnings in the Age of Extraterrestrials," published this year, by New Page Books, Pompton Plains, NJ. ISBN 978-1-60163-318-7.

New version:

This book is a second version of the original 1977 work of the same title. The book aims to "...fill out our understanding of at least one important dimension of the UFO phenomenon. This is the religious dimension, the spiritual dimension." (p.12.) "Overall, this book is an attempt to understand how we understand Unidentified Flying Objects." (p.13.)

Models:

The main thrust of the book is to explore four models. "We understand new and unusual phenomenon in terms of prior systems of belief. The close encounter, abduction and contactee cases examined in this book seem to fall loosely into four basic belief subsystems...Interstellar Diplomat (a political model); the Research Scientist (a scientific model); the Celestial Savior ( a religious model); and the Hybridizer ( a model that combines the scientific and the religious.)" (p.37.)

Interstellar diplomat:

Encounters with aliens is viewed "...with centuries of political wars and international diplomacy contributing to our experience." (p.38.)

Research Scientist:

When mankind went to the Moon we collected rocks to analyse. We view UFO visitations as explorers.

Celestial Savior:

"...the ufonauts teach us to save ourselves rather than we do it for us." (p.38.)

Hybridizer:

Reflecting on abduction accounts which "...resemble reports from earlier in that decade of childhood sexual abuse and satanic ritual abuse." (p.38.)

Peters explores each model by presenting individual cases; and a review of relevant cultural events, such as films.

Interspersed in the models, among other things,  are looks at Roswell; MJ-12; Philip Corso; Disclosure; the Condon Committee; Erich von Daniken, and ancient astronauts.

ETH:

Peters explores the ETH as a proposed hypothesis for UFOs. He points out that although there are three sides involved (civilian UFO groups; the scientific community, and scientists such as Hynek and Vallee)  "...as most people see it, the controversy has only two sides. The argument is between the first two positions mentioned above: either pro UFO-ETH or con UFO-ETH." (p.105.)

Peters observes "What is interesting to note is that each position in the debate accuses the other of being unscientific." (p.106.)

Theology:

Peters is currently Emeritus Professor of Systematic Theology and Ethics at Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary. In chapter ten he examines his central hypothesis . "In this book I am testing the hypothesis that even though we in our modern era have been enlightened by the discoveries of science, to the extent that we feel we have outgrown the mythological world view of the ancient religions, the same spiritual needs that found expression in those ancient religions are still with us." (p.202.)

In the book he is also exploring a second hypothesis "...which I will call the global anxiety hypothesis." (p.207.) This hypothesis suggests that the growth of interest in UFOs, reflects the correlation between flaps and international tensions. "I think that, to some extent, belief in UFOs is an expression of insecurity or anxiety and the need for salvation." (p.230.)

Astrotheology:

Peters defines a new term "astrotheology," which he states is "...that branch of theology which provides a critical analysis of the contemporary space sciences combined with an explication of classic doctrines such as creation and christology for the purposes of constructing a comprehensive and meaningful understanding of our human situation within an astonishingly immense cosmos." (p.260.)

The ETI religious crisis survey:

Peter proposed and tested the hypothesis, "Confirmed contact with extraterrestrial intelligent beings would precipitate such a crisis among traditional religions that these religions would collapse." (p.265.)

With 1300 respondents to the survey, "It became clear that the vast majority of religious believers, regardless of religion see no threat to their personal beliefs caused by potential contact..." (p.265.)

Comment:

I found this a deeply thoughful work. It was hard going reading at times, however, it was always worth the effort.

A very important workshop on UAP

Hi all,

GEIPAN:

The "Groupe D'Etudes Et D'Informations Sur Les Phenomenes Aerospatiaux Non Identifies" (GEIPAN) held an important workshop, on 8th and 9th July 2014, in Paris, France.

GEIPAN was created by the "Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales" (CNES) to study reports of "Phenomenes Aerospatiaux Non identifies" (PAN) (Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena.) The CNES is the National Centre for Space Research for France, and is responsible for proposing space policy and implementation to the French government.

The workshop:

The workshop, of scientists and invited UAP researchers, was looking at methods and tools, which could improve the collection and analysis of information on "Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena."

A number of very interesting talks were presented, including:

* "Useful research methods for aircrew and air traffic controller UAP sightings." Richard Haines.

* "Keeping Omni-comprehensive UFO databases: a cost benefit analysis." Edoardo Russo.

* "Unidentified Aerial Phenomena: a strategy for research." Jacques Vallee.

* "The Hessdalen Phenomena: 30 years of research, instrumentation, results, witness stories, challenges and difficulties." Erling Strand.

* "Instrumented monitoring of aerial anomalies." Massimo Teodorani.

Attendees included Jeremiah Vaabaillon, Paris Observatory; Jacques Py, Psychology professor; Thomas Rabeyron, psychology lecturer; and representatives of the gendarmerie and the French Air Force. In addition there were a number of civilian UAP researchers, including Richard Haines; Jacques Vallee; Bertrand Meheust and Ron Westrum. Australian researcher Bill Chalker was invited, but was unable to attend.

Workshops of this calibre are extremely rare, and GEIPAN is to be congratulated for arranging it. I look forward to reading any proceedings of this workshop, if they become available.

One cannot imagine such a workshop being organised here in Australia.

To read the available GEIPAN workshop material (in French) click here.