Unidentified flying object

A UFO or Unidentified Flying Object is simply defined as any object or optical phenomenon observed in the sky which cannot be identified, even after being thoroughly investigated by qualified people.

A fuller definition was given by Dr. J. Allen Hynek, late astronomer, U.S. Air Force consultant and UFO proponent, as "the reported perception of an object or light seen in the sky or upon the land the appearance, trajectory, and general dynamic and luminescent behaviour of which do not suggest a logical, conventional explanation and which is not only mystifying to the original percipients but remains unidentified after close scrutiny of all available evidence by persons who are technically capable of making a common sense identification, if one is possible."

The U.S. Air Force adopted a similar official definition in 1954, saying a UFO is "any airborne object which by performance, aerodynamic characteristics, or unusual features, does not conform to any presently known aircraft or missile type, or which cannot be positively identified as a familiar object." In addition, investigation was stated to be for the purposes of national security and to ascertain "technical aspects." (USAF document)

By the stricter definitions, something must remain unidentified and have anomalous characteristics to be classified as a UFO. Such characteristics, as noted by early Air Force studies dating back to 1947, might include unconventional shape, high speed and/or acceleration, high maneuverability, extreme rate of climb, absence of sound and/or trail, formation flying, and/or evasion upon pursuit. (USAF document)

A number of conventional and unconventional theories have been proposed to explain UFOs. However, the original working term UFO has largely become popularized in the public mind with the notion that UFOs might be extraterrestrial spacecraft (the ETH or Extraterrestrial hypothesis). However, no incontrovertible physical evidence of the existence of such spacecraft has been presented, though many forms of disputed physical evidence do exist in the public domain.

There is an unproven contention that incontrovertible proof probably does exist but is being withheld from the public by world governments, perhaps out of fear of widespread panic and social disruption that might result from disclosure of such information. Such allegations have been made by Ufologists as well as notable high-ranking military officers, government officials, astronauts, scientists, and other notable ETH supporters.

However, similar groups of notables are equally skeptical and often dismiss such statements as conspiracy theories, maintaining that the evidence is unconvincing and that the subject in general is pseudoscience.

History

Strange unidentified apparitions in the sky and on the ground have been reported throughout history. The army of Alexander the Great in 329 BC saw "two silver shields" in the sky. Ancient Roman records occasionally mention "shields" and even "armies" seen in the sky. In 1235 the army of Oritsume in Japan saw mysterious lights in the sky. An appropriate report was made for the emperor, and other appearances occurred in Japan in 1361. On April 14, 1561 the skies over Nuremberg were filled with a multitude of objects, including cylinders and spheres, seemingly engaged in an aerial battle. This event was witnessed by hundreds of people, as was a similar event in Basel in 1566, where numerous "flaming" and black globes appeared. In 1896-97, unidentified "Mystery airships" were reported in the United States, though some of these reports are now known to have been deliberate hoaxes.

Mystery airships were seen throughout Britain in 1909 and from 1912 to 1913. These were thought to be German Zeppelins spying out the land prior to invasion. The same fears generated a similar scare in New Zealand and Australia in 1909. Airships and mystery aircraft were also seen over the USA in 1909 and 1910 and were thought to be the creation of Wallace Tillinghast, though this seems very doubtful. During the First World War there were mystery aircraft scares in South Africa, Canada, Britain and the USA. Most of these scares can be attributed to the misperception of stars, the work of hoaxers and their promotion by the media. These phantom airship scares are detailed in The Scareship Mystery edited by Nigel Watson (DOMRA, 2000).

In his travelogue Altai-Himalaya, Russian artist and mystic Nicholas Roerich reported sighting "an oval form with a shiny surface" flying high above Amdo, eastern Tibet in 1926. However, Roerich did not express an opinion as to what he thought it might be, surrounding passages discuss the technology of ancient civilizations as recounted by Theosophical lore.

There were several reports of unidentified aircrafts in the Scandinavian countries in the 1930s. In Europe during World War II, "Foo-fighters" (luminous balls that followed airplanes) were reported by both Allied and Axis pilots. In 1946, there was a wave of "ghost rockets" seen over Scandinavia.

The post World War II phase in UFOs began with a claimed sighting by American businessman Kenneth Arnold on June 24, 1947, near Mount Rainier, Washington. Arnold was helping to search for the wreckage of a downed U.S. Marine C-46 transport plane. He reported seeing nine bright objects, (possibly irregular, glowing components of a meteoric fireball in the process of breaking up) flying at "an incredible speed" at an altitude of 10,000 feet (3,000 m) towards nearby Mount Adams. The UFOs witnessed by Arnold were not, in the strictest sense of the term, saucer-shaped, he described only their movements as being similar to that of a saucer skipping over water, hence the origin of the term flying saucer. Arnold's claims subsequently received significant mainstream media and public attention.

Beginning in the 1950s, UFO-related spiritual sects began to appear. The Aetherius Society is an early example; more recent ones include Raël and the Ashtar Command. Generally speaking, the aliens who were purported to sponsor such groups, claim benevolent purposes such as warning humanity of the dangers of nuclear war or inviting Earth to join an interplanetary federation.

Others claimed that the main role of the supposed craft was to supervise. This was the case with the UFO encounter reported by police sergeant Lonnie Zamora just outside the town of Socorro in New Mexico, which is perhaps the best documented encounter.

NASA astronaut Gordon Cooper has claimed, (including in his book Leap of Faith), that a classic saucer-shaped aircraft landed at Edwards Air Force Base on May 3, 1957 when he was stationed there, and was photographed by a technical film crew. Cooper said he viewed prints of the object before the film was shipped back to Washington. Project Blue Book claimed it was a weather balloon distorted by desert heat. The incident was Dr. James E. McDonald’s Case 41 in his 1968 Congressional testimony discussing his list of the best UFO evidence. McDonald said the incident evidently happened; besides talking to Cooper, he had interviewed the two photographers involved, who corroborated Cooper’s basic story.[1] In 1985 Cooper addressed a United Nations Panel Discussion on UFOs and ETs chaired by then Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim. Cooper stated, "I believe that these extraterrestrial vehicles and their crews are visiting this planet from other planets which obviously are a little more technically advanced than we are here on Earth. ...For many years I have lived with a secret, in a secrecy imposed on all specialists and astronauts. I can now reveal that every day, in the USA, our radar instruments capture objects of form and composition unknown to us." [2]

By the 1970s, popular sentiment had it that UFOs were alien spacecraft, and that the aliens involved were benevolent, reinforced through movies such as Close Encounters of the Third Kind and E.T., and Klaatu's song Calling Occupants (of Interplanetary Craft), later made popular by Karen Carpenter. This model was all but overturned during the 1980s mainly in the USA, with the publication of books by Whitley Strieber (beginning with Communion) and Jacques Vallee (Passport to Magonia). Strieber, a horror writer, felt that aliens were harassing him and were responsible for "missing time" during which he was subjected to strange experiments. The cover of the paperback edition of Communion introduced a standard "grey" alien-head appearance charactierized by a large lozenge-shaped head sharpening to a pointed chin, a small slit for the mouth and large pointed lozenge-shaped eyes canted downwards towards the nose (this was later satirized in Schwa). Both Strieber and Vallee were led to doubt that these beings were "extraterrestrials" as the term is ordinarily understood, and see more of a connection to elf and fairy lore. (Cf. Jung's comparison with angelic visions in his article Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Skies.) This newer, darker model can be seen in the subsequent wave of "alien abduction" literature, and in the background mythos of TV's X-Files.

Another important development in 1970s UFO lore came with the publication of Erich von Däniken's book Chariots of the Gods. The book argued that aliens have been visiting Earth for thousands of years, which explained UFO-like images from various archeological sources as well as unsolved mysteries (such as the Egyptian pyramids). This "ancient astronauts" theory inspired numerous imitators, sequels, and fictional adaptations, including one book (Barry Downing's The Bible and Flying Saucers) which interprets miraculous aerial phenomena in the Bible as records of alien contact. Many of these theories posit that aliens have been guiding human evolution, an idea taken up earlier by the novel and film 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Another 1970s-era development was the association of UFOs with supernatural subjects such as occultism, cryptozoology, and parapsychology. Many participants in the New Age movement came to believe in alien contact, perhaps through channeling. A prominent spokesperson for this trend was Shirley MacLaine, especially in her book and miniseries, Out On a Limb.

Noting the variance of the above theories with Christian tradition, a number of conservative Protestant writers (e.g., Hal Lindsey) have suggested that UFOs and their occupants are demonic in origin, intent on seducing humanity into accepting non-Christian doctrines such as evolution. This is echoed in the character of the parson Nathaniel in Jeff Wayne's Musical Version of The War of the Worlds.

Etymology

On January 25, 1878, The Denison Daily News wrote that John Martin, a local farmer, the previous day had reported seeing a large, dark, circular flying object resembling a balloon flying "at wonderful speed," and also used the word "saucer" in describing it. [3] This may be the first known use of the word "saucer" to describe an unidentified flying object. Some seventy years later in 1947, the media used the term "flying saucers" to describe Kenneth Arnold's sighting.

The nine objects Kenneth Arnold reported were not strictly saucer-shaped. Arnold initially described and drew a picture of eight of the objects as being thin and flat, circular in the front but truncated in the back and coming to a point. (See Kenneth Arnold for drawing and verbal descriptions.) Another drawing was of a ninth, somewhat larger object with a boomerang or crescent shape, resembling a flying wing aircraft. However, several years later Arnold said he had described their movement as a kind of skipping, like a saucer skimming over water. He complained that the press misquoted him, picking up the "like a saucer" phrase, and reported it as a "flying saucer".

"Flying disks" was another term commonly used by the media to describe the objects in the late 1940s and early 1950s.

By mid-1950, a Gallup poll revealed that the term "flying saucer" had become so deeply ingrained in the American vernacular that 94% of those polled were familiar with it, making it the best-known term appearing in the news, easily beating out others like "universal military training" (75%), "bookie" (67%), or "cold war" (58%).

Hollywood science fiction movies in the 1950s, such as The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951), Forbidden Planet (1956), and Earth vs. the Flying Saucers (1956), depicting flying saucer-like craft, further entrenched the term as a cultural icon. So did popular books on the subject such as Frank Scully's Behind the Flying Saucers (1950), Donald Keyhoe's The Flying Saucers Are Real (1950) and Flying Saucers From Outer Space (1953), and "contactee"-oriented books, such as George Adamski's Flying Saucers Have Landed (1953).

"Flying Saucer" was the preferred term for most unidentified aerial sightings from the late 1940s to the 1960s, even for those that were not actually saucer-shaped. The term "UFO" was more commonly used by the late 1960s. Use of "UFO" instead of "flying saucer" was first suggested in 1952 by Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt, the first director of the U. S. Air Force's Project Blue Book, who felt that "flying saucer" did not reflect the diversity of the sightings. His suggestion was quickly adopted by the Air Force, who also briefly used "UFOB" circa 1954. Ruppelt recounted his experiences with Project Blue Book in his memoir, The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects (1956) online.

An unforeseen difficulty with the term "UFO" is that it often leads to semantic debates between skeptics and advocates. Skeptics often argue that UFO simply means that the object was "unidentified" by those making the sighting and doesn't mean the object is unexplainable, much less extraterrestrial. In contrast, researchers like Hynek have argued that the term should be strictly limited to those sightings that have been intensively investigated and still defy conventional explanation, which was the actual definition adopted by the Air Force in official directives in the 1950s. For example, Air Force Regulation 200-2, issued in 1954, defined an Unidentified Flying Object (UFOB) as "any airborne object which by performance, aerodynamic characteristics, or unusual features, does not conform to any presently known aircraft or missile type, or which cannot be positively identified as a familiar object." Furthermore, investigation of UFOBs was stated to be for the purposes of national security and to ascertain "technical aspects." Obviously these concerns would not apply to the usual explanations for most UFO sightings, such as natural phenomena or man-made conventional objects, except, perhaps, previously unknown foreign aircraft.

Thus the "U" in "UFO", instead of standing for "Unidentified", would more aptly stand for "Unexplained" or "Unconventional". Along these lines, Paul Hill, an early NACA/NASA aerospace engineer, titled his 1970s book on the subject, Unconventional Flying Objects.

Foreign versions of term

In Spanish, Portuguese, and French, the acronym for UFO is OVNI (in Spanish, Objeto Volador No Identificado, in Portuguese, Objeto Voador Não Identificado, in French, Objet Volant Non Identifié). In Russian, the term is NLO or "Neopoznannyi Letaushschii Ob'ekt" (Неопознанный Летающий Объект). In Finnish the acronym for UFO is TLK ("Tunnistamaton Lentävä Kohde"). In Italian, German and Japanese, UFO is an acronym instead of an initialism.

Pronunciation

Ruppelt suggested that "UFO" should be pronounced as a word — "you-foe". However it is generally pronounced by forming each letter: "U.F.O."

Physicist Edward Condon suggested the word should be pronounced "ooh-foe", but this seems to have largely been ignored.

UFOs and popular culture

Regardless of any ultimate explanation, UFOs constitute a widespread international cultural phenomenon of the last half-century. Folklorist Dr. Thomas E. Bullard writes, "UFOs have invaded modern consciousness in overwhelming force, and endless streams books, magazine articles, tabloid covers, movies, TV shows, cartoons, advertisements, greeting cards, toys, T-shirts, even alien-head salt and pepper shakers, attest to the popularity of this phenomenon, its ability to hold public attention, and, yes, to sell! Gallup polls rank UFOs near the top of lists for subjects of widespread recognition--in fact, a 1973 survey found that 95 percent of the public had heard of UFOs, whereas in 1977 only 92 percent had heard of Gerald Ford in a poll taken just nine months after he left the White House." (Bullard, 141)

UFO topics were amongst the most popular on early computer Bulletin board systems (Bullard writes that "Only sex Web sites outscore UFOs for popularity on the internet." (Bullard, 141), and millions of people have some degree of interest in the subject. There have also been notable hoaxes involving UFO reports, some of which have received substantial press attention (see the list below).

UFOs have played a role in tourism, such as in Roswell, New Mexico, site of a supposed UFO crash in 1947 (see Roswell UFO incident).

A 1996 Gallup poll reported that 71% of the United States' population believed that the government was covering up information regarding UFOs. Another Gallup poll in 2001 found that 33% of respondents "believe that extraterrestrials have visited the Earth sometime in the past." [4] These two poll results may seem confusing or contradictory if one considers only the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) as an explanation for UFOs. The poll results may also simply suggest that a greater percentage of those polled believe that the U.S. government has been less than forthright in regard to UFOs than accept the ETH.

A 2002 Roper poll for the Sci Fi channel found similar results, but with more people believing UFOs were extraterrestrial craft. Again about 70% felt the government was not sharing everything it knew about UFOs or extraterrestrial life. But 56% thought UFOs were real craft and 48% that UFOs had visited the Earth. The younger the person was, the more likely the person were to hold such beliefs. [5]

Comprehensive review of opinion polls on UFOs since 1947

Typical reported characteristics of UFOs

• Saucer, toy-top, or disk-shaped "craft" without visible or audible propulsion. (day and night)
• Rapidly-moving lights or lights with apparent ability to rapidly change direction — the earliest mention of their motion was given as "saucers skipping on water." Disc-shaped craft are sometimes reported to move in an irregular or "wobbly" manner at low speeds.
• Large triangular "craft" or triangular light pattern
• Cigar-shaped "craft" with lighted windows (Meteor fireballs are sometimes reported this way).

The number of different shapes, sizes, and configurations of claimed UFOs has been large, with descriptions of chevrons, equilateral triangles, spheres, domes, diamonds, shapeless black masses, eggs, and cylinders. Skeptics argue this diversity of shapes, size and configurations points to a socio-psychological explanation. Other researchers argue that the large diversity of UFO shapes points to a possible paraphysical origin. Still others argue that there is a large diversity in the shapes and sizes of human flying craft, reflecting different origins, propulsion systems, and purposes, so such diversity in UFOs is not necessarily unexpected or inexplicable.

Another argument is that the true underlying shape may, in some cases, be concealed or distorted by the ionization of air around the objects, believed by some researchers, such as NASA engineers Paul Hill and James McCampbell or rocketry pioneer Hermann Oberth, to be a characteristic of the propulsion system. Air ionization could also partly explain the diversity of colors reported, as different air molecules are excited at different energy levels, as well as the electric, neon-like glow around the objects often reported, similar to what happens with polar auroras. Another view is that the shape may be concealed or distorted by space-time distortions arising from an anti-gravity propulsion system. However, some feel that such speculation is overly premature because the very actuality of UFOs as alien craft is itself problematic.

Other advocates, arguing for the non-conventional interpretation, reply that the volume of impressive sightings reported by witnesses, from commercial airline pilots to United States presidents, and occasionally captured on film and radar, possesses strong consistency and cannot be explained away simply as mundane phenomena (weather balloons, aircraft, Venus, etc.).

One writer contends that UFO mass sightings — sometimes called "flaps" — are "a hard core of genuinely unusual sightings ... surrounded by a great deal more misidentification, wishful thinking and general flakiness." [6]

Other researchers, such as Jacques Vallee, argue that if UFO sightings are motivated by some mechanism through which the public can release hidden fears and satisfy a psychological need for fantasies, why did "UFO waves" not coincide with such science-fiction feats such as Orson Welles' radio adaptation of The War of the Worlds in 1938, or the motion-picture versions of Flash Gordon (1936-37)? Vallee points out that the theory regarding how the general public generates and propagates UFO reports as a way of releasing psychological tensions, is denied by the absence of correlation between notable periods of interest in science fiction and major peaks of UFO activity. No single and comprehensive "psychological" theory to explain UFO reports has yet been proposed. A notable attempt on the basis of his theory of archetypes was made by the Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung in his book Flying Saucers (1959). Jung, however, also felt that at least some UFOs were "nuts and bolts" craft, based on physical evidence such as simultaneous radar contact.

Scientific UFO field studies

Norway

One established non-military station, which has seriously monitored UFOs, including anomalous lights, is project Hessdalen AMS in Norway.

United States

Challenged to explain sightings of unidentified lights and luminous phenomena in the hills around Piedmont, Missouri, Dr. Harley Rutledge established Project Identification in 1973 to gather scientific data.

Official governmental studies

Australia

See Australian Ufology

Canada

In the early 1950s, Project Magnet was created to investigate the possibility of discs powered by magnetic propulsion. The equipment was designed to detect gamma rays, magnetic fluctuations, radio noises and gravity or mass changes in the atmosphere.

France

• GEPAN (Group d'Etude des Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non-Identifiés) was the official French UFO study agency, started in 1977. In 1988 it was reorganized into SEPRA (the Service d'Expertise des Phénomènes de Rentrées Atmosphériques) and discontinued in 2004. GEPAN/SEPRA was a unit of the national space agency of France (CNES) and was based at the CNES technical center in Toulouse. It was set up to help civilian and military authorities understand the precise nature of the UFO phenomenon. It devised a precise analytical methodology and accumulated a database of more than 2200 different cases, with some 6000 eyewitness accounts and approximately 100 sightings from aircraft. (description and links) A 1979 GEPAN report stated that about a quarter of over 1600 closely studied UFO cases defied explanation, echoing results from the USAF's initial UFO studies from 1947 to about 1954. (see Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14)
• COMETA (in English, "Committee for in-depth studies") was a semi-official committee that began investigation into UFOs in 1995 and issued a final report in July 1999, titled "UFOs and Defense: What must we be prepared for?" Before its public release, the report was sent to French President Jacques Chirac and to Prime Minister Lionel Jospin. The study was carried out primarily by an independent group of former "auditors" at the Institute of Advanced Studies for National Defense, or IHEDN (the same group whose recommendations two decades before led to the formation of GEPAN), and by experts from various fields. The report was prefaced by General Bernard Norlain of the Air Force, former Director of IHEDN, and began with a preamble by André Lebeau, former President of CNES. Other contributors included various generals, admirals, aerospace engineers and scientists (including from SEPRA), and the national police superintendant. The report concluded that UFOs were physically real, under control of intelligent beings, and probably extraterrestrial in origin. They also accused world governments of covering up this information, with strongest criticism directed at the U.S. government. summary of report

United States

In response to the June-July 1947 wave of UFO sightings and resulting publicity, the U.S. government began a number of formal studies of UFOs:

• From July 9 to July 30, 1947, Army Air Force Intelligence studied the 16 best UFO sightings of the previous months, mostly those reported by military and civilian pilots, and concluded that the "flying saucer situation" was neither imaginary nor adequately explained as natural phenomena: "something is really flying around."

• In response to the earlier study, the engineering and intelligence divisions of the Air Force Materiel Command at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, under the direction of General Nathan Twining, further reviewed the data. Twining's memo of September 23, 1947, likewise concluded the craft were real, further defined their described characteristics, and urged that the subject should be treated seriously, including a formal investigation by multiple government agencies besides the Air Force. Both the Air Intelligence and Material Command studies concluding saucer reality were classified and not publicly acknowledged for many years.

• Twining's memo resulted in the United States Air Force founding Project Sign in late 1947, the first publicly acknowledged government UFO study. Sign produced an "Estimate of the Situation" in late summer, 1948, concluding that the flying saucers were not only real but likely interplanetary in origin. USAF Chief of Staff General Hoyt S. Vandenberg ordered the report destroyed citing lack of physical proof. In late 1948 Project Sign was renamed Project Grudge. Grudge was active until early 1952, when it too was renamed and upgraded in status by the Pentagon, becoming Project Blue Book. In 1956, the first director of Blue Book, Edward J. Ruppelt, referred to the previous era of Grudge as the "Dark Ages" of USAF UFO studies. According to Ruppelt, highly influential Pentagon generals were frustrated with the UFO debunking of Project Grudge, resulting in it being replaced by Blue Book. Since Project Blue Book was dissolved in 1969, the United States government claims that they have had no formal study of UFO reports.

• In December 1948, mysterious Green Fireballs were sighted over sensitive military and government research facilities in New Mexico, such as Los Alamos National Laboratory. Dr. Lincoln LaPaz, astronomer and noted meteor expert, investigated for the Air Force, with extensive help from military intelligence and the FBI. Based on observed object characteristics, LaPaz quickly concluded the fireballs weren't natural and thought they might be Russian spy devices. Upon urging of the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, a year later the Air Force set up a small observation program called Project Twinkle. In 1951, over LaPaz's objections, Twinkle concluded the fireballs might be some natural phenomenon. But at the same time, scientists at Los Alamos told new Project Blue Book chief Edward J. Ruppelt they thought the fireballs were alien probes from spaceships orbiting Earth.

• The Robertson Panel was organized by the Central Intelligence Agency in late 1952, in response to a wave of UFO sightings, especially in the Washington DC area, which included highly-publicized radar contacts and jet intercepts. After brief study, the panel concluded that most UFOs were prosaic, and furthermore suggested a public relations campaign using celebrities, authority figures, and media giants like Walt Disney Corporation to reduce public interest. They also recommended spying on civilian UFO organizations because of their influence on the public. Immediately after the Robertson Panel, Project Blue Book was downgraded in status by the USAF, directed to withhold information on unexplained cases from the public, and also ordered to reduce the number of unexplained cases to a minimum. Thereafter, unexplained cases plummeted from over 20% down to 3%. The alleged intent of this government program, as indicated on many UFO-related websites and other UFO conspiracy sources, is to ridicule or discredit any who had seen UFOs or had alien encounters. This protocol is allegedly still in effect.

• Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14 was a massive scientific statistical study of all Blue Book UFO reports to date conducted by the Battelle Memorial Institute at behest of the Air Force from 1951 to 1954. Their statistics indicated that 22% of the reports remained unexplained even after stringent analysis and the highest quality reports were twice as likely to remain unexplained than the poorest quality (35% vs. 18%). Also six studied characteristics (speed, duration, color, etc.) were found to be different between knowns and unknowns at a high level of statistical significance.

• The Brookings Report was a study commisioned by NASA in 1960 from the Brookings Institution. The study was noteworthy for its conclusions regarding possible future contact with an extraterrestrial civilization, which they felt would likely be highly disruptive: "...societies sure of their own place in the universe have disintegrated when confronted by a superior society..." Among groups cited as likely having trouble adapting to the new reality were religious fundamentalists and many scientists. The report's conclusions have been offered as a possible motive for governments to cover up evidence of extraterrestrial life.

• The Condon Committee (1966 to 1969), commissioned by Project Blue Book while under pressure from a Congressional inquiry after a new wave of sightings in 1965 and 1966, was a landmark but still controversial study which supported the misidentification-delusion-hoax explanation for UFO reports, and furthermore argued that no available evidence warranted further scientific study. The conclusions were quickly endorsed by the National Academy of Science (NAS), but a more detailed review by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) criticized the NAS position and the Condon Report conclusions, which they noted did not match the actual data. About 30% of the cases examined by the Condon Committee itself were "well-documented but unexplainable" and formed the "hard core of the UFO controversy." They recommended a moderate level, ongoing scientific study of UFOs.

Ultimately, the official U.S. Air Force public position was that UFO reports were due almost entirely to misidentification of ordinary aerial phenomena, delusion, or hoaxes. Both contemporary and modern critics, however, argue that some of the listed studies harbored an unacceptable degree of bias, were involved in sloppy science of dubious validity, or even perpetrating a cover up. Furthermore, the official Air Force position was frequently at odds with internal, classified documents, many later released under the Freedom of Information Act, which proved that the subject was treated far more seriously by the Air Force and other government agencies, like the CIA and FBI, than the public had been led to believe. In addition, many documents still remain classified or are heavily censored even when released, such as those of the CIA. Sometimes lawsuits have had to be filed to get even the censored documents released to the public.

Civilian UFO investigation groups

There have been a number of civilian groups formed to study UFO’s and/or to promulgate their opinions on the subject. Some have achieved fair degrees of mainstream visibility while others remain obscure. The groups listed below have embraced a broad variety of approaches, and have seen a correspondingly wide variety of responses from mainstream critics or supporters

United States

• Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO) (1952-1988)
• National Investigations Committee On Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) (1956-1980)
• Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) (1969-present)
• Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) (1973-present)
• Fund for UFO Research (FUFOR) (1976-present)
• National Institute of Discovery Science (NIDS) (1996-present)

Political Action Groups

• Citizens Against UFO Secrecy (CAUS) (~1978- ): Small, Arizona based research and judicially oriented organization filing many FOIA applications and lawsuits to declassify and release government UFO information. home page
• Paradigm Research Group (PRG) & Extraterrestrial Phenomena Political Action Committee (X-PPAC) (1996- ): Small, Washington D.C. based group founded and headed by political activist/lobbyist Stephen Bassett, pushing for government UFO disclosure. home page
• Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence (CSETI)[7] (1990- ): Maryland based, founded and run by the controversial Dr. Steven Greer. Education and lobbying group that runs The Disclosure Project, an effort to get government disclosure on UFOs and other topics, claiming to currently have over 400 government, military, and intelligence witnesses. home page

Other UFO organizations

Two notable organizations, UFO Casebook[8] and Malevolent Alien Abduction Research[9] also study UFOs, alien contact.

Science and UFOs

Ufology is the study of UFO reports and associated evidence.

While most academics prefer to ignore the subject, others, including mostly amateur and some professional scientific researchers, continue to investigate. Unfortunately, the quality of investigations by amateur researchers can vary enormously.

Probably the most favored theory among advocates is the more conventional extraterrestrial hypothesis, though the Interdimensional hypothesis and the Paranormal/Occult Hypothesis for UFOs are sometimes given as possibilities by some (see also below).

It is a common error to assume that the only question of interest provided by the subject is whether UFOs represent alien intelligence (Peter Sturrock has argued that this emphasis on the extraterrestrial hypothesis has narrowed the field and restricted debate). Putting aside the question of physical reality of UFOs, there have been studies of UFOs and UFO enthusiast subcultures from a folklore or anthropological perspective, and some feel the subject, at the very least, may provide new insights in the fields of psychology (both individual and social), sociology, and communications.

Since the late 1940s, people throughout the world have become familiar with UFO reports. These reports have been attributed to a wide range of causes including planets, stars, meteors, cloud formations, ball lightning, deliberate hoaxes, experimental military aircraft, hallucinations, and extraterrestrial spacecraft. Despite the large number of reports and great public interest, the scientific community has shown little interest in UFOs. This may be due in part to the fact that there are no public or government funds to support UFO research. Many scientists also assume that the 1969 Condon Report settled the issue, hence UFO data is no longer worth examining. It has also been contended that the CIA's 1953 Robertson Panel recommendations of official public ridicule through the mass media has made the subject scientifically and politically taboo. Each of these may have had some impact in dampening the interest of the scientific community in regard to UFO research.

UFOs have been subject to various investigations over the years, varying widely in scope and scientific rigor. Governments or military agencies of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Sweden, Brazil, Mexico, Spain, and the Soviet Union, are known to have carried out the investigation of UFO reports at various times. Despite a strong residue of extremely puzzling cases, no national government has ever publicly suggested that UFOs represent any form of alien intelligence. Perhaps the best known study was Project Blue Book, conducted by the United States Air Force from 1952.

Despite unexplained cases, the general official opinion of the mainstream scientific community is probably that all UFO sightings ultimately result from ordinary misidentification of natural and man-made phenomena, deliberate hoaxes, or psychological phenomena such as optical illusions or dreaming/sleep paralysis (often given as an explanation for purported alien abductions). Statistics compiled by U.S. Air Force studies found that the strong preponderance of identified sightings were due to misidentifications, with hoaxes and psychological aberrations accounting for only a few percent of all cases. Still many academics feel that the subject is a waste of time, due to a number of factors. Unreliability of witness testimony is often cited.

It has been suggested, however, that rather few academics have actually researched the topic themselves or become personally familiar with the literature. As the Sturrock poll results below suggest, absence of study of the subject increases skepticism and strongly affects willingness to investigate. Some academics have argued that this constitutes unacceptable bias, and that while current evidence may be lacking, new evidence should be evaluated objectively as it arises. Some in the scientific community feel there is enough evidence to warrant further investigation efforts, comparing it to the period in the history of meteorite research or atmospheric electrical phenomena such as sprites or ball lightning when there was only witness testimony available. In such examples, the eyewitness accounts of such phenomena eventually proved correct despite initial skepticism, denial, and sometimes hostility from many scientists. Others point out that it is erroneous to claim the evidence is only observational and that a number of recorded physical effects also exist that are amenable to research by the physical sciences. These include simultaneous radar contact, photographs/movies/videos, radiation increases, electromagnetic interference, and physiological/biological effects. (See Physical Evidence section below)

Other reasons often cited for the disdain shown by many scientists for the subject are:

• Arguments that aliens could not be here because of the distances and energies required for interstellar travel in a reasonable period of time, according to present-day understanding of physical law
• Lack of indisputable physical evidence
• The unreliability or scientific inadequacy of many reports
• The many circumstances that can lead to misidentification of ordinary objects seen at a distance in the sky — a scientific, skeptical approach can cast reasonable doubt on the "strangeness" of cases that appear at first glance to be very impressive.
• The general sensationalization surrounding the subject, including the perception that many amateur researchers lack proper scientific training and instead have a "readiness to believe"

While many scientists would agree that the sighting of a genuine extraterrestrial craft is not an impossibility, some also argue that that the patterns of reported UFO behavior do not personally strike them as rational. Why, for example, would sightings occur with great frequency for decades without any attempt by the alien intelligence to communicate its presence unambiguously? Or if an extraterrestrial civilization was engaged in mapping or otherwise investigating the earth, as some have hypothesized, why would it take so long, when present-day terrestrial technology, such as satellites, can do the job so quickly?

Proponents, however, note that there are counterarguments to all of these objections. Some of these are:

• Many of the skeptical arguments rest on hidden or presumed assumptions about alien intentions and technology. Why would aliens necessarily make their presence unambiguously known? Why would alien interests necessarily be restricted to simple physical surveys? Why assume interstellar travel to be nearly impossible, basically an assumption that alien science and technology would not be that much more advanced than that of present-day humans?
• Some arguments show a lack of knowledge of the available evidence. Many sightings, for example, are not of distant "lights in the sky," which might easily be simple misidentifications, but are of structured objects at close range, often with associated physical effects and evidence (see below).
• Why focus on only poor cases when there are also many high-quality, unexplainable ones, even when investigated by trained scientists, such as those involved with the Battelle Institute investigation for the U.S. Air Force in the 1950's or the 1960's Condon Commission?

In the past, the Condon Report's negative conclusions seem to have been particularly damaging to the likelihood of large numbers of scientists involving themselves seriously in the investigation of UFOs. However, the conclusions section of the report was written by Condon, who expressed public disdain for the subject long before the investigation was concluded. Subsequent reviews by the AIAA, and more recently by a scientific panel organized by Dr. Peter A. Sturrock [10], have shown that the conclusions section was badly at variance with the report's actual contents, where about 30% of the cases examined could not be explained. When the report came out in late 1969, atmospheric physicist Dr. James E. McDonald wrote a paper called "Science in Default," criticizing the Condon Report for bad science, and furthermore criticising mainstream science for its failure to deal with the subject. [11] Nonetheless, the positive evidence presented by Sturrock and others in support of UFO reality has seen little attention or support from other scientists.

Recently, hopes that this theme might be about to become respectable again were raised when a peer reviewed article on UFOs and SETI appeared in JBIS, the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society. A good introduction to this aspect of the subject is given by one of the authors, astronomer Bernard Haisch, in his website [12], an introduction to the area for scientists, which has a link to the JBIS article.

This alleged widespread negative feeling among the scientific community regarding UFOs as outlined above has been challenged as inaccurate. Following a formal 1977 survey of the American Astronomical Society, Sturrock learned that a majority of those who responded to the survey (1356 responded; over half of the AAS membership) thought that UFOs deserved scientific study, and were willing to contribute their time and expertise to such studies. His results were: [13]

• 53% felt UFOs were definitely or probably a topic worthy of further scientific study vs. only 20% who felt they definitely or probably were not.
• 80% expressed a willingness to contribute to the resolution of the UFO question, though only 13% of these could think of a way to do so.
• Lack of knowledge strongly contributed to skepticism and lack of willingness to investigate. Only 29% of those having spent less than an hour reading about the subject felt further investigation was warranted vs. 68% who had spent over 300 hours.
• Younger scientists were more willing to investigate than older ones.
• Skepticism against the extraterrestrial hypothesis ran high. Probabilities of conventional explanations such as hoax or familiar/unfamiliar craft or natural phenomena were rated at 13% to 23% vs. only 3% for UFOs being actual alien craft.
• 5% of respondents admitted to puzzling sightings; only 10% of these said they had reported their sightings.

Sturrock did another survey of over 400 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics members in 1973. About two-thirds thought UFOs were possibly, probably, or certainly a scientifically significant problem. 5% said they had had UFO sightings. 10% thought UFOs were from space. [14][15]

Sturrock noted in summarizing his surveys that guaranteed anonymity was important in getting high rates of response. Possibly fear of ridicule by colleagues or fear of professional repercussions may figure in suppressing open expression of interest in the subject within the scientific community. Dr. Jacques Vallee claims many scientists are interested in investigating UFOs but prefer to work quietly in the background because of the attached "ridicule factor." Vallee refers to these scientists as the "invisible college."

Other surveys of scientific/technical and well-educated groups also show clear interest in UFOs or belief that they are real or extraterrestrial. A 1971 survey of Industrial Research/Development magazine, based on 90,000 readers, found that 76% felt the government wasn't revealing all it knew about UFOs. 54% thought UFOs definitely or probably existed and 32% thought they came from outer space. A 1978 survey of Optical Spectra readers found 42% felt it "quite conceivable" that UFOs were space ships from other civilizations. Two 1970s surveys of MENSA members revealed over 50% thought they were from space. Opinion polls of the general public have also consistently shown that the higher the education the more likely people are to believe UFOs are real. For example, a 1978 Gallup poll found 66% of college graduates thought UFOs real vs. 57% for high school graduates and 36% for those with only grade school education. [16]

Still, some claim the general perception in the scientific community remains that, if UFO reports pose a scientific problem at all, it has more to do with psychology and the science of perception than with physical science. Indeed, most reports simply comprise narrative accounts of what someone saw or thought he saw in the sky. However, it is also pointed out that trying to reduce UFO sightings to mere psychological misperceptions of individuals is often inadequate. A large fraction of reports involve more than one witness, and sometimes an event is witnessed from two or more different locations. There have also been mass sightings, sometimes involving hundreds or even thousands of witnesses. Sightings may also be accompanied by corroborating information such as radar tracking, movies, or physical effects on individuals or the environment.

Others feel that physical scientists cannot get involved in the UFO problem unless there is associated physical evidence. If there is no physical evidence, then it is contended there is no way that physical scientists can contribute to the resolution of this problem.

One objection to this argument is that even eyewitness accounts can be treated with scientific methods to obtain important information. Witnesses to meteor fireballs, for example, can be interviewed to reconstruct trajectories, and this often leads to recovery of meteorite fragments. Accuracy and reliability of individual accounts is not essential if large numbers of sightings are analyzed, because statistical analysis can reveal important trends. One example of applying such techniques in researching UFO reports occurred during investigations of the mysterious Green Fireballs that suddenly appeared over sensitive military and research installations in New Mexico in the late 1940s. Hundreds of witnesses were interviewed to determine object characteristics and also to try to recover fragments through determination of trajectories.

A massive statistical analysis of UFO cases, called Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14, was commissioned by the USAF and carried out from 1952 to 1954 by the Battelle Memorial Institute (see United States government studies above). Statistician Dr. David Saunders, a member of the Condon Commission, recommended compiling a statistical data base of cases to determine trends, which eventually resulted in a catalog of over 10,000 cases compiled by Saunders and others. [17] Various other researchers have also compiled such databases, such as Dr. Jacques Vallee, [18] or Larry Hatch, who maintains a public database of thousands of cases with online statistical analyses. [19]

It has also been argued by various people, such as physicist Dr. Michio Kaku, that the demand for hard physical evidence (the fabled "alien hubcap") is an unreasonably restrictive one. Kaku and others have noted that much of physical science consists of indirect physical evidence, such as spectrograms of stars to determine composition. Nobody, for example, demands an actual piece of a neutron star for analysis.

Physical evidence

There have, in fact been many UFO reports accompanied by physical evidence of various kinds, both direct and indirect. Hynek's close encounter scale would define indirect physical evidence as data obtained from "close encounters of the first kind," i.e. data obtained from afar, such as radar contacts or photographs. More direct physical evidence comes from "close encounters of the second kind," interactions occurring at close range, which include so-called "landing traces," and physiological effects.

A small fraction of these cases have been shown to be deliberate hoaxes. A larger fraction, including those researched by governmental and military authorities, have been labeled unidentified or unexplainable. Analyses of most cases have results that are ambiguous or inconclusive. However, even the ambiguous physical cases should be amenable to statistical analysis to reveal possible underlying trends across cases.

A list of various physical evidence cases includes:

• Radar contact and tracking, sometimes from multiple sites. These are often considered among the best cases since they usually involve trained military personnel, simultaneous visual sightings, and aircraft intercepts. One such recent example were the mass sightings of large, silent, low-flying black triangles in 1989 and 1990 over Belgium.
• Photograpic evidence, including still photos, movie film, and video, including some in infrared spectrum (rare).
• Images recorded by SOHO and other Sun watching probes. A library of Star Cruisers has been compiled complete with links to the official government versions of the images.
• Recorded visual spectrograms (extremely rare) — (see Spectrometer)
• Recorded gravimetric and magnetic disturbances (extremely rare)
• Landing physical trace evidence, including ground impressions, burned and/or dessicated soil, burned and broken foliage, magnetic anomalies, increased radiation levels, and metallic traces. See, e.g. Height 611 UFO Incident or the 1964 Lonnie Zamora's Socorro, New Mexico encounter, considered one of the most inexplicable of the USAF Project Blue Book cases). A well-known example from December 1980 was the USAF Rendlesham Forest Incident in England. Another less than 2 weeks later, in January 1981, occurred in Trans-en-Provence and was investigated by GEPAN, then France's official government UFO-investigation agency. [20] Catalogs of several thousand such cases have been compiled, particularly by researcher Ted Phillips.[21][22]
• Physiological effects on people and animals including temporary paralysis, skin burns and rashes, corneal burns, and symptoms resembling radiation poisoning, such as the Cash-Landrum incident in 1980. One such case dates back to 1886, a Venezuelan incident reported in Scientific American magazine. [23]
• So-called Animal/Cattle Mutilation cases, that some feel are also part of the UFO phenomenon. Such cases can and have been analyzed using forensic science techniques.
• Biological effects on plants such as increased or decreased growth, germination effects on seeds, and blown-out stem nodes (usually associated with physical trace cases or crop circles)
• Electromagnetic interference effects, including stalled cars, power black-outs, radio/TV interference, magnetic compass deflections, and aircraft navigation, communication, and engine disruption.[24]
• Remote radiation detection, some noted in FBI and CIA documents occurring over government nuclear installations at Los Alamos National Laboratory and Oak Ridge National Laboratory in 1950, also reported by Project Blue Book director Ed Ruppelt in his book. [25]
• Actual hard physical evidence cases, such as 1957, Ubatuba, Brazil, magnesium fragments analyzed in the Condon Report and by others. The 1964 Socorro incident also left metal traces, analyzed by NASA.
• Misc: Recorded electromagnetic emissions, such as microwaves detected in the well-known 1957 RB-47 surveillance aircraft case, which was also a visual and radar case; [26] polarization rings observed around a UFO by a scientist, theorized by Dr. James Harder as intense magnetic fields from the UFO causing the Faraday effect. [27]

Despite the low opinion of the subject matter possibly held by many scientists, many reported physical effects would seem to be ripe for scientific analysis. A comprehensive scientific review of physical evidence cases was carried out by the 1997 Sturrock UFO panel.[28]

Some scientists and engineers have attempted to reverse engineer the possible physics behind UFOs through analysis of both eyewitness reports and the physical evidence. Examples are former NASA engineer James McCampbell in his book Ufology online and NACA/NASA engineer Paul Hill in his book Unconventional Flying Objects. Among subjects tackled by both McCampbell and Hill was the question of how UFOs can fly at supersonic speeds without creating a sonic boom. McCampbell's solution of a microwave plasma parting the air in front of the craft is currently being researched by Dr. Leik Myrabo, Professor of Engineering Physics at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute as a possible advance in hypersonic flight.[29]1995 Aviation Week article

Some recently reported developments in electronic warfare mimic electromagnetic interference and physiologic effects described in UFO cases dating back to the 1940s and 1950s, and may conceivably be examples of military reverse engineering efforts. In late 1998, the U.S. Air Force Scientific Advisory Board issued a report on 21st century air force weaponry, in which they described microwave directed energy weapons that could be used to stall vehicles, making them easy targets for bombing. The same weapon is also reported capable of disrupting aircraft navigation and communication systems, as well as ground electronics and power grids. [30] A microwave crowd control nonlethal weapon causing heating and intense pain was announced in 2001. [31] Other microwave weapons have been proposed that would cause loss of bodily functions. [32] (See also wonder weapons)

Identified flying objects (IFOs)

It has been estimated that up to 90% of all reported UFO sightings are eventually identified. While a small percentage of UFO reports are deliberate hoaxes, most are misidentifications of natural and man-made phenomena.

However, the actual percentages of IFOs vs. UFOs depends on who is doing the study and can vary widely depending on criteria. For example, scientists for the Battelle Memorial Institute, who did a study for the USAF of 3201 UFO cases in the 1950s, ended up with 22% being unidentified, using the stringent criteria that all four analysts had to agree that the case had no prosaic explanation, whereas agreement of only two analysts was needed to list the case as explained.

In contrast, much more conservative numbers for the percentage of UFOs were arrived at individually by Allen Hendry, who was the chief investigator for the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS). CUFOS was founded by Dr. Allen Hynek (who had been a consultant for the Air Force’s Project Blue Book) to provide a serious scientific investigation into UFOs. Hendry spent 15 months personally investigating 1,307 UFO reports. In 1979, Hendry published his conclusions in The UFO Handbook: A Guide to Investigating, Evaluating, and Reporting UFO Sightings. Hendry admitted that he would like to find evidence for extraterrestrials but noted that the vast majority of cases had prosaic explanations. Hendry’s conclusions were:

• "Out of 1,307 cases: 1,194 (91.4%) had clear prosaic (non-extraterrestrial) explanations; 93 (7.1%) had possible prosaic explanations; and 20 (1.5%) were unexplained.

• Statistics: 28% of the UFO reports were bright stars or planets; 1.7% were the tip of the crescent moon; 18% were advertising plane banners (usually seen edge-on rather than the face-on); and 9% were fireballs and reentering space debris.

• Distortions in the atmosphere can cause celestial bodies to appear to “dart up and down,” “execute loops and figure eights,” “meander in a square pattern,” or even “zigzag.” This helps explain why celestial bodies can so easily fool observers.

• In 49 of the UFO reports caused by celestial bodies, the witness’ estimated distance to the UFO ranged from 200 feet to 125 miles (60 m to 200 km). Similarly, some witnesses believed that the UFO was “following them” even though the celestial body was actually stationary. Even police and other reliable witnesses can easily be fooled by sightings of stars and planets.

• Reentering space debris or meteors may appear as a string of lights, which can be misinterpreted as lights coming from windows of a spacecraft. The human brain then creates the illusion of a spacecraft based on this misinterpretation, which then fools the observer."

Common misidentifications of human phenomena include:

• Balloons (meteorological or passenger).
• Military aircraft.
• Flashing landing lights of conventional aircraft.
• Unconventional aircraft or advanced technology (i.e., the SR-71 Blackbird or the B-2 Stealth bomber).
• Advertising planes.
• Artificial earth satellites (and particularly satellite flares, which can be surprisingly bright)
• Hovering aircraft (such as helicopters).
• Blimps.
• Rockets and rocket launches.
• Kites.
• Model aircraft.
• Hang-gliders.
• Fireworks.
• Lasers aimed at the clouds.
• Searchlights.
• Deliberate hoaxes.
• Jiffy Fire Starters.

Common misidentifications of natural objects include:

• The moon, stars, and planets (for example, the cusps of the rising crescent moon in the tropics, and Venus at maximum brightness)
• Unusual weather conditions (such as lenticular cloud formations, noctilucent clouds, rainbow effects, and high-altitude ice crystals).
• Comets.
• Meteor Swarms.
• Near or large meteors.
• Flocks of birds.
• Swarms of flying insects.
• Reflections from atmospheric inversion layers.
• Hot ionized gas (natural or man-made).
• Earth lights (luminous electrical events from low-level earthquakes and tectonic-geological phenomena.)
• Ball lightning.
• Atmospheric inversion layers.
• Reflected light (especially through broken clouds).
• Aurora borealis (northern lights).

Popular ideas for explaining UFOs

Depending on who is doing the evaluation, between about 3% and 30% of all cases remain unexplained. The remaining residue of unexplained UFO sightings constitute a debate on their ultimate origin. Some of the more popular hypotheses for explaining UFOs are:

• The Extraterrestrial Visitation Hypothesis
• The Paranormal/Occult Hypothesis
• The Interdimensional Hypothesis
• The Psychological-Social Hypothesis
• The Natural Explanation Hypothesis, e.g. ball lightning
• The Earthlights/Tectonic Stress Hypothesis
• The Man-made Craft Hypothesis (see Military flying saucers)
• More than one explanation--various combinations of the above

Evidence and explanations

Some feel that UFO study is still a worthwhile topic because of open questions, especially due to occasional reports of UFOs from professional or military astronomers or pilots — individuals whose careers, and often their very lives, rely on their ability to recognize and assess aircraft, weather conditions, distances, and other factors vital to flight. Some Ufologists argue such cases are more difficult to dismiss as misidentification of mundane objects. Gordon Cooper and Edgar Mitchell are two NASA astronauts who have expressed an interest in UFOs, and both have decried what they consider the biased attitudes of some professionals; Cooper claims to have seen UFOs in the early 1950s.

It is also noted that UFO evidence goes beyond just eyewitness accounts. There is sometimes corroborating evidence such as simultaneous radar contact, photographs/movies/video, or physical interactions with the environment, e.g., electromagnetic interference, physiological effects, or "landing traces." (see Science and UFOs section)

Skeptics and ufologists both agree that the vast majority of cases can be explained as natural phenomena, usually misidentification of objects that viewers are either unfamiliar with or see in unusual conditions. These turn out to be honest mistakes. Only a few percent of sightings have been actual hoaxes.

After investigation, most UFOs actually become IFOs — Identified Flying Objects. However, a small residual, from 3% to 30% depending on who is doing the counting, remain unexplained. The 1950s Battelle Memorial Institute statistical study, commissioned by Project Blue Book, found that it was actually the better cases with the better witnesses and evidence that tended to defy explanation. Their percentage of unexplained cases out of 3200 studied was 22%, which went up to 35% for the best cases.

However, even if the overwhelming majority of all UFOs become IFOs, one well documented case such as the Chile 1997 radar/visual case confirmed by the government in Santiago [33] is sufficient to negate the 'null hypothesis'. Similarly, Physicist Michio Kaku states that although "perhaps 99% of all sightings of UFOs can be dismissed as being caused by familiar phenomena" that "What is disturbing, to a physicist however, is the remaining 1% of these sightings, which are multiple sightings made by multiple methods of observations. Some of the most intriguing sightings have been made by seasoned pilots and passengers aboard air line flights which have also been tracked by radar and have been videotaped. Sightings like this are harder to dismiss."[34]

On the other hand, many still inexplicable cases are either ignored by the media or, if a purported skeptic offers an explanation that fails to fit the facts (e.g., Zig-zagging formation of lights and confirmed by radar are blamed on misinterpreting 'Jupiter'), it is often taken up by the press and the case is closed, as far as the media is concerned.