Magazine Summary
ON FLYING SAUCERS AND OTHER “UNUSUAL” AERIAL OBJECTS
Summary
This article by Julius Sumner Miller examines the subject of flying saucers and unusual aerial objects from a scientific viewpoint. It notes that while many reports can be explained as weather balloons, planes, reflections, or meteors, approximately 20% remain unexplained. The current scientific consensus attributes these to atmospheric phenomena like mirages or fog, though a hovering nocturnal light is mentioned as not fitting known physics. The article also references historical reports from 1916 and 1932 and suggests that psychological abstractions or even spots in the eyes could explain some observations.
Magazine Overview
This document is a scanned page from a publication titled "ON FLYING SAUCERS AND OTHER ‘UNUSUAL’ AERIAL OBJECTS". The article is authored by Julius Sumner Miller, identified as a Ford Foundation Fellow from the University of California, Los Angeles. The page number is 716.
The Subject of Flying Saucers
Julius Sumner Miller begins by noting that as the year is about to turn (he is writing on Christmas day), it is an opportune time to review the subject of flying saucers and other unusual aerial objects, which has garnered significant attention in both reputable and disreputable press outlets. He acknowledges the peculiar position science teachers find themselves in when asked about these phenomena, as children can pose difficult questions. Miller states his intention is to summarize the scientific utterances on the subject from reputable technical quarters to convey the general position held by scientific observers.
He observes that while no final opinion has been definitively stated by the scientific community, the evidence points in a particular direction, though readers are free to interpret based on their own judgment or bias.
Historical and Mythological Context
Miller draws a parallel between man's history, which is filled with mythical and real occurrences, and the sky. He notes that early written records and stone writings depict the sky populated by gods, birds, and animals, with constellations being mental constructs of mythical creatures. This mythology, he points out, persists today, with constellations still taught based on conjured likenesses.
He then introduces a "new" mythology that has arisen, largely from reports by balloon and airplane observers and air-defense spotters. Miller suggests these reports possess a psychological character rather than a purely physical one.
Air Force Interest and Report Analysis
The Air Force has shown particular interest in flying saucers for evident reasons. Miller states that a sifting and analysis of reports by reliable, competent observers reveal that roughly 80% of these observations can be explained by conventional means. These explanations include:
- Weather balloons
- Planes
- Reflections from objects like newspapers flying about
- Meteors (at night)
- Reflections of searchlight beams incident on clouds
These are considered real phenomena. However, Miller notes that approximately 20% of utterly reliable reports lack a simple explanation.
Scientific Explanations for Unexplained Phenomena
The current position in scientific quarters regarding these unexplained mysteries is that they are atmospheric phenomena. These include mirages, fog, and ice-crystal layers. Miller asserts that nearly all "objects" reported by pilots at great heights can be explained by standard physical concepts. He highlights one specific observation that does not fit known physics: a hovering nocturnal light. As a way to resolve this dilemma, he mentions the possibility that these flying saucer images could be craft from interplanetary space, manned by beings from other planets.
Historical Precedents and Alternative Views
Miller points out that these "unusual" phenomena are not new to the literature. He cites a recent letter to *Science* (Vol. 116, page 640) that refers to reports by Elihu Thomson in 1916 and by John Zeleny in 1932, which described similar "objects in the sky."
He then presents another perspective: if these phenomena are not real in the sky and not pure psychological abstractions, could they be spots in the eyes? He uses the example of the "canals" on Mars, suggesting that this is how they were "established."
Societal Context
The article concludes with a brief, seemingly unrelated statistic: that in the fall, the United States was short about 345,000 public elementary and secondary school classrooms, with three out of every five classrooms being overcrowded.
Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance
The primary theme of this article is the scientific investigation and explanation of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), commonly known as flying saucers. The author, Julius Sumner Miller, adopts a balanced approach, acknowledging the public fascination and the existence of unexplained sightings while grounding the discussion in scientific principles and observable data. The editorial stance is one of cautious skepticism towards sensational claims, favoring conventional explanations where possible, but also admitting the limitations of current scientific understanding for certain phenomena. The article encourages critical thinking and interpretation based on evidence and personal judgment, rather than accepting unsubstantiated theories. There is an underlying concern for the scientific literacy of the public and educators when faced with such topics.
Although no final opinion has been stated except by the quacks the evidence points clearly in one direction, but readers are still free to interpret as their judgment or bias dictates.
Frequently Asked Questions
What percentage of flying saucer reports are generally explained by conventional means?
Roughly 80% of these observations by reliable, competent observers fall into categories such as weather balloons, planes, reflections, meteors, or reflections of searchlight beams incident on clouds.
What is the current scientific position on unexplained aerial phenomena?
The position now taken in scientific quarters is that these unexplained mysteries are atmospheric phenomena such as mirages and fog and ice-crystal layers. Nearly all the 'objects' reported by fliers at great heights can be explained on the basis of standard physical concepts.
Are there any observations of unusual aerial objects that do not fit known physics?
Yes, one observation mentioned is that of a hovering nocturnal light, which still does not fall within the description of known physics.
What historical reports of unusual aerial objects are mentioned?
A recent letter to Science refers to reports by Elihu Thomson in 1916 and by John Zeleny in 1932, wherein were described some 'objects in the sky.'
In This Issue
People Mentioned
- Julius Sumner MillerFord Foundation Fellow, University of California, Los Angeles
- Elihu Thomson
- John Zeleny
Organisations
- Ford Foundation
- University of California, Los Angeles
- Air Force
- Science
Locations
- Los Angeles, USA
- Mars