1979 02 00 OMNI - Oberg - UFO Update

Magazine Overview

Title: ASTRONOMY AND THE FLYING SAUCER
Issue: UFO UPDATE
Volume: 32
Date: 1979 (derived from context, issue date raw is 'OMNI')
Publisher: Omni
Price: $2.50
Cover Headline: UFO UPDATE

This issue of Omni, dated 1979, features a comprehensive exploration of the UFO phenomenon, focusing on the intersection of astronomy and unidentified aerial phenomena. Written by James Oberg, the articles delve into why professional astronomers are hesitant to report sightings, the nature of their encounters, and the ongoing efforts to uncover government involvement and data related to UFOs.

Why Aren't Astronomers Reporting UFOs?

James Oberg addresses the common question of why professional astronomers, with their deep knowledge of the cosmos, are not the primary reporters of UFOs. He explains that while astronomers do occasionally report UFOs, their reports are fewer than those from the general public. This is attributed to their familiarity with sky phenomena, which helps them identify most events, and their modern research methods, which often involve analyzing photographic plates or monitoring closed-circuit TV rather than direct telescope observation of small sky areas. A 1976 survey by Dr. Peter Sturrock of Stanford University found that less than 3 percent of polled astronomers had witnessed or instrumentally recorded an unidentified event potentially related to UFOs.

Despite the low reporting rate, the article highlights intriguing cases from astronomers, including lights that hovered and vanished, executed bizarre maneuvers, or appeared in strange formations. Some classic 'flying saucer' sightings are also recounted, such as a silvery disc with colored lights observed by an astronomer and his family, or a glowing sphere dancing around a tree. However, many of these compelling accounts have not been rigorously investigated by UFO experts.

Identified Flying Objects (IFOs) and Scientific Scrutiny

The concept of an 'Identified Flying Object' (IFO) is presented as a testament to an observer's perception and sometimes luck. An example is given of an astronomer who observed a bright, aluminum-hued flying saucer near Pensacola, Florida, which later turned out to be a reflection from a thin cloud layer and an inversion layer, thus becoming an IFO.

Astronomers involved in 'full-sky' searches for artificial satellites and meteors, such as those using the Baker-Nunn cameras, are discussed. While these projects aim to track light in the night sky, there is debate about whether unidentified objects have been photographed. Some pro-UFO specialists believe such photos exist but are hidden or destroyed, while others argue that UFOs, being localized and low-level, wouldn't appear on these wide-field scans. Scientists involved in these projects invite UFO colleagues to examine the photographic files, a challenge that has reportedly been declined due to the expense and time involved.

Dr. Carl Sagan, in his Encyclopedia Americana entry on UFOs, cited a Harvard observatory sky survey from the mid-1950s that detected no unexplained objects, contributing to the general skepticism among astronomers.

However, Dr. J. Allen Hynek disputes this, recalling that during the Moonwatch satellite-tracking mission, his team picked up 'things' on film that were never fully investigated, suggesting that such anomalies were dismissed due to the effort required for investigation. This contrasts with the views of other scientists, including Dr. Frederick Whipple, who stated that the SAO files were available for investigation and that Hynek knew he would find nothing if he pursued it.

UFO theorist Jacques Vallee suggested that French scientists may have destroyed UFO evidence out of fear. Conversely, an astronomer who worked on the satellite-survey project dismissed the idea of hidden UFOs on Baker-Nunn cameras, stating they only recorded objects identifiable as satellites or meteors. This astronomer was later identified as Dr. J. Allen Hynek, whose earlier statement was reportedly removed from later reprints of Edward Ruppelt's book 'The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects' due to its skeptical conclusions.

Government Secrecy and UFO Files

A significant portion of the issue is dedicated to the question of government secrecy surrounding UFOs. Many UFO buffs believe the government holds secret files and conducts covert studies, despite official denials. The article discusses efforts to extract UFO-related documents from agencies like the CIA, Air Force, Navy, FBI, and State Department through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

Groups like 'Ground Saucer Watch' and 'Citizens Against UFO Secrecy' (CAUS) have filed legal suits to obtain these documents. CAUS aims to uncover any information the government may not have disclosed and to determine if UFO research continues after the termination of Project Blue Book. While some intriguing, though not spectacular, information has been released, officials appear to have been as baffled by the phenomenon as the public, with internal government attitudes ranging from credulity to suspicion.

Reports of unidentified aerial activity continue to be distributed among government agencies and foreign sources. However, there is no evidence of ongoing investigations into civilian UFO sightings or a special office dedicated to UFOs. The current approach seems to be the routine circulation of reports to relevant agencies for their specific interests, such as unidentified aircraft for the Air Force or FBI.

The Question of Prosecution and Lost Cases

The issue of federal prosecution for disclosing UFO data is also examined. Despite government regulations, there are no records of individuals being prosecuted for discussing UFO sightings. However, many people with 'startling UFO stories' remain unwilling to share them publicly or provide their names, citing fear of disclosure.

UFO investigators are often skeptical of these claims, as stories can be fraudulent, based on memory errors, or are third- or fourth-hand accounts. The article also touches upon the question of whether all UFO reports sent to the Air Force ended up in the Blue Book files. Some researchers have collected cases from the 1950s that were officially reported but never appeared in the Blue Book registry.

Former astronaut Gordon Cooper is cited as an example, recounting an incident where he and his team photographed a landed UFO at Edwards AFB in the mid-1950s, but the films mysteriously vanished. Skeptics suggest that such disappearances could be due to misperceptions of classified military tests rather than extraterrestrial craft.

To address this ambiguity, UFO researchers called on President Carter to issue an executive order waiving federal prosecution for citizens willing to disclose UFO information, hoping to open up new sources of data. As of early 1979, there had been no response from the White House.

Controversy Within UFO Groups

The article also points out internal controversies within UFO groups, noting that some groups, like Ground Saucer Watch and CAUS, have been criticized for withholding documents that do not support their conspiratorial theories. Philip J. Klass, a UFO skeptic, accused CAUS of selectively releasing material and withholding crucial information, particularly regarding a 'crashed saucer' incident allegedly hidden by the government in 1948. CAUS, through its director W. Todd Zechel, rejected these allegations, stating they are committed to presenting findings based on the evidence.

Next Omni Previews

The issue also includes previews for the next Omni magazine, highlighting articles on space tourism, an interview with Arthur C. Clarke about extraterrestrials and space colonization, a piece on the cloning of a human being by David Rorvik, a profile of Albert Einstein, the 'Langdon Adult Intelligence Test,' and the results of a 'Delphic Poll' from readers.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the scientific investigation of UFO phenomena, the role of professional astronomers, government transparency, and the persistent skepticism and controversy surrounding UFOs. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, presenting various viewpoints from scientists, researchers, and skeptics, while acknowledging the enduring public fascination and the ongoing search for definitive evidence.