1966 09 03 Saturday Review John Lear

Magazine Overview

Title: Saturday Review
Issue Date: September 3, 1966
Cover Headline: REPORT FROM GENEVA
Main Article Focus: The Disputed CIA Document on UFOs

This issue of Saturday Review features a prominent article by Norman Cousins titled "The Disputed CIA Document on UFOs," which critically examines the handling of unidentified flying object (UFO) investigations by the U.S. government, particularly the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Air Force.

The Disputed CIA Document on UFOs

The article begins by referencing a previous report on the twenty-year-old argument about whether Earth is being explored by extraterrestrial vehicles. It notes the scientific plausibility of intelligent life elsewhere but questions the likelihood of such life surviving interstellar travel and landing on Earth without leaving traces, contrasting this with the debris left by human lunar missions.

The core of the article revolves around the minutes of a 1953 meeting of a panel of eminent scientists, headed by H. P. Robertson of the California Institute of Technology, which was convened to study UFOs. The Air Force, through the Blue Book Project director Major Hector Quintanilla, Jr., requested declassification of these minutes. However, the CIA, which had summoned the panel, provided only a "sanitized" (edited) version, citing national security reasons.

This editing process is presented as highly problematic. The author argues that the CIA's insistence on censorship, despite the Air Force's request for unequivocal declassification, suggests that vital information of long-range significance might be withheld. The fact that the CIA, rather than the Air Force, acted as the censor is interpreted as a potential sign that the missing data has clandestine implications, a claim long made by UFO enthusiasts.

The article contrasts the edited version of the Robertson panel's report with its original signed text. The primary conclusion of the signed report was that UFO evidence showed no indication of being a direct physical threat to national security and did not suggest the presence of foreign artifacts capable of hostile acts. The panel recommended that national security agencies strip UFOs of their special status and aura of mystery by implementing a public reassurance program.

The edited minutes, however, introduce a "shift in emphasis" and a "momentary difference of opinion among the panelists." While the panel as a whole did not accept the thesis that UFOs are interstellar vehicles, one member's background as an aeronautical engineer and technical intelligence officer led him to eliminate all known and probable causes of sightings, leaving "extraterrestrial" as the only remaining explanation for some cases. However, the panel could not accept these cases due to them being raw, unevaluated reports.

Ruppelt's Account and the "Hierarchy Ponders"

The article references Captain Edward J. Ruppelt's book, "The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects," which published an excerpt from the Robertson panel's report under the heading "The Hierarchy Ponders." This excerpt states that while the possibility of inhabited celestial bodies and interstellar travel is not impossible, "there is nothing in all of the so-called 'flying saucer' reports that we have read that would indicate that this is taking place."
Ruppelt's own reflections suggest that the panel found loopholes in even the best sightings, and that while they had "good circumstantial evidence," they lacked concrete facts like hardware, photos, measured speeds, altitudes, or sizes. The panel considered the possibility of UFOs being a new natural phenomenon but noted that their general appearance did not follow a consistent pattern.

Ruppelt expected the panel to recommend scaling back or canceling Project Blue Book, but instead, they recommended its expansion. This was due to the number of reports from credible observers and the potential for new sightings to provide scientific data valuable to the Air Force.

The 1966 Committee Report and CIA's Role

The article then discusses a 1966 ad hoc committee of the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, which reviewed the findings of previous scientific panels, including the Robertson panel. This committee also concluded that there was no evidence that UFOs posed a threat to national security.

However, the committee recommended strengthening the Air Force's UFO program by quadrupling its investigative force, staffing it with experts in various scientific fields, and setting up instruments in frequent UFO sighting locations. They also stressed the importance of informing the public about all details of UFO investigations to dispel mystery and ensure accountability.

The article highlights the confusing consequences of the CIA's editing, noting that the 1966 committee's concluding paragraphs echoed Captain Ruppelt's points. The committee urged that scientific reports be printed in full and made available, and that condensed versions be included in Project Blue Book publications, with wide circulation among prominent members of Congress and other public figures.

The author suggests that the CIA's editing of the Robertson panel minutes in 1953 might have been a mistake, and that the unexpurgated text should be made public. The panel believed a disciplined approach could resolve the UFO mystery within eighteen months to two years, a timeframe similar to the eighteen-month duration of the $300,000 appropriation for the 1966 independent university study.

Letters to the Science Editor

The "Letters to the Science Editor" section addresses several points:

• Ufoof: A reader points out an error in the magazine's previous article, stating that there is no "St. James translation" of the Bible, but rather the King James Version commissioned in 1610 and completed in 1611.
• Caption Misleading: A reader questions why a picture caption was misleading. The science editor explains that the caption was based on information from an Air Force officer who, under deadline pressure, spoke from memory, leading to inconsistencies.
• Ezekiel References: A reader inquires about the references to Ezekiel's UFO sightings, noting that Arthur W. Orton in "Analog Science Fact & Fiction" interpreted Ezekiel's account as a description of an actual extraterrestrial landing.
• Mount Rainier Location: Several readers correct the magazine's geographical reference, stating that Mount Rainier is in the Cascade Range of Washington State, not the Rockies.
• NICAP Photo Analysis: A reader criticizes the NICAP representative's analysis of a UFO photo, calling the comparison to a "straw hat" unscientific.
• Dust Cloud: A reader questions how Rex Heflin could have created a dust cloud while photographing a UFO from his vehicle.
• Psychological Impact of UFOs: A reader recommends the book "When Prophecy Fails" by Festinger, Riecken, and Schachter for a sociological and psychological study of UFO cults.
• Astronomers and Mars Canals: A reader questions whether astronomers who cannot see UFOs are the same ones who could see canals on Mars.
• Objective Investigation: A reader praises the magazine's objective investigation of the UFO controversy, noting that the subject often lends itself to ridicule.

Medical Ethics (continued)

This section continues a discussion on medical ethics, with a reader expressing gratitude for the series "Experiments on Humans-The Growing Debate." The reader, a medical student, finds the debate valuable in preparing for future responsibilities as a physician.

Another reader discusses a study at the University of Pittsburgh Health Law Center concerning disclosure to patients. The study aims to determine an objective standard for disclosure of information about experimental procedures, risks, and consequences prior to obtaining consent. The goal is to establish a format for the disclosure process and assess consistency among surgeons.

Other Content

• Book Review: A review of "Intelligence in the Universe" by Roger A. Mac Gowan and Frederick I. Ordway, III, is mentioned, noting that it downgrades "flying saucer opera."
• Letters from Readers: Several other letters discuss various aspects of UFO sightings, scientific investigation, and public perception, including a critique of the Air Force's approach and a defense of policeman Lonnie Zamora's sighting in Socorro, New Mexico.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the scientific investigation of UFOs, the role of government agencies (particularly the CIA and Air Force) in handling and potentially censoring information, and the public's perception and susceptibility to sensationalism regarding UFOs. The editorial stance appears to favor transparency, rigorous scientific methodology, and a critical examination of official narratives, while also acknowledging the public's fascination with the unknown.