Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1997 -> Feb -> Oberg/Cooper rebuttal.6

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: "Jerry Cohen" <rjcohen@li.net>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 07:13:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 09:12:25 -0500
Subject: Oberg/Cooper rebuttal.6


=================
Oberg/Cooper rebuttal.6
continued from 5
----------------------------------
A researcher's response to James Oberg's:
"IN SEARCH OF GORDON COOPER'S UFOs"
by Jerry Cohen
=================

1.      Why small groups of civilians (scientists & others) are
        presently studying the phenomenon.

2.      Where do we find the truly "hard-core" cases?

   = The accuracy of the following can be checked by consulting
        the sources provided, including your local libraries =

--------------------------------------

        The following is a brief summary of what was discussed in
"Oberg/Cooper rebuttal parts.3-5" and the next important question;
"Where do serious professional researchers look for cases that
they believe may be 'true' unknowns?"  As I said in "Oberg/Cooper
rebuttal.1a/b," this is a highly important point that must be
considered if one is to, within this lifetime, find additional
critical, verifiable documentation regarding UFOs.

I apologize if this is redundant to some but I felt everything
before this should be briefly summarized before continuing with
the three cases.  Those with photographic or just great memories
can skip this.  However, those people who have been unsuccessful
in finding reliable data concerning UFOs should definitely read
this section.  Presentation of the three cases from 1957 will
follow in "Oberg/Cooper rebuttal.7."

--------------------------------------

          =========================================
          SUMMARY OF OBERG/COOPER REBUT.3-5 & NICAP
          =========================================

        So what do we have so far?  We discovered that the Air
Force's own consultant concerning UFOs, after studying them for a
good fifteen years, defected and came out saying that UFOs were
"not all hogwash."  He felt there was a core of cases that could
not be easily explained in scientific terms and were definitely
worth studying.  He put his career on the line to say this to the
world, when others were too fearful to admit to other scientists,
that they might be studying the topic in a sincere fashion. 1
And why did they feel this way?   Because, other scientists, not
knowing the data, were laughing at the possibility these things
could be real. As researchers are painfully aware, some of them
still are today.

Hynek's 1968 letter to Colonel Sleeper, written before Blue Book
closed, told Sleeper that it's 20 year study, the same study the
Air Force was using to claim that the majority of UFO cases had
been thoroughly, scientifically explained, was, in actuality, a
"non-study."  As previously mentioned, with the publishing of that
letter in Hynek's book "The UFO Experience," the bedrock that UFO
skeptics had to stand upon simply crumbled.  The statistics quoted
by the Air Force were, as Hynek put it, "a travesty." 2

We also learned, confirmed by Walter Sullivan, New York Times
Science Editor, and reconfirmed by Dr. Hynek in that same book,
that the "Condon Study" was also greatly influenced by this "fear
of professional ridicule".  Low's fateful memo had exposed the
study as an exercise in pretending to study something it was
afraid of.  The heads of the study wanted, in Dr. Low's own words,
as previously discussed, " ...to describe the project so that, to
the public, it would appear a totally objective study but, to the
scientific community, would present the image of a group of non
believers trying their best to be objective, but having an almost
zero expectation of finding a saucer." 3

Additionally, we found that Hynek wasn't the only one that
disagreed with the results of the "Condon Study."  Other studies
were performed. Other scientists and engineers, felt the data of
the Colorado Study did not support Dr. Condon's conclusions and
fifty scientists had signed a statement urging a congressional
investigation of UFOs to no avail.   Case material presented by
Drs. McDonald and Hynek convinced those professionals that the
conclusions Condon reached were not in keeping with the available
facts. More study was definitely indicated. 4

Now, with the major two studies on UFOs proven to have serious
"flaws" (If you read "Oberg/Cooper rebuttal parts.3-5" you know I
am trying to be kind), what did we have left?  ...... the core of
truly "unsolved" UFO cases which everyone had avoided focusing
upon in the first place.  The question was, how many were there,
where could they be found, and who was going to do the looking?
Unfortunately, not "mainstream science."  This formidable task was
thrust back upon none other than, you guessed it folks, the
civilian UFO groups who had been attempting to collect whatever
data they could on the phenomena all along, without the vast
resources of "mainstream science."

One excellent source of documented sightings was Richard Hall's
previously mentioned manuscript "The UFO Evidence," published back
in 1964 by NICAP' (National Investigations Committee on Aerial
Phenomena).   If you remember, Hall had compiled, edited and
submitted it to numerous congressmen prior to its final
publishing.  5

NICAP was a relatively conservative UFO group. 6  It had an
excellent staff composed of impressive people of quite varied
educational disciplines, some of whom had been fairly high up in
military echelons. 7  It was not quick to claim any sightings were
valid and it's journal provided an excellent place to record these
unusual claims when they were reported. The journal was for the
most part, competent and lucid.  Reports were taken,
investigations conducted, investigator's comments added and
finally entered into the journal. Speculations were held to the
minimum.

Hall's manuscript contained an explanation of NICAP, its policies
and a "reality of UFOs" statement by its Board of Governors. 8  It
also contained, as previously mentioned, a listing of 746
documented sightings by Air Force, Army, Navy & Marine personnel,
pilots and aviation experts, other military personnel,
observations by professional scientists and engineers, including
astronomers and aeronautical engineers. 9   They gave reasons why
the objects that were seen appeared to be under intelligent
control, not just floating debris, balloons, kites, etc.  They
also reported on electro-magnetic effects observed, radar cases,
photographic evidence, physical and physiological effects.  The
majority of cases fell in the date range from 1942-'62.  10
This, then, was an important part of the evidence.

A few cases could be found from some of  the "Blue Book files that
Hynek had presented" in the books he was writing. 11   Others
could be found in the "Blue Book files themselves," IF the Air
Force would permit people to get at them. 12   Remember, Hynek
stated they didn't let HIM peruse the files,  and he was their
"consultant." 13

And yet most amazing of all, another important place some documented
unknowns could be found was in the CONDON STUDY itself. 14
If one waded through the voluminous material therein, one could
find cases actually listed as unknowns by the project's scientists
and some others listed as "solved" that some outside scientists
felt "very" strongly needed reexamining.  Mind you, the project
had not examined many of the best cases available, and yet this
thought provoking fact remained;  it still contained a fairly
large percentage of unknowns.  In reality, as I mentioned
previously, researchers found the study's own data did NOT really
support Condon's conclusions.  15   Therefore, here was another
solid source for investigation, as one could readily see the
thoroughness or lack of same that was applied to each case.

"Hidden cases" provided yet another more nebulous source.  These
were government cases which various researchers had heard rumors
about but could not absolutely prove existed. Project Blue Book
cases such as those illustrated by Dr. Hynek to Colonel Sleeper
and others, including some from the Condon Study which McDonald
brought to the attention of various science groups, were clues
there were probably other "hidden" cases buried not only in Blue
Book files, but also, perhaps, in government communications
regarding same. 16   When the government passed the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA), a means of locating "some" of those cases
via their "related memos" was opened.  Find enough memos and you
could possibly confirm their related cases.  Needless to say, the
UFO groups began filing both requests and, where necessary,
lawsuits to search for what they were virtually positive had to be
there.  The Air Force and government had to know more than they
were telling, and FOIA requests were seen as an excellent way to
flush them out.  As previously mentioned, the book "The UFO Cover-
up" covers both this and more in great detail.  17

With the preceding solidly documented history tucked under our
belts, I can finally get to the specific cases I mentioned at
the outset of these essays.  These cases will give us an indication
of the strength of some of the evidence at hand and demonstrate that
Gorden Coopers claims may be more solid than certain researchers
would have us believe.  This evidence continues to mount,
indicating that there is definitely something flying around our
airspace whose characteristics preclude it belonging to our Air
Force. (or any other that we know)  The first two articles I'll
present were the first I ever cut out of a newspaper.  I eventually
discovered material that led me to believe these reported events
were more solid than I ever imagined.  If they are a secret
development of ours, it was developed back in 1957 when the
following cases occurred.  I don't believe we had an operating
version of the "Stealth" at that time.  What was seen was nothing
like it anyway. You be the judge.


Bibliography:

1       Hynek, J. Allen "The UFO Experience" Henry Regnery Company
1972, appendix 4 (Excerpt of a Letter from J. Allen Hynek to
Colonel Raymond S. Sleeper)
2       Ibid . Appendix 4, Section D, Paragraph 1 . Hynek quote:
"The statistical methods employed by Blue Book are a travesty on
the branch of mathematics known as Statistics."
3       Sullivan, Walter . introduction to the "Scientific Study
of Unidentified Flying Objects",  New York:  Bantam Books (A New
York Times Book), 1/8/69
4.      National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena
(NICAP) Journal . Jan 69 . p 7 : IBID . May 1969 . p 8 : Bulletin
of Atomic Scientists . April 1969 . Dr. Hynek's comments on Condon
Study : McDonald, Dr. James E. . Presentation to Dupont Chapter of
Scientific Research Society of America . Wilmington Delaware . Feb
12, 1969 : McDonald, Dr. James E. . Presentation of National
Amateur Astronomer's Association (NAA) . Aug 22, 1969 : McDonald,
James E. . Presentation to American Association for the
Advancement of Science (AAAS) meeting . Dec 27, 1969 : NICAP
Investigator . Nov 1970 . AIAA Quotes regarding their study on UFO
data : McDonald, Dr. James E. . NICAP UFO Investigator . Feb/Mar
1969 . "A Scientist's Critique" : NICAP UFO Investigator .
Sept/Oct 1969 . "UFO Clearing House Recommended"
5       NICAP' (National Investigations Committee on Aerial
Phenomena) . "The UFO Evidence" . Published in 1964 . Washington
D.C. : NICAP closed its doors in 1980.  Its files now reside at
CUFOS (J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies,) . 2457 West
Peterson Avenue, Chicago Illinois 60659 USA
6       Hall, Richard . CUFOS International UFO Reporter .
May/June 1992 . pp 17 & 24 . "NICAP and lessons from the past";
also ... NICAP Journal, September 1975 . p4 . col 1
7       NICAP UFO Investigator . Oct 1971 . Special Commemorative
Issue . p1 . "Navy Admiral Gives Support to Reports of Flying
Saucers":  Ibid . p 4 . "NICAP Board of Governors 1971"
8       NICAP' (National Investigations Committee on Aerial
Phenomena) . "The UFO Evidence" . Published in 1964 . Washington
D.C. inside cover and p ii
9       Ibid . p iii and contents
10      Ibid . p 129 . Section XI . "THE UFO CHRONOLOGY"
11      Hynek, J. Allen "The UFO Experience" Henry Regnery Company
1972 : also, Hynek, J. Allen " . "The Hynek UFO Report" Dell
Publishing Co., Inc. 1977
12      Newsweek Magazine 12/29/69 "Closing the Blue Book" : also,
CUFOS (Center for UFO Studies) . Associate Newsletter . Dec. 1981
. p. 6 or 8? . "Federal Court Upholds Decision Against CAUS" :
also, National Enquirer . 1/6/76 . "Air Force's Massive Study of
UFO Sightings Will Stay 'Top Secret' for 50 Years"
13      Hynek, J. Allen "The UFO Experience" Henry Regnery Company
1972, appendix 4 (Excerpt of a Letter from J. Allen Hynek to
Colonel Raymond S. Sleeper) : Appendix 4, Section A, Paragraph 9 :
"It must be pointed out that neither of these cases were shown to
me by Blue Book personnel.  I happened upon them by accident
during one of my visits as I scanned through material lying on a
desk, and not in the files; I am not permitted to peruse the files
themselves."
14      Condon, Dr. Edward U.:  "Scientific Study of Unidentified
Flying Objects",  New York:  Bantam Books (A New York Times Book),
1/8/69
15      Ibid : also, NICAP UFO Investigator . Feb/Mar 1969 . p 5 .
"A SCIENTIST'S CRITIQUE" by Dr. James E. McDonald : Ibid . May
1969 "HYNEK SPEAKS OUT" :  Ibid . Nov. 1970 "AIAA RECOMMENDS NEW
UFO STUDY" Hard-Core Cases Difficult to Ignore, Says Group
16      Ibid footnote #12 : also, Hynek, J. Allen "The UFO
Experience" Henry Regnery Company 1972, appendix 4 (Excerpt of a
Letter from J. Allen Hynek to Colonel Raymond S. Sleeper) :
Initial case from Appendix 4, Section A : McDonald, James E. .
presentation at AAAS UFO Symposium, Boston 12/27/69 . "Case #4
Kirtland AFB 11/4/57"
17      Fawcett, L. & Greenwood, B. "The UFO Cover-up" Simon &
Schuster Fireside Book 1992

==========================
End:  Oberg/Cooper rebuttal.6
Summary of Oberg/Cooper rebut.3-5 & NICAP
==========================

Respectfully submitted,
Jerry Cohen

E-mail:  rjcohen@li.net