Department of the Air Force Committee to Review Project Bluebook, 1966-1967

Text

This text came with the file. It may have mistakes. When the text and the image disagree, the image is right.

nby remainderu after eliminating all other possibilities of terrestrial
and divine origin and leav:irg extra-terrestrial as the only alternative.
At this time, the UOC Committee apparently favors the Hall hypothesis.
c.
Data from sightings are being put on punch cards.
The coding
system can be expanded up to 50 cards per sighting. All reports of
sightings after 1 January 1967 are being computerized.
For cases prior
to 1967, the Committee asked NICAP to pick out cases they believe should
be included in the computer analysis part of the investigation.
When
questioned as to why NICAP was solicited as a source, the Committee stated
that if their report is to have any credibility then NICAP would ha.veto
be involved in one form or another.
I am 1.nclined to agree with their
viewpoint.
8.
There will be 21 senior scientists associated with the UOC project.
9.
In my opinion, one of the most interesting and potentially beneficial
facets of the Committee's investigations is the sub-contracts with various
agencies and individuals (i.e., SRI, Ford, RAND, NCAR, etc.) to study such
phenomena as illumination, visual perception, fireballs, radiochemistry,
ball lightning, etc., as they apply to UFOs.
10.
CONCLUSIONS:
After listening to the UOC briefing and discussing the
matter informally with others, I do not believe the SAB Ad Hoc Committee
should pursue this matter further at this time.
The UOC Committee seems
to have a fairly good grasp of the problem, and I do not see what useful
purpose the SAB Committee can serve.
Later in the calendar year after the
UOC Committee has gained experience and analyzed some data, it might be
useful for us to convene at Boulder for a series of formal briefings on
the results and scope of the investigation.
I can see a useful purpose
for such a meeting.
Since in a sense the UOC Committee is a brainchild of
the SAB, the SAB Ad Hoc Committee could review the UOC Committee's progress
and serve as a useful ndevil's advocate" or sounding board to help estab­
lish credibility.
The SAB could also suggest new directions where warranted.
This type of SAB action would, of course, have to be done with the sanction
of Dr. Stever, OSR, and Dr. Condon.
Assistant
USAF Scient
cutive Secretary
ic Advisory Board
1.
Comments by UOC Committee
Lt Colonel, USAF
2 Atch
2.
Progress Report
3
NW 90306"
Docld:.34714841 Page 35