The History of Denial of
the Extraterrestrial Presence
(C) Kathleen Marden
Early in my career as UFO and abduction researcher, I felt perplexed by the failure of physical science to take UFOs and alien abductions seriously. Was funding available for academic research studies on the evidence that these phenomena might be real and not imaginary? As part of my investigation, it seemed prudent to explore the official channels that have diverted funding away from the scientific study of UFOs, to the investigation of those so-called "weird" people who report UFO encounters. What I discovered is an orchestrated plan, through official channels, to effectively remove science interest in UFO research.
In this time frame, The information was difficult to acquire, so at great expenditure I visited physical archival collections at the American Philosophical Society and authored my book Fact, Fiction, and Flying Saucers with the late nuclear physicist Stanton T. Friedman. The correspondence files contained evidence of collusion by a few members of the intelligence community, academic scientists, and media collaborators to disseminate misinformation to the American public. This was accomplished through distortion, censorship of perceived taboo topics, peer ridicule, and threats.
The cover-up began in the mid-1940s and was strengthened in 1953, when the CIA funded Robertson Panel convened. A small group of government scientists, military officers, and CIA officers viewed a limited amount of evidence and established an official policy regarding UFOs and the people who observe them. Following this meeting, an officially orchestrated plan for ridicule of UFO witnesses, scientific dismissal based on logical deduction, not scientific evaluation, and monitoring of UFO organizations and its leaders was instituted. Covertly, channels within the military establishment were studying UFO reports that might be a threat to national security. The official US Air Force program, Project Blue Book funneled reports that defied explanation into secret channels.
In 1966, the Air Force Science Advisory Board’s Ad Hoc Committee convened to review Project Blue Book, ostensibly in an effort to improve it. However, the government’s own documents, acquired through FOIA requests, reveal a clear intent to end the project. Project Blue Book had become little more that a public relations mouthpiece and was a thorn in the side of the Air Force who did not wish to devote more time or funding into what they considered a public relations disaster. Behind the scenes, a official Top Secret channel was already collecting the most compelling cases of highly advanced technology in US airspace. There is compelling evidence in the US Air Force files of a plan to end Project Blue Book.
In October 1966 the Secretary of Defense announced the committee’s decision to appoint Edward U. Condon, PhD, a respected physicist at the University of Colorado to spearhead a formal study on unidentified flying objects, which resulted in the 1969 “University of Colorado Report on Unidentified Flying Objects”. Ufologist’s high hopes for an objective study diminished when Dr. Condon made a series of negative public statements about the project, avoided cases that warranted serious attention, and personally focused upon “crackpot” cases. He exploited a lunatic fringe with assistance from two of his associates. An thorough analysis of the documented evidence indicates that it was a highly political undertaking with a preconceived intent.
At the project’s inception in 1966, Robert J. Low, assistant dean of the graduate school, wrote to university officials Thurston Manning and E. James Archer, “In order to undertake such a project, one would have to approach it objectively. That is, one has to admit the possibility that such things as UFOs exist. It is not respectable to give serious consideration to such a possibility…The very act of admitting these possibilities just as possibilities puts us beyond the pale…Our study would be conducted almost exclusively by non-believers who, although they couldn’t possibly prove a negative result, could and probably would add an impressive body of evidence that there is no reality to the observations. The trick would be, I think, to describe the project so that, to the public, it would appear to be a totally objective study but, to the scientific community, would present the image of a group on non-believers trying their best to be objective but having an almost zero expectation of finding a saucer…One way to do this would be to stress investigation, not of the physical phenomena, but rather of the people who do the observing—the psychology and sociology of persons and groups who report seeing UFOs…I can’t imagine a paper coming out of the study that would be publishable in a prestigious physical science journal. I can quite easily imagine, however, that psychologists, sociologists and psychiatrists might well generate scholarly publications as a result of their investigations of saucer observers.”(1)
Levine handed the memo to David R. Saunders, PhD, a Condon Committee key staff member. In turn, the memo found its way to writer John G. Fuller. His expose’ in the May 14, 1968 issue of LOOK magazine titled “Flying Saucer Fiasco: The half-million-dollar cover-up on whether UFOs really exist” blew the project wide open, enraged ufologists, and troubled American taxpayers. Doctor Condon fired Saunders and Levine for insubordination because they had disclosed "the trick" to the American public. This disloyal move would not be tolerated.
In keeping with his negative tone, at the end of the study, Condon issued the following statement: “Nothing has come from the study of UFOs in the past 21 years that has added to scientific knowledge.…we consider it safe to assume that no ILE (intelligent life elsewhere), outside of our solar system has any possibility of visiting Earth in the next 10,000 years.”(2)
Despite the official statement made by Edward Condon that the committee found no evidence to justify a belief that extraterrestrial visitors have penetrated our skies, the special UFO subcommittee of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics found that 30% of the 117 cases studied in detail could not be identified.
The subsequent National Academy of Science’s report on the Condon Study states, “The least likely explanation for UFOs is the hypothesis of extraterrestrial visitations by intelligent beings.” Section 7 of the report states that UFO reports “should be of interest to social scientists.” Why social scientists? They would receive funding to conduct academic studies on UFO witnesses and abductees to determine the psychological processes that cause some people to believe in the "impossible." It was an ingenious plan to dismiss the UFO presence and those who were witnesses as fantasy prone, perceptually challenged, or delusional.
In recent years, brave retired military whistle blowers, high ranking government officials, and scientists have submitted evidence to the viewing public regarding perplexing with radar videos of highly advanced craft. They have trans-medium capabilities such as maneuvering underwater, in our atmosphere, and in space. Military scientists have offered hypotheses on how these craft can simply appear, disappear and reappear again. They have informed us of a "knowing" what our military pilots are thinking and responding in kind. Their vehicles appear be intelligently controlled despite rapid acceleration and deceleration that would be fatal to human pilots. Congressional hearings are presenting military and civilian witnesses under oath. The hearings are available on YouTube.
For a fuller account of military-intelligence involvement in the UFO presence read Fact, Fiction, and Flying Saucers Stanton T. Friedman and Kathleen Marden. (Available on Amazon and at other online bookstores. Autographed books available at Kathleen Marden's bookstore.
Footnotes:
1. The entire text of Robert Low’s memo can be found in Appendix A of "UFOs? Yes! Where the Condon Committee went Wrong" by David R. Saunders and R. Roger Harkins.
2. Edward Condon, "The Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects," Section 2. “Summary of the Study”.