Flying Saucer Fiasco
Look Magazine, May, 14, 1968
By John G. Fuller
The extraordinary story of the half-million-dollar "trick"
to make Americans believe the Condon committee
was conducting an objective investigation
A
STRANGE SERIES of incidents in the University of Colorado Unidentified
Flying Objects study has led to a near-mutiny by several of the staff
scientists, the dismissal of two Ph.D's on the staff and the
resignation of the project's administrative assistant.
The study,
announced as a totally objective scientific investigation of one of the
most puzzling phenomena of modern times, has already cost the taxpayer
over half a million dollars. The committee is scheduled to release its
report by the end of the year.
The announcement by the Secretary
of Defense in October 1966, that the Air Force had selected Dr. Edward
U. Condon and the University of Colorado for the UFO research contract
was welcomed both by skeptical observers and those convinced of the
existence of flying saucers.
Maj. Donald Keyhoe and his National
Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, who were among the
severest critics of the Air Force's study, publicly announced cautious
support and offered NICAP's nation-wide UFO reporting system to the new
research group.
Condon, then 64, a distinguished physicist,
former president of both the American Association for the Advancement
of Science and the American Physical Society, had grappled with and
subdued the House Un-American Activities Committee, and served as
director of the U.S. Government's National Bureau of Standards from
1945 to 1951. His leadership appeared to promise pure scientific
objectivity in the study. Only two details seemed to disturb some
observers. Four out of the first five investigators appointed were
psychologists. And Robert J. Low, project coordinator and key
operations man in the study, held a master's degree in business
administration (although his bachelor's degree was in electrical
engineering). Some critics felt that more physical scientists were
needed. Condon assured them that the staff would become more balanced,
and later, it was.
The project staff received a minor jolt early
in October of 1966, when the Denver Post published a story: CU AIDE
SLAPS UFO STUDY Low was quoted as saying that the UFO project "comes
pretty close to the criteria of nonacceptability" as a university
function.
But the massive problems of getting the project started
left little time for debate over that statement. Briefings were held in
which Dr. J. Allen Hynek, chairman of the Department of Astronomy of
Northwestern University and one of the few scientists in the country
who had given UFOs serious study, gave the staff the background
information he had acquired in his 20 years as scientific consultant
for the Air Force. Later, such authorities as Major Keyhoe and Richard
Hall, from NICAP, Maj. Hector Quintanilla, of the Air Force UFO study,
and Dr. James McDonald, physicist at the Institute of Atmospheric
Physics and professor in the Department of Meteorology at the
University of Arizona, addressed the group. McDonald had carried out an
extensive investigation on his own.
After examining the hundreds
of well-documented reports of sightings by military and airline pilots,
radar operators, police, technical observers and articulate, rational
laymen, McDonald rejected as highly unlikely such conventional
explanations for UFOs as ball lightning (plasma), hallucinations,
hoaxes and misinterpretations of natural phenomena. He concluded that
"only abysmally limited scientific competence has been brought to the
study of UFOs within Air Force circles in the past 15 years.
Unfortunately, during all this time, the scientific community and the
public were repeatedly assured that substantial scientific talent was
being used...."
From the beginning, the relationship between Dr.
McDonald and Robert Low, the project coordinator, was abrasive. Low,
who speaks softly, smoothly and guardedly, contrasts sharply with
McDonald, who is intense and bluntly articulate.
The relationship
between the Colorado group and NICAP was especially important. NICAP
was large and well-organized, and could supply information on UFO
sightings on a nationwide scale. NICAP hoped that the Colorado group
would retain its scientific objectivity by concentrating on the
estimated ten percent of "high credibility" cases, such as those Dr.
McDonald was investigating.
The first major turbulence in the new
project came early in February, 1967. Condon, burdened by heavy
responsibilities in many public and educational projects, could not
spend much time in the project offices. Low assumed the
responsibilities for most of the decision-making. But on January, 25,
Condon, known for his breezy, anecdotal style, spoke before a chapter
of Sigma Xi, the honorary scientific fraternity. The Elmira, N.Y.,
Star-Gazette reported:
"Unidentified flying objects are not the
business of the Air Force,"... Dr. Edward U. Condon said here Wednesday
night.... Dr. Condon left no doubt as to his personal sentiments on the
matter: "It is my inclination right now to recommend that the
Government get out of this business. My attitude right now is that
there's nothing to it." With a smile, he added, "but I'm not supposed
to reach a conclusion for another year..."
The story also quoted
Condon as saying: "What we're always reduced to is interviewing persons
who claim they've had some kind of experience....I don't know of any
cases where the phenomenon was still there after the person reports
it... and it seems odd, but these people always seem to wait until they
get home before they report what they saw."
Keyhoe knew of cases
where "the phenomenon was still there after the person reported it,"
and where the observer didn't wait to get home before he reported it.
He bristled. He knew that Condon had not yet investigated any field
cases personally, nor had any members of the staff completed any
meaningful research. The project was only three months old. "I have to
admit," Keyhoe told David Saunders, a key staff member, "that I'm
shocked by these statements. Is this a scientific investigation or
isn't it?"
Condon wrote Keyboe that some of his remarks had been
taken out of context. NICAP then issued this statement: "Although we
retain some reservations about the impressions of Dr. Condon's
attitudes conveyed through some press accounts, we find no reason to go
along with the skeptics who interpret the project merely as the latest
gambit in an Air Force propaganda campaign. Having met most of the
scientists involved, we are generally satisfied with their
fair-mindedness and their thorough plans..."
The NICAP
cooperation made it possible to establish an Early Warning System, and
staff investigators were now being dispatched for field reports.
Saunders gave particular attention to field surveys, as well as to the
development of a master casebook and staff discussions of major cases.
Low was giving the staff members considerable leeway in the approach
they were taking. Condon, with his office some distance away, did not
appear frequently, and some of the staff felt that it was often
frustrating to try to reach him. During this time, it seemed to some of
the staff that several potentially interesting cases were turned down
for investigation by Low for what were apparently specious reasons.
Another
scientific investigator, Dr. Norman Levine, joined the project and
immediately became aware of the strained atmosphere developing between
Low and several members of the staff. Condon himself was heard to say
that he wished the project could give the money back.
A senior
member of the staff who was asked to make a speech before a teachers
association began looking for specific details on the origin of the
project. He was told that he might find some information in the
open-files folder under the heading AIR FORCE CONTRACT AND BACKGROUND.
The relaxed open-file system was part of a general overall policy to
keep the project out of the cloak-and-dagger category. (In a later
memo, Low said:
"The key point to keep in mind, it seems to me,
is that our own files are not secure, they are not confidential, they
can't be kept confidential, nor should they be....It is inconsistent
with the purposes of a university to keep confidential any records of
research activity....or any other records for that matter.")
The
staff member found most of the material about the contract rather dull
going, but one memo, written by Low to university officials on August
9, 1966, contained a few fresh details. The memo, labeled "Some
Thoughts on the UFO Project," had been written before the contract was
signed. In it, Low said,
"..... 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 a totally objective study but, to
the scientific community, would present the image of a group of
nonbelievers 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 UFO's. If the emphasis were put here,
rather than on examination of the old question of the physical reality
of the saucer, I think the scientific community would quickly get the
message....I'm inclined to feel at this early stage that, if we set up
the thing right and take pains to get the proper people involved and
have success in presenting the image we want to present to the
scientific community, we could carry the job off to our benefit...."
When
Levine read the memo, he was disturbed by the word "trick" and the
phrase about making the investigation "appear a totally objective
study" to the public. Others on the staff had a similar reaction.
Many
staff members were also disturbed by the news that Condon had decided
to attend the June Congress of "Ufologists" in New York. This was a
convention of far-out supporters of undocumented and highly colorful
UFO sightings.
On September 18, Condon, Low and Saunders met for
the first time in many weeks. As a result of his reading of the memo,
Saunders was deeply concerned about the negative approach to the UFO
problem. It would be easy, he felt, to concentrate on the nut-and-kook
cases and persuasively eliminate any serious consideration of the real
problem.
The meeting went on for three hours. Low did most of the
talking. Condon seemed tired. Low's position was that Saunders was
sticking his nose into something that was none of his business.
Condon's position was that he didn't understand what Saunders was
talking about.
Saunders was led to believe that if by chance the
Extra Terrestrial Intelligence (ETI) hypothesis was substantiated, the
announcement would be sent by Condon directly to the Air Force and the
President, and never be allowed to go to the public. This troubled him,
because Saunders had been given a clear understanding that the report
would go first to the National Academy of Sciences, then to the public
and Air Force simultaneously. Saunders felt he could not let the
problem drop. Another meeting was agreed to.
At this point,
Keyhoe suddenly sent word that NICAP was going to take a strong stand
against the Condon committee and no longer would supply material and
reports. The reason, Keyhoe said, was a new speech made by Condon at
the Atomic Spectroscopy Symposium at Gaithersburg, Md., on September
13, 1967. A report of the new Condon speech had already reached Dr.
McDonald in a letter from a colleague at the University of Arizona,
William S. Bickel, assistant professor of physics on the campus.
".....
Dr. Condon's speech was funny and entertaining," Bickel wrote. "But to
me, it was also disappointing and surprising. Dr. Condon emphasized
mostly funny things. He told of an offer made to him by a contactee,
who, for a sizable sum deposited in the right bank, would introduce him
to a UFO crew. ... He told how he tracked the case down and concluded
that it was very likely a hoax..... My feelings about UFOs are similar
to those of many people - I don't know what they are, I believe people
are seeing real things, and I believe a scientific attack on the
problem will solve the mystery - whatever they are..... The net effect
of Dr. Condon's talk was zero, if not negative...."
In reply to
Bickel, McDonald wrote, "..... The crackpots are so immediately
recognizable that one need not waste any time at all on them.... I fail
to understand why a scientific group should be given an address by any
member of the Colorado team on the topic of the crackpot fringe...."
Word
came from Keyhoe that he was drafting a long letter to the Colorado
study group, and NICAP would reconsider its cooperation only if the
answers to a list of questions were satisfactory.
On September
27, the Rocky Mountain News (Denver, Col.) published this headline: UFO
RESEARCH CHIEF AT CU DISENCHANTED. Condon was quoted as saying: "I'm
almost inclined to think such studies ought to be discontinued unless
someone comes up with a new idea on how to approach the problem.... The
21st century may die laughing when it looks back on many things we have
done. This [the UFO study] may be one."
The majority of the staff
began exploring several proposals, including the possibility of the
entire staff resigning en masse or issuing a press release or a
minority report. Another proposal was the establishment of an
independent scientific group to explore the rational sighting reports
and eliminate the crackpot-fringe static. There was general agreement
that an objective study of the UFO problem should be made and that
accurate and unbiased findings should reach the National Academy of
Sciences, the public and the Air Force. A confrontation with Low and
Condon was arranged. Condon expressed regret that his statements had
appeared in the press. Several members of the staff told of their
concern that the content and form of the final report would reflect
what they now felt was Condon's and Low's prejudice and would be
unjustifiably negative. Staff members speculated that Condon was tired
as well as disenchanted. He remained an enigma because the staff saw so
little of him.
At an informal meeting in Denver on December 12,
1967, Saunders, Levine, McDonald and Hynek agreed that a new
organization might be formed consisting only of professional-level
members, designed to assure the continuation of intelligent UFO study
regardless of whether the Condon report were negative or positive.
After Hynek left, McDonald first became aware of Low's memo, and
expressed his shock.
On January 19, 1968, Low phoned McDonald at
the University of Arizona. McDonald reminded Low of the clearly
negative tone of Condon's public statements over a period of time,
including Condon's disturbing preoccupation with the crackpot elements.
He also brought up Condon's failure to investigate personally
significant field cases or to question any of the working staff who had
been making a serious UFO study. McDonald stressed that he was not
opposed to negative findings. What bothered him was that negative
findings were already being clearly expressed by both Low and Condon.
Low hung up in anger. McDonald prepared a long letter to Low to review
his complaints. Low did not get around to reading the letter until
February 6. In it, McDonald mentioned for the first time his concern
about the memo, quoting to Low the phrases about "the trick." "I am
rather puzzled by the viewpoints expressed there," McDonald wrote, "but
I gather that they seem entirely straightforward to you, else this part
of the record would, presumably, not be available for inspection in the
open Project files...."
Mrs. Mary Louise Armstrong, who had
worked directly with Low as his administrative assistant, was in the
office as Low finished reading the letter. Low exploded. He said that
whoever gave the memo to McDonald should be fired immediately. Then he
seemed to cool down.
On Wednesday, February 7, Saunders was
summoned to Condon's office. Low and Condon were present. The
questioning focused on the memo. Did Saunders know of it and know where
it was kept? Saunders said that the memo was only part of the whole
problem. It alone did not seem especially important, he felt. The
broader issues of scientific integrity were at stake. Condon, furious
that he had not immediately been informed that McDonald knew of the
memo, told Saunders, "For an act like that, you ought to be ruined
professionally."
Saunders countered by saying that Condon and Low
seemed to be treating the symptoms rather than the disease. He reminded
them of the efforts of the entire staff to get Low and Condon to modify
their intractable stance. He reviewed the long sequence of events and
reminded Low that he had blocked the investigation of one particularly
startling UFO case. Low protested that the investigation on this was
completed. No mention was made of any dissatisfaction with Saunders's
work.
Dr. Levine was summoned while Saunders was still in
Condon's office. Saunders offered to stay. Low rose from his chair and
physically ushered him out the door. Levine was unnerved by the
forcible ejection of Saunders. Again, the questioning went straight to
the memo. Levine said that he was at the Denver meeting when the memo
was given to McDonald. He understood there was nothing whatever
confidential about the memo, and did not see anything wrong with the
action. Condon asked why Levine had not brought the memo to him, and
Levine said that Condon's public and private statements had indicated
that there was little likelihood of effective communication. He told
Condon that Low had slammed the door in his face when he brought up the
handling by Low of an Edwards Air Force Base case, and recalled that
Condon himself had suggested that Levine call in sick when he was
scheduled to make a talk at Colorado's High Altitude Observatory.
Condon
accused him of being disloyal and treacherous, and Levine replied that
loyalty to a scientific goal might take precedence over personal
loyalty. Condon asked why Levine didn't invite him to come over and
investigate the important cases. Levine indicated that he did not feel
it was his place to invite the chief scientist of the project over. The
questioning lasted about an hour. Condon dismissed Levine abruptly.
Mrs.
Armstrong had joined the project at its inception with no convictions
whatever about UFOs. By February, 1967, she was convinced that the
study was being gravely misdirected. When, on February 7, 1968, Condon
told her that he was going to fire Saunders and Levine the next day,
Mrs. Armstrong's first impulse was to resign immediately. But she then
decided first to confront Condon with what she regarded as clear,
unassailable documentation of the factors behind the disagreement and
low morale of the staff.
She talked to Condon on February 22,
1968, at his office. She told him frankly that there appeared to be an
almost unanimous lack of confidence in the project coordinator and his
scientific direction of the project. She pointed out that Low had
indicated little interest in talking to those who carried out the
investigations or in reading their reports. She said that her long,
close association with Low gave strong evidence that he was trying very
hard to say as little as possible in the final report, and to say that
in the most negative way possible. At Condon's request, she wrote a
follow-up letter in which she added that the tone of the memo indicated
that Low was not unbiased from the beginning. Condon then wrote her:
"My position is that that letter is a confidential matter between the
two of us and that for you to disclose it to anyone else would be
gravely unethical." But after long consideration, Mrs. Armstrong felt
that it was more important to the public interest to state her feelings
clearly.
The others who left the project also felt they had an
obligation to speak out, and when Condon failed to respond positively
to his outspoken letter of criticism, McDonald brought the matter
before the executive officers of the National Academy of Sciences in a
vigorous written protest. Saunders and Levine cleared their desks at
Woodbury Hall and left.
Asked about the near-mutiny in the
investigating staff, Condon said that he would make no comment. Low
stated that he had absolutely "zero comment" to make about the
dismissals. Thurston Manning, vice president and dean of the faculties
of the University of Colorado, delivered word through his secretary
that he had nothing to say. Scott Tyler, in charge of public relations
for the university, said that he had no comment.
The hope that
the establishment of the Colorado study brought with it has dimmed. All
that seems to be left is the $500,000 trick.
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed