Documents / Hearing transcript

Symposium on unidentified flying objects: hearings before the Committee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, Ninetieth Congress, second session, July 29, 1968.

U.S. House of Representatives · 1968-07-29 · 256 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is the printed record of a July 29, 1968 symposium on unidentified flying objects held by the Committee on Science and Astronautics of the U.S. House of Representatives, chaired by Rep. J. Edward Roush. The committee heard statements from six scientists: J. Allen Hynek, James E. McDonald, Carl Sagan, Robert L. Hall, James A. Harder and Robert M. L. Baker. It also printed papers from Donald Menzel, Stanton Friedman, Frank Salisbury and others. Hynek argued that puzzling UFO reports from competent witnesses deserve serious scientific study.

223 (The biography of Dr. Shepard follows:) DR. ROGER N. SHEPARD Roger N. Shepard is professor of psychology at Stanford University. Pre- viously he was professor and then director of the psychological laboratories at Harvard and, for eight years before that, member of technical staff and then department head at the Bell Telephone Laboratories. He obtained his Ph.D. in experimental psychology from Yale (1955), and has published some 30 tech- nical and scientific papers on human perception and memory and on computer methods for discovering patterns in large arrays of data. Although he has had a long-standing interest in the problem of UFOs, this is his first paper on this particular subject. PREPARED STATEMENT BY ROGER N. SHEPARD SOME PSYCHOLOGICALLY ORIENTED TECHNIQUES FOR THE SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENA ABSTRACT Even if our interest is in the study of UFO's as some sort of extraordinary physical phenomenon (whether of natural or, possibly, of intelligent, extra- terrestrial origin), our study cannot ignore the inescapable fact that nearly all of our evidence comes—not from physical measuring instruments—but from human observers. So far, however, we have consistently sold the human observer short. Indeed, in neglecting to make use of psychologically oriented techniques that would more fully enable observers to bring to bear their really rather re- markable powers of perception and recognition, we may have been forfeiting the opportunity of obtaining evidence from independent observers that wouldbe sufficiently convergent and well-defined to clarify the true nature of the phenomena. The extent to which the apparent unpredictability of UFO Phenomena Hinders their scientific study The scientific investigation of a set of phenomena becomes possible whenever those phenomena exhibit some discernible degree of order or pattern. Scientific study is of course greatly facilitated when, as in astronomy, the order strongly emerges in the form of a space-time pattern of the very occurrences themselves. For, only then, can we arrange to have suitably trained observers suitably "train- ing" powerful and, hence necessarily, highly directional recording and measuringinstruments on the right place at the right time. • Indeed, by contrast with astronomical -phenomena, those loosely classified together as "Unidentified Plying Objects" ("UFO's") or • (with perhaps some- what less commitment implied as to their real nature) "Unidentified Aerial Phenomena" sometimes appear almost inaccessibleto scientific study. Certainly' phenomena that are rare and fleeting are difficult enough but, if in addition they are totally capricious and unpredictable when they do occur, then the sci- entific method is to no avail and we are reduced to awaiting each new hap- pening in the same primitive state of uncomprehending docility. The repeated successes of science, however, have encouraged us always to search for pattern and order even when none at first appears. And, although a scientific study does of course become enormously more difficult when the occur- rences of the phenomena do not fall into any predictable pattern in space and time, it remains a possibility so long as some regularity exists within the phenomena themselves whenever they do happen to occur. Thus, in the field of psychopathology, even if it were the case that some psychological phenomena(such, say, as psychotic episodes) occurred wholly unpredictably—striking any person at any time, quite at random, we could still study the internal pat- terns of such episodes when they do strike. We might for example find that. when symptom A appears, it is usually accompanied by symptom B, but seldom by symptom C, and so on. This, too, is a kind of predictability and can evenlead to a degree of understanding and perhaps, eventually, to a method of treatment.

Cases discussed

About this file

Hearing transcript, from the govinfo collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 256 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.