www.realityuncovered.net

Hynek, J. Allen, in “UFOs Merit Scientific Study” – a letter submitted to Science Magazine in 1966 – wrote the following passage.

“It is unequivocally false to say that UFOs are never reported by scientifically trained people. Some of the best, most coherent reports come from such witnesses,” Citing examples he said “Four of the sightings were made by professional astronomers while on duty at their observatories, five more by technical specialists, including one reported by the associate director of one of the nation’s ranking technical laboratories. . . All but three involved brilliantly illuminated craft maneuvering in the air.”

This letter, and Hynek’s subsequent change of heart on the matter of UFOs, is as relevant today as it was in 1966.

Many people reading this, faced with the ridiculous nature and the overwhelmingly insane claims by so many people online and offline, usually choose to live their lives in relative isolation from the UFO community. Many people who have sightings or experiences report that those experiences had a significant impact on their lives and their sense of reality. In fact, Dr. Hynek himself started out as a skeptic when he was first asked by the Air Force to take part in Blue Book. It was his careful, scientific analysis of the Blue Book cases that led him to believe that within the noise, there was in fact a signal.

In the Forward that he wrote for Jacques Vallee’s book, “Challenge to Science – UFO Enigma” Dr. Hynek described the field back in 1966. Surprisingly, many readers today, over three decades later, will recognize what Hynek describes.

“As an astronomer, I probably would never have approached the subject had I not been officially asked to do so. Over the past eighteen years I have acted as a scientific consultant to the U.S. Air Force on the subject of unidentified flying objects-UFO’s. As a consequence of my work on the voluminous air force files and, to a greater extent, of personal investigation of many puzzling cases and interviews with witnesses of good repute, I have long been aware that the subject of UFO’s could not be dismissed as mere nonsense. Nonsense is present, to be sure, and misidentification of otherwise familiar objects that many sincere people report as UFO’s. But is there not a “signal” in the “noise,” a needle in the haystack? Is it not precisely our role to try to isolate the valid from the nonsensical? By carefully working through tons of pitchblende, Madame Curie isolated a tiny amount of radium-but the significance of that minute quantity was world–shaking.”

Dr. Hynek was primarily a professor and astronomer, but it was his work as a scientific advisor to the U.S. Air Force for which is he most remembered and famous. Under Project Sign, Project Grudge and Project Blue Book, Hynek analyzed case after case – probably witnessing a volume of accounts and learning of events most of us would never have the time to review. Even after the Air Force dropped Blue Book, Hynek continued on in his pursuit of the truth behind the UFO enigma by analyzing trace evidence left by UFOs.

Hynek was an intelligent guy. With a Ph.D. in astrophysics from Yerkes Observatory, he understood more than most the significance of UFO events and the many physical and natural events and phenomenon that could easily explain most UFO events. In his work with the Air Force, he would do his best to explain a sighting based on known astronomical objects. When he started this work – Hynek was very much a skeptic and worked hard at debunking the many UFO reports sent his way.

However, over time and faced with occasional reports that he couldn’t legitimately convince himself were bogus, the scientist in Dr. Hynek came out. He recognized a true scientific mystery buried within the hundreds and thousands of erroneous reports. He saw reports by very credible and professional witnesses, and couldn’t explain them away. He polled 44 astronomer colleagues and 11 percent came back saying that they’d certainly witnessed objects in the night sky that they couldn’t explain with science, yet were afraid of being ridiculed for reporting them.

In an article Hynek published in the 1953 edition of the Journal of the Optical Society of America, he wrote:

“Ridicule is not part of the scientific method, and people should not be taught that it is. The steady flow of reports, often made in concert by reliable observers, raises questions of scientific obligation and responsibility. Is there … any residue that is worthy of scientific attention? Or, if there isn’t, does not an obligation exist to say so to the public—not in words of open ridicule but seriously, to keep faith with the trust the public places in science and scientists?”

By the 1970s, Hynek and Dr. Jacques Vallee were lockstep in their belief that the UFO phenomenon was not an extraterrestrial “nuts and bolts” phenomenon, but instead was a phenomenon created “closer to home.”

“There are just too many things going against this theory. To me, it seems ridiculous that super intelligences would travel great distances to do relatively stupid things like stop cars, collect soil samples, and frighten people. I think we must begin to re-examine the evidence. We must begin to look closer to home.”

The UN Meeting about UFOs

For those of you who followed our recent expose of Richard Theilmann and his tales of attending a UN conference on UFOs, you may be interested to know (if you didn’t know already), that there was, in fact, a very real meeting at the United Nations in 1978 when Dr. Allen Hynek, Dr. Jacques Vallee, and Dr. Claude Poher presented a speech to the UN General Assembly on the subject of UFOs in an effort to use the UN as an authority, since the United States Air Force had shunned any further review of the phenomenon.

What were some of the events that Dr. Hynek believed actually took place, and could not be explained – as reported by credible witnesses? He reported these to the Joint Symposium of the American Institute of Aeronautics in 1975.

–> materialization and dematerialization
–> shape changes
–> noiseless hovering in the Earth’s gravitational field
–> accelerations that – for an appreciable mass – require energy sources far beyond present capabilities
–> the psychic effects on percipients
–> purported telepathic communications

One thing that is certain is that after the Air Force killed the official study into the phenomenon, as of the mid 1970’s, both Hynek and Vallee ramped their own research into high gear. I’m not convinced that the true details of their work have ever been made public, although the odds are very good that Vallee carried the torch well into the 80s and 90s. Despite his claims to no longer be involved in Ufology, you will find a statement here and there to the media, and a hint that he is actively testing and researching a phenomenon that he and Hynek both viewed as a sort of “control system.”

It seems fitting to close with the words from Hynek himself.

“Certainly no progress can be made without scientific study. Unfortunately, as the authors point out, scientists, “draped with dignity,” have often refused to study the reports. The fact of the matter is that many of my colleagues who have undraped their dignity long enough to take a hard look at the reports have joined the growing ranks of the puzzled scientists: they privately indicate serious interest in the phenomenon but publicly they choose, like the subject itself, to remain unidentified; they are unwilling to expose themselves to the raillery and banter that go with it.

It is to them in particular, and to all who foster the true Galilean spirit, that this book will be of greatest value. They grope and seek, examining even those ideas that seem fanciful and strange, for they know how strange and fanciful the term “nuclear energy” would have been to a physicist one hundred years ago. They are ready to accept a new challenge to science.”

While Hynek’s words and intentions were valiant in 1966, I ask you this – are the intentions and activities of those scientists still as honorable and filled with good intentions as they were so many decades ago?

—

References:

http://www.cohenufo.org/Hynek/hynk_mole2_cohn.htm

http://www.nicap.org/whatresp.htm

One of the things that we’ve mentioned often here, in our review of the general belief system many of the Parapsychologists/Paraphysicists had during the the early government/SRI psychic research was that there was an obvious intersection in the 1970’s between UFO research and Psychic research, such as in our MJ-12 philosophy article. A long list of strange events took place during that time that indicate a few individuals working with the SRI psychic research project, either directly or indirectly, had a hand in the creation and distribution of strange tales and myths over the next few decades. We’ve revealed all of the evidence that proves, beyond any doubt, the involvement of Dr. Christopher Green and Dr. Hal Puthoff through the years, from MJ-12 and all the way up to Project Serpo. In our last blog update we also finally revealed Kit Green’s admission that a small group of three “intellectuals,” including himself and Hal Puthoff, came up with a “Core Story” that represented what those three men commonly believed regarding the UFO phenomenon. The third man was Jacques Vallee.

In our last post we revealed how the prolific Jacques Vallee, who was giving a great many interviews throughout the 1970s to promote his new Ufology books, suggested that the phenomenon represented an informational control system and that researchers should be looking for patterns in order to understand the phenomenon. Next, I would like to cover another early interview with Jacques Vallee published in 1978 by FATE Magazine.

Vallee Ties Ufology to Religion in Passport to Magonia

In his 1969 publication Passport to Magonia, Vallee makes it clear that he’s no typical Ufo believer. Rather, he represents a new group of Ufologists that are to arise throughout the 1970’s from the small legion of Parapsychologists working on the question of psychic functioning. In doing so, Vallee ties the UFO phenomenon not to physical extraterrestrial visitations, but to existing religious belief systems of a society – and he views the phenomenon as a tool or weapon that harnesses those beliefs for some other, possibly darker, purpose. He writes (excerpt from the link above):

“When the underlying archetypes are extracted, the saucer myth is seen to coincide to a remarkable degree with the fairy-faith of Celtic countries … religious miracles… and the widespread belief among all peoples concerning entities whose physical and psychological descriptions place them in the same category as the present-day ufonauts.”

It isn’t until he published the Invisible College that he suggests Ufo researchers should actively interact with the “control system.” However, in this 1978 interview with FATE Magazine, Vallee makes it extremely clear what he believes the correct “test” approach should be when he responds to the interviewer’s question about abduction cases.

“An engineer observing a computer would want to look at the back and open up the boxes. He would want to take a probe and examine the different parts of the computer. But there is another way of looking at it; the way of the programmer, who wants to sit in front of the computer and analyze what it does, not how it does it. That’s my approach. I want to ask it questions and see what answers I get. I want to interact with it as an information entity.”

As an engineer myself, Vallee’s approach makes sense – however, it is surprisingly naive coming from such an intelligent man.  It makes the observer (us) wonder exactly how Vallee would attempt to “ask it questions” in order to watch the reaction of the “information entity”?  And going there, we must then ask the question, what would such “questions” look like to the folks who are simply observing the social reaction to the phenomenon?  How would those “questions to the control system” appear to public visitors on blogs, websites and forums? How would it appear to passers-by who are simply curious about a particular strange abduction case or UFO sighting? At what point do those “questions” become misinformation to the casual observer?  Or, to the scientists attempting to reverse-engineer this social informational control system – are casual observers simply collateral damage? Maybe they consider that their ultimate scientific agenda has a much higher purpose?

Was Vallee really considering, likely along with his scientist friends, actively “testing” the control system? In Vallee’s own words (remember, this was in 1978) – emphasis is mine:

“I’ve come up with the control system concept because it is an idea which can be tested. In that sense it’s much closer to a scientific hypotheses than the others.

There are different kinds of control systems – open ones and closed ones – and there are tests you can apply to them to find out what kind of control system you’re inside. That leads to a number of experiments you can do with the UFO phenomenon, whereas the other interpretations don’t lead you to anything.

The control system concept can be tested by a small group of people – you don’t need a large organization or a lot of equipment – and you can start thinking about active intervention in the phenomenon.”

Finally, after confusion by the interviewer, who asks him for more specifics, Vallee finally expands upon how exactly he wants to “test” the Ufology control system.

“Vallee: I hesitate to be too specific. I’m speaking, as I’m sure you understand, of the attempted manipulation of UFO manifestations. It’s a pretty tall order. We’re assuming that there is a feedback mechanism involved in the operations of the control system; if you change the information that’s carried back to that system, you might be able to infiltrate it through its own feedback.”

Final Notes

The RU suggestion here is significant. We are proposing that a group of UFO researchers, in the 1970’s, formulated their own “attack plan” against the UFO phenomenon. Vallee published more books in the latter part of the 1970s that would elaborate upon what subject matter they would use and how they would test the system. We will show how these “scientific” tests conducted against the “control system” ultimately muddied the waters and destroyed the chance for legitimate study of the UFO phenomenon throughout the 1980s and 1990s. Shockingly, these scientists refuse to give up on their efforts, even today.