Ancillary Mercy полностью

In late May 1968, Condon finally hired science writer Daniel S. Gillmor to be the editor of the project’s final report. Gillmor received editorial help from Dr. Joseph H. Rush, a physicist on loan to the project from the National Center for Atmospheric Research. Also assisting was associate editor Harriet Hunter and several specialists from the local lab of the Environmental Science Services Administration (including Gordon Thayer). Franklin E. Roach also returned to the project to work on astronaut sightings; Roach had been involved in briefing and debriefing astronauts on Mercury and Gemini flights from 1961 to 1966. Thus, by June 1, 1968, the date on which the Colorado study formally completed its investigative phase, a substantially new crew had come aboard from that which existed at the beginning of the year—just in time to write the final report.

Meanwhile, James McDonald continued to try, vainly, to persuade Frederick Seitz of his idea for a UFO research panel. McDonald asked Seitz to give him the names of the 11 scientists who were going to review the Colorado Project Report; he wanted to let them know of his own views and criticisms. Seitz refused.⁷⁹

THE SYMPOSIUM

The efforts of NICAP and Congressman Roush bore fruit on July 29, 1968, when the House Science and Astronautics Committee began a “symposium” on UFOs. Congressman George P. Miller, of California, was the chairman of the committee, but Roush, who was acting chairman, directed most of the proceedings. Some of the major figures in UFO research were invited to testify before Congress, including Hynek, McDonald, and Sagan. Others included Dr. James A. Harder, associate professor of civil engineering at the University of California at Berkeley; Dr. Robert L. Hall, head of the department of sociology at the University of Illinois at Chicago; and Dr. Robert M. L. Baker, Jr., of the Computer Sciences Corporation and the department of engineering at the University of California in Los Angeles. Baker, it will be recalled, had analyzed the Tremonton, Utah, film in 1955. Donald Menzel also attended, largely on the basis of his complaint that the symposium presented a wholly pro-UFO point of view. Although he did not testify, he submitted a paper, which the committee included in its records.

The symposium, while decidedly pro-UFO in orientation, was no free-for-all; it remained carefully managed. Menzel, for example, was not the only attendee unable to speak to the committee. Keyhoe, too, learned that, despite NICAP’s role in securing the hearings, NICAP representatives could not testify or submit information. Chairman Miller also warned that no criticism of the air force’s Project Blue Book, nor of the University of Colorado’s UFO Project, would be permitted. Although several prepared statements critical of the air force made it into the official hearings record, they went unnoticed by the press.

It was James McDonald who made the greatest impression during the symposium. Providing thirty pages of verified UFO reports, his long statement included the following remarks:

I have become convinced that the scientific community, not only in this country but throughout the world, has been casually ignoring as nonsense a matter of extraordinary scientific importance....

My own present opinion, based on two years of careful study, is that UFOs are probably extraterrestrial devices engaged in something that might very tentatively be termed “surveillance.” ...

I believe no other problem within your jurisdiction is of comparable scientific and national importance. These are strong words, and I intend them to be....

I have interviewed several hundred witnesses in selected cases, and I am astonished at what I have found. I had no idea that the actual UFO situation is anything like what it appears to be....

I now regard the [extraterrestrial hypothesis] as the one mostly likely to prove correct.⁸⁰

McDonald may have made an impression, but the symposium had no lasting impact. Aside from some grumbling about the University of Colorado Project, Congress did nothing.⁸¹

With the symposium fizzling out, and the Colorado University Project clearly headed toward a negative conclusion, NICAP’s situation was dismal. The main problem was always a lack of funds, and by the summer of 1968, the situation was becoming desperate. In August, Keyhoe pleaded with members in NICAP’s UFO Investigator that the organization was “on the brink of disaster,” facing “an imminent shutdown.” The response barely kept NICAP limping along.⁸²

UFO HYPOTHESIS AND SURVIVAL QUESTIONS