← Back to 1970

1970 October 10th Giant Rock Convention Daniel Fry Talks About Resonance At 30min Wind Noise Paul Wilson Stanton Friedman

Understanding Audio Transcript

Recording structure

• [00:00] Opening remarks and introduction
• [23:26] Main address
• [01:11:38] Development of the main themes
• [01:46:49] Questions and closing discussion

Hover your cursor over the sentence to see the timestamp.

[00:00] Opening remarks and introduction

Since there aren't many of the old timers left, Truman Bathroom died, George Adamski's gone, a lot of the old beginners in this flying saucer business, who are now being proven right, have passed beyond. And so I want to open this program today with one of my best friends and one of your best friends, qualified in the fields of science, recognized nationally and internationally, to come up here and start this program for us. Dan, how many of you know Dan Fry? In steadfast through the years, he hasn't backed up an inch on the things that he related

first here in 1954, and he hasn't missed a convention since. So I want to give you one of the finest guys you'll ever meet, Dan Fry. One of the problems of getting an introduction like that is that you hardly know what to say afterwards. Seems like the best thing I could say was amen and sit down. Seems like anything I say after that can't do anything but lower the opinion which by now you must have of me. However, this is a spacecraft convention, and we should say a little bit.

About spacecraft, I might point out first that it seems like every year I have to come a little farther to this convention. I used to live in El Monte, and there wasn't much of a drive down here, and then I moved to Oregon, and then it became about 900 miles each way. This convention, I had to come here from Sweden. Actually, I had to come back anyway, but it just happened. I was doing a tour of Europe, a 10-week tour. I was in six countries, all of the Scandinavias and Germany and Holland and so forth.

I was interested in a number of things, a number of conditions there, how people looked at various things, not only the occasional arrival of spacecraft from somewhere else, but also the number of other things. And I was again reminded of the fact that I constantly discover as I tour other countries that people everywhere are, after all, very, very much alike. There are infinitely more things in which we're all alike than the few things in which we are different. But I found that the people there, even like the people here, are pretty well fed up on

political gobbledygook. They are very hungry for a little bit of logic and reason. They long for some sort of explanations that they can understand without all of the deciphering and interpretations that are necessary in even the simplest political speech. I had very good response all over Europe. There were a few members of dissident groups who came to Sneer. Easily enough, all of them remained to cheer before the meeting was over. All they needed was simple explanations of simple facts so that they could be understood.

I don't buy most of the negative propaganda that some of their leaders would like to feed them. It's a good sign because people are getting a little more intelligent everywhere. There were still a few people in Europe who were very, very, very, very, very, very, very intelligent. They were very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very intelligent. They were very, very, very, very, very, very, very intelligent. They were a little bit benighted because there were a few who still thought that there

was some importance to the Condon Report. I'm sure everyone in the United States long ago learned that it had no significance. But just in case there are a few who still haven't learned this simple fact, perhaps we ought to talk about the subject for a few minutes. This isn't really worthy of more than a few minutes discussion. It's busy, but perhaps we could spare about 30 minutes. So, with that, I think we're going to end the discussion. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So, come on over. And I did. We got into some interesting discussions.

And he said, now, of course, you must realize that nothing he said here can have any effect on that final report, which we will make. only seven about seven months before the report came out but they had long since decided what would be in the report and so i offered to write the report for him i said i'll do it for a quarter of what you will pay the official agency to write it and they will have exactly the same things in it that i can dig down in my files and find exactly the same material that you're going to put in this report and most of it's been there for 10 years so i'll do it much cheaper well i didn't see mike a good idea to him so we we talked a little about what should go in a report if the

report was to be of any significance and the 30 minutes came and went and an hour came and went and two hours came and went and a little more than two hours came and went and i said look i've got to get home i've got to break this up and he also had a couple of appointments that he was an hour overdue for at the time so the meeting broke up but by the time i left i knew exactly what would be in the report i knew why it would be in there i don't know how many of you have seen the report quite a thick book that's labeled the report of the scientific study of unidentified flying objects and the scientific should be parenthesis or something else as i do have to admit that i've never seen a less scientific

report on any subject in my life i don't object to the findings the findings as written in the conclusion were inevitable from the beginning of the study in fact as one reads the book you become inevitably aware of the fact that the conclusions were written before the study began they were written as a means of outlining the parameters in which the study should be made and those parameters were carefully followed all through the study and of course the conclusions are printed in the front of the book rather than at the end of the book as conclusions usually are so it's quite significant that they were printed before the study just as they were written before the study another interesting thing about the book is when you open the book you can see that it's a

scientific study of ufo and when you open it you see at the top page the first page at the top a scientific study of ufo and the first two words are we believe very interesting we believe sounds more like the beginning of a religious dogma than a scientific study and of course that's actually what it is the study of a religious dogma rather than a scientific event but it's hard to read it is a scientific approach without becoming so disgusted with every page that you want to throw the book in the fire and think no more about it not because of the conclusions but of the because of the ridiculous way in which those conclusions were presumably reached and also the paradoxical nature there's hardly any statement that you can find in any part of that book that if you look a

few pages farther on you can't find a statement that absolutely contradicts the first one almost is contradictory to another statement made in the same report for example we have the statement we cannot expect to be visited from space for the next 10 000 years and then almost immediately thereafter that it says of course this is not a prediction for the future well that's a statement that we can't expect to be visited from space in the next 10 000 years isn't a prediction for the future i don't know what you would call it but of course the bet had to be coppered once the safety was made they had to copper the best because the spacecraft might land on the white house lawn the next morning so what the statement really says is uh we don't think there'll be a visitation for the

next 10 000 years but if the spacecraft lands on the white house lawn at eight o'clock tomorrow morning all bets are off and of course the whole the whole book is a hodgepodge of similar there are a few pretenses at scientific approach all of which can be criticized for their scientific content more than for the conclusions there was quite a bit of work done apparently by a major automobile company and studying magnetic fields there's quite a bit in ufology about the magnetic fields and i think it's interesting to see how they accompany the approach of a space device whether it's passenger carrying or remotely controlled sampling devices

seems to be some magnetic phenomena accompanying them compasses and begin to point in the wrong direction and other magnetic phenomena occur and also we find various other types of phenomena well they disposed of all of these types of phenomena by the simple experiment of determining how strong a magnetic field would be required to saturate the ignition coil of an automobile and so stop the engine had been observed very frequently that internal combustion engines which use spark plugs cease to function in the presence of a ufo and when they found that there's something like 10 000 gauss as i recall

something like 10 000 gauss field strength was required to saturate the core of an ignition coil they decided that a few million kilowatts of energy would be required to produce such an appeal over any considerable area so of course it was impossible that this would be an explanation if any of those quote scientists unquote who made that study had taken the trouble to discuss the subject with me for as much as 20 minutes prior to that study i could have given them a comprehensive scientific statement backed mathematically and scientifically

as to the propulsion method of these devices and that study of that propulsion device predicts all of the phenomena virtually all of the phenomena that has ever been observed surrounding the ufo it predicts it without ever having seen the ufo without ever having heard of one without ever having seen one in operation you can predict from a study of the propulsion system virtually all of the physical phenomena that surrounds them but of course no one did consult me no one consoled anyone else who had any real knowledge on it such it was a sort of a witch hunt and it had to be very to avoid contacting anyone who had any and this of course was in line with the study itself

you recall no doubt that the beginning of that study it was pointed out that in order is that the study should not be biased by previous opinions they would have to employ people who had no previous opinion on ufos who had never done any study of the subject had never been interested in it before so it sounds like a good way to avoid bias and it probably is but it's of course a way in the world to get any scientific knowledge on a subject it's like saying we want to find out what the quasars are we notice they emit a lot of energy there's something out there in the heavens and they put out too much light for their size and their distance and we want to know what they are but we can't employ any astronomers because they might be biased on suchy they might

all just remember what the subject was those ones we are not interested in quietly and well in fact dynamic but we can see further as we know in other studies generally we are not really interested in the report as a president columnistic obstacles but we appreciate much of the vision of the other have an opinion we can't employ any scientists because they also might have read the works of the astronomers and so they might be biased so what we're going to do we're going to hire a half a dozen grammar school children we're going to give them two years to find out what the quasars are and when they make the report and we'll have the scientific unbiased report on the quasar the

situation is exactly the same in the first place if you're going to pick a person to study UFOs who has been exposed to a constant publicity of newspapers magazines radio and television for 15 years and has never become interested in the subject in that 15 years then obviously you're picking a person whose mind is already long since closed the person who not only has had no interest in the subject in the previous 15 years but who is never going to have any interest in the subject for the rest of his life if you pick a person who has never done any study of the subject no

matter how scientifically qualified that man is and give him two years to learn more about the subject than other equally qualified men who have diligently investigated the subject for 15 or 20 years and expect him to come out ahead of the 15 or 20 year man you're just expecting too much of any human being a two-year investigation into the subject of UFO by a scientist who has never been interested before and has never known anything about the subject before is certain to put him in just about the position that's just become and occupied when the report was ordered you're going to need a lot of chaff you're going to

need a lot of unexplainable things you're going to need a lot of events which seem to be witchcraft or imagination or a lot of other things there's a lot of chaff around any wheat and when you begin to thresh wheat the first thing that hits you in the eye is the chaff it blows freely in the wind and it's always around and it gets in your eyes the inexperienced investigator said well gee if that's all there is to it then I'm not interested in chaff but the experienced investigator knows that there's only one

place on earth where chaff grows and if you beat through enough chaff eventually you're going to come down to the wheat that's what the whole threshing process is about but if you make a few passes with the flail and get a little chaff in your eyes and say oh that's ridiculous then the wheat is still going to be there but you're never going to find it and this of course is what happened in a few years before the continent report if it had been continued for another five or six years inevitably those men would have come to a little bit of the wheat but now let's consider the propulsion mechanism of the devices which have been

observed in our skies from time to time as far back as the written history of man can trace they occasionally make short angle turns at fairly high speed they seem to have almost no limit to acceleration we say there could be no living things in such a such an object because he would be crushed to death by the acceleration of course this is nonsense except when examined from our one little aspect our one little method of producing acceleration we have airplanes and other vehicles in which we travel and we bring these things into motion we accelerate them by a propeller blade or a jet stream or a pair of driven wheels in the back of the car

and these apply a thrust to the craft itself or the device itself and so accelerate the auto or the plane unfortunately that force does not act upon the pilot the pilot is accelerated only by thrust against those parts of his body that are in contact with the seat the seat moves forward and accelerates him and pushes against his body and so accelerates the pilot but the pilot's body has inertia and tends to remain where it is so the body is crushed between the thrust of the seat and its own inertia and this is what produces the feeling of acceleration that we experience when we accelerate our motor vehicles if it's very severe

which is superior and if we accelerate in such cases only the only possible case is when a person goes either forward or forward wait delay or delay we do the same with all physical objects the pilot has crabbowl beta markers which can target those parts in the body so blinds the pilot which is the verde which is most likely going to the body here so that's the flighteeeee of the pilot's body and every atom is equally accelerated at exactly the same rate which simply means that the pilot is in pre-fall at all times no matter how high the rate of acceleration is if you place an astronaut in a space capsule and take him 100 miles or so above the surface

of the earth and simply release the capsule without putting it into orbit it will begin to fall directly towards the center of the earth and it is accelerating at 1g or about 32 feet per second per second but the pilot is not pushed against some part of the craft by the acceleration he's floating in the middle of the craft and free fall because every atom of his body is accelerating exactly the same rate as every atom of the craft if we then take the same space capsule over a body with the mass of the sun we'll make it a cold one so the craft doesn't doesn't evaporate and the pilot doesn't cook.

But if we released it over a body with the same mass as the sun, it will accelerate at about 10 Gs, or about 320 feet per second per second. Will a pilot then be crushed by the thrust of the seat against him or the thrust of the craft? Of course not, he is still in free fall, he's still floating in the middle of the craft. He feels absolutely no difference whatever

between the 1 G acceleration and the 10 G acceleration. And if we take that same capsule over some dwarf star that has a mass of, say, 10 tons per cubic inch, as some of them do, and release the craft above that star, it will accelerate downward at a rate of about 100 Gs, or 3,200 feet per second per second. Will be accelerating almost the speed

of a slow rifle bullet. Then will the pilot be crushed? He's accelerating at 100 Gs. Will he be crushed? Of course not, he'll still be floating perfectly freely in the center of the craft without even touching the walls. So when acceleration is produced by a force which acts equally upon every atom of mass,

acceleration has no more significance than does velocity once it's been achieved. Has no significance at all. And the only limit to that acceleration, then, is that, is the limit of the available force. Okay, fine, we want to accelerate our craft with G-fields. But how do we produce them? We have been told by our textbooks and so forth

[23:26] Main address

for the past 100 years, approximately, that gravity can manifest itself only as an attraction between various bodies of matter. Can manifest itself only as an attraction. We can always fall toward the Earth, but gravity can never cause us to fall away from the Earth. Perhaps that's fortunate for all of us. But we assume that because we don't,

nothing can ever cause this to happen. Because until recent years, we observed nothing but an attraction resulting from gravity, we sort of automatically postulated that this is all it could produce. Now we are beginning to discover the fact that gravity can produce a repulsion just as readily as gravity. Now we are beginning to discover the fact that gravity can produce a repulsion just as readily as gravity. Now we are beginning to discover the fact that gravity can produce a repulsion just as readily as gravity.

Now we are beginning to discover the fact that gravity can produce a repulsion just as readily as gravity. Now we are beginning to discover the fact that gravity can produce a repulsion just as readily as gravity. Now we are beginning to discover the fact that gravity can produce a repulsion just as readily as gravity. Now we are beginning to discover the fact that gravity can produce a repulsion just as readily as gravity. Now we are beginning to discover the fact that gravity can produce a repulsion just as readily as gravity. Now we are beginning to discover the fact that gravity can produce a repulsion just as readily as gravity. Now we are beginning to discover the fact that gravity can produce a repulsion just as readily as gravity. Now we are beginning to discover the fact that gravity can produce a repulsion just as readily as gravity.

trying to teach that gravity can manifest itself only as an attraction because that's the way we usually see it working but when we do this we forget that we preached exactly the same thing about magnetism for more than two thousand years for more than two thousand years we thought that magnetism could manifest itself only as an attraction between bodies of matter between load stones and pieces of iron we had only load stones then as representative of magnetic fields and we noticed that every load stone attracted every other load stone and every load stone attracted every bit of iron that came within its range and so we said magnetism is an attraction between bodies of matter and then one day in the relatively recent past an experimenter

happened to have a compass on his workbench when he was passing an electric current through a piece of insulated wire and he noticed that the compass needle jumped away from the wire instead of being attracted toward it and he didn't believe it he repeated the experiment a dozen times and he couldn't believe what he was seeing magnetism was exerting a repulsion they couldn't do that and he tested it again and again and again until he could no longer convince himself that he was seeing something or that was something he'd eaten or that witches were interfering with his tests and finally he wrote up the results of his experiment

and when he did nobody else believed it either they began to ridicule this man who had said that something had happened that obviously couldn't happen but fortunately it was a relatively simple experiment and they could all try it for themselves and enough of them did so that eventually everybody at long last became aware of the fact that a magnetic field can produce a repulsion just as readily as an attraction so now a hundred years later we're belatedly coming to the realization that the gravitational field is really no difference from the magnetic field or the electrical field except it's a special case manifestation of the same field principle you know that the

late dr einstein spent the last few years of his life working toward a unified field concept in which the same laws could be brought to bear on all of these fields mechanisms and he was successful to the satisfaction of many other physicists although he never quite succeeded to his own satisfaction but he did show that there should be no difference between a gravitational field and an electric or magnetic field there's no reason why it should be the only field mechanism known to man which could produce only an attraction and never a repulsion so having decided we want to produce a gravitational field artificially so to

speak we begin to study the existing field mechanisms and we find there are two major ones known the electrical field and the magnetic field both of them produce repulsions just as readily as they do attractions but we find they're always perpendicular to each other if you produce a moving electrical field a magnetic field will be produced perpendicular to the electrical field if you produce a changing magnetic field and electrical field will be produced perpendicular to the electromagnetic field

they always reproduce each other perpendicular to each other so now we've gotten up to two dimensions we have the electrical field and the magnetic field field which is a unidimensional thing it produces the magnetic field perpendicular to it so now we have two dimensions but we on this planet have gone far enough so that we are finally have finally become aware of three dimensions we're not two-dimensional creatures anymore we're three-dimensional creatures and so we have to find the third dimensional aspect of the field mechanism and all we have to do in order to discover this is to produce a sufficiently strong electrical and magnetic field so that the perfect field perpendicular to it will become

visible now we can do it through resonating fields if you have a system an electrical system which produces a magnetic field perpendicular to it and if you have a system for producing a magnetic field at the exact place where the electrical field would produce one and you bring these two into resonance then each one reinforces the other we've never done this we have only push systems we never produced push-pull electromagnetic systems we make all kinds of use of induction we circulate currents around a wire and one end of a coil and then we take off the output as a transformer as the transform current at the other end so we put it in at one end and we bleed

it at the other end we've never produced a resonating system where each end reinforces the other one we do we bring these two into absolute resonance we find we can produce field strengths infinitely higher than any we have ever dreamed of before a resonating system always raises the limits greatly and one we produce we've developed two systems worth and perpendicular to each other each one of which reinforces the other we can produce fields of several millions of dots we think today that 10 000 or 15 000 gauss is a fairly strong magnetic field and it is as far as iron is concerned iron begins to saturate at about that point iron begins to saturate between 10 and 15 000 gauss with special alloys you can get 20 or perhaps a little more

but with resonating fields you can produce several millions of guts when you do you then are easily able to detect the field which results from that resonation we find that it is perpendicular to both of the other fields and is gravitational in nature it's a third Dimension of the field triad and it is the gravitational field and you are producing it in the same way that each individual atom produces its gravitational field to the resonating fields that are within it now if we've produced such a system on a macrocosmic scale that is so we can use it to cause a spacecraft to fall away from the Earth or to fall toward it more rapidly if there is any other activity that may be relevant Entrepreneurs emotionally balance which is to potentiallyween committee participants go back to the sky but for the moments we've had we'veA occurring COdimensional Finance um using the Eto'o Yellow Coating the light

it more rapidly if we choose or to fall sideways also if we choose we find that one other thing occurs the resonation between this electrical and magnetic field produce a very high degree of ionization in the air about the craft the air is very highly ionized and we know a little bit about what ionization in air will do and from what we know of this we can predict the number of the physical phenomena that will result from such a field ionized air in the first place will cause instant condensation of any supersaturated air in the wilson cloud chamber which was our first means of studying nuclear physics we used super saturated air in a little glass box and any charged particle that came through

knocked off a few electrons or ionized a few of the atoms on its path and immediately condensation began on that path and made a cloud streak which could be photographed that's why it was called the cloud chamber so we can predict that these objects producing a very high degree of ionization in the air about them if they're traveling in air that is saturated or close to saturation condensation will occur about them if they're moving very slowly they will tend to be surrounded by a cloud formation we can also predict that since the degree of this ionization is quite high that some of the emission from that ionization will be within the visible range we can predict that it will flow at night that it will emit visible light at night and so having made this

converged permanently through an occasion plan we we say well now let's look around in history and see if there are any descriptions of such things back before the time when people could even imagine the the nature of such a propulsion field and of course we find that there are in several places we look in the the book called the holy bible for example we find the case where the israelites were being delivered from bondage bondage device which moved through the air above them hovering and moving slowly forward as they walk forward and we have a description of that object and what does it say it says it was a cloud by

day and a pillar of fire by night now this is exactly the description that any eyewitness would have given at that time it's predicted by the simplest study of the propulsion mechanism of the device since the air was rather highly i have it hasn't saturated at that time there would be condensation around the craft during the daytime it would be covered by a cloudy filament on the outside during the day at night when it was dark the glow would become visible to the eye it would be a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night we also know a few other things about the an ionized mass of air is that it's a very quick conductor electricity until we say what would happen if one of these devices came close to one of our high

tension power lines carrying from a quarter of a million to half a million volts and this huge mass of ionized air which is a good conductor of electricity swept around that power line well of course the current would simply flow from the high side of the line to the ground side of the line you'd have a tremendous flow of electric current equivalent to the absolute shorting out of that line the same effect as if you threw a big copper bus bar across the two wires except that in that case they would spark and arc and burn the wires and you could see some evidence of it afterwards when a cloud of ionized air simply sweeps around these high tension lines there's

a tremendous flow there's a tremendous grounding effect the nearest generator is immediately beyond its capacity to respond and its automatic kickoff device disconnects it from the overload that doesn't disconnect the load however and the load is then thrown on the next generator down the line in these big power chains and so the domino theory operates that is they generate kick off one after another clear to the end of the line and you have a major blackout this has been observed to occur on an number of cases quite inexplicably otherwise throughout the country in the case of the better known new york blackout of course there were pages and pages of description of just how

these generators kicked off one after another but there was no adequate explanation and never has been of why such a tremendous overload could have occurred at one local point at that time since the whole purpose of gaining all these different power stations and generators together were that any overload could be absorbed by the various generators involved so while a great description of the process was given in many magazines no explanation was given of the real cause of the blackout and many people said oh there were ufos reported in the vicinity of the area where the blackout began and there were i mean they were reported by dozens of people were stealing electric power from our power lines and that's why the overload caused our generators

to kick off well i don't think they would have to bother stealing our meager supplies of electric energy but the very approach of such a craft to the vicinity of a power line would certainly have that effect there's also one other effect that's predictable if this massive ionized air envelops an automobile which uses high tension current in its spark plugs the circuit from the top of this plug to the block becomes a much shorter and lower resistant circuit than the circuit across the gap of the spark plug where it's going through the gasoline vapor and the compression of the engine so it's predictable that the engine will die and these are all easily predictable physical phenomena

no person in the scientific field can deny or argue against these phenomena and they're all predictable from the simplest study of the propulsion mechanism it shouldn't have required 15 or 18 or 20 years of study to come up with the reason why these things occur they should have been predictable from the beginning and yet even our topmost scientists haven't even begun to think in the logical terms they seem to avoid logic as though it were a plague because if they involve logic then they might have to accept the results of that logic and since this is unthinkable to most scientists

a very careful effort is made to avoid all all logic and reason there is of course a whole series of questions they were no different in europe from the questions that exist everywhere else and i've been answering those questions from this platform for 17 years i always hesitate to go over them because i think gee there are people in this audience who have been hearing me speak for 17 years and how can i keep on giving the same answers and yet the fact remains that they're always 100 or two new people who have never heard the answers have no idea what they are and haven't even yet begun to apply logic to this subject and so for the benefit of those people

I usually impose on the patience and the generosity of those who have heard me give these answers before after all it only happens once a year and perhaps those of you who have heard the answers seventeen times before can bear to hear them once more when objects are observed

in our skies and someone says maybe they're visitors from someplace else the astronomer says where in the world could they be from our planets don't seem to have conditions suitable for humanoid life as we know it or intelligent life of any kind perhaps and the next nearest stars are much too far away

for anyone ever to visit us well of course those protests began to be made by the people of the world and they began to be made by the people of the world seventeen years ago and quite a few years before our first orbital flights and a long time before our first lunar landings

they began at a time when scientists were equally determined in pointing out that no one could ever reach the moon because of the ridiculous distances the mass ratio involved was much too large the ridiculously large ratio and science could never overcome the obstacles imposed

by the physics of the thing the greater the scientist was the more loudly he ridiculed the possibility because he knew of the hazard the difficulties involved unfortunately this has been true all through history I am compiling a book

and one of these days we'll publish a book called Scientific Arrogance Through the Ages it consists entirely of the verbatim statements of some of the world's top scientists regarding the utter reality the ridiculousness and impossibility of doing something which subsequently was done

within less than ten years of the time the statement was made I have over a hundred of these items today over a hundred items in which the top scientists of the country stated absolutely and categorically that it was impossible to accomplish a certain task that it would never be accomplished

because it was impossible and the task was accomplished within less than ten years of the time of the scientists ridiculed the possibility simply showing that by and large the scientist has a greater difficulty in accepting things in the future than the average person

because the scientist is aware of the problems and difficulties where the average person isn't and they loom much larger to the scientist than they do to the average person during the first few years of my work with rocketry and I began to work with rocketry some years before Uncle Sam ever got the idea of building a rocket

in fact I was a member of the Pacific Rocket Society who was designing, building and firing its own rockets from its own proving ground some years before Uncle ever got into the act we gave a demonstration flight in which we set a world's record at the time actually we got something over eight miles from a two-stage missile

which was about seven feet in length and it cost us a lot of money it cost the society $22.50 to build, to fuel and to launch and that was the time when they were still talking about Goddard's experiments in their white sands in which he got some fourteen and eighteen hundred feet respectively from a liquid-fueled

and this was a solid liquid-fueled missile that we were using we got something over eight miles it was a world record at the time except that nobody knew about it we did invite reporters from Los Angeles papers and they did come and they wrote up the stories of the flights

but gave no details or specifications primarily because while they were very successful and the reporters were very interested they one of them interviewed me after the flights and I was careless enough to admit that I expected to live long enough

to see astronauts in orbit about the Earth and that did it you should see the stories that we got in the Los Angeles papers english papers the next day these ridiculously optimistic youth with their minds in the clouds who think they're really going to live long enough to see something that probably can never happen but at least won't happen within at least 200 years and how ridiculous the idea was to think that any person living then could live long enough to see us and us in orbit about the earth so we lost all of the status that we might have gained by our very adequate and startling demonstrations

of missiles simply by projecting them a little bit into the future i've always thanked my lucky stars that i did not admit at the same time that i was convinced i would live long enough to see astronauts land on the moon i've been thankful ever since that i did not say that because i'm sure i would have been confined if i had i would have simply been far too dangerous of persons who have been allowed to wander loose on the streets with hallucinations like that so we've always had the problem of scientific inability to look even briefly into the future scientific breakthroughs of real content have been made not by scientists

but by those who are considered by their contemporaries to be pseudoscientists or metaphysicians if we read history and read the autobiography of most of our great early scientists they weren't scientists at all they were metaphysicians because they were capable of thinking in the areas where there were yet no proofs so most of the progress actually has come from them but we again come to the point where we see things and say maybe we're being visited and the astronomers said oh no these these other stars are much too far away no intelligent being would sit in a small capsule for years and years and years wait just waiting to see what this planet looked like and they automatically make

certain assumptions none of which are valid they make the assumption first that the device whatever it is in which the people arrived was built was designed and built and fueled and manned and launched for the sole purpose of visiting this planet and that would be a rather arrogant assumption and not a very likely one and they assume that the devices are small relatively small in which these intelligent beings travel because the only ones we have are still small and they can't seem to realize that within 25 years we will be building spaceships of some thousands of tons of burden that are totally independent of this planet the moment they leave it you will never have to land again at this planet nor at any other planet if they don't choose to

do so they will have complete built-in cycles of ecology they will be planetoids in themselves and they will never have to touch at any planet if they don't choose to we have already such plans on drawing boards nasa has spent some tens of millions of dollars in developing ecological systems to make it possible and at the rate that we're polluting this planet we may all have to get off of it fairly soon and nasa is going to have to get off of it fairly soon and nasa is going to have to get off of it fairly soon and only hopes that by the time that event comes to pass we will have developed systems enabling at least a few of us to get away but these are not devices that are built to visit any particular planet they're not devices that are built particularly for travel at all they are not

vehicles they are homes they can be vehicles also because they can move from one point to another readily and once they are accelerated space will continue in a given direction at a given speed without any further addition of energy forever until they come into contact with some other force and so the vehicle that comes into the vicinity of this planet the vehicle comes close enough so that the operators with their advanced observational equipment can detect that this planet is occupied and this is probably at least some hundreds of thousands of miles distance and perhaps some millions of miles distance when that event occurs on such a craft it is not the purpose for which that craft was built it's not

the purpose for which it was fueled it's not the purpose for which it was launched that event is simply one minor event in the life of whatever generation happens to be aboard that craft at that moment a little bit of study of our own progress in space travel makes it obvious that because we're almost on the extreme outer edge of this galaxy and the almost all the planets in the center were formed at least a few million years before ours it makes it very obvious that any intelligent life on those planets began traveling in space at least a couple of million years ago and a statistical approach to this subject leads to the inevitable conclusion that at least

75 percent of all of the intelligent life in this galaxy has never set foot on a planet in its life at least 75 percent percent of the intelligent life in this galaxy dwells dwells within their own self-constructed planetoids we may have a little horror when we think of this we think oh those poor beings are confined in a ship that's only a few miles long and a mile or two wide and that's as far as they can travel and of course we forget they can take off to the other side of the galaxy anytime they shoot we think of them as being confined and perhaps have a little pity for them a little feeling of claustrophobia for them on the other hand they look down at us on this rapidly polluting

surface of this planet until those poor primitive earth beings down there they're still trapped on the surface of their planet they can't go anywhere except a few miles up or a few miles down they're subject to cyclones tornadoes whirlwinds floods earthquakes forest fires all of these cataclysms of nature which we have to try to survive because we can't do a thing about them and i'm sure they feel much more sorry for us than we do for them in our very primitive state on this planet in their craft in their craft they control the temperature to a tenth of a degree at all times and the humidity to a tenth of a percent and even their gravity to whatever level best suits them for the purpose involved

they control every aspect of their environment to the utmost degree and we still talk a lot about the weather but really nobody has done much about it yet and so when we take a look at the reality of the universe we find that all of our scientific objections collapse it doesn't really matter whether it takes five years to come here from a planet about alpha or proxima centauri or whether it takes 10 years or whether it takes time or whether it takes a thousand years there may be a thousand spacecraft between here and alpha centauri right now and the nearest one may be 900 miles out on the shadow side of this planet

right now there's no way we could detect it if it was unless it happened to be in sunlight or reflecting sunlight to earth and so all of these scientific objections collapse when we realize that it's possible for people to live in space as well as just to travel in it but we're still trapped on the surface of the planet and we insist that everybody else has to be too it's a question of applying logic to these scientific objections and if you do one by one they all break down and fade away in fact the existence of extraterrestrial life and intelligence becomes predictable and the fact that this planet would occasionally be observed perhaps sometimes that's not like perhaps sometimes just

like we've been in the past and it's the statistical certainty that this will occur the statistical certainty that has occurred on fairly frequent intervals as far back as history can be traced of course if we read that history we find that it has indeed occurred just as statistics say that it must have but it is so seldom that slides you can reason as applied to this subject that we we wind up with all kinds of confused uh opinions all kinds of confused thoughts and beliefs on the subject i think i've covered probably most of the time that i was expected to speak i wasn't given a limit i think van said i thought i should let my conscience be my guide so i think perhaps that's enough this afternoon thank you thank you dan fry

dan always amazes me because every year he brings us a new looks or new parallels to a condition and he makes it understandable to the average layman in such a manner that it makes sense as paul wilson arrived yet paul come up here i want you to introduce your friend i want you to meet an associate consultant in our research over at the dome and this man has moved up the desert here his wife is one of the people that are running that little gift shop and by the way she's an old friend of mine who went to kleinburg and Tigers in the early 1900s and he's been around for some time here since he moved us here since he lived here for a little while and he's been an interesting fellow as a friend of mine and at one point he's the first one to mention a couple of people in our research over at the dome and that uh this man has moved up the desert here his wife is one of the people that are running that little gift shop affect grounds getting hard they have these folding stools in there and a number of things for your convenience here on the ground straw hats and all kinds of things paul wilson uh

los angeles police department for what he says 20 years and 20 minutes it's taking 20 minutes to check out again uh in the course of his 20 years with the los angeles police department he naturally was involved in more than just crime i don't think there's quite enough involved in many investigations and micro electronic detection and he's gained a vast experience in holding that job wait i'll get a heavy through paul i met a friend of his uh who's saying he is going to introduce you who spoke here last year since paul and claudine and billy have moved up here at the desert we have more fun than anybody in the city because they fit right in with everything we're doing

and i'm very proud to have paul as an associate in our work so i'm going to turn this microphone over to paul dad oh 15 automobiles going away somebody must have spread the word that i was going to say something i guess the task before me now it is not as a task it's a pleasure to introduce a man with whom i have had occasion to become very well acquainted who i believe is the an outstanding expert in the subject that we're i guess is primarily under discussion today i formalized some notes telling you about this man and i think it's only be fitting that i take a few minutes of your time

and bring out some of the high points provided i can find it first as you know my name is paul wilson i have been in the past associated with various uh aerospace efforts some of which is connected with the space industry some of it not so connected with it and work as an engineer and a research scientist this man that i'm going to introduce to you mr stanton friedman through his continuing research and broad professional background mr friedman is eminently qualified to lecture and discuss this sometimes controversial subject of unidentified flying objects and flying saucers he was up to recently employed by trw systems in redonda beach in the development of nuclear electric generators from spacecraft for spacecraft

he earned his bachelor's in science of science and natural science degrees in physics from the university of chicago and has had more than 13 years of experience in the development of advanced nuclear propulsion systems for applications in airplanes rockets car systems and for spacecraft his past employers include general electric westinghouse general motors aerojet general nuclear and mcdonald douglas after knife company in addition to his activities in other professional societies mr friedman is a member of the aerial phenomena research organization and as mentioned previously he was a past president of the ufo research institute

he has addressed approximately a hundred audiences is that correct or should we add some numbers to that it's now somewhat over 100 audiences many of them grew were groups of scientists and professional people across the united states and canada he is one of only 12 scientists who provided testimony to a congressionally sponsored ufo symposium and has also appeared on many tv programs including the joe prine show and others he has studied and investigated the subject of ufo for some 11 to 12 years and has been lecturing for the past three to three and a half years during this last year i've been driven to attend a large number of his speeches approximalemly three of his many lectures the first presentation

was through a large group of scientists and engineers at westinghouse research laboratories in pittsburgh pennsylvania and the other was areas places here in southern california i found his presentations to be extremely interesting highly informative and educational and as a true scientist he does not draw hasty conclusions from limited information but presents the facts to them and evidence as it has been observed. Now I presume following your lecture there will be a question and answer period. At this time, let's introduce Mr. Stanton Briggs.

Thank you very much, Paul. I'm not really going to give a full-blown lecture on flying saucers. Most of you have spent a lot of time reading some of your writings. What I'd like to do is to kind of give you a picture of some of the things that have happened in the past year, or at least since last year's convention. Some of the things that have happened, especially within the scientific community, that to me give some indication of good tidings for the future. I share with Dan Fry some concern about scientists.

Being one myself, I've had the opportunity to work with, I guess, several thousand across the country. But I would disagree with him about one aspect of what he said. Maybe that's a starting point for a talk. And that is that the great discoveries weren't made by scientists, but by pseudoscientists. And I don't think that's really the case. I think the facts are that the great discoveries in the physical sciences have been almost universally made by very young, non-eminent scientists. All the statements about what's impossible, slight,

and all the other things that are impossible, and all the other things that are impossible, and all the other things that are impossible, and all kinds of other things, have almost invariably been made by eminent older scientists. Although none of the great discoveries are made by these same eminent older scientists. What we're really talking about, in other words, is a generation gap in science. That's as clear and definite as any other generation gap that we can talk about. There are many to talk about today.

And I think that the problem today is for a young scientist to have courage enough, or be foolish enough, depending on how you look at it, to stand up and be counted publicly for opinions that are contrary to the opinions of the older, eminent scientists. And let me give you an example of this generation gap. Dan Fry mentioned the Condon Report, the 965-page scientific study of UFOs. The National Academy of Sciences set up a committee to evaluate the scientific study of UFOs. The National Academy of Sciences set up a committee to evaluate the scientific study of UFOs. They had less than a month, or roughly a month, to do it in.

They were each given a copy of the report, and they went at it. And they have published their evaluation. As a matter of fact, it's included at the beginning of the Condon Report, some parts of it. And pretty much what they did was rubber stamp the report. And they concluded with a rather fascinating statement. That extraterrestrial visitors is the least... likely explanation for unidentified flying objects. There's no basis given for that study, for that statement. Certainly doesn't fall out of anything else they've

said. So they went even one step further. There are two intriguing things. The first is that Condon himself is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, which you wouldn't know from any of the newspapers that quoted the National Academy. It's a very elite group, 800 people, elects new members once in a while. To expect them to say anything negative about Condon is sort of like expecting the AMA to take doctors to task. It doesn't happen. The second intriguing thing is that the average age of the committee, the members of this committee, was 65. Condon himself, of course, was 65 when he started the study. Now in contrast to this,

we have a symposium that Paul mentioned. The House Committee on Science and Astronautics, rather, had a symposium in July of 1968, which got very little publicity, again in contrast to the Condon report, but at which testimony was provided by a total of twelve people, six in writing, six in person. The average age of these twelve, ten of whom came out rather positively Pro UFO, was close to 40 rather than 65. So we have to be careful when knocking the scientific community that we knock the right guys. Knock those old men and not us young guys, I guess is what I'm saying. Now let me tell you about some things that have

happened since last October. One of the most, well hopefully the most useful thing or one of the most useful things was that the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which has over 100,000 members and of which Condon was once president incidentally, held three sessions on flying saucers, on UFOs, of course they didn't use the phrase flying saucers, at its annual meeting in Boston in December of 1969. Fifteen different scientists presented papers, all the scientists had PhDs, everybody had the right qualifications. And

an interesting split in the papers. The papers by the people who had spent a lot of time on UFOs, Jim McDonald from the University of Arizona, J. Allen Heineck from Northwestern, several others, came out strongly for let's get on with the job, the scientific community hasn't done its job in the past, let's get on with it. McDonald looked at four cases in gory detail that all of which included simultaneous are at visual contact, some of them lasting for three hours, and where MacDonald had found all kinds of information that the Condon study hadn't found, Hynek was pointing out the importance

of getting to the job at hand, the people who hadn't had any previous publications about flying saucers, who had, so far as anybody could tell, not spent any time thinking about them, were the ones who came out with the negative notions about flying saucers. One psychiatrist from Harvard University was convinced that one probable explanation for the flying saucer shape and the Zeppelin shape was that the saucer shape was the mother's breast, honest to God, this is from a psychiatrist from Harvard, and the Zeppelin shape was a phallic symbol. This is a contribution of modern psychiatry to the study of flying saucers.

It's unfortunate that the person who presented this question... ...hadn't done any studying of the people who have seen flying saucers, as opposed to the hypothetical people who he feels have problems. The important thing is that the symposium was held despite the fact that Condon made an all-out effort by writing a seven-page letter to the members of the board of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and to several other people, like Vice President Agnew, to try to stop those three sessions from being held. The fact that the AAAS resisted these attempts is in itself, I think, a significant thing,

because Condon does carry a lot of weight, and the fact that they were able to hold the symposium despite his written letters is a good thing. Now the proceedings of that symposium are due to be published, supposedly, by the end of this year. And because of the high standing of the AAAS, hopefully the book will be reviewed by a lot of people. It will be read by a lot of people who might not otherwise see it, and they will get a chance at least to be exposed to the good information that's in it, no less the bad.

Plenty of that, too, unfortunately. So that's one good thing that happened, where presumably something good will come out of it when the report gets published. Again, as far as I know, the positive speakers got very little publicity in the newspaper. Now, another event of the, well, two other events of the past year. The Condon Report itself got some unfavorable reviews in the technical literature, surprisingly enough, to some people. The Bulletin of the Atomic Sciences, which is a rather, it carries more weight than you

might expect for a publication with that kind of title, asked Dr. Hynek to review the Condon Report. Hynek took this opportunity to point out a number of weaknesses in the report that suggests that half the cases he wouldn't even have bothered with. And that's what happened. And that's what happened. He brought it up and he was very clear that the research methods were the kind of thing that you flunk graduate students for.

Because they were obviously not the best ones to deal with. Research methods is the kind of thing that you flunk graduate students for. Condon was upset, of course, by Hynek's review, and he got almost equal time with the paper, it's one of the more amusing papers around, UFOs I Have Loved and Lost. It was a paper by Dr. Condon, presented at American Philosophical Society meeting, and then republished in the Bulletin of the Atomic Sciences. And I think that contrary to what one might expect, since he's totally negative in the paper about flying saucers and any teacher who gives credit for books about flying saucers ought to be publicly horsewhipped,

a few other strong statements like that, I think that the paper will do some good because I've talked to a number of people who have read it who were not turned on by saucers but who now are at least turned off by condoms so that it helps to, in effect, reduce the significance of his study,

[01:11:38] Development of the main themes

which is probably a good thing. Back to Hynek again, I might mention that he had a full-page article in the Christian Science Monitor this past year, again something that one wouldn't have expected even two or three years ago. So the climate is gradually changing. Now, most important to me, anyway, is the fact that the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, which is the largest and most responsible group of space scientists in the world, used to be the American Rocket Society, they set up a subcommittee to study UFOs three years ago.

They, too, made sure that nobody on the committee had expressed any previous opinions about UFOs to get an unbiased opinion. Now, I'm not going to go into too much detail about the subject of this review. On no other subject would you do this. You'd want people who knew something about the subject leaving that aside. The committee, after three years, has finally come out with a statement that they call an appraisal of the UFO problem, which has not yet been published any place.

It will be, hopefully, in the very near future. And I am very intrigued and pleased by some of the statements they make in this appraisal of the UFO problem. Remember now, this is a committee that has scientists from all over the country, including some who work for the government, some in industry, some at universities. And this committee had some intriguing things to say. One of them is that you could come to exactly the opposite conclusions that Condon came to

by looking at the data in the Condon Report, which, for a committee like this, is rather a strong statement to make. Another is that they feel further research efforts should be supported. Those two alone are worth the time of the committee. There are many other comments, many other discussions, that point in the direction of, let's do the job right as engineers and scientists. Let's not brush the problem aside.

When this gets published, hopefully it will make it possible for people like me to get some support, for full-time study of UFOs. Now, on a completely different side of happenings of the past year, let me mention a survey that was taken in Manhattan Beach, California. An opinion survey. You know, do you believe flying saucers are real? Do you either agree strongly or partly or undecided or strongly disagree?

This kind of thing. It's very intriguing that more than 80% of the people interviewed, out of several hundred, indicated that they believe that flying saucers are indeed real. Something like 88% indicated that they felt that the government wasn't telling us all it knows about UFOs, with only 4% saying that they thought it was. That's a 20 to 1 credibility test.

Another finding was that something like one out of six of the people had claimed to have seen a UFO, which is an enormous number of people, and that over 60% believe that the UFOs originate in outer space, not on the Earth. Now, the intriguing thing about this to me is that the general public has far more positive viewpoints about UFOs than most media people would ever believe.

I keep getting told, at least in Southern California, that nobody cares about UFOs. This is, you know, back in Los Angeles, not out of Giant Rock, obviously. Nobody cares about UFOs. The subject is dead. Nobody believes in that stuff. It's all a lot of malarkey. I've had media people, newsmen from Southern California, tell me this. And yet, just 12 days ago, 10 days ago,

September the 30th, I gave a lecture at Merced College, up in the thriving metropolis of Merced, California. And we had 1,200 people there for the lecture, some of them sitting on the floor. And quite a few of the people remained for a very extended discussion that took place afterward. The college itself was surprised.

This is twice as many people as they expected. A local newspaper man who told the college that this was one subject that really turned him off wound up finally attending the lecture and had a very favorable and thoughtful article in the newspaper, the next day, despite the fact that he had previously been turned off. And quite accurate reporting,

and he picked up the things I would have preferred for him to pick up. I had a similar kind of response for a paper I gave in Las Vegas, not at a gambling table, but at a technical society meeting. Energy 70. Fancy title for a fifth annual inter-society energy conversion engineering conference.

All kinds of energy conversion systems were discussed. I gave an invited paper on flying saucer energetics. And I was very pleased by the fact that the session I spoke at was extended a half hour so that we could get on with the discussion about the paper, which is kind of unusual for technical meetings. That paper will be published in the proceedings of the conference.

The news media treated me very favorably. And incidentally, I do have some extra copies here that will be for sale in the back. The important thing here, though, is that somebody who speaks respectively or responsibly on this subject can get a fair hearing if he is willing to stand up.

That the news media people are willing to listen. They are willing to give you fair treatment. I'm saying this in the hope of encouraging some of the technical people who are probably here. At least I found last year that several people kind of sidled over to me after I spoke and let me know that they worked for McDonnell Douglas or TRW or JPL or other such places.

They wouldn't say that publicly, of course, but, you know, they were willing to admit it to me. My hope is that some of these people will get active in their technical societies, will speak out in public, will get their companies to look upon this subject as other than something for a bunch of nuts to monkey with. And that they will be willing

to talk to the media and be quoted. Sometimes misquoted, but that's one of the risks you take. I'd like to mention just briefly some of the highlights of my paper in Las Vegas, judging by the response I got anyway, a couple of the ideas that caught people's attention. One of them is I want to change the name of UFOs. You know, it's really a kind of sick name anyway.

Unidentified Flying Object doesn't tell you anything very useful. After all, we're only interested in the ones that are unidentified after an investigator gets finished identifying or trying to identify. I think if you look at the characteristics of UFOs and then look at the characteristics of what we landed on the moon, you know, the Lunar Excursion Module,

the LEM, L-E-M, if you compare its characteristics, that is, it was able to land in an unprepared landing field, it could take off from an unprepared landing field, it was relatively small, just a little bit larger than the people it contained. If you look at it, and then consider UFOs, not as UFOs,

but as Earth Excursion Modules. Somebody else is coming here, they've got something that they put in orbit near the Earth, they send down an Earth Excursion Module. That's capable of landing where it pleases, that's pretty much independent of the surroundings, that occasionally has been observed to have pilots or creatures or humanoids outside

picking up specimens to take back, which, incidentally, is what most of the observations of creatures with saucers indicate. Perfectly rational, as somebody else's Earth Excursion Module. A kind of humorous story here, perhaps, about one approach to UFOs that gets into the question of Earth Excursion Modules.

In a review of the Condon Report, one of three that appeared in a technical journal, a journal called Icarus, which I'm sure nobody here has heard of, but is a reputable journal, which had an anti-Condon review, too, by Jim McDonald. In the pro-Condon Report review,

the guy does a little attempt to find out what fraction of the universe's heavy element would be present in UFOs. He's an astronomer. He's aware that most of the universe consists of light elements, not heavy elements. He says, let's assume that if we're being visited, every other sun in the galaxy would be visited,

and that if the visits are once a year here, that they've been going on for roughly 10 billion years, and that the things can travel at the speed of light, and he comes up with a number that tells us how many vehicles there would have to be. This is like assuming that the same number of flights that land at Los Angeles airport today

were landing there 50 years ago, 5,000 years ago, and 5 billion years ago, which is an interesting assumption. Totally false. But he further assumes that since the Saturn C5 weighs several thousand suns, UFOs must weigh a million suns anyway to get here from another star.

And from this you can calculate how much of the universe's heavy elements. He concludes that you can't be visitors from outer space because they'd be using far more of the heavy elements than exist in the universe. So let me focus on just one part of that, besides the ridiculous assumptions

about all this has been going on for five billion years. But just the five, the one million ton spaceship. The Saturn V, which is 365 years old, 365 feet tall, roughly, weighs only 3,000 tons. Most of the EEMs that have been observed on the surface of the Earth,

there's a whole series of them in France, say in 1954, were about 16 feet in diameter. And yet this man is making the assumption that these things would weigh 3,000 times as much as a Saturn rocket, which is 365 feet tall. So it's a perfect illustration kind of of what Dan was saying before

about scientists being non-scientific. There is no reason in the world to assume that the same craft necessarily which lands on the ground is launched from another star system, just as the Saturn V didn't land on the moon. What I'm saying, and this is something that's happening today,

is that it is possible to approach many of the aspects of UFOs from the viewpoint of today's space age technology without being irrational, without being ridiculous, and without being laughed at. Let me take just a few more minutes to stress again a point that Dan made

but that I think I would like to repeat. The business about people saying it's impossible, and there is indeed a long list of such statements by people who should have known better. Again, the eminent older scientists, not typically the younger, more humble scientists. I like to say in my lectures that what these guys should be saying is

not, it's impossible, but we don't know how. For example, to go 10,000 miles an hour in the atmosphere without burning up, somebody proved that was impossible 20 years ago. So UFOs can't exist because you can't go that fast. Of course, now we go that fast. We don't solve that problem of going that fast

without burning up the way the guy who proved it couldn't be done solved, I should say. So the question of humility, in other words, becomes an important one here. The same with the generation gap of scientists. Instead of it's impossible, we should say we don't know how. Instead of saying that we're in the center of the universe

or the most advanced creatures in the universe, we also ought to back up a little bit and retain some of our humility. A lot of people forget that Copernicus, 50 years after Columbus, started about a 200-year period trying to get the Earth out of the center of the universe. You know, intelligent people knew that the Earth

was round at the time of Columbus, but they didn't know that the Earth wasn't in the center of things. The generally accepted notion of the universe was that the Earth was here, that's still, at the start of the millennium, the moon, the planets, and the stars all moved around the Earth.

We're the peak of the universe, in other words. Well, after 200 years and a few people being burned and a few church notions being changed a little bit, finally it was accepted that, okay, the Earth isn't the center of the universe, the Sun is the center of the universe. But the main creature in the universe is, of course, man. Well, it took until the late 1920s

for somebody to decide to notice that, no, the Sun isn't in the center of the universe either. It's off in the corner of the galaxy, a not very important star. Okay, what UFOs do then is finish the job. The notions of the 1920s took the Earth out of the middle of the universe,

but they still didn't take man out of the middle of the universe. A Nobel Prize-winning physiologist just two years ago, a man from Australia, said that, life is a very, very, very unlikely accident. We are unique in the universe. He didn't bother to add

that he is a Nobel Prize-winning physiologist who's, of course, at the top of that unique group of people. It seems to me that what we have to recognize is, first, that there's nothing special about our own star. There are other stars that were at the same state of development earlier.

That let's hope that there isn't anything special about what we've managed to do on the surface of this planet. And the real obstacle toward really doing something about UFOs is that when we face up to reality, we recognize we're not at the top of the heap anymore. From my own conversations with Condon, I'm convinced that this is one step

he is unwilling to take. And the same goes with most of the members of the National Academy of Sciences, who will tell you what they think. Who will tell you, incidentally, if they were coming here from outside, they would be talking to us, meaning them, the members

of the National Academy of Sciences. So let me end it at that. I'll be back to say perhaps some of the same things, some different things tomorrow. I would like to have a brief session for questions and answers if anybody... This is kind of the fun time anyway. And you get a little tired of just being talked at.

Now you get a chance to talk back. So let me shut up and say, if you got any questions, maybe I can answer them, maybe not. Thanks for listening. Anybody got any questions and has strength enough to raise their hand? Can't hear that one.

Anybody got any questions? Did I put you all asleep? Here's a question. The question was, I mentioned what kind of research that I'd like to do UFO research and tell you what kind of research I'd really like to be involved in. You know somebody from a foundation who's here maybe?

Well, what I'd really like to do is two different things really, both related to UFOs. The first would be to set up a nationwide network of local investigative groups, each with a 24-hour answering service, each with enough technical people and equipment

to be able to go to the scene of a sighting while it's in progress and make some measurements of the attributes of so-called flying systems. Our experience in Pittsburgh, we got within five minutes of a sighting. This is on a shoestring budget.

I think each one of these groups could help lift the laughter curtain, as I call it. I think each of these groups could use existing means of communication, the police, the civil defense, civilian air patrol, all these other groups

that already have communication systems to both ferret out good old sightings, and there are plenty of these around, most sightings go unreadable, unreported, and to be ready to investigate new sightings. As an example of the kind of group that can be set up,

University of Redlands here, one of the geology professors, Philip Seft, was one of Condon's early warning observers. They had a sighting in town and they managed to round up something over 30 people who had observed this UFO.

They got an artist to draw up a picture on the basis of his discussions with all these people. They got a heck of a lot of data with an interdisciplinary group, a bunch of amateurs, if you will, and I think if we did this around the country

and got rid of the notion that UFO means laughter, that we could get measurements of UFO characteristics. We might not capture one, but I'm not running a zoo either, so I just assume make these measurements, that's one thing I'd like to do.

For a relatively modest amount of money, compared to what we are, compared to what we are already spending on the development of advanced propulsion systems, see one of the challenges I make to NASA, which is spending a few billion bucks a year, is that if it is worthwhile to spend money on an SST,

on a space shuttle, on a nuclear rocket, on the VTOLs and VSTOLs, none of which have all the good features of a UFO, then it is certainly worthwhile to spend a modest amount of money on getting some data from which

we might be able to build a totally new kind of system. My paper at Las Vegas, incidentally, I go into detail to the kind of propulsion system that I'd like to work on from there. So that's one area. The other thing about UFOs that I'd like to deal in

is the whole question of their philosophical implications. I think it's important to mankind that, we wake up to the fact that somebody has apparently evolved a more advanced technology and probably a more advanced sociology than we have.

And maybe if you do the little business of looking at the Earth as if you were not an Earthling, and I don't know how many non-Earthlings there are here, I'm an Earthling, my pinky works right, you know. I think if we do that,

you may come up with some new notions about how to be respectable human beings. And we sure could use some of those. So that's the other side of the problem, along with, this is also philosophical, but we as taxpayers, and some of us at least are, are also committed to the search

for extraterrestrial life. We're going to spend $800 million eventually to put a few black boxes on the planet Mars to try to find out what kind of microbes are up there. Well, first we've got to put an orbiter, and then we've got to put a lander. And we throw out a sticky string

and bring it back and dip it in a little bucket of solution and run some fancy tests, and maybe we can find out if there are any microbes there. If we happen to have picked the right solution and done the right thing. And after we've spent $800 million.

But frankly, if we are committed to the search for extraterrestrial life, let's do it where it's easy, down here. Let's spend a small fraction of that $800 million, tenth of a percent maybe, hundredth of a percent, to look down here.

Because I think our attitude about extraterrestrial life is more or less like the attitude of the people who gave the prize for nest building to Mrs. Robbins. But the judge asked her a question. He said, he said,

you've built this wonderful glorious nest, we've given you the prize, but I've got one question. How come the hole in the bottom of the nest doesn't have a hole in the bottom of the nest? Well, I think it's the same way with the scientists who talk about the search

for extraterrestrial life. As long as they're not coming here and we don't need to worry about them and they're not as smart as we are, we're looking as hard as we can. But not for real looking as somebody said over there. So yeah, there's plenty of research to do.

I'd like to spend my lifetime doing it. Besides just speaking. Any other questions? The question is, why are the spacecraft so elusive? Well, not having been on any of the spacecraft, I obviously haven't had a chance to ask any of the pilots,

but one might speculate that there are a number of reasons why somebody coming here from elsewhere doesn't land, say, you know, at Hollywood and Vine or in the middle of Broadway or at the UCLA stadium or someplace like that.

I think that there's probably a rule in the galaxy that you don't interfere with the primitive society. In the first place. In the second place, you want to get back to where you came from.

And you land in the middle of a busy place here and you're liable not to get back, at least not without making an awful fuss. Because typically we, not only do we shoot first and ask questions later, but we like to have specimens for our zoo. I mean, literally.

Another reason might be that they don't really care about us, particularly, that as long as we don't bother them, they won't bother us. That their purpose in being here, for example, might be to set up a base

for providing fuel for a fusion propulsion system. They don't need us to do that. They might also be the equivalent of anthropologists. Again, when you study a primitive society, you don't like to interfere with the society because then you change it.

So you study at a distance. You know, they might be graduate students doing their thesis work. In that case, too, they wouldn't want to get too closely involved. You could laugh and you might say that maybe there are people who have been sentenced

or being punished. They have to spend some time here. You know, two weeks in the atmosphere of the Earth might be enough punishment to last anybody for a long time. So I think their elusiveness is only that they don't really care about us, that they're interested in what's going on, perhaps.

But maybe they're finding out, you know, what kind of ore is in that rock over there. But they don't need our help. They might also worry about biological contamination, too, which is another kind of problem, aside from the moral contamination, which we won't even talk about today.

So it's not surprising to me. It would be much more surprising to me if they were elusive. That is, if they did land down in the middle of UCLA Stadium and said, take me to your leader, this to me would be the strangest thing that could occur,

partly because there isn't any leader to be taken to. Any other questions? There's a question. How big is space? Any boundary lines to space? Well, I don't want to get involved in the question whether we have

an infinite universe or a curved universe. I do want to say, though, that the limits aren't such as to restrain ourselves from travel throughout the universe. Contrary to what a lot of scientists have pronounced, including Condon, incidentally, with some very foolish statements

about, you know, it's impossible to get here from there, this sort of thing. There are published studies by young respectable scientists, respectable young scientists, anyway, which show that you can get to other star systems

from the Earth in reasonable time using today's technology. You might also have to use a heck of a lot of today's money, which is a separate question. So the distances in the universe are enormous. But they're not enormous enough

to prevent travel between solar systems and even, eventually, between galaxies. This isn't science fiction. It's science. So that the limits of the universe, we know we can see out at least two billion light years, which is much further than I feel

like traveling at the moment. So that's far enough, in other words, two billion light years. The nearest star is, you know, four and a half light years. So we can go a heck of a lot further than that. And it's enough, it's a long trip is right,

but it wouldn't take terribly long if we decided to spend the money to build fusion propulsion systems and other propulsion systems. So that the universe is big enough to be interesting, small enough to be visited, large enough to be awesome.

Maybe that's an answer, I don't know. Any other questions? Yes. Is there another energy that travels faster than the speed of light? Well, first of all, let's recognize that we don't need to go faster than the speed of light

to travel around much of the galaxy. To get anywhere near the speed of light, the time interval is very short. But there are a number of respectable young scientists, again, searching for things that are called tachyons, particles which theory says might very well exist and which would have a peculiar characteristic

of traveling only faster than the speed of light and which slow down to the speed of light, which makes for a very neat, very peculiar, very weird world, the world of the tachyon. Now, there are experiments being made that people are seeking for these particles, but since we don't know what their properties are,

they're very hard to look for. As a matter of fact, they've had to reprogram some of the computer methods for evaluating pictures taken in bubble chambers, because the way the programs were set up, they would not catch any of the particles,

would not notice any of the particles that were going faster than the speed of light. So, there may very well be, in other words, another world on the other side of the speed of light, but we don't need to invoke that for travel to the stars.

So, it's a fascinating world. Some physicists are involved in it. There are plenty of arguments going on about whether it's real or not. We may not know for a number of years. The question is, why not only our government, but almost all the governments of the world

seem to be determined to keep the UFO question under wraps. Well, quite clearly, I don't speak for our own government, no less anybody else's, but I'd be happy to speculate for a moment. Can you imagine what the Air Force funding level would be

if they were to stand up and say, we can't protect our country, against these crummy little saucers that keep flitting in and out? Wouldn't be as high as it is, I don't think. Now, I think that part of it is self-interest. I think that if we had captured a saucer, for example,

then wouldn't it make sense to keep it secret? Say we knew positively that they were there, and we were trying to duplicate their characteristics, because they would indeed make great delivery systems for A-bombs and such things. Do you think we should announce it to the rest of the world,

so they will try to either steal the secrets from us or duplicate them? No. You can make a case that each government is afraid that if it tells what it knows, it knows more than the other guy, so the other guy will find out something he didn't know before.

This will spur him to further effort, and the first guy will lose any possibility of his being the first. Because you see, no matter who on this planet, from Castro to Kosygin, and back to Nixon, any one of these guys who manages to build something

with the characteristics of UFOs is suddenly in an all-powerful position. So I think the government, on the one hand, can make a case for keeping secret what it knows about UFOs. I think another part of this problem, though, is the resistance to being imaginative. When did a government

ever distinguish itself by its imagination? Did ours when we court-martialed Billy Mitchell, for example? He was right, but we court-martialed him anyway. The same with a whole bunch of other things. The government is a group, you know,

is ruled by a bunch of unimaginative old men, typically. I'm not anti-old, just the old people who are clapping, I give you credit. No, I think that's really the crux of the matter, is that all the problems I have mentioned,

the philosophical and psychological problems of thinking about the new world, the distant world, the world of the future, the people who are doing this thing aren't the people who are running the government and never have been. So I think that the explanation is

self-interest on the part of the government in order to maintain itself as it is, good, bad, or indifferent, rather than any desire to do the best for the people of the world. I don't give many governments credit for wanting to do that.

Yeah. The question is, is the purpose of the space people to come to the Earth always beneficial or are there some whose purpose is questionable? I really don't know what their purpose is in coming here. As I said before,

frankly, I don't think it's beneficial. I don't think they're coming here to save us. I don't think they're coming here to tell us how to solve our problems. I don't think we've earned either one of those things. And frankly, just as I don't give my five-year-old daughter

who's wandering around here someplace guns to play with, I can't see an advanced civilization giving us the equivalent of guns to play with because we might be very foolish and use them very unwisely. So I don't think that they're here

to be beneficial. I don't think they're here to harm us. I think they're here not quite in spite of us, but almost that. I would point out, though, that when it comes to determining the motivation of a powerful group of people,

just consider the position of the turkeys on a turkey farm. We passed one this morning on the way out here. Can you imagine that about this month and the early part of next month how the turkeys tell each other how beneficent their masters are?

They get fed. They get water. They get taken care of. They get nice carpeting to walk on. Whatever other good things turkeys want, they get. Up until about the fourth Thursday in November, and I think that this is the kind of thing

we have to keep in mind about the UFOs. They may not have harmed us so far. They may give no indication of harming us, but we may be the main course for their Thanksgiving, too. I think that'll end it for today on that happy note. Thank you much.

Thank you, Stan Friedman. Now we're going from the scientific aspect for a change to a contact aspect. And I don't need to introduce this man to a lot of you. The next speaker I want to bring to you is ex-Lieutenant of the Air Force,

Mel Noel.

[01:46:49] Questions and closing discussion

Thank you, George. I've been a pilot 20 years. When I was 19 years old, with 300 hours in my logbook, I entered the United States Cadet Training Program in the United States Air Force. At that time, I thought I knew just about all there was to know about flying.

In a matter of months, the education and re-education made me felt like I knew nothing when I entered the Air Force. 20 years later and 8,500 hours later, I once again feel or felt that I knew everything there was to know about flying. I arrived here last night from Georgia Air Force Base,

and I was just after completing three days of physiological training. Is George here? He'll have to control the volume. Is that any better? The last three days, I studied and experienced effects of rarefied atmosphere,

symptoms of hypoxia, hyperventilation, effects that human beings experience when they begin to leave this atmosphere. We went up to 43,000 feet. At that time, for all practical purposes, we run out of atmosphere. There isn't any more. Without oxygen, we found out

we had between six and nine seconds to live. We found this out by being without oxygen for that many seconds and having to do something about it in order to live. In 1954, serving with the Air Force, we were placed on an assignment of photo reconnaissance. Without being initially informed as to the exact nature of the assignment,

shortly after, however, being informed as to the nature of what we might observe on an if-and-when basis. We knew that we were going to participate for a period of 90 days. Our first reaction was one of natural skepticism, that we were fronting the Air Force's embarrassed position of saying

we were doing something about it. The Air Force has never been officially and cannot be officially charged with the investigation of UFOs. The Air Force is officially charged with the protection of this country. They are not scientifically orientated. That falls in the hands of other groups.

We were, therefore, merely to observe and, if possible, to record, document symptoms or physical case of UFO phenomena. For 19 days, we looked at an awful lot of sky and covered a lot of distance within the continental body of the United States. For the 19th day, an occurrence took place which, for myself and three other men,

will stay with us for the rest of this life. UFOs are not real to the majority of people. Most people have never seen and it is impossible for them to assimilate, let alone understand, what the phenomena is all about or appreciate it. Those who have been visited by the phenomena,

and I don't mean favored by it, it is only for them to judge. This is a very elusive subject. We were successful on two out of three occasions in photographing the phenomena. A very real, a very physical phenomena. Observing objects operating from hover, that is zero motion,

to an estimated 3,000 miles per hour. With the education and the equipment that we were operating, which were capable of service speed of 550 knots, it was very disconcerting to us that something could go around us that fast. Due to the statutes of limitations, moments, that is the records of this,

of these investigations, could not and much of it cannot ever be revealed. The fact that it did happen is self-evident enough. For the years since then, I have personally, along with the help of the Associates and many, many others, attempted to zero in,

to narrow in, to separate the chain from the wheat. We have come across physical, that is material artifacts. We have documented evidence, the form of sound of the object. We have evidence which has led us to believe of the physical existence

of an operation of these forms of objects on this planet. And yet today, we probably don't have much more than a drop in the bucket as to what it's all about. I feel that most people who come to hear something about UFOs come to be entertained.

I arrive at that conclusion only because if those who came to listen were serious about it, they would have done something about it a long time ago. This country is founded on free enterprise. This country is founded on the principle that if we want to do something and make it happen, that we have the right to take that action

within the statutes. It has been well within the capability of this country and this country is the people, yourself, to put together, without the government, a research program that could certainly have exposed considerable material,

hardcore evidence concerning this subject. Like so many other things, a greater part of the population has joined the Weight Watch and Wonder Club. Like a friend of mine who has also spoken here today, stated earlier, he said, well, we're back at the zoo.

Go climb back in the cage and let everybody have a look at us. And that's basically the feeling you get. It's not too late to do something. This phenomena is just as real and just as physical today as it was in 1947 when a man named Kenneth Arnold

said he sighted something around Mount Rainier and called them flying saucers. The effects are still as dynamic. We have in our own files 38 case histories of fatalities to these objects. These were not flukes or misinterpreted. These were people who died as a result of the effects of these objects.

There are other considerable realms of material relative to communications about the benevolence and the do-good attitude of humanoids. And yet nobody has ever taken and performed what we call a cerebral autopsy on these people. And just like so many other things, there's one principal reason.

It's called money. There are enough serious, interested, and qualified individuals in this country today. Scientists such as Mr. Friedman, Paul Wilson, many, many others who are ready and willing to put aside virtually all parts of their lives

to pursue this research. The response of the public to these people and they had asked them, has been, yeah, okay, swell, that's great, let us know when you find something, see you later.

And that's it. I may sound bitter. I am. Hopefully invested, but perhaps daily expended several tens of thousands of dollars in pursuit of this. Thousands of hours

throughout this country, Canada, Mexico. We have a group of finance people to Argentina, to Italy, to Great Britain. They'll just have a drop in the bucket. We may have more than most people. For the time being,

what you hear today may not be relevant, may not be pertinent, may not affect you in this life. But there's also an outside chance and perhaps the only one that if and when this subject breaks, this will be the only place you'll hear.

People get discouraged and they look for little breaks in life. People walk up and they say, gee, Mel, didn't you hear about the report in the newspaper about the Air Force Academy? They've got a chapter in their textbooks

on UFOs. And I point out to them that chapter's been there for four years. The Air Force isn't ignorant. They say, gee, how come we don't hear about it on the newspaper, in the newspaper,

on the radio, or on television? I point out that this is a free enterprise and people who are news commentators are still working for somebody. They're working for somebody who is paying their salary. The person that pays that salary

also usually decides what will be released as policy. Flying saucers are not necessarily good press. They have a ring about them that's too unreal. It's funny foreign material. Other than to get behind something and say it doesn't make any difference

if there was less sightings this year than last year or less last year than the year before, all it takes is one. One case. One physical case. We have hundreds of physical cases. I say this this year,

I said it last year, I said it the year before, and for the last five years. The same thing. I frankly don't expect anyone here to do anything more about it this year than they did last year, the year before,

or five years before that. In essence, you are members of the Weight Watchin' Wonder Club. You and the greater part of this country have sat back and rationalized your position position taking the position of complacency and been entertained by it you who are involved certainly don't know today if they're going to get paid dirt that is the whole thing we are fortunately plugged in we have sources of information that quite frankly you'll never

get to how many of you have heard of or read the book andromeda strain maybe a half a dozen out of several hundred was released not too long ago for those of you who are not familiar with the text this centers around a project a satellite project operated from vandenberg air force base the operation is known as project scoop the lights are placed in orbit around the planet the purpose of which is to collect samples of bacteriological life in the upper and rarefied atmosphere these satellites are recovered returning to the earth they are then studied for these forms of life in the course of this project we discover through the tracking of the satellite

that the particular satellite in question departs its orbit temporarily for a matter of minutes a very slight deviation but still a positive deviation it has struck something the satellite struck was not a ufo it was not a flying saucer the satellite struck a meteorite the satellite returning to earth fell in arizona not far from a very small town population approximately 60. unfortunately population there the members of the population came across the satellite foolishly placed it in a station wagon took it into town but then turned over to the local doctor as he was considered to be the most educated individual and might best decide what to do with it

20 hours later when the air force arrived with their homing devices to locate the satellite they found it was dead and the entire population of the town with the exception of two members an elderly gentleman and a six month old baby were found dead the two men retent by the air force to recover the satellite also died they through a system of tremendous precaution recovered the satellite delivered to a research center in nevada a five-story silo underground where it was isolated studied with radio isotope microscopes to ascertain exactly what it contains that killed these people they also of course recovered the elderly gentleman and the young baby to find out

why they lived in the course of the text it is so decided that in order to save the rest of the population that they should eliminate the disease from the town the affected area by detonating an atomic bomb feeling that nothing known to man can live through the two million degrees of heat produced by such explosions due to political problems in washington however the decision to do this is postponed for 48 hours in the meantime the scientists in the silo nevada successfully isolates the strain which they label as the andromeda strain it is a multi-cell living creature which is capable of regeneration it duplicates itself without the one essential

ingredient that man requires to replace himself reproduce himself that is protein they discover that the strain is embedded in the meteorite in the form of a spore a very hard shell floor i recommend the book to you number one because it's very entertaining i'm sure you'll enjoy it it's well written number two because the strain is real the strain was not recovered from a satellite the satellite did not land in arizona and did not kill the population of a town the andromeda strain is real and it was recovered from a meteorite it was recovered from the spore of a meteorite and it was opened with laser beams they have no known way of controlling this thing if it should

regenerate and becomes gross in the atmosphere let's say it's not an easy job at times to ascertain exactly what is real and exactly what is unreal there are those who will tell you that nothing is real and there are those who will tell you that everything is real it is only within the capability of the mind to assimilate it there are many things that are real today which we deny the reality of because we fear it and because we can't control it because we're frustrated in our attempts to control it our egos is our prime error we deny the very existence of it some of that has been made

self-evident in the ufo field people who we have bestowed honors university honors on to close their minds to the subject because it is not within the meanings of their books of their formulas if it doesn't fit it's not real so if and when we in our group or any other group might uncover the true facts about this subject i can only bear witness to you that it is a real and physical phenomena there is very little that i can explain about any further i've seen it three times it only takes once each year hopefully i say i hope we can tell you more next year between last year and now unfortunately there is very little i can tell you once again i can only say i hope we can

can tell you more next year i don't sound optimistic and i'm not because what this subject requires as others have pointed out is a concerted research project which requires the type of funding that only a collective effort can produce we will tell you that we are not members of the white watch and wonder club that if and when something happens and they are still happening we do go there we do look into it we do have access to certain laboratory equipment we do have access to political ends at the same time that doesn't get the whole job done we'll keep trying in the meantime why don't you think about what you might be able to do thank you very much thank you mel hey are you and jim over there at the booth

every time mel noel gets up here you wonder what's going to happen you because he uh he does lead us to think in uh about things that he is interested in and investigating and unfortunately in a lot of these cases you're running to dead end or you can't give all the answers because our technology doesn't make it possible but we always like to have mel get up here while he's here at giant rock uh bring a man up here now that's been in this uh saucer business you

since the early days you probably many of you know him by name through books and he was here a number of years ago and i think he looked better now than he did then he put a lot of weight on and so to all of you here i want you to know gray barker thank you george and greetings to everybody it is just such a wonderful pleasure to be here with you because after all i live quite a distance from here in west virginia i came here with my colleague james mosley who is going to greet you in just a moment uh but i just can't quite get over how wonderful it is to get here i think the last time i was here was in 1958 shortly after that i went into educational uh motion picture sales and it would seem that every time the convention

was held something came up that i just couldn't make it