Australian Department of Defence: Scientific and Intelligence Aspects of the UFO Problem, 1971

Source file: CIA-UAP-019-Australian_Dept_of_Defense_Scientific_and_Intel_Aspects_of_the_UFO_Problem.pdf Originating agency: Australian Department of Defence, Joint Intelligence Organisation (JIO), Nuclear Branch Document type: Minute Paper (internal memorandum with attached studies) National Archives reference: NAA: A13693, 3092/2/000 Classification: Unclassified (internal routing; some portions marked) Date: 27 May 1971 Signatory: O.H. Turner, Head of Nuclear Branch Page count: 19 (all read) VIRIN: 260508-O-D0360-1096 PURSUE Release: 3

Summary

This document is a minute paper dated 27 May 1971, produced by O.H. Turner, Head of the Nuclear Branch of the Australian Department of Defence's Joint Intelligence Organisation (JIO). It is addressed to the Director (through DST — the Defence Science and Technology directorate), with a handwritten note requesting to discuss the matters with the Director after reviewing the attachments.

The minute transmits two attached documents intended to "focus on aspects of the UFO problem that have tended to remain hidden." The first attachment — titled "U.S. Official Attitude to U.F.O.'s" — covers the history of US government UFO investigation from 1947 through the closure of Project Blue Book in December 1969, drawing on CIA reports, USAF records, Congressional hearings, and Blue Book records. It is accompanied by a detailed chronology (Appendix "A") running from June 1947 to December 1969. The second attachment deals with evidence for weapon systems used by UFOs, drawn from the computerised database collected by Dr Jacques Vallee in collaboration with Dr J. Allen Hynek at Northwestern University.

The document's Summary section (pages 3-4, labelled "May 71") advances a highly critical assessment of US UFO policy and proposes Australia chart an independent course.

Research Article

The author and context

O.H. Turner, Head of the Nuclear Branch of the JIO, produced this paper within an Australian defence intelligence organisation. The JIO was responsible for producing strategic intelligence assessments for the Australian government and military. The Nuclear Branch's involvement suggests institutional awareness that UFO phenomena intersected with nuclear and strategic defence concerns — a linkage that appears throughout the PURSUE collection.

The document was eventually archived in the National Archives of Australia (NAA reference A13693, 3092/2/000), and was released through the Freedom of Information process. The CIA's inclusion of it in PURSUE Release 3 — as a foreign government document — reflects the significance accorded to an allied nation's internal intelligence assessment of the same UFO problem that US agencies were simultaneously managing.

The Summary's key arguments

The document's Summary (the most clearly legible section) advances five numbered arguments:

1. Early USAF analysis pointed to extraterrestrial origin. "The early analyses of UFO reports by USAF intelligence indicated that real phenomena were being reported which had flight characteristics so far in advance of U.S. aircraft that only an extra-terrestrial origin could be envisaged." A government agency — "which later events indicated to be the CIA Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI)" — then studied UFO propulsion methods while responsible for intelligence on foreign nuclear and missile research and development.

2. CIA alarm and the Blue Book debunking strategy. "The CIA became alarmed at the overloading of military communications during the mass sightings of 1952 and considered the possibility that the USSR may take advantage of such a situation." As a result, the CIA "acting through the Robertson-panel meeting of mid-January 1953, persuaded the USAF to use Project BLUE BOOK as a means of publicly 'debunking' UFO's, and at a later stage to allocate funds for the Avro advanced 'saucer' aircraft and the launching of a crash programme into anti-gravity power. To initiate such programmes decades ahead of normal scientific development would indicate that the U.S. Government acknowledged the existence of advanced 'aircraft' which presumably used a gravity-control method of propulsion."

3. Public ridicule as cover. "By erecting a facade of ridicule, the U.S. hoped to allay public alarm, reduce the possibility of the Soviet taking advantage of UFO mass sightings for either psychological or actual warfare purposes, and act as a cover for the real U.S. programme of developing vehicles that emulate UFO performances."

4. The Condon Report's flaws. "The conclusions of the Condon report conflict with its own contents and has been discredited by many reputable scientists including the UFO scientific consultant to the USAF. In accordance with the recommendations of the Condon report, Project BLUE BOOK was terminated, but presumably this would have little effect on the main programme."

5. Australia's deficiency and the way forward. "It would appear wrong for Australia to remain ignorant of the true situation. We lack an intelligence viewpoint that can assess the nature and possible consequences of the problem, a scientific viewpoint that could derive scientifically valid data from the reports and a public relations viewpoint that can honestly satisfy public interest. To overcome these deficiencies in the Australian investigation of UFO's, it would seem that a strong case exists for the acceptance of the RAAF suggestion that another government department assume responsibility for the investigation and analysis of UFO reports."

US official attitude to UFOs: the attached study

The first attachment provides a narrative account of US UFO investigation from 1947, covering:

• June 1947: ATIC (Air Technical Intelligence Centre) at Wright-Patterson AFB investigates initial "flying saucer" reports.
• End of 1947: Most investigators believed in an interplanetary rather than Soviet origin; a written estimate sent to the Pentagon was rejected for insufficient hard evidence.
• February 1949: Project SIGN becomes Project GRUDGE, with a deliberate effort to eliminate acceptance of UFOs.
• March 1952: Project GRUDGE becomes Project BLUE BOOK with 10 qualified staff.
• Summer 1952: More than 20-fold rise in sightings including the Washington D.C. radar-visual cases; CIA regarded this as a national security threat.
• January 1953: The Robertson Panel convened by CIA/OSI. The panel recommended that the investigation continue with increased personnel and equipment. The CIA, however, in a 16 February 1953 report showed preference for publicly abandoning investigation while intensifying data collection.
• 1953 onward: Blue Book reduced to virtually one airman while covert collection transferred to the 4602nd Air Intelligence Service Squadron.
• 1953: JANAP 146 legislated that service personnel discussing UFO sightings were liable to 1-10 years gaol and/or a $10,000 fine. A 1960 revision (JANAP 146E) made it an offence under the Espionage Act.
• 1955: Six Gravity Research Centres established at major US universities; 485 essays written on gravity control by 1955; by 1966, 46 separate projects financially supported.
• 1965-66: Surge in sightings; Maj. Gen. LeBailly requests USAF Scientific Advisory Board review of Blue Book.
• 1966: Colorado University selected; Dr Edward Condon appointed with $313,000 (later $525,000).
• 1967: Condon publicly stated his pre-determined conclusion; staff resigned; final 965-page report lacked coherence.
• December 1969: Project Blue Book closed.

The attachment also addresses the RAAF attitude, noting that the Directorate of Air Force Intelligence was responsible for UFO analysis but admitted its interests lay "solely in the area of air defence" and that it lacked "both interest and competence to consider the scientific aspects." An identification list of Australian sightings 1960-1965 contained 15 invalid Venus identifications and only 9 plausible meteor identifications out of 37 claimed.

The Vallee-Hynek database and weapon systems

The second attachment (referenced but its text not fully reproduced in the minute itself) dealt with evidence for weapon systems used by UFOs, drawn from the computerised database that Dr Jacques Vallee compiled in collaboration with Dr J. Allen Hynek at Northwestern University. The document notes this evidence "represents only a fraction of world-wide reports dealing with the same weapon systems" and that "Australia has had its share of this kind of reporting."

Statistical analysis of Blue Book data

The attached study reproduces a table from Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14 on sighting reliability versus percentage of unknowns:

The document comments: "The percentage of reports that had to be registered as 'unknown' (i.e. incapable of being even approximately identified as a known object) increased as the sighting reliability improved. Conversely, the percentage listed as 'insufficient information' decreased with improving reliability." It notes that Blue Book consultants "statistically tested the unknown object population to determine the likelihood that it was similar to the population of identified objects and found that the probability was less than one in 10^28."

Key figures named in the document

The attached study names numerous individuals relevant to UFO investigation history: General Twining (AMC), General Vandenberg (Air Force Chief of Staff), Captain E. Ruppelt (Project GRUDGE/BLUE BOOK), Admiral Hillenkoetter (CIA Director to October 1950), Major D. Fournet (Blue Book Project Officer at the Pentagon), Admiral D.S. Fahrney (first NICAP Chairman), Admiral H.B. Knowles, General A. Wedemeyer, Col J.J. Bryan (NICAP directors), Dr H.P. Robertson (Robertson Panel Chairman), Dr Luis Alvarez, Dr Lloyd Berkner, Dr Samuel A. Goudsmit, Dr Thornton Page (Robertson Panel members, the latter also Chairman of the Special Committee that countered the Condon Report), Dr J. Allen Hynek (USAF scientific consultant 1948-69), Dr Jacques Vallee (Hynek's collaborator), Dr Edward Condon (Colorado University project director), Maj. Gen. LeBailly (Director of Information), Dr J.E. Lipp of RAND Corporation, and William P. Lear (Lear Inc., Santa Monica). Scientists listed as involved in gravity research include Teller, Oppenheimer, F.J. Dyson, J.A. Wheeler, Richard Arnowitt, Vaclay Hlavaty, and Stanley Deser.

Significance

This is one of the most substantive analytical documents in the PURSUE Release 3 collection. It is the product of a senior Australian defence intelligence officer drawing on extensive open and classified sources to argue, in 1971, that:

• The US government acknowledged the existence of advanced non-human aviation technology;
• Project Blue Book was a deliberate public facade;
• Substantial covert US research into gravity-control propulsion was underway;
• The Condon Report was intellectually dishonest;
• Australia needed to build its own independent, scientifically credible UFO investigation capability.

The document is remarkable for its frankness within an official intelligence context, and for the breadth of its sourcing. Its inclusion in PURSUE Release 3 by the CIA represents a form of corroboration: an allied intelligence partner had independently arrived, by 1971, at conclusions about US UFO policy that US agencies were not making public.

Key People

Locations

Incidents

Notable Quotes

"The early analyses of UFO reports by USAF intelligence indicated that real phenomena were being reported which had flight characteristics so far in advance of U.S. aircraft that only an extra-terrestrial origin could be envisaged." — page 3, Summary

"The CIA became alarmed at the overloading of military communications during the mass sightings of 1952 and considered the possibility that the USSR may take advantage of such a situation." — page 3, Summary

"By erecting a facade of ridicule, the U.S. hoped to allay public alarm, reduce the possibility of the Soviet taking advantage of UFO mass sightings for either psychological or actual warfare purposes, and act as a cover for the real U.S. programme of developing vehicles that emulate UFO performances." — page 3, Summary

"Such an intensive onslaught on the gravity enigma was entirely irrational from the standpoint of conventional science, and can only be rationalized within the context of a firm belief that UFO's were real and that the intelligences behind them knew how to control gravity." — page 6, attached study

"It would appear wrong for Australia to remain ignorant of the true situation. We lack an intelligence viewpoint that can assess the nature and possible consequences of the problem, a scientific viewpoint that could derive scientifically valid data from the reports and a public relations viewpoint that can honestly satisfy public interest." — page 4, Summary

"The two documents attached are intended to focus on aspects of the UFO problem that have tended to remain hidden." — page 2, covering minute