Use ARROWS to page backward or forward


Page 10


Case 6 is described on Condon and Gillmor (1968) pp. 266-270. The abstract of this case (Condon & Gillmor, 1968) p. 266 is as follows:

Three adult women went onto the high school athletic field to check the identity of a bright light which had frightened an 11-year-old girl in her home nearby, and reported that one of three lights they saw maneuvering in the sky above the school flew noiselessly toward them, coming directly overhead, 20-30 ft. above one of them. It was described as a flowing [sic], solid disc-like, automobile-sized object. Two policemen who responded to a telephone message that a UFO was under observation verified that an extraordinary object was flying over the high school. The object has not been identified. Most of the extended observation, however, apparently was an observation of the planet Jupiter.

Photographic Evidence

In his summary of this category, Hartmann (Condon & Gillmor, 1968, p. 86) describes a “residual group of unidentifieds” which “is not inconsistent with the hypothesis that unknown and extraordinary aircraft have penetrated the airspace of the United States,” although “none yields sufficient evidence to establish this hypothesis.” A little later, Hartmann remarks:

After investigation, there remains a small residual of the order of 2 of all cases, that appears to represent well recorded but unidentified or unidentifiable objects that are airborne-i.e., UFOs. . The present data are compatible with, but do not establish either the hypothesis that (1) the entire UFO phenomenon is a product of misidentification, poor reporting, and fabrication, or that (2) a very small part of the UFO phenomenon involves extraordinary events.

As examples of the “small residual” cases, we may refer to Cases 46 and 47. Concerning Case 46 (McMinnville, Oregon, May 11, 1950), Hartmann reaches the following conclusions (Condon & Gillmor, 1968, p. 407):

This is one of the few UFO reports in which all factors investigated, geometric, psychological, and physical appear to be consistent with the assertion that an extraordinary flying object, silvery, metallic, disc-shaped, tens of meters in diameter, and evidently artificial, flew within the sight of two witnesses. It cannot be said that the evidence positively rules out fabrication, although there are some factors such as the accuracy of certain photometric measures of the original negatives which argue against a fabrication.

Hartmann describes Case 47 (Great Falls, Montana, August 15, 1950) in an abstract as follows:

Witness I, General Manager of a Great Falls baseball team, and Witness II, Secretary, observed two white lights moving slowly across the sky. Witness I made 16 mm. motion pictures of the lights. Both individuals have recently reaffirmed the observation, and there is little reason to question its validity. The case remains unexplained. Analysis indicates that the images on the film are difficult to reconcile with aircraft or other known phenomena, although aircraft cannot be entirely ruled out.