The below excerpt is transcribed from the relevant “Hynek” segment, which is on the Video from the late 70s that I have, entitled “UFOs: It Has
“The CIA now would enter the picture. By convening a Panel of top scientists to examine the UFO phenomenon. The CIA’s concern was that recent
waves of sightings might constitute a threat to National Security. The thinking was that the enemy could exploit UFOs as a decoy in the preparation
for an attack on the United States. Five outstanding scientists and various Air Force and CIA representatives were to meet on Wednesday, January 14
1953. Among the Panel Members was one Associate Member who was destined to have more experience with the UFO phenomena than any other American
scientist to date - Dr J. Allen Hynek, Astrophysicist and head of the Astronomy Department of North Western University.”
(Hynek now speaking);
“I was called into the meeting on Thursday. The Panel Members were seated around this table. It was a rather sombre and impressive occasion,
actually. I was a Junior Member and I remember feeling considerably nervous and apprehensive about being in front of this powerhouse of scientists.
But then for the past four years I had been Scientific Adviser to the US Air Force on this very problem. There were two films that were of particular
interest to the Panel at that time. One was a film taken by a Navy Officer while on vacation in Utah, near Trementon, Utah. And the other was a film
taken in Great Falls, Montana by the owner of the local Baseball team. The Utah film had already been subjected to some thousand or so man-hours of
analysis by the Navy’s Photographic Interpretation Laboratory.”
(1st film is shown whilst Hynek continues to speak…)
“The Panel got up from their chairs and crouched along the walls and (unintelligible), and they asked to have the films run several times, as a
matter of fact.”
(2nd film is shown whilst Hynek continues to speak…)
“On the basis of their detailed analysis of the Utah films, they had concluded that the objects shown in the films could not be Birds, Balloons,
Aircraft and so forth, but indeed that they were “Self-Luminous Unidentified Objects”. Despite this conclusion, the Panel rejected this and
concluded that the objects were Birds. They couldn’t be Unidentified, therefore they had to be Birds.”
(Films cease to be shown now. Hynek continues to speak.)
“I came away from the Meeting and from the room with the distinct feeling, however, that the Panel had deliberately moved to debunk the whole
subject and not to give it the serious scientific attention which it deserved.”
(* Notes regarding Films shown whilst Hynek is speaking on the Video):-
(1st film lasts a total of 10 seconds. 2 Objects on “Normal Speed” are noticeable, passing behind a tower and over a number of other structures.
However, on “Pause/Still Frame progression”, up to 22 Objects are noticeable.)
(2nd film lasts a total of 31 seconds. 4 seconds of the 31 second film sequence are not seen on the Video – as Hynek is seen talking, only.
Therefore, 27 seconds of this sequence are shown on the Video. 8 or 9 objects on “Normal Speed” are noticeable, in the clear blue sky. However, on
“Pause/Still Frame progression”, 22 to 46 objects are noticeable).
Now, was this Meeting that Hynek refers to MJ-12 or the Robertson Panel, or a combination of both “Parties”?
It appears, as Gazrok stated that it was the Robertson Panel, and thus I must "eat my words".
“REPORT OF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS CONVENED BY OFFICE OF SCIENTIFIC INTELLIGENCE, CIA January 14 - 18, 1953”;
“Studies In Intelligence Vol. 01 No. 1, 1997”;
“The A Die-Hard Issue
CIA's Role in the Study of UFOs, 1947-90”;
“The Robertson Panel, 1952-53
In January 1953, Chadwell and H. P. Robertson, a noted physicist from the California Institute of Technology, put together a distinguished panel of
nonmilitary scientists to study the UFO issue. It included Robertson as chairman; Samuel A. Goudsmit, a nuclear physicist from the Brookhaven National
Laboratories; Luis Alvarez, a high-energy physicist; Thornton Page, the deputy director of the Johns Hopkins Operations Research Office and an expert
on radar and electronics; and Lloyd Berkner, a director of the Brookhaven National Laboratories and a specialist in geophysics. (30)
The charge to the panel was to review the available evidence on UFOs and to consider the possible dangers of the phenomena to US national security.
The panel met from 14 to 17 January 1953. It reviewed Air Force data on UFO case histories and, after spending 12 hours studying the phenomena,
declared that reasonable explanations could be suggested for most, if not all, sightings. For example, after reviewing motion-picture film taken of a
UFO sighting near Tremonton, Utah, on 2 July 1952 and one near Great Falls, Montana, on 15 August 1950, the panel concluded that the images on the
Tremonton film were caused by sunlight reflecting off seagulls and that the images at Great Falls were sunlight reflecting off the surface of two Air
Force interceptors. (31)
The panel concluded unanimously that there was no evidence of a direct threat to national security in the UFO sightings. Nor could the panel find any
evidence that the objects sighted might be extraterrestrials. It did find that continued emphasis on UFO reporting might threaten "the orderly
functioning" of the government by clogging the channels of communication with irrelevant reports and by inducing "hysterical mass behavior" harmful
to constituted authority. The panel also worried that potential enemies contemplating an attack on the United States might exploit the UFO phenomena
and use them to disrupt US air defenses. (32)
To meet these problems, the panel recommended that the National Security Council debunk UFO reports and institute a policy of public education to
reassure the public of the lack of evidence behind UFOs. It suggested using the mass media, advertising, business clubs, schools, and even the Disney
corporation to get the message across. Reporting at the height of McCarthyism, the panel also recommended that such private UFO groups as the Civilian
Flying Saucer Investigators in Los Angeles and the Aerial Phenomena Research Organization in Wisconsin be monitored for subversive activities. (33)
The Robertson panel's conclusions were strikingly similar to those of the earlier Air Force project reports on SIGN and GRUDGE and to those of the
CIA's own OSI Study Group. All investigative groups found that UFO reports indicated no direct threat to national security and no evidence of visits
Following the Robertson panel findings, the Agency abandoned efforts to draft an NSCID on UFOs. (34) The Scientific Advisory Panel on UFOs (the
Robertson panel) submitted its report to the IAC, the Secretary of Defense, the Director of the Federal Civil Defense Administration, and the Chairman
of the National Security Resources Board. CIA officials said no further consideration of the subject appeared warranted, although they continued to
monitor sightings in the interest of national security. Philip Strong and Fred Durant from OSI also briefed the Office of National Estimates on the
findings. (35) CIA officials wanted knowledge of any Agency interest in the subject of flying saucers carefully restricted, noting not only that the
Robertson panel report was classified but also that any mention of CIA sponsorship of the panel was forbidden. This attitude would later cause the
Agency major problems relating to its credibility.”
“The “Pentacle” Memorandum”;
“2. The greatest implication, which is perhaps not obvious on first reading but which amounts to a scandal of major proportion in the eyes of any
scientist, has to do with the outright manipulation of the Robertson panel. Here is a special meeting of the five most eminent scientists in the land,
assembled by the government to discuss a matter of national security. Not only are they not made aware of all the data, but another group has already
decided "what can and cannot be discussed (Pentacle's own words!)" when they meet. Dr. Hynek categorically stated to me that the panel was not
briefed about the Pentacle proposals.”
I still hold onto the fact that an "unadulterated/un-blacked out" Appendix C that I hold in my hot little hand lists January 15, 1953, MJ-12 and
Hynek all named on the same document (although not on the Internet).
Not to worry, the Robertson Panel it so is!