look like?" wasn't one of them because when you
have a picture of something you don't normally ask what it looks
like. Why the intelligence officer didn't pass this information on to
us I'll never know.

The Montana Movie was rejected by the panel as positive proof
because even though the two observers said that the jets were in
another part of the sky when they saw the UFO's and our study backed
them up, there was still a chance that the two UFO's could have been
the two jets. We couldn't prove the UFO's were the jets, but neither
could we prove they weren't.

The controversial study of the UFO's' motions that Major Fournet had
presented was discarded. All of the panel agreed that if there had
been some permanent record of the motion of the UFO's, a photograph
of a UFO's flight path or a photograph of a UFO's track on a
radarscope, they could have given the study much more weight. But in
every one of the ten or twenty reports that were offered as proof
that the UFO's were intelligently controlled, the motions were only
those that the observer had seen. And the human eye and mind are not
accurate recorders. How many different stories do you get when a
group of people watch two cars collide at an intersection?

Each of the fifty of our best sightings that we gave the scientists
to study had some kind of a loophole. In many cases the loopholes
were extremely small, but scientific evaluation has no room for even
the smallest of loopholes and we had asked for a scientific evaluation.

When they had finished commenting on the reports, the scientists
pointed out the seriousness of the decision they had been asked to
make. They said that they had tried hard to be objective and not to
be picayunish, but actually all we had was circumstantial evidence.
Good circumstantial evidence, to be sure, but we had nothing
concrete, no hardware, no photos showing any detail of a UFO, no
measured speeds, altitudes, or sizes--nothing in the way of good,
hard, cold, scientific facts. To stake the future course of millions
of lives on a decision based upon circumstantial evidence would be
one of the gravest mistakes in the history of the world.

In their conclusions they touched upon the possibility that the
UFO's might be some type of new or yet undiscovered natural
phenomenon. They explained that they hadn't given this too much
credence; however, if the UFO's were a new natural phenomenon, the
reports of their general appearance shoul