An Analysis of the Condon Report on the Colorado UFO Project
Peter A. Sturrock (Stanford University), Journal for Scientific Exploration
In-depth analysis of the Condon Report details the many disagreements between Condon's dismissive summary and the actual data. - The analysis of evidence by categories shows that there are substantial and significant differences between the findings of the project staff and those that the director attributes to the project. Although both the director and the staff are cautious in stating conclusions, the staff tend to emphasize challenging cases and unanswered questions, whereas the director emphasizes the difficulty of further study and the probability that there is no scientific knowledge to be gained.
Dr. Thornton Page's Review of The "Condon Report"
Thornton Page, American Journal of Physics, October 1969
In one sense, the Condon Report lives up to its title Scientific Study, because physical principles and available data are applied meticulously to more than 56 selected, well-documented "cases" (UFO sightings), with the result that 33 cases are explained. however, as several other reviewers have noted, this leaves unexplained a larger proportion than the 10% or so which caused all the ruckus and forced the Air Force to fund the Colorado Project in the first place. Hence, it may be argued that Condon's carefully written conclusions (the first five pages of the Report) do not logically follow from the case studies.
Flying Saucer Fiasco
John G. Fuller, Look Magazine, May, 14, 1968
The extraordinary story of the half-million-dollar "trick" to make Americans believe the Condon committee was conducting an objective investigation.
National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Panel Review of the Condon Report
National Academy of Sciences / Sign Historical Group
A positive review and endorsement of the University of Colorado Report on UFOs (Condon Report). - The charge to the Panel was "to provide an independent assessment of the scope, methodology, and findings of the (University of Colorado) study as reflected in the (University's) Report."
Secrets of the Condon Report
Flying Saucers and UFOs 1969, Vol. 3
Reprinted excerpts from Flying Saucers and UFOs magazine's article on the Condon Report.
The Condon Report (Review/Comment by Stanton Friedman)
Stanton Friedman, Crash at Corona
The initially enthusiastic support [for the Condon study] from the major private UFO groups soon turned sour, as it became apparent that outspoken study director Dr. Edward Condon had concluded well in advance that there was nothing to be learned from investigating UFOS.
The Condon Report (Review/Comment)
Bernard Haisch, Ph.D., Astrophysicist
The negative conclusion of the Report is more apparent than real however, since there is a substantial discrepancy between the conclusion in the "Summary of the Study" written by Condon singlehandedly, and the conclusion one could reasonably draw from the evidence presented in the body of the Report.
The Condon Report (University of Colorado Report on UFOs, 1968)
University of Colorado / U.S. Air Force
Full text of the Condon Report, conducted by the University of Colorado with the US Air Force, under the directorship of Dr. Edward U. Condon.
The Condon Report and UFOs - Review by J. Allen Hynek
J. Allen Hynek, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist, April 1969
Hynek does not agree with the Condon Report and in this review essay he tells why.
The Truth About the Condon Report
NICAP (National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena), The U.F.O. Investigator, Vol. IV, No. 9, SPECIAL (January 1969)
The conclusions of the Colorado University UFO project are fully negative, as we predicted. However, some of the chapters contain strange contradictions of what the project's director, Dr. Edward U. Condon, stated in his two opening sections. Several reports state the probable existence of structured, intelligently controlled, unknown objects capable of precise maneuvers and extremely high speeds.
The UFO Report: Condon Study Falls Short
Robert M. L. Baker Jr., Scientific Research, April 14, 1969
This half-million-dollar, 965-page report probably represents the ultimate case against the UFO "cult" – in fact, it was to be the last scientific word on that controversial subject. But, paradoxically, the report contains some evidence suggesting that the UFO phenomenon should be studied further.
UFO - An Appraisal of the Problem
1968 Statement of the American Insitute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Subcommittee on UFOs
Includes a discussion of the Condon Report: "There are differences in the opinions and conclusions drawn by the authors of the various chapters, and there are differences between these and Condon's summary. Not all conclusions contained in the report itself are fully reflected in Condon's summary."
UFOs And The Condon Report - A Scientist's Critique (James MacDonald Critique of the Condon Report)
James E. McDonald
Summary of a talk presented to The Dupont Chapter of The Scientific Research Society of America (RESA), Wilmington, Delaware, February 12, 1969, by Dr. James E. McDonald, member of the Condon Report, in which he critiques the Condon Report's conclusions.
UFOs, Social Intelligence, and the Condon Committee (PDF)
Diana Palmer Hoyt, thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
The history of UFO sightings and their sociopolitical context and consequences constitutes the broad subject of this study and provides a site for analysis of how scientists address, both publicly and privately, anomalies that appear to pertain to science. The Condon Report, the Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects, commissioned by the Air Force in 1968, provides a complex case for the exploration of how the outcome and conclusions of the study were influenced by all that had gone on before in ufology.
USAF-Sponsored Colorado Project for the Scientific Study of UFOs
Michael D. Swords, Ph.D., 1995 MUFON Symposium Proceedings
One of the most significant elements in the history of UFOlogy was the so-called Condon Project, centered at the University of Colorado in 1967-1968. This paper discusses the origin, methodological philosophy and overview of the research problem, the activities, results, and external impacts of this work. The paper finds a complex mix of personalities, attitudes, and theories enmeshed in political and social forces, which predestined the project's conclusions and crippled its ability to make any scientific contribution toward the solution of the UFO mystery. Its resultant impacts were nevertheless formidable, both negatively and positively.