It must be emphasized that my colleagues and sincerely held a fascination "flying saucers" the result of the post-war mass psychosis and sincerely sympathized with our poor citizens, fooled such utter nonsense. So I accepted the invitation of the air force for the role "astronomical censor ' reports of UFO sightings as a good chance to expose, to crush, to dispel this unscientific Mirage. However, to demonstrate the power and might of our scientific methodology on the material of letters and stories of eyewitnesses I failed...

Only with the establishment of the program "Blue book" and with the arrival of her head captain Ruppelt I began to feel that truly "dive" in the UFO problem. But the unexpected collapse in 1968 programs "Blue book" (established in 1948 under the air force to study the reports of UFO) gave me feedback, namely the desire to continue to promote further research UFO using the rich experience accumulated by me over 20 years of cooperation with the United States air force (the result was the organization of j. A. Hynek in 1973 center for the study of UFOs in Evanston - Approx. as amended).

People often ask me, did not observe whether I personally unidentified flying object? I have to answer this question negatively. Thus, my experience with UFO secondary, that is, I "see" these objects through the eyes of others. To me many times asked to recommend a "good" a book on UFOs, accompanying these appeals replica-type: "is There something real?", "There truthful testimony about UFOs?" or "Where can I read more about this, but not written crazy?"

After much thought I decided to take up such a book. I had to do it in the interests of those who sincerely puzzled phenomenon who wants to know, what are the testimonies about UFOs first hand what type of objects are observed and how they are interpreted by the eyewitnesses.

But, sadly, I can't tell the readers of the chief, which they, of course, expect me to explain what a UFO. Just because I don't know. And nobody knows (still the question about the nature of UFOs remains open). But I'm determined to show that not all evidence is fabricated or falsified. "Good" book, in my opinion, must be fair and impartial. It should be based on solid facts and to be well documented.

Chapter 1. The irony of science

One summer evening 1968 in Victoria (British Columbia) hosted the reception on the occasion of astronomical Symposium. The large restaurant has gathered hundreds of astronomers from different countries. Suddenly entered the room the man and announced that appeared in the sky unidentified flying objects. A light laugh was on the table, but quickly verse, and people came back to their conversations. None of the scientists went outside to see the mysterious phenomenon of nature!

Erwin Schroedinger, one of the founders of quantum mechanics, said that the main requirement to the scientist should be insatiable curiosity. However, to the UFO phenomenon academic community not showing curiosity. Moreover, totally aggressive reaction of scientists on any mention of "flying saucers" suggests some kind of pathology that deserves the attention of psychiatrists.

There are two types of scientists that deny UFO. The first type are the scoffers who do not even try to deal with some particular case of observation of the phenomenon. The second type consists of scientists who are inclined to admit the reality of UFOs, but only as a purely psychological phenomenon.

The position of the second group of scientists still deserves attention because they have the materials for discussion. The views of the first group, however, does not stimulate debate, because, in her opinion, there is no phenomenon, it is not the subject of discussion. If the problem really is "crappy", then why it causes such a violent response authoritative and respectable scientists? Is it not because it is implemented subconscious response to the call that they are not willing to accept?

Famous canadian science historian Thomas Haug wrote: "One of the most interesting aspects of the UFO phenomenon is that it serves as a kind of index of the viability of science. I would think this only the science that treats new facts and accept their new explanations, including contradict the laws of nature". Next, So Gaudi stressed that any existing system of ideas sooner or later begins to resist the new facts that are beyond its scope. For example, most scientists did not agree with recognized now theories about the origin of meteorites, the mechanism of nuclear reactions, on the character of the blood flow in the human organism, about the Northern lights, etc. "Therefore, " continued So Gaudi, - if the scientific community easily perceives new facts, it means that they are not new in the true sense of the word". The following example illustrates said. Once physics were ready to admit that meteorites do not fall from the sky, and "made" of the rocks by lightning. This explanation could easily fit into the established pattern of the world. People couldn't imagine any other reason. "Hence, it is clear, - concluded So Gaudi - what if UFOs are not recognized for reality or construed as delusions of witnesses, that modern science can not be considered true!"

It is likely that many professionals would use their abilities to the study of UFOs, if they had the proper information. Unfortunately, they have to draw information about UFOs newspaper, tabloid magazines and occult books. Bibliography various literature related to UFOs, is that in 400 pages'

But not only specialists are misinformed on this problem. The entire society has distorted notions about UFOs. These include the following "true":

"On UFO sightings reported only fanatics". In fact, the most sensible and clear messages coming from eyewitnesses, does not informed about the problem, but honestly confused seen. And the fanatics UFOs or the occult and mysticism rarely send their descriptions. Besides these incoherent texts are easily detected and rejected.

"About UFOs are never reported these scientists are". This statement is also incorrect. Moreover, it is the scientists belong to the most detailed, accurate and qualified describe what he saw. Another thing is that their names do not appear in the media, because they avoid publicity and prefer to remain anonymous witnesses.

"Information about UFOs come from unreliable, ignorant and generally questionable people". Some descriptions really belong unreliable witnesses, prone to exaggeration. Usually these people are mistaken for UFOs known objects, but their messages are easily identified and excluded from further consideration. Sometimes I write and insufficiently educated people. But this does not mean that they cannot be trusted. Moreover, experts on investigation of transport accidents, the most highly appreciate the testimony of adolescents. The latter, of course, is not always the intellectuals, but speak and write without any prejudice. On the other hand, completely idiotic and boobies rarely prevail against his laziness to write something sensible. Very few reports are filed and mentally defective people. Psychiatrist Berthold Schwarz examined 3400 patients and among them have not found a single witness the appearance of UFOs! His colleagues received the same results and noted the almost complete absence sick of interest in these phenomena.

"UFO ships ' little green men" and all the aliens from outer space". As I said, no one knows, what are UFOs. But to deny the phenomenon due to the extravagance of space hypothesis of origin is unacceptable, since in this way we will lose the opportunity to consider other hypothesis.

We can define a UFO as described by the eyewitnesses of the event in the sky or on the earth object or light spot, the appearance of which, the trajectory, the General dynamics of the movement and the nature of the glow defy conventional logical explanation. It is particularly important that these objects or light spots remain unclear and specially trained experts, providers of professional expertise on the place of observation.

In view of the statement, I want to emphasize that my own research of many years has taught me strongly to weed out messages to people "crack pot", religious fanatics and mystics. As practice has shown, a considerable number of testimonies easily identified by experts with regular monitoring of natural objects or specimens purely terrestrial technology. The rest of the message, not amenable to such identification, and leave the most coveted science sediment. It includes the following categories of evidence: has global character, that is, coming from different corners of the globe; presents a competent, responsible, mentally normal eyewitnesses, deserving full trust; contains references to the details of which together shall not be identified with any known; containing elements beyond verbal description and not relevant, therefore, to the known physical or mental processes or phenomena.