Within Condon Report
Did Condon's Conclusion Outrun the Evidence?
Several sightings remained unresolved, raising a lasting dispute over whether Condon's broad recommendation fairly matched the case evidence.
On this page
- What the unresolved cases actually showed
- Why unexplained did not mean extraterrestrial
- The main criticism of Condon's recommendation
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
Did the University of Colorado’s UFO study actually support Edward Condon’s famous conclusion that further large-scale UFO research was unlikely to advance science? More than fifty years later, that remains the central dispute surrounding the Condon Report. The controversy is not that the study found clear evidence of extraterrestrial craft—it did not. The argument is whether the report’s own case investigations justified such a sweeping recommendation against continued federal study. Several cases remained unexplained, some investigators involved in the project expressed reservations, and critics argued that the report’s summary sounded more definitive than the evidence beneath it. Supporters replied that unexplained reports are not the same as evidence for an extraordinary phenomenon and that the overall record still failed to demonstrate a productive scientific research programme.[files.ncas.org]files.ncas.orgCondon Report, Section I: Conclusions & RecommendationsAlthough we conclude after nearly two years of intensive study, that we do not see…
Within Colorado’s place in UFO history, this question matters because the Condon Report became one of the most influential documents ever produced on the subject. Its conclusions helped persuade the Air Force to close Project Blue Book in 1969.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying ObjectsThe decision to discontinue UFO investigations was based on an evaluation…
What the unresolved cases actually showed
One common misconception is that the Colorado study explained every case it examined. It did not.
The report contained numerous investigations of sightings, photographs, radar incidents and other reports. Some were resolved through conventional explanations such as aircraft, astronomical objects, atmospheric effects or misinterpretation. Others remained unresolved because the available evidence was incomplete or because investigators could not identify a convincing explanation.[Wikipedia]WikipediaCondon CommitteeCondon Committee
The most frequently cited example is the 1956 Lakenheath–Bentwaters radar and visual incident in England. The report’s own analysis stated that ordinary explanations could not be ruled out but judged them relatively unlikely, concluding that the probability that at least one genuinely unidentified object was involved appeared “fairly high”. Critics later pointed to this passage as evidence that the report contained stronger mysteries than its public reputation suggested.[Wikipedia]WikipediaCondon CommitteeCondon Committee
Other investigators associated with the project also acknowledged a residual category of puzzling reports. Committee consultant Gerald Rothberg later wrote that a small number of cases remained difficult to explain even after detailed examination.[Wikipedia]WikipediaCondon CommitteeCondon Committee
These unresolved incidents became the foundation of later criticism. Opponents of Condon’s recommendation argued that if trained investigators could not explain some of the best-documented cases, the logical response should have been more research rather than less.[Kirk McD]kirkmcd.princeton.eduKirk McDUFOs and the Condon Report - A Scientist's Critiqueby JE McDonald · Cited by 2 — The Report analyses only about ninety cases, a t…
Why unexplained did not mean extraterrestrial
Supporters of the report drew a different conclusion from exactly the same evidence.
The Colorado team’s central argument was not that every sighting had been solved. Rather, it was that decades of investigation had failed to produce reliable scientific evidence of a new physical phenomenon. An unexplained case might simply reflect missing data, imperfect observations or limitations in the investigation itself. It did not automatically indicate advanced technology, extraterrestrial visitors or an unknown force of nature.[files.ncas.org]files.ncas.orgCondon Report, Section I: Conclusions & RecommendationsAlthough we conclude after nearly two years of intensive study, that we do not see…
Condon therefore focused on the practical value of future research. His conclusion stated that twenty-one years of UFO investigations had not added to scientific knowledge and that further extensive study was unlikely to be productive. At the same time, he did not argue that all future work should be prohibited. The report explicitly stated that scientists with specific, well-defined proposals should still receive support.[files.ncas.org]files.ncas.orgCondon Report, Section I: Conclusions & RecommendationsAlthough we conclude after nearly two years of intensive study, that we do not see…
This distinction is often overlooked. The report rejected the idea of a permanent, large-scale federal UFO programme. It did not claim that every unidentified observation had been explained, nor did it forbid future scientific investigation of unusual aerial phenomena.[files.ncas.org]files.ncas.orgCondon Report, Section I: Conclusions & RecommendationsAlthough we conclude after nearly two years of intensive study, that we do not see…
The main criticism of Condon’s recommendation
The strongest criticism was not that the report contained errors in every case study. It was that the summary and recommendation appeared broader than the evidence justified.
Astronomer J. Allen Hynek, formerly a consultant to Project Blue Book, argued that the report’s introductory conclusions downplayed the fact that a substantial fraction of the investigated cases remained unexplained. He believed the report presented a more dismissive picture than its detailed chapters warranted.[Wikipedia]WikipediaCondon CommitteeCondon Committee
Physicist James E. McDonald went further. He argued that the study examined only a small sample of the most significant UFO reports and failed to engage adequately with some of the strongest cases available. In his view, the report’s recommendation against continued research was therefore premature.[Kirk McD]kirkmcd.princeton.eduKirk McDUFOs and the Condon Report - A Scientist's Critiqueby JE McDonald · Cited by 2 — The Report analyses only about ninety cases, a t…
Critics also pointed to the famous “Low memo” controversy. Before the project was fully underway, project administrator Robert Low wrote a memorandum suggesting that the study could be conducted by sceptical investigators while appearing objective to the public. When the memo became public, opponents argued that it indicated bias from the beginning. Defenders of the project responded that the memo did not represent Condon’s views and that it did not determine the actual findings of the study.[Wikipedia]WikipediaCondon CommitteeCondon Committee
Some scientists sympathetic to UFO research framed the issue as a logical problem. If a selected group of cases still contained unexplained events after careful analysis, they argued, that residual mystery itself justified further investigation.[Wikipedia]WikipediaCondon CommitteeCondon Committee
Why many scientists still accepted the conclusion
Despite these criticisms, the report’s overall recommendation received important institutional support.
Before publication, the National Academy of Sciences conducted an independent review of the Colorado study. Its review panel agreed that the evidence available from two decades of UFO investigations did not justify assigning a high scientific priority to the subject. This endorsement carried significant weight because it came from outside the project itself.[Wikipedia]WikipediaCondon CommitteeCondon Committee
For many scientists, the key issue was not whether a handful of reports remained unexplained. Most scientific fields contain anomalous observations. The question was whether those anomalies formed a consistent pattern that pointed toward a discoverable phenomenon. The National Academy panel concluded that the available data did not meet that threshold.[Wikipedia]WikipediaCondon CommitteeCondon Committee
That judgement helped shape federal policy. The Air Force cited the Condon Report, the Academy review and its own experience when it decided to terminate Project Blue Book.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying ObjectsThe decision to discontinue UFO investigations was based on an evaluation…
Did Condon’s conclusion outrun the evidence?
The answer depends largely on what question is being asked.
If the question is whether the Colorado study proved that all UFO reports had ordinary explanations, the answer is clearly no. Several cases remained unresolved, and even some participants acknowledged a lingering residue of difficult incidents.[Wikipedia]WikipediaCondon CommitteeCondon Committee
If the question is whether the report demonstrated extraterrestrial visitation or another extraordinary phenomenon, the answer is also no. The study found no verified evidence of alien craft, revolutionary technology or a new physical process.[files.ncas.org]files.ncas.orgCondon Report, Section I: Conclusions & RecommendationsAlthough we conclude after nearly two years of intensive study, that we do not see…
The real disagreement concerns policy. Critics believed unresolved cases justified more organised scientific investigation. Supporters believed that decades of effort had already shown diminishing returns and that scarce scientific resources were better directed elsewhere.[Kirk McD]kirkmcd.princeton.eduKirk McDUFOs and the Condon Report - A Scientist's Critiqueby JE McDonald · Cited by 2 — The Report analyses only about ninety cases, a t…
That unresolved tension explains why the Condon Report remains controversial within Colorado’s UFO legacy. The debate was never simply about whether some sightings were unexplained. It was about whether unexplained sightings, by themselves, were enough reason to maintain a permanent national research programme. The report answered “no”; many of its critics believed the evidence pointed in the opposite direction.[files.ncas.org]files.ncas.orgCondon Report, Section I: Conclusions & RecommendationsAlthough we conclude after nearly two years of intensive study, that we do not see…
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to Did Condon's Conclusion Outrun the Evidence?. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry
Directly addresses how evidence should be evaluated and interpreted.
UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Re...
Examines credible cases and debates over official conclusions.
The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects
Provides historical context for evaluating UFO case evidence.
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Selected fromUFO wall art oneBay.co.uk.
Current eBay listing
UFO ABDUCTION OVER THE OCEAN -DEEP FRAMED CANVAS WALL ART PRINT
Current eBay listing
UFO ABDUCTION OVER THE OCEAN -FRAMED WALL ART PAPER PRINT POSTER
Endnotes
1.
Source: files.ncas.org
Link:https://files.ncas.org/condon/text/sec-i.htm
Source snippet
Condon Report, Section I: Conclusions & RecommendationsAlthough we conclude after nearly two years of intensive study, that we do not see...
2.
Source: Wikipedia
Title: Condon Committee
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condon_Committee
3.
Source: archives.gov
Title: National Archives Project BLUE BOOK
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/military/air-force/ufos
Source snippet
National ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying ObjectsThe decision to discontinue UFO investigations was based on an evaluation...
4.
Source: Wikipedia
Title: Unidentified flying object
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_flying_object
Source snippet
Unidentified flying objectUpon investigation, most UFOs are identified as known objects or atmospheric phenomena, while a small number...
5.
Source: Wikipedia
Title: Identification studies of UFOs
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identification_studies_of_UFOs
Source snippet
Identification studies of UFOsIdentifying unidentified flying objects (UFOs) is a difficult task due to the normally poor quality of t...
6.
Source: colorado.edu
Title: condon report cu boulders historic ufo study
Link:https://www.colorado.edu/coloradan/2021/11/05/condon-report-cu-boulders-historic-ufo-study
Source snippet
The Condon Report: CU Boulder's Historic UFO Study5 Nov 2021 — The “Condon Report” officially concluded UFOs did not warrant further inve...
7.
Source: colorado.edu
Title: cu site one last government commissioned reports ufos what does it say
Link:https://www.colorado.edu/today/2021/06/09/cu-site-one-last-government-commissioned-reports-ufos-what-does-it-say
8.
Source: youtube.com
Title: UFOs, the Air Force, and the Colorado Study (Ret. USAF Col. David Shea)
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2wfUiUodpM
Source snippet
The Condon Report | NASA's Unexplained Files...
9.
Source: youtube.com
Title: The Condon Report | NASA’s Unexplained Files
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_W7SqS6UhE4
Source snippet
Lakenheath/ Bentwaters UFO Incident 1956 - Dr. David Clarke...
10.
Source: kirkmcd.princeton.edu
Link:https://kirkmcd.princeton.edu/JEMcDonald/mcdonald_resa_021269.pdf
Source snippet
Kirk McDUFOs and the Condon Report - A Scientist's Critiqueby JE McDonald · Cited by 2 — The Report analyses only about ninety cases, a t...
11.
Source: kirkmcd.princeton.edu
Title: mcdonald aaas 69
Link:https://kirkmcd.princeton.edu/JEMcDonald/mcdonald_aaas_69.pdf
12.
Source: kirkmcd.princeton.edu
Title: mcdonald nicap 061069
Link:https://kirkmcd.princeton.edu/JEMcDonald/mcdonald_nicap_061069.pdf
Additional References
13.
Source: pearl-hifi.com
Link:https://pearl-hifi.com/11_Spirited_Growth/01_Books/Jacobs_David_M/UFOs_and_Abductions__Challenging_the_Borders_of_Knowledge.pdf
Source snippet
UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the Borders of Knowledge"22 This obvious disconnect between the findings and conclusions of the Condon R...
14.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWxvCEyIjro
Source snippet
Edward U. Condon: Quantum Pioneer & Champion of Scientific Integrity...
15.
Source: cia.gov
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP81R00560R000100010008-3.pdf
16.
Source: encyclopedia.com
Link:https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/condon-report
17.
Source: archive.org
Link:https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-4vyHjooOJagoGAwN/Scientific%2BStudy%2BOf%2BUnidentified%2BFlying%2BObjects_djvu.txt
18.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/groups/NASA.SCIENCE/posts/2385436511550476/
19.
Source: ufotransparency.com
Link:https://ufotransparency.com/files/decade-1960s-condon-report-1968-condon-report-full-text-ncas-archive
20.
Source: amazon.co.uk
Link:https://www.amazon.co.uk/Scientific-Study-Unidentified-Flying-Objects/dp/B000J2VA3K?tag=searcht-20
21.
Source: centerforinquiry.s3.amazonaws.com
Link:https://centerforinquiry.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/1986/07/22165324/p42.pdf
22.
Source: boulderreportinglab.org
Link:https://boulderreportinglab.org/2026/06/25/the-u-s-air-force-once-paid-cu-boulder-to-study-ufos-heres-what-it-found/