The existence of unidentified flying objects has been confirmed by studies of institutions with an official mandate.
Anyone expressing on the existence or non-existence of unidentified flying objects (UFOs) and atmospheric phenomena (EAPs) in the public, should be aware of the studies that have been carried out on behalf of public authorities in the United States, in France and in the USSR many decades ago:
An analysis by the Battelle Memorial Institute, in 1952, of the USAF Project Blue Book material with 3,201 sightings of 'UFOs in the broad sense', which were reported between 1947 and 1953 by USAF personnel. A summary of the results delivered Leon Davidson in 1956 in Flying Saucers: An Analysis of the Air Force Blue Book Special Report No. 14, White Plains, N.Y., Davidson. According to Davidson, 33.3% of all cases remained unidentifiable. In 1969 the USAF handed approx. 13,000 reports on 93 microfilm reels to the National Archives, Washington D.C. From these reports, 6% (approx. 800) remained unidentified. For 17%, there was not enough information. According to an analysis by Bruce Maccabee in Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14, (1979, Evanstone, IL, CUFOS), the number of UFO cases 'excellent' and adequate for further scientific studies amounted: 434
Prof. Edward Condon of the University of Colorado in 1968 received a request by the USAF to investigate UFO phenomena. The study performed by 35 scientists was published in 1969 in Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects, ('Condon Report'), New York, Dutton. The Blue Book material remained unconsidered. Though the foreword does not correspond with the content of the authors' contributions, according to the judgment of the latter, 30% of the cases remained inexplicable: 33
Gindilis, Menkow and Petrovskaya of the Institute of Space Research of the Akademy of Sciences of the USSR in 1978 published studies of UFO reports. An American Short version appeared in 1980 in Observations of Anomalous Atmospheric Phenomena in the USSR: Statistical Analysis, CUFOS. The number of unidentified cases amounted: 457
Within the Department of Space Research in France, the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, the department Groupe d'Etude des Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non Identifiés (CNES – GEPAN) examined reports of unidentified objects. In 1978 the results were published in Nore Technique N°1, Toulouse. Excerpts were published by Jean-Jacques Velasco in the MUFON 1978 International UFO Proceedings, Washington. The number of flying objects not to be identified amounted: 263
Thus, the total number of UFO sightings confirmed in governmentally funded studies until 1978 already amounted 1,178 cases.
Although these are less than 1% of UFO reports registered by private organizations today, at least these 1,178 UFO sightings could not be identified with the application of rigorous scientific methods. It should be included in general knowledge that, already in 1978, there were at least 1,000 objects that could not be explained, and that this applies the occasional presence of UFOs as secured in the scientific sense.
Despite a clearly secured existence of the UFO phenomenon, it is doubted by the majority of the population and even by scientists. The reason is that the results of the studies, for example in the USA, were interpreted by the principal of the studie, the USAF, and released only in excerpts. The number of unidentified cases that the Battelle Memorial Institute had noted was reduced by the Air Force to a tenth. Instead of 3% remaining unidentifieds investigations had ten times more yield. (Stanton Friedman, 1971: 'Saga', in May 1971, p 20-21 and 88-94).
All pronouncements of the military only limited credibility can be conceded. The trick of the skeptics is to explain all reported objects for UFOs and represent at first cases subsequently explainable as an essential findings. This is as if one sticks apples and pears into a bag with the inscription 'apples'. If it then turns out that not all the fruits are 'apples', e.g. only of 3% apples, then one concludes there are virtually no apples. Few scientists and virtually no journalist had bothered to read the 1,000-page Condon report before they wrote their own reports. Most read only the preface of Condon and joined his opinion. Condon had not acknowledged the reports of his colleagues and claimed that there was no UFO phenomenon relevant for science. So, 'the Science' had settled the UFO phenomenon as 'fiction'.
If the military and scientists claim that one can clear up any unknown phenomena, if only enough information where available, then journalists must be satisfied with this information if they did not want to sacrifice time and research investigative. It so happens that all the media and the uninformed general public underestimate the importance of the phenomenon exorbitantly. For even a single well-researched case of an unidentified intelligently controlled object should be an occasion to move at least something the prejudices about our uniqueness.
As there is still no theoretical understanding and no certainty about the phenomenon, it is made ridiculous by scientifically 'politically correct' contemporaries, as already happened with the phenomena of parapsychology; or existence is denied at all. That goes unnoticed, as anomalous phenomena are very rare.
A scientist, however, should be curious and not do agree with newspaper reports nor a dogmatic belief of the uninformed mass of his colleagues, but examine evidence itself. Today there are good scientific journals and books in which qualified scientists can inform reputably about the phenomenon of unidentified atmospheric light phenomena and flying objects. Literature recommendations on this matter are available on this website.
In the Journal of Scientific Exploration (JSE), for example, a scientific journal about anomalistic phenomena, repeatedly scientific papers and book reviews on UAP- and UFO sightings repeatedly appear. The JSE is the official publication of the Society for Scientific Exploration, an organization which was founded by Stanford astrophysicist Prof. Dr. Peter Sturrock, together with other scientists. Members of IGAAP also write reports for the JSE.