What do you think?
Rate this book
Collector's Library of the Unknown
Unidentified Flying Object Experience: A Scientific Inquiry
A scientific look at the phenomenon of UFO's exploring the evidence and asking the tough questions about the universe.
276 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1972
199 people are currently reading
991 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews
March 5, 2024
It is truly wonderful to have a proper expert elucidate us on a phenomenon that provides us with the greatest mystery of our time. Despite this having been written 1972, long before the Tic Tac and even the Belgian wave incidents, it has aged very well. The writer acted as scientific advisor to UFO studies undertaken by the U.S. Air Force under three projects: Project Sign (1947–1949), Project Grudge (1949–1951) and Project Blue Book (1952–1969). What this means is you will be getting it straight from the horses mouth. What’s more, you will be getting the information from somebody who was in both, the debunker and later on the believer camps. This book also contains the by now famous Close Encounter scale which he first published therein. Speaking of close encounters, Hynek also functioned as an advisor to the 1977 movie UFO movie Close Encounters of the Third Kind, named after a level of that before-mentioned scale. He even has a small cameo role in it. Totally made me check out the movie again, and there he was pipe and all.
September 9, 2013
This is a classic in the UFO literature. Hynek, an astronomer at Northwestern University who worked several years as an external advisor for the air force, wrote this book as a response to the Condon Report that was published in 1969 and that concluded that UFO reports were not to be taken seriously (even though if one reads the entire 1000-pages, one gets a quite different idea).
Interestingly, Hynek initially was a skeptic about UFOs, but while studying became convinced that something was going on. Hynek was reluctant to conclude that UFOs are alien craft, though he certainly considers it a possibility, but he did think that studying UFO reports might result in "new empirical knowledge". In other words, science has something to gain from studying the UFO phenomenon.
The book starts with technical matters in Part One. Hynek discusses problems with defining "UFO" and goes into the matter of what a UFO report actually is. In Part Two, Hynek introduces and illustrates his famous "prototypes" and discusses reports of strange nocturnal lights, daylight discs, and Close Encounters of the First, Second, and Third Kind.
In Part Three Hynek responds explicitly to the Condon Report. He gives insights into the history of the report, and shows how the report went wrong and what conclusions can be drawn from it. He also gives a description of how scientists could constructively engage with the UFO phenomenon.
Even today, more than 40 years after the book was first published, this is a brilliant and very readable book on UFOs, that shows that the UFO phenomenon is really something, that the extraterrestrial origin of UFOs cannot be established on the basis of UFO reports, that reports are not made by kooks and crazies, and that scientists who dismiss UFOs out of hand do not know what they are talking about. If you are interested in UFOs, this book is a definite must-read.
Interestingly, Hynek initially was a skeptic about UFOs, but while studying became convinced that something was going on. Hynek was reluctant to conclude that UFOs are alien craft, though he certainly considers it a possibility, but he did think that studying UFO reports might result in "new empirical knowledge". In other words, science has something to gain from studying the UFO phenomenon.
The book starts with technical matters in Part One. Hynek discusses problems with defining "UFO" and goes into the matter of what a UFO report actually is. In Part Two, Hynek introduces and illustrates his famous "prototypes" and discusses reports of strange nocturnal lights, daylight discs, and Close Encounters of the First, Second, and Third Kind.
In Part Three Hynek responds explicitly to the Condon Report. He gives insights into the history of the report, and shows how the report went wrong and what conclusions can be drawn from it. He also gives a description of how scientists could constructively engage with the UFO phenomenon.
Even today, more than 40 years after the book was first published, this is a brilliant and very readable book on UFOs, that shows that the UFO phenomenon is really something, that the extraterrestrial origin of UFOs cannot be established on the basis of UFO reports, that reports are not made by kooks and crazies, and that scientists who dismiss UFOs out of hand do not know what they are talking about. If you are interested in UFOs, this book is a definite must-read.
February 20, 2017
Read this when it was first published circa 1970. Good analysis of the USAF-funded Condon Report. Otherwise, go with "Edge of Reality" by Hyneck and Jacques Vallee, published five years later, which is much more interesting.
January 3, 2025
This book answers the objection: “but the government investigated the matter and found nothing!”
April 4, 2019
3.5 stars. I listened to the audiobook and wish there had been two narrators, one for the author's voice and a different one for the many witnesses et al whom he quotes. As it stands, the many different people speaking all blend together.
Actually one narrator who bothered to alter his voice so the listener would know when Hynek was speaking or when he was quoting someone else would be fine, you know, what the narrator of any audiobook is supposed to do.
Actually one narrator who bothered to alter his voice so the listener would know when Hynek was speaking or when he was quoting someone else would be fine, you know, what the narrator of any audiobook is supposed to do.
April 7, 2019
This is a seminal work on the UFO question. Some excerpts from notable Project Blue Book cases are included to illustrate Dr. Hynek's various UFO classifications (i.e.: nocturnal lights, daytime discs, and close encounters of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd kind). His insight into how this topic should be documented and studied is included along with his view of the Conden Report.
December 11, 2020
The Probable Reality of UFOs and the Truth Behind Project Blue Book’s ‘Investigation’ into this Phenomena
If this is your first foray into the UFO field, or even if you’re a long-time investigator, you couldn’t find a better summary of data than is found in J. Allen Hynek’s The UFO Experience A Scientific Inquiry. In fact, this is probably one of the best books to start with, especially if you’re not convinced that there’s at least a modicum of probability that UFOs/ETs might actually be real and visiting us.
However, after reading several other books on the subject of Project Blue Book by both Hynek and others, this book seems to be the ‘tame’ version of what Hynek REALLY thinks about Project Blue Book and the US Air Force’s tactics when involving the so-called ‘investigations’ of Unidentified Flying Objects.
Additionally, the appearance of the latest cover of this book notwithstanding (it looks a bit Pop-Kitsch-ish to me), it is truly a serious inquiry into the subject of Unidentified Flying Objects, otherwise known as UFOs as conducted by the renowned, well educated and highly acclaimed scientist/ astronomer. Dr. J. Allen Hynek. And as far as being a ‘snooze fest,’ as one reviewer termed it, Hynek is a scientist and subsequently utilizes charts, tables and statistics to go along with the various chosen accounts. So it may take a scientist – or at least a scientifically-minded individual – to be able to read this book without being bored.
Ironically, The UFO Experience book was published in 1972 as a response to the Condon Report which was ultimately the nail in the coffin (allegedly) of the U.S. Air Force’s Project Blue Book (which was ‘closed’ in approximately 1969), for whom Professor Hynek – who was an astronomer at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois – was a scientific consultant and investigator. Hynek was also the creator of the Close Encounter ranking system (CE-1, CE-2, CE-3, etc.) which the field of ufology utilizes ubiquitously, as well as a consultant on the Steven Spielberg film, Close Encounters of the Third Kind.
While The UFO Experience and the summarized biography of Hynek written by author Mark O’Connell on Hynek’s website, CENTER FOR UFO STUDIES.org or CUFOS, presents an extremely intelligent individual, this man is more complicated than he would at first appear.
Certainly, this definitely seems to be true based on the data promulgated by History Channel’s ‘based on’ TV series, PROJECT BLUE BOOK, as well as several books Hynek himself wrote along with a more expanded biography in book form by the above referenced author, Mark O’Connell. That is, Hynek also seemed to be an extremely contrary and confusing man in several respects. At least when he was working with Blue Book and as far as his investigative summaries and reports on UFOs to the public were concerned.
However, after having read the UFO Experience and the Hynek UFO Report both for which Hynek was the lone author, as well as The Edge of Reality which he wrote with computer scientist and ufologist Jacques Vallee along with O’Connell’s biography of Hynek (not to mention Richard Dolan’s excellent dual – so far – volumes, UFOs and the National Security State Chronology of a CoverUp in which Dolan provides just a bit more eye-opening tidbits on Hynek) along with former Project Blue Book director, Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt’s The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, I’d say it’s pretty evident why Hynek behaved as he did.
Hynek was working for the United States Air Force who expected him – even though he was not enlisted in the Air Force or even worked for the government – to toe the party line, so to speak. And Hynek, being the stand-up guy he was, likely felt that he should bow to authority and do as they asked (ordered? Threatened?) regarding the information that was relayed to the public. In other words: lie.
Yes, unfortunately what Hynek found was that the Air Force – the government – seemed to be dissembling to the American public as well as to the world as a whole in regard to not only the reality of the existence of UFOs, but in regard to the reality of their intent and the affect/effect they might have on the world’s population.
And this not just once, but numerous times. So that pretty soon the ‘swamp gas’ explanations with which he was appeasing the Air Force gave way to numerous cases that he – Hynek – truly believed as a scientist and astronomer, were Unidentified or anomalous. In other words ‘probably’ legitimate UFOs.
In other words, even if the Unidentified cases amounted to 23 percent or less of Blue Book’s entire case load, the ultimate conclusion – according to Project Blue Book and the US Air Force – seemed to be that however minute that number, UFOs were nothing to worry about and the reports merely a product of delusional, paranoid whackjobs. And because Hynek ultimately came to believe that UFOs definitely WERE quite real, did that make him the head whackjob?
Still, while the government wanted Hynek to lie as well as tell the public there was nothing to worry about, that UFOs didn’t really exist, Hynek knew differently. And so eventually the agreement to cover up the truth with fictitious stories of ‘swamp gas,’ gave way to Hynek telling the truth: that UFOs are most likely real and from the reports he’d received and processed, not to mention his own personal experiences, they likely do not originate on this planet or possibly even from this dimension.
Note the various types of ‘reporters’ or those reporting sitings to Hynek aside from the so-called tin-hat-wearing-fringe-idiots and non-professional individuals who just happened to catch one:
* military pilots and other military personnel (there are a LOT more of these than one might think)
* civilian pilots
* astronauts
* air traffic controllers
* engineers
* policeman/police personnel
* astronomers/astrophysicists
* mathematicians
* various scientists
And I’d like to add one more category that has most likely heretofore gone unrecognized:
*military dependents – while dependents, as such don’t typically have professional degrees (although, of course, many do), there are enough in this category to add to sitings cases in various areas – especially on or near military bases. This is the area to which I belong since I had several anomalous sitings while both a military ‘brat’ and a military wife living on numerous military bases on several continents.
Note, also, that the pilot/astronaut category is typically backed up by what was/is termed radar-visual sitings, since the ‘bogey’ could be seen not only with the physical eyes or by the aviator specifically, but was also picked up on radar.
Finally, please note that I’m not ridiculing those who’ve experienced or believe in UFO/ET phenomena. Far from it. I’ve had my own admittedly anomalous experiences in this area and have sought answers for at least the last 50 years. But like so many, I merely want to know the truth. Not just because I feel that if it IS our government who is covering up these events, I want to know why. I want to understand how we as a species – and in fact all the various species on Planet Earth – are or will be affected/effected. Ultimately, it is not a matter of being afraid; it is a matter of wanting answers and wanting TRUTHFUL answers.
If this is your first foray into the UFO field, or even if you’re a long-time investigator, you couldn’t find a better summary of data than is found in J. Allen Hynek’s The UFO Experience A Scientific Inquiry. In fact, this is probably one of the best books to start with, especially if you’re not convinced that there’s at least a modicum of probability that UFOs/ETs might actually be real and visiting us.
However, after reading several other books on the subject of Project Blue Book by both Hynek and others, this book seems to be the ‘tame’ version of what Hynek REALLY thinks about Project Blue Book and the US Air Force’s tactics when involving the so-called ‘investigations’ of Unidentified Flying Objects.
Additionally, the appearance of the latest cover of this book notwithstanding (it looks a bit Pop-Kitsch-ish to me), it is truly a serious inquiry into the subject of Unidentified Flying Objects, otherwise known as UFOs as conducted by the renowned, well educated and highly acclaimed scientist/ astronomer. Dr. J. Allen Hynek. And as far as being a ‘snooze fest,’ as one reviewer termed it, Hynek is a scientist and subsequently utilizes charts, tables and statistics to go along with the various chosen accounts. So it may take a scientist – or at least a scientifically-minded individual – to be able to read this book without being bored.
Ironically, The UFO Experience book was published in 1972 as a response to the Condon Report which was ultimately the nail in the coffin (allegedly) of the U.S. Air Force’s Project Blue Book (which was ‘closed’ in approximately 1969), for whom Professor Hynek – who was an astronomer at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois – was a scientific consultant and investigator. Hynek was also the creator of the Close Encounter ranking system (CE-1, CE-2, CE-3, etc.) which the field of ufology utilizes ubiquitously, as well as a consultant on the Steven Spielberg film, Close Encounters of the Third Kind.
While The UFO Experience and the summarized biography of Hynek written by author Mark O’Connell on Hynek’s website, CENTER FOR UFO STUDIES.org or CUFOS, presents an extremely intelligent individual, this man is more complicated than he would at first appear.
Certainly, this definitely seems to be true based on the data promulgated by History Channel’s ‘based on’ TV series, PROJECT BLUE BOOK, as well as several books Hynek himself wrote along with a more expanded biography in book form by the above referenced author, Mark O’Connell. That is, Hynek also seemed to be an extremely contrary and confusing man in several respects. At least when he was working with Blue Book and as far as his investigative summaries and reports on UFOs to the public were concerned.
However, after having read the UFO Experience and the Hynek UFO Report both for which Hynek was the lone author, as well as The Edge of Reality which he wrote with computer scientist and ufologist Jacques Vallee along with O’Connell’s biography of Hynek (not to mention Richard Dolan’s excellent dual – so far – volumes, UFOs and the National Security State Chronology of a CoverUp in which Dolan provides just a bit more eye-opening tidbits on Hynek) along with former Project Blue Book director, Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt’s The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, I’d say it’s pretty evident why Hynek behaved as he did.
Hynek was working for the United States Air Force who expected him – even though he was not enlisted in the Air Force or even worked for the government – to toe the party line, so to speak. And Hynek, being the stand-up guy he was, likely felt that he should bow to authority and do as they asked (ordered? Threatened?) regarding the information that was relayed to the public. In other words: lie.
Yes, unfortunately what Hynek found was that the Air Force – the government – seemed to be dissembling to the American public as well as to the world as a whole in regard to not only the reality of the existence of UFOs, but in regard to the reality of their intent and the affect/effect they might have on the world’s population.
And this not just once, but numerous times. So that pretty soon the ‘swamp gas’ explanations with which he was appeasing the Air Force gave way to numerous cases that he – Hynek – truly believed as a scientist and astronomer, were Unidentified or anomalous. In other words ‘probably’ legitimate UFOs.
In other words, even if the Unidentified cases amounted to 23 percent or less of Blue Book’s entire case load, the ultimate conclusion – according to Project Blue Book and the US Air Force – seemed to be that however minute that number, UFOs were nothing to worry about and the reports merely a product of delusional, paranoid whackjobs. And because Hynek ultimately came to believe that UFOs definitely WERE quite real, did that make him the head whackjob?
Still, while the government wanted Hynek to lie as well as tell the public there was nothing to worry about, that UFOs didn’t really exist, Hynek knew differently. And so eventually the agreement to cover up the truth with fictitious stories of ‘swamp gas,’ gave way to Hynek telling the truth: that UFOs are most likely real and from the reports he’d received and processed, not to mention his own personal experiences, they likely do not originate on this planet or possibly even from this dimension.
Note the various types of ‘reporters’ or those reporting sitings to Hynek aside from the so-called tin-hat-wearing-fringe-idiots and non-professional individuals who just happened to catch one:
* military pilots and other military personnel (there are a LOT more of these than one might think)
* civilian pilots
* astronauts
* air traffic controllers
* engineers
* policeman/police personnel
* astronomers/astrophysicists
* mathematicians
* various scientists
And I’d like to add one more category that has most likely heretofore gone unrecognized:
*military dependents – while dependents, as such don’t typically have professional degrees (although, of course, many do), there are enough in this category to add to sitings cases in various areas – especially on or near military bases. This is the area to which I belong since I had several anomalous sitings while both a military ‘brat’ and a military wife living on numerous military bases on several continents.
Note, also, that the pilot/astronaut category is typically backed up by what was/is termed radar-visual sitings, since the ‘bogey’ could be seen not only with the physical eyes or by the aviator specifically, but was also picked up on radar.
Finally, please note that I’m not ridiculing those who’ve experienced or believe in UFO/ET phenomena. Far from it. I’ve had my own admittedly anomalous experiences in this area and have sought answers for at least the last 50 years. But like so many, I merely want to know the truth. Not just because I feel that if it IS our government who is covering up these events, I want to know why. I want to understand how we as a species – and in fact all the various species on Planet Earth – are or will be affected/effected. Ultimately, it is not a matter of being afraid; it is a matter of wanting answers and wanting TRUTHFUL answers.
July 19, 2025
The UFO Experience
A tad sexist with the author constantly assuming the reader is male and saying “girl”, but the dated book is dated. What are you gonna do~
Essentially a study on how UFO phenomena can’t easily be explained in some cases, that a display of available facts aren't the most useful to draw conclusions, which is what caused outlandish explanations and several investigation committees. “Life on Other Worlds” by Steven Dick helps fill a lot of gaps.
The book is very dry, simply repeating the same thing again and again, that the unidentified has remained as such. “It can’t be, therefore it isn’t.” Emotionally charged excuses as Blue Book wasn't properly staffed, paced, or funded. He thinks the pentagon set it up as an excuse and cover up.
The investigation was believed to no longer further science, platitudinous was thrown around. The Condon Committee studied the wrong problem. All in all, but a bad book but it lacked in some areas.
A tad sexist with the author constantly assuming the reader is male and saying “girl”, but the dated book is dated. What are you gonna do~
Essentially a study on how UFO phenomena can’t easily be explained in some cases, that a display of available facts aren't the most useful to draw conclusions, which is what caused outlandish explanations and several investigation committees. “Life on Other Worlds” by Steven Dick helps fill a lot of gaps.
The book is very dry, simply repeating the same thing again and again, that the unidentified has remained as such. “It can’t be, therefore it isn’t.” Emotionally charged excuses as Blue Book wasn't properly staffed, paced, or funded. He thinks the pentagon set it up as an excuse and cover up.
The investigation was believed to no longer further science, platitudinous was thrown around. The Condon Committee studied the wrong problem. All in all, but a bad book but it lacked in some areas.
March 30, 2024
the stories were interesting and shoutout to that astronomy class for me being able to read things like "sidereal rotation position of venus" and know what they mean
May 21, 2024
A ‘CLASSIC’ AND VERY INFLUENTIAL WORK OF UFOLOGY
Josef Allen Hynek (1910–1986) was an American astronomer, professor, and ufologist, who acted as scientific advisor to the UFO studies by the U.S. Air Force under Project Sign and Project Blue Book. Initially a skeptic, he later became a ‘believer,’ and in 1973 founded the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS), to conduct scientific analysis of UFO cases. (He also invented the distinction between ‘Close Encounters’ of the First Kind, Second Kind, and Third Kind.)
He wrote in the Preface to this 1972 book, “During my many years as scientific consultant to the United States Air Force on the matter of [UFOs] I was often asked to recommend ‘a good book about UFOs.’ … With a few notable exceptions I have been hard pressed to give a good answer to such questions… I hope that this is a book to answer the questions of the person who is curious about the UFO phenomenon as a whole… I cannot presume to describe, however, what UFOs ARE because I don’t know; but I can establish beyond reasonable doubt that they are not ALL misperceptions or hoaxes… A ‘good book on UFOs’ should, I think, be honest, without prejudgment; it should be factual and as well documented as possible…”
In the Introduction, he explains, “I have often been asked whether I myself have had a ‘UFO experience.’ The answer is no if I apply the tests I insist are necessary… On two separate occasions in the past 20 years I have seen an object and a light, respectively, that I could not readily explain, but since a possible, though not particularly probable, natural explanation exists, these two experiences do not fall within the definition oof a UFO used in this book.” (Pg. 3-4)
He outlines “I can categorically say that my own study over the past years has satisfied me on the following points: (1) Reports of UFO observations that are valid for study exist quite apart from the pronouncements of ‘crackpots,’ religious fanatics, cultists, and UFO buffs. (2) A large number of initial UFO reports are readily identifiable by competent persons as misperceptions and misidentifications… (3) A residue of UFO reports is not so identifiable. They may fall into one or more of the following categories: a. those that are global in distribution… b. those made by competent, responsible, psychologically normal people… c. those that contain descriptive terms that COLLECTIVELY do not specify any known physical event, object, or process… d. those that resist translation into terms that apply to known physical and/or psychological events, objects, processes, etc.” (Pg. 12-13)
He suggests, “provided we do not put too much weight on any ONE single report, there is no reason no, at least at first, to believe them. ‘Why SHOULDN’T we believe what several UFO reporters of established personal reputation tell us?’ is just as valid a question as ‘Why should we believe them?’ Criteria for disbelief and belief are on a par...” (Pg. 22)
He argues, “It is interesting to note, as substantiation of the theory of the credibility of reliable witnesses, that in those instances in which ‘fake’ UFOs have been deliberately contrived to test public reaction---hot air balloons and flares dropped from airplanes, are examples---the resulting UFO reports are not only invariably far fewer than the experimenter expected but of interest more for what they did NOT report than for what they did… The almost complete absence in such reports of occupants, interference with automobile ignition systems, landing marks, and other physical effects on the ground, and the many other things characteristic of reports of Close Encounters is eminently noteworthy.” (Pg. 23)
He explains, “Each such screened report demands an answer to two distinct questions: What does it SAY happened? What is the PROBABILITY that it happened? We can make those two questions the basis of a very helpful two-dimensional arrangement of UFO reports. Each report… can be assigned to numbers: Its STRANGENESS Rating and its PROBABILITY Rating. The Strangeness Rating is… a measure of how ‘odd-ball’ a report is within its particular broad classification… a high Strangeness Rating … contained a number of separate very strange items, each of which outrages common sense… Assessment of the Probability Rating of a report becomes a highly subjective matter. We start with the assessed credibility of the individuals… and we estimate to what degree, given the circumstances at this particular time, the reporters could have erred. Factors that must be considered here are internal consistency of the given report, consistency among several reports … and finally, ‘how it all hangs together.’” (Pg. 27-29)
He proposes, “[In] the Close Encounter cases… there appear to be three natural subdivisions, which we can call … Close Encounters of the First Kind: … in which the reported UFO is seen at close range but there is no interaction with the environment… Close Encounters of the Second Kind: … physical effects on both animate and inanimate material are noted… Close Encounters of the Third Kind: … the presence of ‘occupants’ in or about the UFO is reported.” (Pg. 32-33)
He notes, “Turning now to the trajectories and kinematics of the Daylight Discs… The discs appear to have a universal ability to take off smoothly, often with fantastic accelerations and usually without producing a sonic boom. Newton’s Second Law of Motion rules out extremely rapid acceleration for bodies of appreciable mass. It is not my aim, however… to pass physical judgment; that requires more data than presently exist in recorded form.” (Pg. 63)
He acknowledges that “some celebrated hoaxes have been accompanied by photographs… I am extremely wary of any photograph submitted to me. In my opinion, a purported photograph of a UFO… should not be taken seriously unless the following conditions are satisfied: (1) there were reputable witnesses to the taking of the picture… (2) the original negative(s) is available for study… (3) the camera is available for study; and (4) the owner of the photograph is willing to testify under oath that that photograph is… what it purports to be---that of a UFO.” (Pg. 65)
He states, “Probabilities, of course, can never prove a thing. When, however, in the course of UFO investigations one encounters MANY cases, each having a fairly high probability that ‘a genuinely new empirical observation’ was involved, the probability that a new phenomenon was NOT observed becomes very small… as the number of cases increases. The chances, then, that something really new is involved are very great…” (Pg. 91)
He observes, “a Close Encounter of the Second Kind… [o]ther than the fact that a physical effect of some sort is left… this category does not seem to differ in many ways from Close Encounters of the First Kind. Why in one instance the encounter is without physical incident while in the other a measurable physical effect … is manifested is a puzzle.” (Pg. 126)
He laments, “When a subject is greeted with such utter disdain as the UFO has been, the very obtaining of such data is immeasurably difficult. Without funds, without time, and often without the cooperation of the original observers, who fear ridicule by involvement, the kind of documentation needed in the court of science is virtually unobtainable… it would be helpful but not necessary to have the sympathetic understanding of one’s colleagues in engaging in such work.” (Pg. 128)
He admits, “Until the subject of UFOs has gained sufficient scientific respectability so that younger people with scientific imagination and courage can undertake proper investigation of the subject, we are left with most unsatisfactory descriptions of brilliantly illuminated oval objects that perform the most incredible feats. We shall have to content ourselves with saying that … [some UFO] seems to have the strange property of being able, in some unfathomable way, to interfere with car ignitions. How this could happen… is a foreign to our physics of 1972 as the origin of solar energy was to the physics of 1912.” (Pg. 140)
He points out, “Another thing bothers us: the humanoids seem to be able to breathe our air and to adapt to our air pressure and gravity with little difficulty. Something seems terribly wrong about that. This would imply that they must be from a place… very much like our own… But how?” (Pg. 159)
He states, “The popular impression … was that [Project] Blue Book was a full-fledged, serious operation… The actual situation was unfortunately the opposite. The operation was generally headed by an officer of lesser rank… For one long period of time a sergeant with little technical training was given the chore of evaluating most of the incoming reports.” (Pg. 206)
He concludes, “I would hold that it has been established that: (1) There exists a phenomenon… that is worthy of systematic, rigorous study… (2) … the body of data points to an aspect or domain of the natural world not yet explored by science. (3) For a directed, objective study … the available data require major organization, systematization, and the adoption of a uniform terminology…(4) Investigations that have sought to disprove the above have failed to make a case… (5)… new empirical observations exist that describe a NEW FACT… which needs to be brought within an acceptable framework… and, if possible, explained… It is likewise important to keep clearly in mind … [That] It has not been shown: (1) That the new fact… requires a basic shift in our outlook on the natural world. (2) What a VERIFIABLE explanation of the UFO phenomenon is… the problem must be rigorously defined, and … Feasible, tractable methods of attack must be outlined…” (Pg. 242-243)
This book will be “must reading” for anyone seriously studying the subject of UFOs.
Josef Allen Hynek (1910–1986) was an American astronomer, professor, and ufologist, who acted as scientific advisor to the UFO studies by the U.S. Air Force under Project Sign and Project Blue Book. Initially a skeptic, he later became a ‘believer,’ and in 1973 founded the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS), to conduct scientific analysis of UFO cases. (He also invented the distinction between ‘Close Encounters’ of the First Kind, Second Kind, and Third Kind.)
He wrote in the Preface to this 1972 book, “During my many years as scientific consultant to the United States Air Force on the matter of [UFOs] I was often asked to recommend ‘a good book about UFOs.’ … With a few notable exceptions I have been hard pressed to give a good answer to such questions… I hope that this is a book to answer the questions of the person who is curious about the UFO phenomenon as a whole… I cannot presume to describe, however, what UFOs ARE because I don’t know; but I can establish beyond reasonable doubt that they are not ALL misperceptions or hoaxes… A ‘good book on UFOs’ should, I think, be honest, without prejudgment; it should be factual and as well documented as possible…”
In the Introduction, he explains, “I have often been asked whether I myself have had a ‘UFO experience.’ The answer is no if I apply the tests I insist are necessary… On two separate occasions in the past 20 years I have seen an object and a light, respectively, that I could not readily explain, but since a possible, though not particularly probable, natural explanation exists, these two experiences do not fall within the definition oof a UFO used in this book.” (Pg. 3-4)
He outlines “I can categorically say that my own study over the past years has satisfied me on the following points: (1) Reports of UFO observations that are valid for study exist quite apart from the pronouncements of ‘crackpots,’ religious fanatics, cultists, and UFO buffs. (2) A large number of initial UFO reports are readily identifiable by competent persons as misperceptions and misidentifications… (3) A residue of UFO reports is not so identifiable. They may fall into one or more of the following categories: a. those that are global in distribution… b. those made by competent, responsible, psychologically normal people… c. those that contain descriptive terms that COLLECTIVELY do not specify any known physical event, object, or process… d. those that resist translation into terms that apply to known physical and/or psychological events, objects, processes, etc.” (Pg. 12-13)
He suggests, “provided we do not put too much weight on any ONE single report, there is no reason no, at least at first, to believe them. ‘Why SHOULDN’T we believe what several UFO reporters of established personal reputation tell us?’ is just as valid a question as ‘Why should we believe them?’ Criteria for disbelief and belief are on a par...” (Pg. 22)
He argues, “It is interesting to note, as substantiation of the theory of the credibility of reliable witnesses, that in those instances in which ‘fake’ UFOs have been deliberately contrived to test public reaction---hot air balloons and flares dropped from airplanes, are examples---the resulting UFO reports are not only invariably far fewer than the experimenter expected but of interest more for what they did NOT report than for what they did… The almost complete absence in such reports of occupants, interference with automobile ignition systems, landing marks, and other physical effects on the ground, and the many other things characteristic of reports of Close Encounters is eminently noteworthy.” (Pg. 23)
He explains, “Each such screened report demands an answer to two distinct questions: What does it SAY happened? What is the PROBABILITY that it happened? We can make those two questions the basis of a very helpful two-dimensional arrangement of UFO reports. Each report… can be assigned to numbers: Its STRANGENESS Rating and its PROBABILITY Rating. The Strangeness Rating is… a measure of how ‘odd-ball’ a report is within its particular broad classification… a high Strangeness Rating … contained a number of separate very strange items, each of which outrages common sense… Assessment of the Probability Rating of a report becomes a highly subjective matter. We start with the assessed credibility of the individuals… and we estimate to what degree, given the circumstances at this particular time, the reporters could have erred. Factors that must be considered here are internal consistency of the given report, consistency among several reports … and finally, ‘how it all hangs together.’” (Pg. 27-29)
He proposes, “[In] the Close Encounter cases… there appear to be three natural subdivisions, which we can call … Close Encounters of the First Kind: … in which the reported UFO is seen at close range but there is no interaction with the environment… Close Encounters of the Second Kind: … physical effects on both animate and inanimate material are noted… Close Encounters of the Third Kind: … the presence of ‘occupants’ in or about the UFO is reported.” (Pg. 32-33)
He notes, “Turning now to the trajectories and kinematics of the Daylight Discs… The discs appear to have a universal ability to take off smoothly, often with fantastic accelerations and usually without producing a sonic boom. Newton’s Second Law of Motion rules out extremely rapid acceleration for bodies of appreciable mass. It is not my aim, however… to pass physical judgment; that requires more data than presently exist in recorded form.” (Pg. 63)
He acknowledges that “some celebrated hoaxes have been accompanied by photographs… I am extremely wary of any photograph submitted to me. In my opinion, a purported photograph of a UFO… should not be taken seriously unless the following conditions are satisfied: (1) there were reputable witnesses to the taking of the picture… (2) the original negative(s) is available for study… (3) the camera is available for study; and (4) the owner of the photograph is willing to testify under oath that that photograph is… what it purports to be---that of a UFO.” (Pg. 65)
He states, “Probabilities, of course, can never prove a thing. When, however, in the course of UFO investigations one encounters MANY cases, each having a fairly high probability that ‘a genuinely new empirical observation’ was involved, the probability that a new phenomenon was NOT observed becomes very small… as the number of cases increases. The chances, then, that something really new is involved are very great…” (Pg. 91)
He observes, “a Close Encounter of the Second Kind… [o]ther than the fact that a physical effect of some sort is left… this category does not seem to differ in many ways from Close Encounters of the First Kind. Why in one instance the encounter is without physical incident while in the other a measurable physical effect … is manifested is a puzzle.” (Pg. 126)
He laments, “When a subject is greeted with such utter disdain as the UFO has been, the very obtaining of such data is immeasurably difficult. Without funds, without time, and often without the cooperation of the original observers, who fear ridicule by involvement, the kind of documentation needed in the court of science is virtually unobtainable… it would be helpful but not necessary to have the sympathetic understanding of one’s colleagues in engaging in such work.” (Pg. 128)
He admits, “Until the subject of UFOs has gained sufficient scientific respectability so that younger people with scientific imagination and courage can undertake proper investigation of the subject, we are left with most unsatisfactory descriptions of brilliantly illuminated oval objects that perform the most incredible feats. We shall have to content ourselves with saying that … [some UFO] seems to have the strange property of being able, in some unfathomable way, to interfere with car ignitions. How this could happen… is a foreign to our physics of 1972 as the origin of solar energy was to the physics of 1912.” (Pg. 140)
He points out, “Another thing bothers us: the humanoids seem to be able to breathe our air and to adapt to our air pressure and gravity with little difficulty. Something seems terribly wrong about that. This would imply that they must be from a place… very much like our own… But how?” (Pg. 159)
He states, “The popular impression … was that [Project] Blue Book was a full-fledged, serious operation… The actual situation was unfortunately the opposite. The operation was generally headed by an officer of lesser rank… For one long period of time a sergeant with little technical training was given the chore of evaluating most of the incoming reports.” (Pg. 206)
He concludes, “I would hold that it has been established that: (1) There exists a phenomenon… that is worthy of systematic, rigorous study… (2) … the body of data points to an aspect or domain of the natural world not yet explored by science. (3) For a directed, objective study … the available data require major organization, systematization, and the adoption of a uniform terminology…(4) Investigations that have sought to disprove the above have failed to make a case… (5)… new empirical observations exist that describe a NEW FACT… which needs to be brought within an acceptable framework… and, if possible, explained… It is likewise important to keep clearly in mind … [That] It has not been shown: (1) That the new fact… requires a basic shift in our outlook on the natural world. (2) What a VERIFIABLE explanation of the UFO phenomenon is… the problem must be rigorously defined, and … Feasible, tractable methods of attack must be outlined…” (Pg. 242-243)
This book will be “must reading” for anyone seriously studying the subject of UFOs.
September 12, 2025
#Binge Reviewing my previous Reads # Aliens, UFOs, and life beyond Earth
Some books feel less like texts and more like turning points, and J. Allen Hynek’s *The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry* (1972) is exactly that—a pivot in how humanity talks about the unexplained. Before Hynek, UFOs were either pulp-magazine fodder, breathless campfire tales, or government footnotes buried in reports.
After Hynek, the subject acquired a strange, uneasy dignity: not proof of extraterrestrials, but evidence that something persistent and perplexing deserved real attention. Reading it during a moment when skepticism and belief dance constantly on social media feels almost uncanny—the book is both dated and strikingly fresh, like an old vinyl record whose crackle enhances rather than diminishes its voice.
Hynek himself is the story behind the story. A trained astronomer, respected academic, and consultant for the U.S. Air Force on projects Sign, Grudge, and later Blue Book, he began his public career as the consummate skeptic. His role was to explain away UFO sightings with science: Venus mistaken for a starship, meteors confused with rockets, weather balloons shimmering in the sun.
For years, he was the go-to debunker, the calm voice assuring the public that nothing was out of place in the skies. He even coined “swamp gas” as a dismissive explanation, a phrase that would dog him forever. And yet, slowly, something shifted.
The shift is written into every page of *The UFO Experience.* By the time he published the book in 1972, Hynek had spent decades listening to witnesses—pilots, radar operators, ordinary citizens—and realized that not all cases could be brushed aside. Yes, some were hoaxes, some were misidentifications. But a residue remained, stubborn and inexplicable. That residue is the heart of this book. Hynek’s genius was not in proving that aliens exist; it was in demanding that the unexplained not be ignored simply because it made us uncomfortable.
One of the book’s most lasting contributions is his classification system, the famous “Close Encounters” schema. Close Encounters of the First Kind: simple sightings, lights in the sky, objects without physical evidence. Second Kind: sightings accompanied by physical traces—burned ground, radar confirmation, electromagnetic interference. Third Kind: encounters involving beings or occupants. It was an elegant taxonomy, not unlike what a biologist might create when cataloging species. And it stuck. Spielberg borrowed the phrasing wholesale for his film, and from then on, “close encounter” entered global vocabulary. It’s rare that a scientist coins a term that becomes a cultural meme, but Hynek managed it with understated flair.
Yet the classification system is only the scaffolding. The book’s deeper achievement is tone. Hynek walks a razor’s edge between belief and disbelief. He refuses the giddy sensationalism of UFO cultists who see extraterrestrials behind every flash of light. But he also refuses the smug cynicism of debunkers who dismiss every testimony as folly. His mantra, repeated in different ways throughout the book, is simple: *some UFO reports represent a real phenomenon, and it is the responsibility of science to investigate them.* That doesn’t mean endorsing wild theories; it means honoring the process of inquiry. In a sense, Hynek was reclaiming the true spirit of science: not dogma, but curiosity.
The case studies he includes are the most gripping parts of the text. Pilots who reported objects executing maneuvers beyond the limits of known aeronautics. Radar blips corroborated by multiple stations. Ground marks left in the aftermath of sightings—scorched rings, disturbed vegetation. These reports are not presented with fanfare; Hynek’s prose is calm, measured, almost dry. But precisely because of that restraint, the reader feels the weight of accumulated anomalies. One strange sighting is anecdote. Hundreds, cross-checked, become pattern. Hynek doesn’t insist on an answer—he insists on the *validity of the question.*
It is important to note the era in which the book appeared. The early 1970s were a liminal moment: the Apollo missions had just landed humans on the Moon, expanding our cosmic horizons. At the same time, the Vietnam War had eroded trust in government, and conspiracy thinking was gaining momentum. In that atmosphere, UFOs were more than curiosities; they were lightning rods for broader anxieties about secrecy, technology, and the unknown.
Hynek, consciously or not, provided a middle path. His approach reassured those wary of gullibility that UFOs could be studied seriously, while also validating the sense among believers that witnesses deserved respect, not ridicule.
Reading *The UFO Experience* today, half a century later, is a lesson in contrasts. Some sections feel dated: the absence of digital records, the reliance on testimony in an age before smartphones, the lack of modern astrophysical context. A few cases he cites have since been debunked, and new waves of sightings—naval pilot videos, declassified Pentagon reports—have added layers he could never have anticipated. But in other ways, the book feels startlingly relevant. The current debates about UAPs (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) echo Hynek’s core point: that dismissing data because it is inconvenient is unscientific. Replace “swamp gas” with “drone” or “camera glitch” and the same dismissiveness repeats. Hynek’s call for structured inquiry remains unanswered, which is why his work continues to resonate.
What also shines through is Hynek’s humanism. Again and again, he stresses that witnesses are not fools or fabricators. They are often trained observers—pilots, police officers, radar operators—whose accounts deserve the dignity of attention. By treating witnesses with respect, Hynek democratizes science: he suggests that knowledge can begin with ordinary people looking up at the sky, not just experts in labs. In this sense, his book is not only about UFOs; it is about the ethics of listening.
Of course, the book has its limits. Hynek carefully avoids speculating about the origins of UFOs. Are they extraterrestrial, interdimensional, psychological, something else entirely? He never commits. This restraint is both strength and weakness. Strength, because it keeps him anchored in inquiry. Weakness, because it leaves readers craving conclusions that never arrive. Some critics accused him of fence-sitting, of refusing to risk reputation by leaping toward bolder claims. But in retrospect, his refusal to sensationalize gave his work a durability that wilder theories lack. While von Däniken was busy attributing the pyramids to aliens, Hynek was quietly cataloging data. Guess which one still gets cited in government hearings?
For me, the most haunting part of *The UFO Experience* is its implicit philosophy of science. Hynek suggests that science must always remain porous at the edges, open to anomalies that don’t fit existing frameworks. To ignore them is to turn science into dogma. He writes with the humility of a man who once mocked, then learned, then admitted he was wrong. That humility is rare in any era, but especially in an age when experts are expected to project absolute certainty. In his evolution from skeptic to cautious advocate, Hynek embodies what genuine inquiry looks like.
Reflecting on the book during my own reading, I couldn’t help comparing Hynek’s careful empiricism with the loud, meme-ready “ancient aliens” crowd. Where von Däniken shouts, Hynek whispers. Where UFO television shows exaggerate, Hynek classifies. Where most people want answers, Hynek insists on better questions. That contrast is precisely why his book still matters. It models a way of thinking in which mystery is not a weakness of knowledge but its frontier.
The cultural afterlife of *The UFO Experience* is extraordinary. Spielberg made Hynek’s “Close Encounters” taxonomy a household phrase, even giving Hynek himself a cameo in *Close Encounters of the Third Kind.* Scholars in UFO studies (yes, it is an academic niche) still cite his framework.
Even recent Pentagon task force reports echo his insistence that certain phenomena resist conventional explanation. His legacy is not belief in aliens per se, but belief in disciplined wonder.
In the end, reading *The UFO Experience* feels less like being convinced of something and more like being invited into a posture of curiosity.
Hynek does not give you aliens; he gives you a method, a lens, a way of treating the extraordinary as data rather than delusion. And that is perhaps more radical than any definitive claim. It suggests that the world is larger, stranger, and more complex than we allow ourselves to admit, and that humility in the face of mystery is itself a form of knowledge.
Fifty years on, Hynek’s book still hovers like one of the phenomena it describes: elusive, hard to categorize, easy to dismiss, yet strangely persistent. It is not proof, but provocation. Not revelation, but invitation.
And in a universe where we still do not know if we are alone, that invitation—to look, to listen, to wonder—may be the most important legacy of all.
Some books feel less like texts and more like turning points, and J. Allen Hynek’s *The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry* (1972) is exactly that—a pivot in how humanity talks about the unexplained. Before Hynek, UFOs were either pulp-magazine fodder, breathless campfire tales, or government footnotes buried in reports.
After Hynek, the subject acquired a strange, uneasy dignity: not proof of extraterrestrials, but evidence that something persistent and perplexing deserved real attention. Reading it during a moment when skepticism and belief dance constantly on social media feels almost uncanny—the book is both dated and strikingly fresh, like an old vinyl record whose crackle enhances rather than diminishes its voice.
Hynek himself is the story behind the story. A trained astronomer, respected academic, and consultant for the U.S. Air Force on projects Sign, Grudge, and later Blue Book, he began his public career as the consummate skeptic. His role was to explain away UFO sightings with science: Venus mistaken for a starship, meteors confused with rockets, weather balloons shimmering in the sun.
For years, he was the go-to debunker, the calm voice assuring the public that nothing was out of place in the skies. He even coined “swamp gas” as a dismissive explanation, a phrase that would dog him forever. And yet, slowly, something shifted.
The shift is written into every page of *The UFO Experience.* By the time he published the book in 1972, Hynek had spent decades listening to witnesses—pilots, radar operators, ordinary citizens—and realized that not all cases could be brushed aside. Yes, some were hoaxes, some were misidentifications. But a residue remained, stubborn and inexplicable. That residue is the heart of this book. Hynek’s genius was not in proving that aliens exist; it was in demanding that the unexplained not be ignored simply because it made us uncomfortable.
One of the book’s most lasting contributions is his classification system, the famous “Close Encounters” schema. Close Encounters of the First Kind: simple sightings, lights in the sky, objects without physical evidence. Second Kind: sightings accompanied by physical traces—burned ground, radar confirmation, electromagnetic interference. Third Kind: encounters involving beings or occupants. It was an elegant taxonomy, not unlike what a biologist might create when cataloging species. And it stuck. Spielberg borrowed the phrasing wholesale for his film, and from then on, “close encounter” entered global vocabulary. It’s rare that a scientist coins a term that becomes a cultural meme, but Hynek managed it with understated flair.
Yet the classification system is only the scaffolding. The book’s deeper achievement is tone. Hynek walks a razor’s edge between belief and disbelief. He refuses the giddy sensationalism of UFO cultists who see extraterrestrials behind every flash of light. But he also refuses the smug cynicism of debunkers who dismiss every testimony as folly. His mantra, repeated in different ways throughout the book, is simple: *some UFO reports represent a real phenomenon, and it is the responsibility of science to investigate them.* That doesn’t mean endorsing wild theories; it means honoring the process of inquiry. In a sense, Hynek was reclaiming the true spirit of science: not dogma, but curiosity.
The case studies he includes are the most gripping parts of the text. Pilots who reported objects executing maneuvers beyond the limits of known aeronautics. Radar blips corroborated by multiple stations. Ground marks left in the aftermath of sightings—scorched rings, disturbed vegetation. These reports are not presented with fanfare; Hynek’s prose is calm, measured, almost dry. But precisely because of that restraint, the reader feels the weight of accumulated anomalies. One strange sighting is anecdote. Hundreds, cross-checked, become pattern. Hynek doesn’t insist on an answer—he insists on the *validity of the question.*
It is important to note the era in which the book appeared. The early 1970s were a liminal moment: the Apollo missions had just landed humans on the Moon, expanding our cosmic horizons. At the same time, the Vietnam War had eroded trust in government, and conspiracy thinking was gaining momentum. In that atmosphere, UFOs were more than curiosities; they were lightning rods for broader anxieties about secrecy, technology, and the unknown.
Hynek, consciously or not, provided a middle path. His approach reassured those wary of gullibility that UFOs could be studied seriously, while also validating the sense among believers that witnesses deserved respect, not ridicule.
Reading *The UFO Experience* today, half a century later, is a lesson in contrasts. Some sections feel dated: the absence of digital records, the reliance on testimony in an age before smartphones, the lack of modern astrophysical context. A few cases he cites have since been debunked, and new waves of sightings—naval pilot videos, declassified Pentagon reports—have added layers he could never have anticipated. But in other ways, the book feels startlingly relevant. The current debates about UAPs (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) echo Hynek’s core point: that dismissing data because it is inconvenient is unscientific. Replace “swamp gas” with “drone” or “camera glitch” and the same dismissiveness repeats. Hynek’s call for structured inquiry remains unanswered, which is why his work continues to resonate.
What also shines through is Hynek’s humanism. Again and again, he stresses that witnesses are not fools or fabricators. They are often trained observers—pilots, police officers, radar operators—whose accounts deserve the dignity of attention. By treating witnesses with respect, Hynek democratizes science: he suggests that knowledge can begin with ordinary people looking up at the sky, not just experts in labs. In this sense, his book is not only about UFOs; it is about the ethics of listening.
Of course, the book has its limits. Hynek carefully avoids speculating about the origins of UFOs. Are they extraterrestrial, interdimensional, psychological, something else entirely? He never commits. This restraint is both strength and weakness. Strength, because it keeps him anchored in inquiry. Weakness, because it leaves readers craving conclusions that never arrive. Some critics accused him of fence-sitting, of refusing to risk reputation by leaping toward bolder claims. But in retrospect, his refusal to sensationalize gave his work a durability that wilder theories lack. While von Däniken was busy attributing the pyramids to aliens, Hynek was quietly cataloging data. Guess which one still gets cited in government hearings?
For me, the most haunting part of *The UFO Experience* is its implicit philosophy of science. Hynek suggests that science must always remain porous at the edges, open to anomalies that don’t fit existing frameworks. To ignore them is to turn science into dogma. He writes with the humility of a man who once mocked, then learned, then admitted he was wrong. That humility is rare in any era, but especially in an age when experts are expected to project absolute certainty. In his evolution from skeptic to cautious advocate, Hynek embodies what genuine inquiry looks like.
Reflecting on the book during my own reading, I couldn’t help comparing Hynek’s careful empiricism with the loud, meme-ready “ancient aliens” crowd. Where von Däniken shouts, Hynek whispers. Where UFO television shows exaggerate, Hynek classifies. Where most people want answers, Hynek insists on better questions. That contrast is precisely why his book still matters. It models a way of thinking in which mystery is not a weakness of knowledge but its frontier.
The cultural afterlife of *The UFO Experience* is extraordinary. Spielberg made Hynek’s “Close Encounters” taxonomy a household phrase, even giving Hynek himself a cameo in *Close Encounters of the Third Kind.* Scholars in UFO studies (yes, it is an academic niche) still cite his framework.
Even recent Pentagon task force reports echo his insistence that certain phenomena resist conventional explanation. His legacy is not belief in aliens per se, but belief in disciplined wonder.
In the end, reading *The UFO Experience* feels less like being convinced of something and more like being invited into a posture of curiosity.
Hynek does not give you aliens; he gives you a method, a lens, a way of treating the extraordinary as data rather than delusion. And that is perhaps more radical than any definitive claim. It suggests that the world is larger, stranger, and more complex than we allow ourselves to admit, and that humility in the face of mystery is itself a form of knowledge.
Fifty years on, Hynek’s book still hovers like one of the phenomena it describes: elusive, hard to categorize, easy to dismiss, yet strangely persistent. It is not proof, but provocation. Not revelation, but invitation.
And in a universe where we still do not know if we are alone, that invitation—to look, to listen, to wonder—may be the most important legacy of all.
July 10, 2021
J. Allen Hynek's The UFO Experience is considered to be a "classic" of ufology literature, which in my experience is usually the kiss of death for any hopes of fortean fun in a book about alleged alien spacecraft/paranormal phenomena. True to form, this classic adopts an at times aggressively dry and relentlessly serious tone, as former Project Bluebook advisor Hynek evinces his disenchantment with the U.S. Air Force's PR campaign while surveying a catalogue of UFO reports that he believes justifies his conversion to UFO advocacy.
For readers like myself who don't take the subject too seriously, the books main points of interest are in the chapters about encounters of the second and third kind, in which a couple of classic cases (Betty and Barney Hill, The Kelly-Hopkinsville Goblins) make welcome cameos. Otherwise, it can be easy to zone out during Hynek's repetitive accounting of the UFO phenomena, especially since a lot of the encounters -- whether they prove Hynek's point or not -- aren't that interesting.
What I like about Hynek is that he's not as ingenuous as some of his peers and seems more willing to call a spade a spade than authors like Tony Dodd or Budd Hopkins ever were. He admits that he's filtered out cranks and wingnuts during his research. Many encounters are explainable. He's by no means perfect (for example, he lays the foundation for the ufologist's common assertion that people with certain job roles couldn't conceivably be making their stories up or misidentifying terrestrial phenomena -- unless they disagree with the author, of course), but he comes across as generally credible and open-minded. I just wish he was a more engaging writer.
For readers like myself who don't take the subject too seriously, the books main points of interest are in the chapters about encounters of the second and third kind, in which a couple of classic cases (Betty and Barney Hill, The Kelly-Hopkinsville Goblins) make welcome cameos. Otherwise, it can be easy to zone out during Hynek's repetitive accounting of the UFO phenomena, especially since a lot of the encounters -- whether they prove Hynek's point or not -- aren't that interesting.
What I like about Hynek is that he's not as ingenuous as some of his peers and seems more willing to call a spade a spade than authors like Tony Dodd or Budd Hopkins ever were. He admits that he's filtered out cranks and wingnuts during his research. Many encounters are explainable. He's by no means perfect (for example, he lays the foundation for the ufologist's common assertion that people with certain job roles couldn't conceivably be making their stories up or misidentifying terrestrial phenomena -- unless they disagree with the author, of course), but he comes across as generally credible and open-minded. I just wish he was a more engaging writer.
July 19, 2012
One of the best books on UFO phenomenon. Written by J. Allen Hynek, who is considered as one of the most distinguished UFO researchers. It classifies UFO sightings into different categories, and then presents all the facts the way they are. Mr. Hynek was invited as a consultant for the Project Blue Book, and most of his data comes from the research. Throughout the book, he criticizes Project Blue Book to be very ineffective. He says they were never serious about the whole issue, which in truth demanded a thorough study by experts. The book is rightly called the Bible of UFOlogy by some circles. A lot has changed since this book came out, but still it stands out. There are also some pictures in the book, related to UFO phenomenon.
January 1, 2024
I respect Hynek and the work he did, even more because he started as a disbelieving skeptic and grew to realize that there's a "there" there. This book is a good overview of the foundation of serious UFO research - his hierarchy of encounter types and largely anonymized examples supporting them. It also touches on why Blue Book, which is often thought to be the gold standard of UFO investigation efforts, was almost entirely ineffective at best, and deceptive at worst. That said, it is a dry read, and doesn't contain the sort of detailed examples that are likely to convince someone who isn't already on board.
November 20, 2017
It's not the most entertaining UFO book out there, but it is thoughtful and scientific in its approach. I would have welcomed more case studies but I understand that its not Hynek's objective to survey UFO reports. I think this is a book written more if you are interested in the history of UFO investigations rather than in the UFO mystery itself.
June 27, 2016
“It is statistically improbably that our sun is the only star out of quadrillions of stars to have planets. That would be somewhat like claiming that acorns can be found lying near only one oak tree in the world."
July 29, 2023
important historical record
Every human should read this book, especially in light of the recent congressional testimony (2023). Hard to think all these stories are BS!
Every human should read this book, especially in light of the recent congressional testimony (2023). Hard to think all these stories are BS!
April 15, 2025
"Ridicule is not a part of the scientific method and the public should not be taught that it is.” -Hynek
r/UFOs first book club recommendation. One of the most important pieces of literature in the field for legitimizing the topic from a scientific perspective.
J. Allen Hynek was one of the scientific consults of the US government's only public facing inquiry into UFOs, project Blue Book. He disagreed with the ultimate findings, and regretted his support for the project. This book is a detailed summary of the type of case files that ultimately caused Hynek to split opinion on.
Hynek sounds like Feynman and Sagan. He was a true scientist, and has the potential to be remembered by successive generations for his insistence on the Scientific Method being applied to all unknown phenomena.
Having lived through Covid, and having seen Ridicule become a weapon of Bad Science, I'm left worrying that the highest echelons of every school, institute, and organization are truly, mind-bogglingly incompetent. Science has already outpaced Religion in this century specifically for unnecessary deaths, and should soundly succeed in taking the crown entirely within the next century or two.
Bad Science abounds. Good Science endures and redeems. So it is with Christians, Star Wars programs and McDonald's locations. I can't live without any of them.
Tangents. I have been out of the UFO loop. I used to check multiple times a day, and now I'm just sort of peeking occasionally. I've been aware of this book and its consensus for a long time. It may be THE UFO book to read. Bad Science then and now.
Disclosure doesn't count until it's on SNL as a joke the other way.
r/UFOs first book club recommendation. One of the most important pieces of literature in the field for legitimizing the topic from a scientific perspective.
J. Allen Hynek was one of the scientific consults of the US government's only public facing inquiry into UFOs, project Blue Book. He disagreed with the ultimate findings, and regretted his support for the project. This book is a detailed summary of the type of case files that ultimately caused Hynek to split opinion on.
Hynek sounds like Feynman and Sagan. He was a true scientist, and has the potential to be remembered by successive generations for his insistence on the Scientific Method being applied to all unknown phenomena.
Having lived through Covid, and having seen Ridicule become a weapon of Bad Science, I'm left worrying that the highest echelons of every school, institute, and organization are truly, mind-bogglingly incompetent. Science has already outpaced Religion in this century specifically for unnecessary deaths, and should soundly succeed in taking the crown entirely within the next century or two.
Bad Science abounds. Good Science endures and redeems. So it is with Christians, Star Wars programs and McDonald's locations. I can't live without any of them.
Tangents. I have been out of the UFO loop. I used to check multiple times a day, and now I'm just sort of peeking occasionally. I've been aware of this book and its consensus for a long time. It may be THE UFO book to read. Bad Science then and now.
Disclosure doesn't count until it's on SNL as a joke the other way.
March 30, 2023
Worth Reading
Anyone interested in UFOlogy knows who Dr. J. Allen Hynek is. With this book, he created the system for close encounters. He's the consultant behind Steven Spielberg's "Close Encounters of the Third Kind."
I waited a long time to read this book. Picking it up, I already had a wealth of knowledge regarding UFOs. However, this was historical literature, and it proved worth the wait.
I loved Dr. Hynek's passion for truth. Even as he criticized what he knew was wrong with Project Blue Book, the Condon Report, and others, he remained true to the scientific method, advocated for better research, and championed for caution. He was precise on what was needed and why.
What I didn't like was that Dr. Hynek's complaints from 1972 remain today. His plea for dropping prejudice and allowing reports without ridicule went unheard. It seems nothing has changed.
There are important nuggets of information in this text. It's not about aliens - it's a proponent for proper research, better data gathering, and a uniformed collection of information to track trends. It's about looking for valid scientific merits in something worthy of consideration for the advancement of human understanding.
I applaud Dr. Hynek. This is an inspirational, if not exactly academic, publication. Well done.
Anyone interested in UFOlogy knows who Dr. J. Allen Hynek is. With this book, he created the system for close encounters. He's the consultant behind Steven Spielberg's "Close Encounters of the Third Kind."
I waited a long time to read this book. Picking it up, I already had a wealth of knowledge regarding UFOs. However, this was historical literature, and it proved worth the wait.
I loved Dr. Hynek's passion for truth. Even as he criticized what he knew was wrong with Project Blue Book, the Condon Report, and others, he remained true to the scientific method, advocated for better research, and championed for caution. He was precise on what was needed and why.
What I didn't like was that Dr. Hynek's complaints from 1972 remain today. His plea for dropping prejudice and allowing reports without ridicule went unheard. It seems nothing has changed.
There are important nuggets of information in this text. It's not about aliens - it's a proponent for proper research, better data gathering, and a uniformed collection of information to track trends. It's about looking for valid scientific merits in something worthy of consideration for the advancement of human understanding.
I applaud Dr. Hynek. This is an inspirational, if not exactly academic, publication. Well done.
January 26, 2025
This meticulously written book, especially since it was authored by the actual scientific consultant (whose input was frequently disregarded) to Project Blue Book, was truly insightful and eye opening. I cannot say enough how much I respect Dr. Hynek’s understanding of and attitude towards the scientific method!
I was delighted with how he strongly emphasized the necessary rigor of the scientific method, the logic & reasoning involved, and the necessity of having an intellectually curious and open mind when investigating any phenomena. Science is NOT simply a collection of facts to be blindly accepted and never challenged—it is a step by step set of tools to test & reason our way through the world in order to understand it better.
Dr Hynek does an excellent job breaking down the structure of how the Blue Book investigation was conducted, and does not hold back on his critiques of its weaknesses. Frankly, based on his assessment of the poor quality of the study, a return to and re-evaluation of the existing data (along with collection of new data) by an independent civilian scientific team could be considered reasonable.
I was delighted with how he strongly emphasized the necessary rigor of the scientific method, the logic & reasoning involved, and the necessity of having an intellectually curious and open mind when investigating any phenomena. Science is NOT simply a collection of facts to be blindly accepted and never challenged—it is a step by step set of tools to test & reason our way through the world in order to understand it better.
Dr Hynek does an excellent job breaking down the structure of how the Blue Book investigation was conducted, and does not hold back on his critiques of its weaknesses. Frankly, based on his assessment of the poor quality of the study, a return to and re-evaluation of the existing data (along with collection of new data) by an independent civilian scientific team could be considered reasonable.
July 19, 2023
When i dive into a broad subject like ufos, I find a primer is helpful. Something that introduces the subject before delving into tantalizing tangents and extremes. Hyneks seminal work here is that primer from a historical lens, from a perspective of introduction to the subject and even from a psychological introduction to coping with a subject of such broad ramifications.
Hynek was the original professional skeptic, hired to debunk reported UFOs but later converted to an advocate of civilian investigation of ufos and a critic of government approach to the subject. That Journey from skeptic to advocate of deeper analysing a genuine mystery, makes him an ideal tour guide.
Hynek also establishes methods and language that are simple and clear for categorizing the phenomenon. Without venturing to explain the phenomenon, Hynek insist on remaining grounded but insistent in exploring this subject. A new modern mystery like this that defies easy explanations, is as invitation for all of to relearn and appreciate the objective brilliance of the scientific method in guiding inquiry
Hynek was the original professional skeptic, hired to debunk reported UFOs but later converted to an advocate of civilian investigation of ufos and a critic of government approach to the subject. That Journey from skeptic to advocate of deeper analysing a genuine mystery, makes him an ideal tour guide.
Hynek also establishes methods and language that are simple and clear for categorizing the phenomenon. Without venturing to explain the phenomenon, Hynek insist on remaining grounded but insistent in exploring this subject. A new modern mystery like this that defies easy explanations, is as invitation for all of to relearn and appreciate the objective brilliance of the scientific method in guiding inquiry
September 17, 2021
Inside Story
The UFO Experience by J. Allen Hynek
The book is replete with references of UFO experiences; however, many of the reports were made by whom Hynek refers to as common, untrained observers. Hynek’s litmus test for who is reputable, and who should be believed concerning UFO reports is confined to those with technical or professional status. Some of the evidence presented is subjective and in the opinion of the author. The objectivity of an investigation would bolster the author’s assertions to a more scientific analysis. Dialogue between various observers, Blue Book, and others is interesting adding color to the repetition of events. The information from the Betty and Barney Hill hypnosis sessions is informative. I recommend The UFO Experience by J. Allen Hynek for those who are not familiar with Dr. Hynek’s career in investigating UFOs, and those who want the inside story of U.S. government programs regarding UFOs.
The UFO Experience by J. Allen Hynek
The book is replete with references of UFO experiences; however, many of the reports were made by whom Hynek refers to as common, untrained observers. Hynek’s litmus test for who is reputable, and who should be believed concerning UFO reports is confined to those with technical or professional status. Some of the evidence presented is subjective and in the opinion of the author. The objectivity of an investigation would bolster the author’s assertions to a more scientific analysis. Dialogue between various observers, Blue Book, and others is interesting adding color to the repetition of events. The information from the Betty and Barney Hill hypnosis sessions is informative. I recommend The UFO Experience by J. Allen Hynek for those who are not familiar with Dr. Hynek’s career in investigating UFOs, and those who want the inside story of U.S. government programs regarding UFOs.
February 26, 2024
I really enjoyed this book. Hyneks writing is very matter of fact, but its perfectly fit for purpose in this expose of Project Blue Books ineptitude and general bad attitude towards this anomaly.
I had no idea however that the leading investigators, both scientific and philosophical in approach, concluded that in actual fact, ET visitors is the least likely explanation (especially considering Hynek and Vallees relationship and influence on Speilbergs Close Encounters movie) of what is happening.
This insight has totally reinvigorated my interest in the subject as it probably becomes clear that something else entirely is behind the phenomenon. Like Hynek mentions in the book, this is were investigation is supposed to start.
I had no idea however that the leading investigators, both scientific and philosophical in approach, concluded that in actual fact, ET visitors is the least likely explanation (especially considering Hynek and Vallees relationship and influence on Speilbergs Close Encounters movie) of what is happening.
This insight has totally reinvigorated my interest in the subject as it probably becomes clear that something else entirely is behind the phenomenon. Like Hynek mentions in the book, this is were investigation is supposed to start.
May 2, 2025
If you watched the mysteries series Project Blue book you know who J. Allen is. In his first book you'll get deep insight into the UFO phenomenon, UFOs experienced, UFOs reported, their strangeness, the data and the problem, nocturnal lights and daylight discs, close encounters of (first, second and third kind), some photos and a chapter into the future, where do we go from here, the methods applied by Project Blue book. If you're into the topic and absolutely groundbreaking work. Highly recommended!
January 4, 2022
Scientifically credible study of UFOs
I really enjoyed this book. It was scientifically accurate without being hard to understand. J. Allen Hynek carefully explains the UFO phenomena within the confines of the scientific method..
I would recommend this book for anyone who is interested in a serious study of UFOs. It expertly describes his studies and scientific data without engaging in the pseudoscience craziness of UFO weirdos.
I really enjoyed this book. It was scientifically accurate without being hard to understand. J. Allen Hynek carefully explains the UFO phenomena within the confines of the scientific method..
I would recommend this book for anyone who is interested in a serious study of UFOs. It expertly describes his studies and scientific data without engaging in the pseudoscience craziness of UFO weirdos.
July 24, 2025
A thoughtful and reasoned journey through the UFO phenomenon. Hynek, one of the leading figures in the field, presents the phenomenon in detail, explaining what it consists of, how it has been (mis)handled throughout history, and how it should be addressed today to truly bring something valuable to our understanding of the world and the universe. A fascinating read that draws us into the UFO world through explanations, reports, and rational, well-considered discussions.
December 29, 2020
For completists only...
A long-winded definition of the UFO problem and some of it's variables without coming to any conclusions. Details are largely in the form of theoretical data points without any intriguing juice. Lays out the original Close Encounters categories. A great addition to any UFO book collection, though mostly for historical purposes.
A long-winded definition of the UFO problem and some of it's variables without coming to any conclusions. Details are largely in the form of theoretical data points without any intriguing juice. Lays out the original Close Encounters categories. A great addition to any UFO book collection, though mostly for historical purposes.
March 26, 2021
The chapters that are processing UFO reports in a scientific way are quite interesting. But much of the book is devoted to the shortcomings of the Blue Book project and the Condon Report. So boring, I had to skip those parts.
June 20, 2021
A well written, if some what exacting, look at the UFO experience that proposes a scientific approach to the subject. Hynek suggests collecting and collating the information relating to such experiences and drawing conclusions from an analysis of the data.
The kindle version seems to be full of 'typos' that make the book a little more difficult to read. But persistence is worthwhile.
The kindle version seems to be full of 'typos' that make the book a little more difficult to read. But persistence is worthwhile.
October 22, 2023
One of the best books I’ve read on the UFO phenomenon. Hynek is trying to make a scientific book, free from hyperbole, with story retelling. This book more than anything, made me frustrated. Hynek discussed the frustration of the government indifference; I feel it
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews