Page:Robertson panel report.pdf/14

Approved For Release 2001/08/07-CIA0RDP81R00560R000100030027-0 1000 man-hours of professional and sub-professional time in the preparation of graph plots of individual frames of the film, showing apparent and relative motion of objects and variation in their light intensity. It was the opinion of the P.I.L. representatives that the objects sighted were not birds, balloons or aircraft, were "not reflections because there was no blinking while passing through 60° of arc" and were, therefore, "self-luminous". Plots of motion and variation in light intensity of the objects were displayed, While the Panel Members were impressed by the evident enthusiasm, industry and extent of effort of the P.I.L. team, they could not accept the conclusions reached. Some of the reasons for this were as follows:

a. A semi-spherical object can readily produce a reflection of sunlight without "blinking" through 60° of arc travel.

b. Although no data was available on the "albedo" of birds or polyethylene ballons in bright sunlight, the apparent motions, sizes and brightnesses of the objects vrere considered strongly to suggest birds, particularly after the Panel viewed a short film showing high reflectivity of seagulls in bright sunlight.

c. P.I.L. description of the objects sighted as "circular, bluish-white" in color would be expected in cases of spectacular reflections of sunlight from convex surfaces where the brilliance of the reflection would obscure other portions of the object. -14- Approved For Release 2001/08/07-CIA0RDP81R00560R000100030027-0