What do you think?
Rate this book
UFOs Explained
Analyzing several UFO cases, the author exposes the myth of extraterrestrial visitors to earth
- GenresNonfictionSkepticism
438 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1974
1 person is currently reading
38 people want to read
About the author
Philip J. Klass
12 books4 followersAmerican journalist, engineer and UFO researcher, known for his skepticism regarding UFOs.
Klass began his writing career for the magazine Aviation Week.
He is not to be confused with sci-fi author William Tenn, whose real name was also Philip Klass.
Klass began his writing career for the magazine Aviation Week.
He is not to be confused with sci-fi author William Tenn, whose real name was also Philip Klass.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
September 23, 2012
A classic debunker skeptoid book. Feh.
April 13, 2025
THE NOTED UFO SKEPTIC IDENTIFIES TEN ‘UFOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES’ TO FOLLOW
Author Philip Julian Klass (1919-2005) wrote in the Introduction to this 1974 book, “Some skeptics dismiss the UFO question without investigation in the belief that reports come only from ‘kooks.’ This is simply not so, as numerous UFO cases analyzed in this book will demonstrate. Many come from seemingly honest, intelligent and often well-educated citizens, including scientists, law-enforcement officers and aircraft flight crews. If you are a skeptic, you may be surprised to learn that a number of scientists, some with impressive-sounding credentials, believe that some UFO reports involve extraterrestrial spaceships that are visiting Earth…
“Those who believe that at least some UFO reports represent extraterrestrial visitations wait impatiently for THE case that will resolve the issue and prove their hopes beyond all doubt… This book will demonstrate that we now have more than enough cases and data to understand and explain the UFO mystery---providing these cases are analyzed objectively and scientifically… This book treats a representative sampling of the more than 10,000 cases on record… Modern public-opinion pollsters have repeatedly demonstrated that a small, representative sample can provide a reasonably accurate profile of the whole. This is the approach that will be used here…
“In most UFO books the cases selected for inclusion are intended to impress the reader with the seemingly inexplicable nature of UFO reports. In this book the cases have been selected with a different purpose---to help you understand the truly complex nature of the mystery and the many different phenomena involved. In the process of analyzing… a number of ‘UFOlogical Principles’ emerge---principles that will help you better understand the next UFO report you read or hear about…”
He states UFOlogical Principle #1: “Basically honest and intelligent persons who are suddenly exposed to a brief, unexpected event, especially one that involves an unfamiliar object, may be grossly inaccurate in trying to describe precisely what they have seen.” (Pg. 16)
He suggests that sightings in 1967 in Monroe County, Michigan were actually of “two fixed-wing aircraft that were being used to test a new experimental military radar.” (Pg. 22) But he asks, “what explanation is there for the fact that all the observers agreed that the UFOs made no sound… when the two aircraft [suggested above] are extremely noisy[?]… One partial explanation may be the distance between the aircraft and the observers… if the wind is blowing in a direction away from the observer toward the aircraft, little if any sound will be heard. But it also seems likely that the observers were so entranced by the idea that they were privileged to be seeing mysterious spaceships from other worlds that they were oblivious to the aircraft engine sounds.” (Pg. 22-25)
He states UFOlogical Principle #2: “Despite the intrinsic limitations of human perception when exposed to brief, unexpected and unusual events, some details recalled by the observer may be reasonably accurate. The problem facing the UFO investigator is to try to distinguish between those details that are accurate that those that are grossly inaccurate… in some cases this poses an insoluble problem.” (Pg. 26)
UFOlogical Principle #3: “If a person observing an unusual or unfamiliar object concludes that it is probably a spaceship from another world, he can readily adduce that the object is reacting to his presence or actions when in reality there is absolutely no cause-effect relationship.” (Pg. 33)
UFOlogical Principle #4: “News media that give great prominence to a UFO report when it is first received, subsequently devote little if any space or time for reporting a prosaic explanation for the case when the facts are uncovered.” (Pg. 35)
UFOlogical Principle #5: “No human observer, including experienced flight crews, can accurately estimate either the distance/altitude or the size of an unfamiliar object in the sky, unless it is in very close proximity to a familiar object whose size or altitude is known.” (Pg. 57)
UFOlogical Principle #6: “Once news media coverage leads the public to believe that UFOs may be in the vicinity, there are numerous natural and man-made objects which, especially when seen at night, can take on unusual characteristics in the minds of hopeful viewers. Their UFO reports in turn add to the mass excitement which encourages still more observers to watch for UFOs. This attention feeds upon itself until such time as the news media lose interest in the subject, and then the ‘flap’ quickly runs out of steam.” (Pg. 105-106)
He states, “[J. Allen] Hynek has repeatedly criticized the Air Force for its failure to conduct a thorough investigation of important cases. Yet despite Hynek’s own recognition of the critical import of the Socorro case, he spent less than one day on the scene during his first visit. And it was not until nearly four months later that Hynek found time to return to Socorro for an equally brief visit.” (Pg. 128)
He continues, “An article that appeared in the El Paso Times… on the first anniversary of the Socorro UFO report, revealed that officials of the town were quick to recognize the tourist potential of the UFO incident… The article quoted [the] City Clerk as saying, ‘We frankly intend to use it as a tourist attraction.’” (Pg. 133)
UFOlogical Principle #7: “In attempting to determine whether a UFO report is a hoax, an investigator should rely on physical evidence, or the lack of it where evidence should exist, and should not depend on character endorsements of the principals involved.” (Pg. 155)
He observes, “If giant saucer-shaped craft with exotic flight characteristics have been operating in our skies for more than 25 years, it is surprising that there is not a single authentic photo of such an object.” (Pg. 164)
He suggests, “It seems certain that the [1950] Mariana UFO movies are not a staged hoax… One typical characteristic of hoax UFO photos is that the incident is almost never reported until the pictures have been developed to see how well they turned out.” (Pg. 189)
UFOlogical Principle #8: “The inability of even experienced investigators to fully and positively explain a UFO report for lack of sufficient information … does not really provide evidence to support the hypothesis that spaceships from other worlds are visiting the Earth.” (Pg. 205-206)
UFOlogical Principle #9: “Whenever a light is sighted in the night skies that is believed to be a UFO and this is reported to a radar operator who is asked to search his scope for an unknown target, almost invariably an ‘unknown’ target will be found. Conversely, if an unusual target is spotted on a radarscope at night that is suspected of being a UFO, and an observer is dispatched or asked to search for a light in the night sky, almost invariably a visual sighting will be made.” (Pg. 218)
UFOlogical Principle #10: “Many UFO cases seem puzzling and unexplainable simply because case investigators have failed to devote a sufficiently rigorous effort to the investigation.” (Pg. 276)
He says of George Adamski, “Adamski never had the opportunity to see his story disputed by hard photographic evidence, for he had died, following a heart attack … in April 1965---a year before the Lunar Orbiter photos were obtained.” (Pg. 293)
This book will be of keen interest to those seeking skeptical perspective on UFOs
Author Philip Julian Klass (1919-2005) wrote in the Introduction to this 1974 book, “Some skeptics dismiss the UFO question without investigation in the belief that reports come only from ‘kooks.’ This is simply not so, as numerous UFO cases analyzed in this book will demonstrate. Many come from seemingly honest, intelligent and often well-educated citizens, including scientists, law-enforcement officers and aircraft flight crews. If you are a skeptic, you may be surprised to learn that a number of scientists, some with impressive-sounding credentials, believe that some UFO reports involve extraterrestrial spaceships that are visiting Earth…
“Those who believe that at least some UFO reports represent extraterrestrial visitations wait impatiently for THE case that will resolve the issue and prove their hopes beyond all doubt… This book will demonstrate that we now have more than enough cases and data to understand and explain the UFO mystery---providing these cases are analyzed objectively and scientifically… This book treats a representative sampling of the more than 10,000 cases on record… Modern public-opinion pollsters have repeatedly demonstrated that a small, representative sample can provide a reasonably accurate profile of the whole. This is the approach that will be used here…
“In most UFO books the cases selected for inclusion are intended to impress the reader with the seemingly inexplicable nature of UFO reports. In this book the cases have been selected with a different purpose---to help you understand the truly complex nature of the mystery and the many different phenomena involved. In the process of analyzing… a number of ‘UFOlogical Principles’ emerge---principles that will help you better understand the next UFO report you read or hear about…”
He states UFOlogical Principle #1: “Basically honest and intelligent persons who are suddenly exposed to a brief, unexpected event, especially one that involves an unfamiliar object, may be grossly inaccurate in trying to describe precisely what they have seen.” (Pg. 16)
He suggests that sightings in 1967 in Monroe County, Michigan were actually of “two fixed-wing aircraft that were being used to test a new experimental military radar.” (Pg. 22) But he asks, “what explanation is there for the fact that all the observers agreed that the UFOs made no sound… when the two aircraft [suggested above] are extremely noisy[?]… One partial explanation may be the distance between the aircraft and the observers… if the wind is blowing in a direction away from the observer toward the aircraft, little if any sound will be heard. But it also seems likely that the observers were so entranced by the idea that they were privileged to be seeing mysterious spaceships from other worlds that they were oblivious to the aircraft engine sounds.” (Pg. 22-25)
He states UFOlogical Principle #2: “Despite the intrinsic limitations of human perception when exposed to brief, unexpected and unusual events, some details recalled by the observer may be reasonably accurate. The problem facing the UFO investigator is to try to distinguish between those details that are accurate that those that are grossly inaccurate… in some cases this poses an insoluble problem.” (Pg. 26)
UFOlogical Principle #3: “If a person observing an unusual or unfamiliar object concludes that it is probably a spaceship from another world, he can readily adduce that the object is reacting to his presence or actions when in reality there is absolutely no cause-effect relationship.” (Pg. 33)
UFOlogical Principle #4: “News media that give great prominence to a UFO report when it is first received, subsequently devote little if any space or time for reporting a prosaic explanation for the case when the facts are uncovered.” (Pg. 35)
UFOlogical Principle #5: “No human observer, including experienced flight crews, can accurately estimate either the distance/altitude or the size of an unfamiliar object in the sky, unless it is in very close proximity to a familiar object whose size or altitude is known.” (Pg. 57)
UFOlogical Principle #6: “Once news media coverage leads the public to believe that UFOs may be in the vicinity, there are numerous natural and man-made objects which, especially when seen at night, can take on unusual characteristics in the minds of hopeful viewers. Their UFO reports in turn add to the mass excitement which encourages still more observers to watch for UFOs. This attention feeds upon itself until such time as the news media lose interest in the subject, and then the ‘flap’ quickly runs out of steam.” (Pg. 105-106)
He states, “[J. Allen] Hynek has repeatedly criticized the Air Force for its failure to conduct a thorough investigation of important cases. Yet despite Hynek’s own recognition of the critical import of the Socorro case, he spent less than one day on the scene during his first visit. And it was not until nearly four months later that Hynek found time to return to Socorro for an equally brief visit.” (Pg. 128)
He continues, “An article that appeared in the El Paso Times… on the first anniversary of the Socorro UFO report, revealed that officials of the town were quick to recognize the tourist potential of the UFO incident… The article quoted [the] City Clerk as saying, ‘We frankly intend to use it as a tourist attraction.’” (Pg. 133)
UFOlogical Principle #7: “In attempting to determine whether a UFO report is a hoax, an investigator should rely on physical evidence, or the lack of it where evidence should exist, and should not depend on character endorsements of the principals involved.” (Pg. 155)
He observes, “If giant saucer-shaped craft with exotic flight characteristics have been operating in our skies for more than 25 years, it is surprising that there is not a single authentic photo of such an object.” (Pg. 164)
He suggests, “It seems certain that the [1950] Mariana UFO movies are not a staged hoax… One typical characteristic of hoax UFO photos is that the incident is almost never reported until the pictures have been developed to see how well they turned out.” (Pg. 189)
UFOlogical Principle #8: “The inability of even experienced investigators to fully and positively explain a UFO report for lack of sufficient information … does not really provide evidence to support the hypothesis that spaceships from other worlds are visiting the Earth.” (Pg. 205-206)
UFOlogical Principle #9: “Whenever a light is sighted in the night skies that is believed to be a UFO and this is reported to a radar operator who is asked to search his scope for an unknown target, almost invariably an ‘unknown’ target will be found. Conversely, if an unusual target is spotted on a radarscope at night that is suspected of being a UFO, and an observer is dispatched or asked to search for a light in the night sky, almost invariably a visual sighting will be made.” (Pg. 218)
UFOlogical Principle #10: “Many UFO cases seem puzzling and unexplainable simply because case investigators have failed to devote a sufficiently rigorous effort to the investigation.” (Pg. 276)
He says of George Adamski, “Adamski never had the opportunity to see his story disputed by hard photographic evidence, for he had died, following a heart attack … in April 1965---a year before the Lunar Orbiter photos were obtained.” (Pg. 293)
This book will be of keen interest to those seeking skeptical perspective on UFOs
January 20, 2016
Klass takes a thorough and, at times, technical look at popular UFO events from the 40's to the 70's. I was particularly impressed by the detailed explication of how radar can lie to the observer and isn't the telling marker of truth that many think it is. A lot of mistaken identifications of the planet Venus as UFO's in here, and explanations of how even professional pilots and military men can be fooled by celestial objects. His disdain for J. Allen Hynek's classication of "important UFO sightings" is evident, but he does provide a lot of evidence and engages in deep-level investigation of seemingly genuine UFO events. A good read.
January 15, 2010
Klass explains it all.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews