Condign ReportFrom TinWiki.org
During May 2006, the British Ministry of Defense (MOD) released a lengthy report entitled “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena in the UK Air Defense Region” (the "Condign Report"). The Condign Report uses the term “UAP” to refer to “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena”, "popularly known as UFOs” [Executive Summary page 3, Para 1].) The report was completed in December 2000. The Condign Report states that it is the “first UK detailed and authoritative report [on UAPs] which has been produced since the late 1950s” (Volume 1, Chapter 1, page 2, page 2).
[edit] Release of the Condign ReportThe full text of the Condign Report was released on the MOD’s website on Monday 15 May 2006. The Condign Report had been obtained from the Ministry of Defense following various requests by Dr David Clarke (senior lecturer in journalism at Sheffield Hallam University) and Gary Anthony under the Freedom Of Information Act (“FOIA”).
[edit] Author(s) of the Condign ReportThe MOD has refused to name the author(s) of the report. The Condign Report appears to have been compiled by a single individual. [edit] Meaning of “Condign”Several ufologists have commented on the similarity between the name of the “Condign” Report and previous reports on UFOs, particularly the Condon Report and Project Sign. The MOD has stated that “Condign” was a randomly selected word and “any similarity with ‘Condon’ is purely coincidental.” The word “condign” means suitable or appropriate, usually in the context of a punishment.
[edit] Terms of ReferenceThe Terms of Reference for the Condign Report indicate that the author of the report had been instructed that the aim of his task was “to determine the potential value, if any, of UAP sighting reports to defense intelligence” (Volume 1, Annex A, Para 1). The Terms of Reference also specify the method by which this objective is to be fulfilled: “A limited analysis based on an electronic relational database containing data extracted from UAP sighting reports, over a period to the present date…” (Volume 1, Annex A, Para 2). [edit] Outline of the ReportThe Condign Report is over 400 pages long. It consists of 3 numbered volumes (Volume 1, Volume 2, and Volume 3) plus an Executive Summary.
[edit] The Executive SummaryThe Executive Summary seeks to briefly summarize the material in the other volumes (particularly the conclusion from Volume 1). The Executive Summary of the Condign Report includes the following: Para 1:
Para 2:
Para 11:
Para 12:
Para 13:
Para 17:
Para 18:
[edit] Volume 1This Volume contains the main report. It contains the conclusions reached, and outlines the methodology adopted. Volume 1 also contains the conclusions reached by the author. The main conclusion is that “simply man-made airborne objects such as aircraft, para-wings or balloons are often the explanation [for UAP reports]. The range of options then progresses through a set of other relatively easily explainable man-made, atmospheric and natural and unusual, propagation and atmospheric phenomena (some of which are still not fully understood)” (Volume 1, Chapter 2, page 2, Para 2). Volume 1 begins with an introduction, which sets out the historical background to the Condign Report. The bulk of Volume 1 is largely devoted to statistical analysis of a database of a limited number of the reports received by the Ministry of Defense in the period 1987 to 1997. The preparation of the relevant database included the “tedious task of converting thousands of paper UAP reports into electronic form” (Volume 1, Chapter 2, page 1, Para 1). The statistical analysis is repeatedly acknowledged to be based on poor and incomplete data. The report comments on the fact that “the great majority of UK Report Forms are incomplete or incompetently completed or as vague as the typical example UAP report [presented at Annex B to Volume 1]” (Volume 1, Chapter 2, page 2, Para 3). It further states that “as DI55 are not permitted to make follow-up investigations after UAP events and not event to speak to witnesses to clarify the meaning of (often cryptic or missing observations) analysis is dependent only on the paper reports)” (Volume 1, Chapter 2, page 2, Para 2). [edit] Volume 2This volume comprises 25 “Working Papers” (also referred to as “Point Papers”) on various topics, ranging from relevant scientific issues to details of various objects that are common causes of UFO reports. The Working Papers include: (a) Working Paper 1 in relation to UAP effects on humans and objects. (b) Working Paper 25 on magnetic field effects on humans. The material in these two Working Papers relies upon the research of Michael Persinger about the possibility that magnetic fields may affect brain activity, particularly the temporal lobe areas. The Condign Report states that there is a “high probability” that UAPs produce EM radiation which “can affect the brain”, causing “the brain to interact in an unusual way with the imagination ‘library’, causing reports of visual activity which are not in fact a true representation of the facts” (Volume 2, Working Paper 1, Annex F, pares 13-16. See also Working Paper 25). [edit] Volume 3This relatively brief volume discusses various miscellaneous matters, including an assessment of UAP as potential hazards to aircraft.
[edit] The plasma-UFO TheoryThe Condign Report was the subject of widespread media coverage (particularly in Britain) after the press was made aware of the report. Most media coverage focused upon the suggestion in the report that UFO reports may be caused by atmospheric-electrical plasmas of some type similar to ball lightning. Previous authors (including Philip J Klass) have advanced the theory that UFO reports may be caused by plasmas similar to ball lightning caused by atmospheric conditions. The material relating to statistical analysis in the Condign Report, however, concludes that meteors are the most significant cause of plasmas that result in UAP reports. The report refers to the large quantity of matter entering the earth’s atmosphere which “in theory is said to burn up”. The report states that certain issues arise “if it is postulated that” not all this material burns up or impacts the surface. (The report acknowledges that there is “a dearth of information in the scientific press on this possibility”). The report suggests that the postulated further material turns into “meteor plasmas”. The report notes a finding that “peak reporting periods co-incided with meteor show peaks”, and contends that the reports did not involve sightings of “falling meteors” but were in fact sightings of “meteor plasmas”. The report concludes that these sightings “were clearly events which occurred after the plasmas had been formed, were usually at low altitude and exhibited the regularly-seen erratic, bobbing, hovering and climbing motion which would not [sic] be mistaken by the public and other credible witnesses” [Volume 1, Chapter 3, paras 53-65 (particularly at paras 54-55 and 65)] [edit] External links[edit] Relevant Discussion Threads |
|

