Ufo Investigations in Cold War America, 1947-1977 Kate Dorsch University of Pennsylvania, [email protected]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2019 Reliable Witnesses, Crackpot Science: Ufo Investigations In Cold War America, 1947-1977 Kate Dorsch University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Dorsch, Kate, "Reliable Witnesses, Crackpot Science: Ufo Investigations In Cold War America, 1947-1977" (2019). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 3231. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/3231 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/3231 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Reliable Witnesses, Crackpot Science: Ufo Investigations In Cold War America, 1947-1977 Abstract This dissertation explores efforts to design and execute scientific tuds ies of unidentified flying objects (UFOs) in the United States in the midst of the Cold War as a means of examining knowledge creation and the construction of scientific uthora ity and credibility around controversial subjects. I begin by placing officially- sanctioned, federally-funded UFO studies in their appropriate context as a Cold War national security project, specifically a project of surveillance and observation, built on traditional arrangements within the military- industrial-academic complex. I then show how non-traditional elements of the investigations – the reliance on non-expert witnesses to report transient phenomena – created space for dissent, both within the scientific establishment and among the broader American public. By placing this dissent within the larger social and political instability of the mid-20th century, this dissertation highlights the deep ties between scientific knowledge production and the social value and valence of professional expertise, as well as the power of experiential expertise in challenging formal, hegemonic institutions. Degree Type Dissertation Degree Name Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Graduate Group History and Sociology of Science First Advisor M. Susan Lindee Keywords boundary-work, Cold War, history of science, science and technology studies, unidentified flying objects, United States of America Subject Categories History | United States History This dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/3231 RELIABLE WITNESSES, CRACKPOT SCIENCE: UFO INVESTIGATIONS IN COLD WAR AMERICA, 1947-1977 Kate Dorsch A DISSERTATION in History and Sociology of Science Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2019 Supervisor of Dissertation _______________________ M. Susan Lindee Professor, Professor of History and Sociology of Science Graduate Group Chairperson ________________________ Adelheid Voskuhl, Professor, History and Sociology of Science Dissertation Committee John Tresch, Professor in Art History, History of Science and Folk Practice Adelheid Voskuhl, Professor, Associate Professor, History and Sociology of Science RELIABLE WITNESSES, CRACKPOT SCIENCE: UFO INVESTIGATIONS IN COLD WAR AMERICA, 1947-1977 COPYRIGHT 2019 Kathryn N. Dorsch This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ To Dave iii Acknowledgements This dissertation would not have been completed, let alone have succeeded to the extent that it has, without the support of many amazing people. I have had a supervisor that many graduate students dream of having. Heartfelt thanks and gratitude go out to my advisor, M. Susan Lindee. She was an early and enthusiastic supporter of both me and my research and this dissertation is a product of her constant encouragement as much as it is my research. She did what all good advisors do; she pointed me in the right directions, kept me on task, asked the hard questions, and most importantly allowed me to chase the things I found to be the most compelling. She has been a role model in successful supervision, and I’ll take her example with me. Likewise, my committee shares credit as well. John Tresch always reminds me to remember my human actors are just that – human – and deserve all the compassion and understanding we can give them. This lesson has not only shaped how I approached my actors in this project, but how I think about the human experience at large. And Heidi Voskuhl has time and time again been there for the soul-searching about how we as historians handle the challenges of unreliable sources and for long conversations about the epistemological stakes of these conversations, both scientifically and historiographically. She has also been a model of the humane academy. I am blessed to now be able to call my supervisor and committee colleagues, and friends. This project has been a significant archival undertaking, and I am especially grateful to the many archivists who helped me along the way. Their unflagging enthusiasm, knowledge, and support made a daunting task possible. Special thanks to Charles Greifenstein and the archivists and staff at the American Philosophical Society; Janet Olson, Kevin Leonard, and the archivists and staff at the Northwestern University Archives; archivists and staff in Special Collections at the University of Arizona University Libraries; and the many archivists at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. who answered my endless requests for more material. The opportunity to present aspects of this work at conferences across disciplines has only strengthened it. Special thanks to my co-panelists and my audiences at the 2016 3 Societies Meeting at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta; &HPS 6 in at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland; the 2016 History of Science Society Meeting, the 2016 Philosophy of Science Association Meeting, and the 2016 Society for Literature, Science, and the Arts, Atlanta, Georgia; and the 2017 History of Science Society Meeting in Toronto, Ontario. It has been my great joy and privilege to have the opportunity to cultivate relationships with so many incredible scholars over the course of this project. Special thanks to Michael Weisberg, who guided me through philosophical debates that would shape my thinking about witnesses and experience. Also to the HPS community, and especially Hasok Chang, whose relentless support convinces me that there’s a way forward for integrated history and philosophy of science, and to Mary Morgan, who read chapters and more, and whose realism about our work has kept me grounded in more ways than one. iv Greg Eghigian deserves special thanks as well, for being an excellent colleague and mentor as we both attempt to unravel the many threads of Cold War UFO science. Karen Rader was another early supporter of my work and her continued support and laughter is appreciated. And I’d like to give a special acknowledgment to Lillian Hoddeson, whose research introduced me to the history of science all those years ago. The opportunity to work for and with her while she wrote no fewer than three books taught me the fundamentals of good scholarship. The environment and support of my home department, the History and Sociology of Science at the University of Pennsylvania, has been crucial to the development and success of this dissertation, as well as to my development as a historian. David Barnes and Etienne Benson pushed me to answer hard questions about the fundamental assumptions of this work, and I enjoyed many conversations with Etienne about accounting for transient objects and non-human agency. Mark Adams and Jonathan Moreno were always a reliable source for fun discussions about the stranger elements of this project which sometimes wandered straight into science fiction. And Robert Aronowitz, Ramah McKay, and Harun Küçük have been, to put it simply, incredibly kind. And to my graduate colleagues, both at Penn and beyond, thank you. I was so lucky to have an amazing (though tiny) cohort of such supportive and thoughtful scholars in Luke Messac and Jesse Smith. Eram Alam, Nadia Berenstein-Lee, Peter Collopy, Deanna Day, Rosanna Dent, Andrew Hogan, Marissa Mika, Samantha Muka, and Ruth Rand all provided warmth, commiseration, support, and friendship when I was just starting out. Tabea Cornel has been an incredible friend as well as an excellent colleague, and Elaine LeFay’s unflagging optimism and good cheer continues to prove that you can do serious scholarship and find the world incredibly hilarious at all moments. Also thanks to my more temporally-immediate colleagues for their support, generosity, conversations, and time – Katya Babintseva, Cameron Brinitzer, Jason Chernesky, Allegra Giovine, Matthew Hoffarth, Zachary Loeb, M. X. Mitchell, Maxwell Rogoski, and Nicole Welk-Jorger. You are more than colleagues – you are friends. To my colleagues from beyond Penn, especially my kick-ass girl gang of colleagues, you all are incredible and I am so proud I get to work with you: Kate Grauvogel, Kate MacCord, Paige Madison, Emmie Miller, Sarah Naramore, Ingrid Ockert, and Kristine Palmieri. For all of you: I have learned from you not just how to be a better scholar, but a better colleague, and a better friend. In closing, this dissertation would not exist were it not for the endless support of friends and family. I am particularly grateful to Lara Arnason, Cassie and Cal Glaspie, Collin and Meg Kenny, and Luke Zeller and Aimee Bryan-Zeller for the endless entertainment from afar. Special thanks to the Conway family, to Becca Nusbaum and to Linda Ruggiero, who have been amazing partners in crime and have listened to me complain endlessly without complaint. A thank you to my family: Allie and Russ Port and Erika and Paul Regier-Rood, thank you for everything, through good times and bad. To my parents, Beth and Jack Sebesta, for all their support and encouragement over the years. To Sara, my sister, for being my biggest and v loudest cheerleader and a rock when I needed it, and to Alex, my brother, who channels absurdity and my laughter better than anyone I’ve ever known.