Reddit reviews UFO Enigma, The

This is reddit, so start with Carl Sagan!

• UFOs: A Scientific Debate details a scientific panel at the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 1969. You get papers from the major scientific players: Donald Menzel, J. Allen Hynek, Carl Sagan, Thornton Page and James Mcdonald's furious, classic Science in Default. There are less famous commentators who discuss photographs and film, as well as the psychological aspect. You get differing viewpoints, and a variety of scientific perspectives. I personally feel James Mcdonald demonstrates that he was by far the most serious scientist looking at UFOs. When you compare the data content in Mcdonald's testimony to Sagan's, the difference is simply staggering. And yet the book contains Donald Menzel's completely contrary commentary, which in fact directly attacks Mcdonald. You rarely get this level of discourse or active critical analysis in UFO books. But you must read the Durant Report of the CIA's 1953 Robertson Panel and remember that Sagan's co-author Thornton Page sat on the Robertson Panel himself. Read the Educational Program section closely and coments about public debunking.
  
  
• Intelligent Life in the Universe has a great deal of information about basic astronomy, as well as a decent discussion of the possibility of ancient contact. Plus it's full of beautiful pictures. Sagan discusses at length the origin myths of ancient Summeria and how, when taken at face value, they could be evidence that civilzation was basically dropped off in mesopotamia by ET visitors or "gods". It's a truly fascinating book because I. S. Shklovskii wrote the original, which Sagan then translated into English. Sagan couldn't resist adding his own commentary, which appears in brackets and is frequently extensive. So you can see where they differ. Sagan dismisses UFOs via a very amusing though not scientifically persuasive anecdote about a trial for a "UFO contactee" con man that Sagan involved with. The book will ultimately teach you much more about astronomy and history than it will about UFOs, which is not at all a bad thing.
  
  If you do read both of these books, I imagine you'll have a pretty good idea what you want to read about next.
  
  You can also read my post at /r/UAP about Carl Sagan for more discussion and context.
  
  EDIT
  
  May as well throw out one more scientific source becuase it is more recent:
  
  
• Peter Sturrock's The UFO Enigma: a New Review of the Physical Evidence details the process and conclusions of a Laurance Rockefeller-funded 1997 scientific panel overviewing the state of UFO studies. It contains a brief history of UFOs and a discussion of then-current research with presentations about Project Hessdalen and GEIPAN. There are conclusions and recommendations, written in committee by a group of scientists. This does include a recommended reading section you may find valuable. Finally there are five case studies: detailed analysis of two photohraphs, a discussion of luminosity reports, an overview of physical traces, the Trans-en-Provence case, and the Mansfield Ohio case. This is a slightly less exciting book than UFOs: A Scientific Debate, but that is because it is less inclined toward rhetoric and more toward scientific analysis.

The best advice I can think of which might actually accomplish something positive is to steer him to fringe science from reputable scientists. At least this way he's getting his weird-stuff fix from someone with mainstream credentials without feeling like you're condescending to him and squashing his interests.

For example, Peter Sturrock is a prominent astrophysicist who's also written some interesting, level-headed stuff on UFOs: http://www.amazon.com/The-UFO-Enigma-Physical-Evidence/dp/0446677094

and Jeff Meldrum is an anthropologist who's written about Bigfoot/Sasquatch: http://www.amazon.com/Sasquatch-Legend-Science-Jeff-Meldrum/dp/0765312174/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1343525191&sr=1-1&keywords=jeff+meldrum

and Richard Wiseman, a psychologist, has noted that some ghost/haunting encounters might be explained by ultra-low frequencies that we don't hear but feel, and which give us a very eerie sensation: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3077192/

Cognitive dissonance? Anyway, I often wonder if Peter Sturrock, Emeritus Professor Of Applied Physics at Stanford, is still interested in the UFO phenomenon. His academic credentials are impressive to say the least. He published a book a while back and also started the Journal of Scientific Exploration in an effort to persuade the scientific community to take the study of 'fringe science' seriously (sadly, it didn't really turn out that way). Back in 1997, and with financial support from Laurance Rockefeller, Sturrock and others reviewed purported physical evidence associated with UFO reports (paper here). Some excerpts:

"I [Peter Sturrock] expressed the opinion that this problem will be resolved only by extensive and open professional scientific investigation, and that an essential prerequisite of such research is that more
scientists acquire an interest in this topic...We hope and believe that [this report] will have the effect of placing the controversy as to the nature of unidentified flying objects in a proper scientific perspective. We also trust that it will stimulate scientific research along lines that may yield important new knowledge...

The panel concluded that further analysis of the evidence presented at the workshop is unlikely to elucidate the cause or causes of the reports. However, the panel considers that new data, scientifically acquired and analyzed (especially of well documented, recurrent events), could yield useful information. In this case, physical scientists would have an opportunity to contribute to the resolution of the UFO problem.

The UFO problem is not simple and should receive more attention, with an emphasis on physical evidence; regular contact between UFO investigators and the scientific community would be helpful, as also would institutional support; and the possibility of health risks associated with UFO events should not be ignored. The panel was greatly impressed by work reported from GEPANISEPRA, the French project originally GEPAN and now known as SEPRA, and there is no doubt that the best prospect for real advance in our understanding of the UFO problem would be the creation of similar projects in other countries..."

...which, is what Lesley Kean and others are calling for almost 15 years later.^1

Edit:^1 And what many have been calling for since the 50s.