[Joe Hadenuf]

Mass hysteria.

No doubt, more qualified than you have seen objects that have not or cannot be identified.

[RS]

"No doubt, more qualified than you have seen objects that have not or cannot be identified."

It's just a shame that many make the giant leap from an UNIDENTIFIED Flying Object to one that they IDENTIFY as an extraterrestrial intelligently controlled object.

Many years ago I saw and photographed a UFO in New York - a few days later I identified it as ECHO I.

[Quix]

Mass hysteria is an exceedingly inapt label attached to most such.

For one, the witnesses are usually disonnected and even quite unaware of each other.

For another, there's no clinical evidence of hysteria.

"Mass hysteria" --to my shrink's mind--is a term usually used by media or other powers that be which don't want to deal with an uncomfortable topic--whether per orders or personal discomfort related preference.

It sounds plausible to the uninitiated and uninformed. But really--it doesn't mean anything in the contexts regarding UFO's in which it's applied.

Now, if, a bonafide unique and very certainly mostly normal composition cloud but a cloud with a very unusual but natural shape wandered by in the sky, and everyone crossing the busiest intersection of main street down town at that moment suddenly came down with the same conviction that the cloud was Martians filled with little green men--until the cloud dispersed quickly in the noonday hot sun as in slow wispy moves normally as clouds are wont to do . . . THEN, perhaps one could talk about "mass hysteria" that MIGHT have existed for a FEW BRIEF MOMENTS.

I think it's a bogus term thought up as part of the typical disinformation stuff.