ParaNet BBS/cansurv
From KB42
ParaNet BBS/cansurv
| File Name: | cansurv.txt |
|---|---|
| Author: | Unknown |
| Date: | Unknown |
| Posting BBS: | Unknown |
| BBS Main Page: | ParaNet Main Page |
| Key Words: | ParaNet, UFO, Ufology |
(9002) Tue 17 May 94 7:52p
By: Ed Hackett
To: All
Re: Canadian Ufo Survey 1
St: Local Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REPOSTED. <BEGIN QUOTE>
@FROM :SWAMP-GAS-REQUEST@CC.UMANITOBA.CA
@SUBJECT:1993 Canadian UFO Survey Report
Message-ID: <9405142126.AA03320@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca>
*
^^^^^^^^^^^
/ .................. \
===========================
+ +
The 1993
CANADIAN UFO SURVEY
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Five Years of UFOs
Compiled by
Chris A. Rutkowski
Contributors:
Paul Anderson, UFO BC Roy Bauer, UFOROM
Steve Bucek, UFO BC Charles Burchil
Grant Cameron, UFOROM Daniel Clairmont, MUFON SK
Graham Conway, UFO BC Tony Cowling, UFO BC
Michel Deschamps, MUFON ON Frances Ellis, UFO BC
Lorne Goldfader, UFORIC Jeff Harland, UFOROM
Robert Hawkes Gordon Kijek, AUFOSG
George Kriger, UFOROM Victor Lourenco, MUFON ON
Mike McCarty, MUFON ON Rob Nowatschka, UFO BC
Christian Page, UFO PQ Stephen Parsons, MUFON NF
Vladimir Simosko, UFOROM Michael Strainic, UFO BC
David Thacker, AUFOSG Tom Theophanous, MUFON ON
Donald Vanden Hoorn, UFO BC Ruth Walde, MUFON SK
Bonnie Wheeler, CUFORG Drew Williamson, MUFON ON
Published by
Ufology Research of Manitoba
Box 1918
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Canada R3C 3R2
May 5, 1994
The 1993 Canadian UFO Survey
Introduction
Since 1989, UFO case data has been solicited from all known and
active investigators and researchers in Canada for analyses and comparison
with other compilations. Before that time, individual researchers would
normally maintain their own files, with little or no communication with
others. Even today, representatives of major UFO organizations often do
not regularly submit case data, and the parent organizations themselves
tend not to do much analyses with the data they do receive, although this
is changing.
After favourable responses from the publication of previous Canadian
UFO Surveys, UFOROM decided to continue the systematic collection of raw
UFO report data in Canada and prepare yearly reports for general
circulation. It always has been felt that the dissemination of such data
would be of great advantage to researchers, so it is presented here once
again as data with some analysis.
This is not to suggest that statistical studies of UFO data are
without their limitations and problems. Allan Hendry, in his landmark book
The UFO Handbook, pointed out flaws in such studies and asked:
... do UFO statistics represent a valid pursuit for more knowledge about
this elusive phenomenon, or do they merely reflect frustration that none
of the individual reports are capable of standing on their own two feet?
(1979, p. 269)
Hendry offered six questions to ask of statistical ufology:
1) Does the report collection reflect truly random sampling?
2) Have the individual cases been adequately validated?
3) Are apples and oranges being compared? Are NLs necessarily the
same kind of UFO as DDs?
4) Are differing details among cases obscured through simplification
for the purpose of comparisons?
5) Does the study imply the question: "Surely this mass of data
proves UFOs exist?"
and 6) Do the correlations really show causality?
The Canadian UFO Survey was undertaken with these and other critical
comments in mind. Readers are left to judge for themselves the value of
these statistical analyses.
Canadian UFO Data
The response from Canadian researchers to requests for 1993 data was
less prompt than in previous years; there was some difficulty in receiving
cases from the "active" researchers and there are still some researchers
who, for whatever reasons, do not submit cases for the annual survey. In
addition, some researchers do not maintain useable case files and do not
retain quantitative criteria in their investigations (for example,
contactee groups).
It is now known that only a small fraction of "active" ufologists and
self-proclaimed "researchers" actually investigate cases and maintain
useable records. However, despite these problems, more than twice the
number of reports were obtained for 1993 than the previous year. The 1993
report may be much more comprehensive because of its broader database.
In 1989, 141 UFO reports were obtained for analysis. In 1990, 194
---
TIMM (0.9 Alpha 3) Macintosh qwk reader
--- DB 1.58/004376
* Origin: The Computer Forum 804 471-3360 (1:275/17)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(9003) Tue 17 May 94 7:52p
By: Ed Hackett
To: All
Re: Canadian Ufo Survey 2
St: Local Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
reports were recorded. In 1991, 165 reports were received and in 1992,
223 cases were examined. In 1993, 489 reports were obtained, an increase
of more than 200% over the previous year.
In 1993, reports were obtained from contributing investigators'
files, press clippings, the files of the National Research Council of
Canada (NRC) and fireball reports from geophysicists and astronomers
associated with the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada and the Meteor
and Impacts Advisory Committee (MIAC) affiliated with the Canadian Space
Agency. The NRC routinely receives UFO reports from private citizens and
from RCMP, civic police and military personnel. Included among the NRC
reports are many observations of meteors and fireballs, and these have
been added into the UFO report database since 1989.
There are several reasons for including such IFOs in the UFO report
database. First, previous studies of UFO data have included meteor and
fireball reports. For this study, the working definition of a UFO is: "an
object seen in the sky which its observer cannot identify." In many
instances, observers fail to recognize stars, aircraft and bolides, and
report them as UFOs. That is why some UFO investigators often spend many
hours sorting IFOs from UFOs. Historically, analyses of UFO data such as
American projects like Grudge, Sign and Blue Book all included raw UFO
data which later resolved into categories of UFOs and IFOs. Second,
observed objects are sometimes quickly assigned a particular IFO
explanation even though later investigation suggests
such an explanation was unwarranted. One 1993 case can serve as an
example: Case NRC 93-030, on 26 February 1993, in Cambellton, New
Brunswick. It involved a triangular formation of 11 lights in which moved
slowly through a fog layer and was observed for 45 seconds by a witness.
The label assigned the report was "possible meteorite." Given the
information on the case, it is probable that the object was not a
"meteorite," but it is impossible to give a definitive explanation at this
time.
Fireballs have always been reported in Canada. The tremendous
increase in fireball reports for 1993 suggests that people have become
more comfortable with reporting observations of unusual objects in the
sky. Another factor is that organizations such the Canadian Space Agency
appear to be more visible to the general public and are requesting and
receiving fireball information. This easier access to information has
accelerated by the blossoming of the so-called "Information Highway" and
the Internet. Indeed, many of the reports in the 1993 survey came via
electronic mail and newsgroups.
Until 1993, the number of Canadian UFO reports appeared to remain
constant at an average of 180 cases per year, even allowing for the influx
of cases from new contributors to the database. However, the number of
reports received in 1993 represents a significant increase over previous
years. The largest contributor to this increase was a single fireball
event on October 30, 1993. That evening, a spectacular object and a sonic
boom was reported by literally hundreds of people throughout Canada. More
than 120 individual reports were filed with astronomers, RCMP, police, the
NRC and other agencies.
(This event will be discussed later in this report.) The implication of
this case is that statistical tabulations of UFO characteristics in 1993
will be skewed by a significant amount.
Note on Missing Data:
Several problems were encountered in acquiring and using data
submitted by Canadian ufologists:
1) In some provinces, localized flaps prevented investigators from
following up individual reports, and instead only noted that several dozen
reports were received from a certain area during a particular month. In
these situations, the meagre report data (often just a note that an
anonymous person had left a message on an answering machine saying that an
objecT had been seen, but no other details) could not be satisfactorily
added to the database. (The number of such "lost" sightings is not
insignificant; more than 200 reports may fall into this category, thus
raising the true number of reported UFOs in 1993 in Canada to about 700!)
2) Only one Close Encounter of the Fourth Kind (CE4) was included in the
database. It should probably have been eliminated. CE4s are the
sensational "abduction" cases which are currently receiving wide
attention. Some researchers have speculated that thousands of such
abductions occur each year, based on various surveys and the number
of witnesses ("experiencers") coming forward. Since abductions are often
reported long after the fact, exact times and dates may be
meaningless as UFO data. Similarly, since witnesses' memories are clouded
or obscured, other data such as colour, duration and even location may be
impossible to ascertain. Indeed, if, as some sceptics would suggest, that
abductions are a psychological rather than a "real" phenomenon, then CE4s
may not be appropriate for inclusion in UFO databases. And, if they really
are true close encounters, their complexity decrees that their inclusion
in a raw data listing might be inappropriate as well. For these and other
reasons, all other CE4 cases were not included in this study. From
information received through conversations and interviews with abductee
therapists and other researchers, it is possible to speculate that at
least 25 relatively-documented abductee cases occurred in Canada in 1993.
---
TIMM (0.9 Alpha 3) Macintosh qwk reader
--- DB 1.58/004376
* Origin: The Computer Forum 804 471-3360 (1:275/17)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(9004) Tue 17 May 94 7:52p
By: Ed Hackett
To: All
Re: Canadian Ufo Survey 3
St: Local Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3) Approximately 30 reports were received after statistical analyses had
been run. This is unfortunate, but emphasizes the need for ufologists
to respond promptly to requests for data. Although it is widely known that
data collection for this annual study begins in January of each year,
many ufologists delay sending their data or ignore repeated requests
for data submissions.
Method
Data for each case was received by UFOROM from participating
researchers across Canada. The information then was coded and entered into
a WordPerfect file, separated by tabs. The file was then converted into
ASCII DOS text and uploaded into a UNIX environment where it was read into
a SAS statistical
package and analyzed.
The coding key is as follows:
Example: 993 10 23 2108 CALGARY AB NL 600 BLUE 1 TRI RUMBLE 6 DND
P
Field: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15
Field 1 is a default YEAR for the report (UFOROM is now coding to
allow for the next millennium).
Field 2 is the MONTH of the incident.
Field 3 is the DATE of the sighting.
Field 4 is the local TIME, on the 24-hour clock.
Field 5 is the geographical LOCATION of the incident.
Field 6 is the PROVINCE where the sighting occurred.
Field 7 is TYPE of report.
Field 8 is the DURATION of the sighting, in seconds (a value of 600
thus represents 10 minutes).
Field 9 is the primary COLOUR of the object(s) seen.
Field 10 is the number of WITNESSES.
Field 11 is the SHAPE of the primary object.
Field 12 indicates whether or not a SOUND was heard.
Field 13 is the assessed QUALITY of the report.
Field 14 is the SOURCE of the report.
Field 15 is the EVALUATION of the case.
Analyses of the Data
In 1993, there were apparent significant increases in the number of
reports in Manitoba, while there was an apparent decrease in reports in
Alberta and Quebec. As usual, British Columbia represents the largest
fraction of UFO reports of all the provinces. Since 1990, BC has garnered
between 30% and 40% of the total number of cases per year. As mentioned
in previous annual reports, this is partly due to the highly efficient UFO
reporting system in that province, and the comparatively large number of
active investigators. The rest of the Provinces appear to have had average
numbers of reports in 1993.
If we look at only the NRC as a source for UFO reports, the
geographicaldistribution of cases is more related to population. The most
reports then come from Ontario, followed by Manitoba and Quebec. As
mentioned earlier, there was a major fireball over the prairies in 1993,
raising the number of cases from Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and this
caused the higher proportion of reports from those two provinces. Taking
that factor into account, the distribution of cases agrees somewhat better
with population, although there is still an overabundance of reports from
Western Canada. It is not clear why this would be so.
TABLE 1
Distribution of UFO Reports by Province
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
BC 15 76 59 90 157
AB 16 9 22 8 56
SK 18 10 7 9 93
MB 22 20 6 23 74
ON 34 21 30 56 51
PQ 28 36 16 10 32
NB 1 7 9 9 3
PEI - 3 1 - 1
NS 3 5 7 3 3
NF 3 4 4 4 7
YK - 1 1 3 -
NWT 1 2 - 1 5
The monthly breakdowns of reports during each year show slightly
different patterns from those of previous years. In 1989, there was a
significant increase in UFO reports in the late fall, with other months
maintaining what appeared to be a fairly constant "normal" level of
reports. But 1990 saw two major increases in report numbers in two months:
April and August. The "normal" level of monthly report numbers appeared
to be constant in other months, with minor fluctuations. In 1991, reports
peaked in August, but there was no single obvious trough. The 1992
breakdown again shows no clear peaks in monthly report numbers. This is
most curious, because UFO reports often are thought to peak in summer and
trough in winter. This has never been the case with Canadian UFO reports
throughout this five-year
---
TIMM (0.9 Alpha 3) Macintosh qwk reader
--- DB 1.58/004376
* Origin: The Computer Forum 804 471-3360 (1:275/17)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(9005) Tue 17 May 94 7:52p
By: Ed Hackett
To: All
Re: Canadian Ufo Survey 4
St: Local Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
period of study. In 1993, the opposite of what is usually imagined was
true: there were peaks in winter, and troughs in summer. The October peak
is easily explained as due to the fireball. Even taking this into account,
there are more cases in fall than in summer, and more in winter than
spring and early fall. Again, there is no immediately obvious reason for
this.
However, in an historical analysis of 480 Manitoba UFO cases in
UFOROM's MANUFOCAT, a distinct June peak and December trough was found.
Analyses of 13,000 cases in Project Blue Book found a similar June peak
and December trough, though Hendry (1979) suggested that this was a
statistical artefact. Further studies are needed to understand the monthly
distribution of UFO data.
TABLE 2
Monthly Report Numbers
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
Jan 13 17 13 15 59
Feb 9 7 7 16 15
Mar 6 6 17 27 20
Apr 9 47 12 16 22
May 5 10 7 22 14
Jun 9 10 12 16 38
Jul 5 9 16 23 27
Aug 5 47 25 19 49
Sep 12 15 16 11 41
Oct 32 16 12 16 152
Nov 27 10 11 21 24
Dec 9 - 17 21 21
An analysis by report type shows a similar breakdown to that found in
previous years. The percentage of cases of a particular type remains
roughly constant from year to year, with minor variations. Nocturnal
lights (NLs), for example, comprised 60% of all reports in 1989, 73% in
1990, 67% in 1991, 61% in 1992 and up to a high of 76% in 1993. The
average of these is 69%, which agrees well with the meta- analysis
conducted by Hendry (1979), which found that NLs comprised 70% of the
cases studied. But, because he was using the original standard Hynek
classification system, he did not have the present category of Nocturnal
Discs (NDs). These were probably distributed between NLs and DDs in his
study.
TABLE 3
Report Types (Modified Hynek Classifications)
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
NL 84 141 110 136 372
ND 20 24 26 44 77
DD 16 15 13 20 26
CE1 10 2 7 15 8
CE2 7 1 4 5 2
CE3 - - 1 2 1
CE4 2 4 2 3 1
EV 2 3 1
RD 1
PH 1 1
For those unfamiliar with the classifications, a summary follows:
NL (Nocturnal Light) - light source in night sky
ND (Nocturnal Disc) - light source in night sky that appears to have
a definite shape
DD (Daylight Disc) - unknown object observed during daytime hours
CE1 (Close Encounter of the First Kind) - ND or DD occurring within
200 metres of a witness
CE2 (Close Encounter of the Second Kind) - CE1 where physical effects
left or noted
CE3 (Close Encounter of the Third Kind) - CE1 where figures/entities
are encountered
CE4 (Close Encounter of the Fourth Kind) - an alleged "abduction" or
"contact" experience
EV (Evidence) - a case where physical traces left by an event are the
primary claim
RD (Radar) - UFOs observed on radar
PH (Photograph) - photographs of a UFO, but no actual sighting
The category of Nocturnal Disc was created by UFOROM for
differentiation within its own report files. Similarly, Evidence is also
an ad hoc creation, and may not be applicable by other researchers.
Normally, Evidence would include such physical traces as "crop circles",
"landing rings" and "saucer nests". However, in 1990 there was a great
increase in the numbers of such traces discovered in North America, and it
was decided to treat these as separate from UFO reports in these Surveys.
The breakdown by Evaluation for 1993 cases was similar to results
from previous years. There were four operative categories: Explained,
Insufficient Information, Possible or Probable Explanation, and Unknown
(or Unexplained).
---
TIMM (0.9 Alpha 3) Macintosh qwk reader
--- DB 1.58/004376
* Origin: The Computer Forum 804 471-3360 (1:275/17)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(9006) Tue 17 May 94 7:52p
By: Ed Hackett
To: All
Re: Canadian Ufo Survey 5
St: Local Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Readers are warned that a classification of Unknown does not imply that an
alien spacecraft was observed; no such interpretation can be made with
certainty, based on the given data (though the probability of this
scenario is admittedly never zero). In most cases, Evaluations are made
subjectively by both the contributing investigators and the compiler of
this report. The category of Unknown is adopted if the contributed data
or case report contains enough information such that a conventional
explanation cannot be satisfactorily proposed. This does not mean that
the case will never be explained, but only that a viable explanation is
not immediately obvious.
TABLE 4
Evaluation of Canadian UFO Data
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
# % # % # % # % # %
Explained 2 1.2 17 8 154 31.5
Insuf. 74 52.5 90 46.4 80 48.5 83 37 170 34.8
Poss. 47 33.3 78 40.2 69 41.8 74 33 115 23.5
Unknown 20 14.2 26 13.4 14 8.5 49 22 50 10.2
The average proportion of Unknowns throughout the 5-year study was
about 14.5%, a high figure considering that this would imply that more
than one in ten UFOs cannot be explained. However, there are several
factors which affect this value. The level and quality of UFO report
investigation varies because there are no explicit standards for
ufologists. Some "believers" might be biased to consider most UFO
sightings as mysterious, whereas those with more of a sceptical
predisposition might tend to subconsciously (or consciously!)
reduce the Unknowns in their files. Furthermore, since there are no
absolutes, the subjective nature of assigning Evaluations is actually an
interpretation of the facts by individual researchers.
If we look only at those Unknowns with a Quality rating of eight or
greater, we then are left with only 26 high-quality Unknowns in 1993
(5.3%). This value is comparable with other years: 4.9% in 1989, 4.6% in
1990, 7.3% in 1991 and 7.6% in 1992. And, if we eliminate the category of
NLs from the 1993 Unknowns in an attempt to focus on detailed, close
observations of UFOs, we get only 16 cases out of the original 489, or
3.3%. This last value is in accordance with the USAF Blue Book studies
which found three to four percent of their cases were "excellent"
Unknowns.
The average Quality rating of reports was 6.36, indicating that there
was a significant amount of useful information available through
investigations for the majority of cases. A breakdown of Quality versus
Evaluation shows that both the Explained and Unknown reports carried with
them a substantial amount of information. Obviously, in those cases,
either the investigators found enough evidence to explain the observations
as of conventional objects, or found that their investigations could not
find an explanation with the same quality and level of information. The
cases with Possible explanations or Insufficient Information were of much
lower Quality and, hence, less information for evaluation.
The Quality of Nocturnal Lights varied considerably, while NDs, DDs
and CEs had an average Quality Rating near 7 on the scale.
Finally, it should be emphasized that even these high-quality
Unknowns do not imply alien visitation. Each case may still have an
explanation following further investigation. And of those that remain
unexplained, they remain unexplained, but still are not incontrovertible
proof of extraterrestrial intervention.
The hourly distribution of cases follows a similar pattern for 1993
as in previous years. There appears to be a continuous curve, with a peak
at 2200 hours local and a trough around 1100 hours local. Most sightings
occur between 9:00 p.m. and midnight. Since most UFOs are nocturnal
lights, this is not unexpected. The number of possible observers drops off
sharply near midnight, and we would expect that the hourly rate of UFO
reports would vary with two factors: potential observers and darkness.
The average number of witnesses per case went down from a value of
2.12/case in 1989 to 1.40/case in 1990, then up again to 1.91/case in
1991. In 1992, this value was up slightly to 2.36/case. The average number
of witnesses in 1993 was 2.07/case. The five-year average was 1.97
witnesses per case. These figures indicate that a typical UFO experience
has more than one witness, and support the contention that UFO sightings
represent observations of physical phenomena.
The category of Duration is interesting in that it represents the
subjective length of time the UFO experience lasted. Naturally, these
times are greatly suspect because it is known that people tend to misjudge
the flow of time. However, some people can be good at estimating time, so
this value has some meaning. Although an estimate of "one hour" may be in
error by several minutes, it is unlikely that the correct value would be,
for example, one minute (disregarding the claims of "missing time" during
the abduction category of experiences). Furthermore, there have been
cases when a UFO
---
TIMM (0.9 Alpha 3) Macintosh qwk reader
--- DB 1.58/004376
* Origin: The Computer Forum 804 471-3360 (1:275/17)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(9007) Tue 17 May 94 7:52p
By: Ed Hackett
To: All
Re: Canadian Ufo Survey 6
St: Local Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
was observed and clocked accurately, so that we can be reasonably certain
that UFO events can last considerable periods of time. The average
duration of a sighting can be calculated as a summation of all given
durations then divided by the number of cases with a stated duration. The
resulting value for 1991 is about 12 minutes, down from 19 minutes in
1990. In 1992 and 1993, the average duration was again about 12 minutes.
This surprisingly long duration is due likely to the large number of
sightings lasting only a few seconds contrasted with the comparative few
that lasted several hours.
An interesting result of the analyses is that long-duration sightings
tend to occur in the early morning hours, from about midnight until 6:00
a.m. It is probable that the majority of observations at this time are
those of astronomical objects, moving slowly with the rotation of the
Earth.
Duration data by itself is not wholly useful in analyzing UFO
behaviour. Hendry describes Duration data this way:
Duration is a powerful feature of identity when it refers to
extremelY short and long events, but is otherwise mostly a reflection of
the witness's behaviour during the event, coupled with the fluctuating
behaviour of the objects watched. (1979, p. 249)
Extremely short duration events are usually fireballs or bolides, while
very long duration events of an hour or more are very probably
astronomical objects. In between, there can be no way to distinguish
conventional objects from UFOs solely with Duration data. (Hendry also
cites a Canadian study by an Ontario UFO group which timed aircraft
observations and found that the duration of such sightings varied between
15 seconds to more than 8 minutes.)
The Duration of sightings decreased with the number of reports. The
majority of sightings had Durations of only a few seconds, while those
with longer Duration were less in number.
In cases where a colour of an object was reported in 1993, the most
common colour was white (36.3%), followed distantly by red (15.7%). Other
colours were also represented, although there is a noticeable change from
previous years, when green and orange were the dominant colours. Since
most UFOs are nocturnal starlike objects, the abundance of white objects
is not surprising. Other colours such as red, blue and green often are
associated with bolides (fireballs).
Shape was a good predictor of UFO type, as was expected. Fireballs
and point sources were usually Nocturnal Lights, whereas cigars, discs and
triangles were either Nocturnal Discs or Daylight Discs.
Summary of Results
As with previous annual Surveys, the 1993 Survey does not offer any
@SUBJECT:1993 Canadian UFO Survey Report
(Continued from last message)
positive proof of the physical reality of UFOs. However, it does show
that some phenomenon which is called a UFO is continually being observed
by witnesses. The typical UFO sighting is that of two people observing a
moving, distant white or red light for several minutes. In most cases,
the UFO is likely to be eventually identified as a conventional object
such as an aircraft or astronomical object. However, in a small
percentage of cases, some UFOs do not appear to have an easy explanation
and they may be given the label of "unknown".
What are these "unknowns"? An additional classification is useful to
try and better understand this kind of report. In the gathering of data
for the study, contributors were asked to give a value for their personal
Evaluation of the reliability of the report. This value is noted as "E"
in the case listing. This value gives the likelihood that the UFO
experience "really" occurred as described by the witness. Granted, it is
impossible for any investigator to judge this absolute value; often, a
subjective value for two categories of "strangeness" and "probability" is
assigned. The Evaluation value is another subjective value imposed by the
investigator or compiler (or both) with a scale such that the low values
represent cases with little information content and observers of limited
observing abilities and the higher values represent those cases with
excellent witnesses (pilots, police, etc.) and also are well-investigated.
Naturally, cases with higher values are preferred.
The 1993 high-quality unexplained cases were the following:
9930130 1900 Quidi Vidi,NF ND 3600s blue ball, 20 witnesses, STRA
9930226 1805 Arthur,ON DD 720s black cigar, 2 witnesses, CAM
9930402 1715 Prince George,BC DD 900s black object, 2 witnesses, STRA
9930514 2200 Penticton,BC ND 10s cigar-shaped object, 2 witnesses,
STRA
9930725 2130 Brocklehurst,BC ND 300s 1 witness, STRA
9930726 0100 Brocklehurst,BC ND 3600s round object, 4 witnesses, STRA
9930802 2230 Mission,BC DD 15s red triangle, 3 witnesses, RCMP
9930804 0436 Glenella,MB ND 120s yellow object, 1 witness, URM
9930812 0030 Lethbridge,AB ND 5s black triangle, 3 witnesses, ASG
9930820 2245 Winnipeg,MB DD 90s yellow triangle, 1 witness, URM
9930821 2045 Vernon,BC ND 150s polygon, 12 witnesses, STRA
9930822 1930 Kamloops,BC ND 3s white trapezoid, 1 witness, STRA
9930901 0330 Dorothy Lake,MB C3 60s blue light & entity, 1 witness,
URM
9930912 1800 Surrey,BC ND 20s silver triangle, 3 witnesses,
STRA
9930912 2030 New Westminster,BC ND 20s red oval object, 2 witnesses,
STRA
9931219 2340 Cold Lake,AB C1 1200s 2 witnesses, ASG
The interpretation of this list is that these cases were among the most
challenging of all the reports received in 1993. It should be noted that
most UFO cases go unreported, and that there may be ten times as many UFO
---
TIMM (0.9 Alpha 3) Macintosh qwk reader
--- DB 1.58/004376
* Origin: The Computer Forum 804 471-3360 (1:275/17)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(9008) Tue 17 May 94 7:52p
By: Ed Hackett
To: All
Re: Canadian Ufo Survey 7
St: Local Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sightings that go unreported as those which get reported to public,
private or military agencies. Furthermore, it should be noted that some
cases with lower reliability ratings suffer only from incomplete
investigations, and that they may well be more mysterious than those on
the above list.
UFOs were reported at a rate of about 40 per month across all of
Canada in 1993, although throughout the 5-year span of this study, the
rate drops to 20 per month. Witnesses range from farmhands to airline
pilots and from teachers to police. Witnesses represent all age groups
and racial origin. What is being observed? In most cases, only ordinary
objects. However, this begs a question. If people are reporting things
that can be explained, then the objects they observed were "really" there.
Were the objects we can't identify "really" there as well? If so, what
were they?
These are questions only continued and rational research can answer,
and only if researchers have the support and encouragement of both
scientists and the public.
Comparisons with Other Analyses of UFO Data
It is most instructive to compare the UFOROM analyses with those of
other organizations, particularly the National Sighting Research Center of
New Jersey, headed by Paul Ferrughelli. The NSRC results have been
reported in a series of publications, a recent one being the National
Sighting Yearbook 1992. The NSRC collected UFO reports from newspaper
clippings, UFO publications and MUFON case files and analyzed the raw UFO
data. Because of the difference in data sources, a comparison with the
UFOROM results will not be true. However, it is still interesting to
compare the two studies.
The NSRC found a total of 197 UFO reports in 1992. This number was
slightly less than that of Canada for the same year. Because of its
larger population, it is likely that the USA had many, many more sightings
that were never accessed through the NSRC's sampling technique.
The NSRC study revealed that there was no clear trend in the monthly
distribution of UFO reports in the USA. Peaks were found in June and
December. Grouping the American and Canadian studies together yields a
monthly distribution with troughs in mid-summer and mid-winter, with
slight variations month-to- month. It is possible to speculate that with
adequate report sampling, there would be no monthly variation in the
number of sightings, except for major flaps which would be more noticeable
in an international survey. This is somewhat counter-intuitive and
suggests that UFO reporting is independent of climate and seasonal
variations. That is, people do not see more UFOs in summer because they
spend more time outdoors during that season.
Like the Canadian study, the American data was unevenly distributed
throughout the country. Most reports came from just two states, Florida
and Indiana. The Florida flap is likely due to the Gulf Breeze reports
which receive a great deal of media attention. The distribution of
sighting duration was nearly identical to the Canadian study. The average
duration of a typical American UFO sighting is between 3 and 9 minutes.
For the hourly distribution of UFO cases, the American study found a
symmetrical distribution with a pronounced peak at 9 PM local time and a
trough at around 9 AM local time. This is in complete agreement with
UFOCAT studies by Hendry (1979) and others cited by him. Canadian
distributions are normally about one hour later in each peak, but are
otherwise identical in distribution. It is possible that there is a
"Daylight Savings" effect within the time data. Breakdown by Hynek
classification yields identical distributions within both American and
Canadian studies, with NLs being overwhelmingly predominant.
A major difference between the Canadian UFO Survey and other studies
of UFO data is that Close Encounter cases appear to be under-represented
in the former database. CEs comprise an incredible 30% of the NSRC data
and nearly 50% (!) of the cases in David Spencer's MUFON UFO Report
Database. There is no question that some screening and/or selection is
occurring in the studies with high proportions of CEs. Hendry (1979) noted
that CEs comprised 13% of the Blue Book unknowns and 14% of his own
unexplained cases. (There were four unexplained CEs in the 1993 Canadian
study.) In each of these studies, CEs represent slightly less than one
percent of the total cases.
In summary, Ferrughelli's analyses of American UFO data yield results
remarkably similar to the UFOROM Canadian studies, despite the differences
in collection procedures. The two studies are complementary, and will
aid further research into the UFO phenomenon.
Addendum:
The Anomalous Event of October 30, 1993
At 9:39 PM CST on October 30, 1993 (0339 UT on October 31, 1993), a
brilliant object was seen streaking through the night sky over the
Canadian prairie provinces. Literally hundreds of people witnessed the
event, which lasted less than 10 seconds. Most observers thought the
object was greenish-blue in colour, though some thought it was orange-red.
Reports were received from witnesses in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba
and Ontario, with some outliers in North Dakota and as far away as
Indiana. Because of its trajectory and appearance, the object was assumed
by scientists to be have been a fireball or very large meteor. It appears
that the burn started over eastern Alberta, headed east across
Saskatchewan and terminated somewhere over Manitoba.
---
TIMM (0.9 Alpha 3) Macintosh qwk reader
--- DB 1.58/004376
* Origin: The Computer Forum 804 471-3360 (1:275/17)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(9009) Tue 17 May 94 7:52p
By: Ed Hackett
To: All
Re: Canadian Ufo Survey 8
St: Local Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dozens of people near Dauphin were jarred by a tremendous "sonic boom"
that some compared to "a car hitting the house." The noise followed the
passage of the object by approximately two minutes. Witnesses in eastern
Manitoba generally saw the object somewhere to their west, so it may have
fallen over Lake Manitoba.
A complication of the investigation is that a check with NORAD revealed
that a booster rocket from a Russian space mission had apparently
re-entered the Earth's atmosphere over Canada at precisely the time of the
observation. It was thus postulated that the observations were consistent
with that of the space hardware re-entry, and that there had not been a
meteoric event. However, one researcher was told by another military
spokesperson that an orbiting camera directed at Canada had recorded two
separate events occurring within a few minutes of each other. It was
possible, then, that some witnesses
had seen the re-entry, while others had seen the fireball. A problem was
that the predicted impact point or the rocket booster was near Nova
Scotia, and there were no reports farther east than northwestern Ontario.
In addition, if the booster was low enough to create a sonic boom over
Manitoba, it could not, under any circumstances, survive to the Atlantic
Ocean. And what could be made of the outlier reports in the United States?
Finally, it is most curious that no observer saw two events. It would seem
logical that at least one person would have seen two objects, given the
large number of witnesses and recorded observations.
Is it possible that a rocket booster re-entered the Earth's atmosphere at
the same point and the time as a meteoroid? Although the statistical
probability of such a unique tandem event is not zero, it is very
unlikely. Something very remarkable and still not completely explained was
seen by hundreds of people that night.
References:
Ferrughelli, P. (1992). National Sighting Yearbook 1992.
National
Sighting Research Center, 60 Allen Drive, Wayne, NJ 07470.
Hendry, Allan. (1979). The UFO Handbook. Doubleday, NY.
Rutkowski, C. A. (1986). The UFOROM Datafile: MANUFOCAT. Ufology
Research of Manitoba, Box 1918, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3C
3R2.
Spencer, T. David. (1993). Initial results from the UFO report
database. MUFON UFO Journal, number 305, pp. 13-15.
The 1993 Canadian
UFO Survey: Five Years of UFOs
Summary of Findings
1. The number of UFO reports in Canada has been increasing since 1989.
Reasons for this include increased public awareness of where to
report UFOs and the increasing participation by UFO researchers in the
annual studies. There were 141 UFO cases reported in Canada in 1989, but
by1993, the number of UFO cases rose to 489.
2. More UFOs are reported in Western Canada than in Eastern Canada.
3. More UFOs are reported in the fall and winter than in the spring and
summer.
4. Two-thirds of all UFOs are classed as Nocturnal Lights; that is, they
are simply lights moving about in the night sky. Most of these can be
explained as aircraft or astronomical objects.
5. 31.5% of all UFOs reported in 1993 were explainable as misidentified
ordinary objects. 34.8% of the cases had insufficient information to
find an explanation. 23.5% had possible explanations.
50 cases (10.2%) could not be explained.
6. Of the unexplained reports, only about half were of high quality (26
cases, or 5.3%). That is, these cases were relatively
well-investigated and well-witnessed and were judged as reliable cases by
at least one investigator.
7. Most UFOs are seen around 10:00 p.m.
8. UFOs usually have more than one witness. Normally, two or more people
see a UFO at the same time.
9. UFO sightings last an average of about 12 minutes.
10. Most UFOs are white in colour.
These findings show that UFOs represent a continuing phenomenon that
refuses to go away. More and more people are reporting UFOs each year,
from all provinces. If UFOs do not represent alien visitation as is
popularly conceived, the numbers of reports demand that the phenomenon
deserves scientific study, if not as a physical phenomenon, then a
sociological or psychological one.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%
For those who wish a hard copy of this report, including 28 additional
tables and graphs not available in ASCII, send $10.00 to:
Ufology Research of Manitoba
Box 1918
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Canada R3C 3R2
--
Chris Rutkowski - rutkows@cc.umanitoba.ca
University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
---
TIMM (0.9 Alpha 3) Macintosh qwk reader
--- DB 1.58/004376
* Origin: The Computer Forum 804 471-3360 (1:275/17)
then a sociological or psychological one.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %
For those who wish a hard copy of this report, including 28 additional tables and graphs not available in ASCII, send $10.00 to:
Ufology Research of Manitoba
Box 1918
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Canada R3C 3R2
-- Chris Rutkowski - rutkows@cc.umanitoba.ca University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
--- TIMM (0.9 Alpha 3) Macintosh qwk reader
--- DB 1.58/004376
* Origin: The Computer Forum 804 471-3360 (1:275/17)
