Ufology Research

Although there are many stories in the news about the "drone invasion," and UAP experts are on podcasts telling everyone about the latest "AWESOME VIDEO!", actual UAP data is hard to come by.

Also, it's impossible to determine the purpose or design of the UAP "drones" based solely on witnesses' descriptions because as researchers know, most eyewitness accounts are not usable as data. And calling the movement of distant lights in the night sky "plasmoid communication" is just plain silly.

Since what we need is actual UAP data, I went through my usual sources of cases and pulled out the UAP reports from so far in December just to see what we are really getting as reports. Many, of course, include witnesses' labeling of them as "drones," even though there's no evidence that 's what they are. In fact, many of the objects called "drones" turn out to be planets, satellites and conventional aircraft. But we get what we get.

Here is a list of what's been officially reported in Canada in December 2024 from publicly accessible databases and sources. Many are from Atlantic provinces because that's where cases are most readily shared and available for research. I have stripped out much of the classifications and categories to make it easiler to read, leaving the dates (Y/M/D), times (24 hr clock), location (Town/Province), and a very brief description. Full case info will be published, as usual, in the 2024 Canadian UFO Survey when it is completed.

Labels: 2024, Canada, December, drones, reports, UAP, UFO

# posted by rutkows @ 3:36 PM 0 comments

About the alien invasion predicted for December 3, 2024: 

First, the good news for those hardcore NHI believers and fans of ufology on social media and popular podcasts.

It happened as predicted. You were right.

The bad news is that you missed it.

I had been taking my daily morning walk along a snowy path in a field in Charleswood, Manitoba, when a dazzling light shone down from the sky onto a patch of exposed grass near me. Onto this patch of hard soil and vegetation landed a domed, saucer-shaped vehicle about 35 feet in diameter and 15 feet in height. The craft seemed metallic, with no apparent seams or rivets, but took on the appearance of burnished brass or aluminum.

Suddenly, a small door opened in the side of the space vehicle (for what else could it have been?) and out of it emerged a small, strange creature. Not the usual almond-eyed grey that many see, nor like an insect, nor an armored thing like a Predator. But it was more like a small, furry dwarf—skinnier and more articulated than an Ewok, and not green like Yoda but kind of beige color with an eggshell-like texture to its skin. (It was naked, except for what looked like purple swimming trunks on its lower body.)

It marched up to me and I was shocked to hear it say in perfect English (with a bit of a Scottish accent, for some reason): “Stand still, Earthling, for your planet is being invaded as I speak! I am Kotorg, Advance Sentry of the Imperial Commander from the planet Ixbez, and I am here to prepare the way for our Strike Force. Your planet will be destroyed and humans will suffer greatly!”

I was quite taken aback by this diminutive alien and did as it obeyed, for I noted it was holding a device in one of its hands: a potato-shaped thing with a nozzle pointing in my direction, and I didn’t want to get zapped or disintegrated.

“As the first Earthling we have encountered, you will be instrumental in conveying our orders to others on your planet,” it intoned in a high-pitched, yet raspy voice. “Take me to your leader!”

Surprised by hearing such a comedic line, I asked, “Which one?”

The little alien seemed puzzled by my reply, and retorted, “What do you mean? There is no one who speaks for your planet?”

I then patiently explained that at the moment there was a leader in our country, but a leader-elect in another, with a different leader currently in power.

I continued: “Of course, there are leaders of individual towns and cities, and leaders of states and provinces, and leaders of other countries around. You may have meant to ask about spiritual leaders, of which there is one in Rome, but also in Iran, London, China, and Japan, not to mention hundreds of other faiths.

“You might also have meant the most prominent head of our society, which at the moment is a popular entertainer on tour and whom millions adore.

“Or perhaps a military leader, of which there are many in individual countries and cantons around the world. Many of these are at the moment engaged in war with each other, dropping bombs and attacking citizens with missiles and warheads, laying waste to the Earth itself. In fact, there is concern that a nuclear device used in an offensive attack could level all of Earth.

“Naturally, Earthlings have created a society where individuals can express dissatisfaction with leadership and petition for better services and programs to preserve flora and fauna—and humans. Unfortunately, humans are fickle and tend to make poor choices, so that our oceans are polluted, our air is fouled by carbon and smog, and we value life only minimally.”

I paused, then asked, “So to whom would you like to be taken?”

The fuzzy alien stared at me, then looked back over its shoulder to the disc-shaped spaceship. It turned again to me and said: “Never mind. You Earthlings are already in the process of destroying your planet and making one another suffer. Our invasion is hardly necessary. We will be back in a billion or your years to invade the next civilization that will rise after yours has collapsed and vanished.”

And with that, the little creature climbed back aboard its flying saucer, The door closed and it took off into outer space.

I suppose the invasion was cancelled.

I continued on with my walk, enjoying the brisk December air. When I returned home, I checked social media to see what was new.

I wonder what posts will be trending today.

Labels: alien, invasion, NHI, UAP, UFO

# posted by rutkows @ 7:43 AM 0 comments

UFOs reported through Transport Canada on March 18-19, 2024

For a few years, it has been unusual for more than one UFO report to be included in the daily Transport Canada incident reports. Over the past few days, there have been four.

February 7, 2024   3:40 am

Lac LaForge, Quebec

CADORS 2024Q0454

February 8, 2024   8:49 pm

Blainville, Quebec

CADORS 2024Q0521

February 9, 2024   12:23 am

Black Rock Mountain, Alberta

CADORS 2024C0715

February 11, 2024   3:36 am

Thunder Bay, Ontario

CADORS 2024O0284

Labels: UFO UAP Canada Transport pilot aircraft government

# posted by rutkows @ 6:27 PM 0 comments

The latest AARO report on UAP has been released, and many UFO fans are panning it already, likely because it doesn't say that aliens are here. 

Actually, there is some interesting detail in the report, which I will get into another time, but what I'd like to do quickly is point out that for the first time, we have a decent breakdown of the cases that are being reported to AARO.

The latest AARO report includes a few pie charts, such as this one on UAP Morphologies (i.e shapes of UAP that were reported):

If this looks familiar to anyone who has been viewing the annual Canadian UFO Surveys, it's because the breakdown is very similar to what we've been finding over the past 35 years or so.

Here is the shape breakdown from the Canadian UFO Survey (CUS) for 2022:

If we look a bit more closely:

Comparison between reported shapes of UAP in AARO vs CUS

 Shape                                             AARO             CUS

Orb/Round/Sphere                            25%                9%*

Rectangle                                          2%                  1%

Triangle                                             1%                  3%

Irregular                                             6%                 20%

Disk                                                    2%                  4%

Cylinder                                             1%                  0%

Oval                                                    4%                  2%

Not Reported                                     53%               

Ambiguous Sensor Contact                  5%

Point Source                                                            41%

Boomerang                                                              1%

Cigar                                                                        16%

Fireball                                                                      2%

A few things need to be noted right from the start. First, AARO grouped reported shapes of Orb, Round, and Sphere together, but there's no category of Orb in CUS. I've addressed this in previous discussions, and stated it explicitly in the Coding Key for CUS data:

If a witness states the object observed was an “orb,” it is important to determine if this was just a judgement on the part of the witness. “Orb” is commonly used by UFO fans to describe a simple light observed in the night sky, even at a great distance, believing the light to be a much larger object, or something that is spherical in nature, despite the human visual limitation and inability to determine an actual shape of a distant light. Therefore, “orb” should not automatically imply a spherical object.

Another major difference is the AARO category of "Not Reported." It's not at all clear what this means. Does it mean that the UAP didn't have a discernable shape? If so, was it a Point Source, as categorized in CUS? If not, where are the AARO reports of Point Sources, since all previous studies of UFOs and UAP have found that the majority of reports fall into that category? Were they radar returns only, perhaps, or Unambiguous Sensor Contacts?

One other thing to note is that AARO focuses mostly on military reports, with some recently from commercial pilots. The Canadian UFO Survey includes not only reports from pilots and cases obtained through the Canadian Department of National Defence, but also from civilians, which is different from the AARO dataset. That may factor into why there are other differences in the categories of reported UAP.

At any rate, it is good to see we are finally getting some breakdown of AARO data.

More, please.

Labels: AARO report 2023 UAP UFO Canadian UFO Survey shape morphologies data statistics

# posted by rutkows @ 10:06 AM 0 comments

“Darn that NASA! Why don’t they do what we want them to do and admit UAP are alien spacecraft?”

The furore has not died down. UFO buffs are still distrustful of NASA for what it said (or didn’t say) in its UAP report released in September 2023. Never mind that it was late, or that they didn’t want to say who would be the new UAP director. Or even that by their own admission they won’t be looking at classified UAP data.

What, exactly are they hiding?

Actually, as I noted in my interviews on NewsNation, CTV, and CBC, it’s really not as bad as most ardent UFO fans are stating.

The NASA UAP report is a huge first step for an organization that has generally held UFOs at arms length and at bay for its entire existence. Astronauts have been almost universally (see what I did there?) dismissive of UFOs and played down the subject, with the exception of a few whom UFO fans insist saw aliens on the Moon and in Inner Space.

Dan Evans of NASA’s UAP study stated very clearly that “understanding UAP is vital” to NASA’s mission. Nicola Fox, of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, said that NASA wants to “de-stigmatize” UAP so that it is a legitimate field of study, and funds will be made available for research projects. And Bill Nelson, NASA’s director, wants to shift UAP discussion from “sensation to science.”

All great ideas and goals.

So what’s the problem?

Here’s the nub: pop ufology and science don’t mix well. Bringing a biker boyfriend to a debutante ball doesn’t usually lead to a good blending of cultures.

In the NASA UAP report, there’s a clear explanation of the issue, but it’s buried on page 29:

In science, data need to be reproducible, and hypotheses falsifiable—the scientific method works by systematically analyzing data with the intent to falsify a hypothesis.

As a general principle, the data should support measurement that can rule out specific explanations or interpretations, leaving us with no choice but to embrace its opposite. In the case of UAP, the hypothesis we seek to reject (or “null hypothesis”) is that the UAP have phenomenology consistent with known natural or technological causes.

And that’s exactly opposite to pop ufology.

Typically, I receive several UFO (or UAP) reports every week, from various sources, including witnesses. The implication is that I am asked to explain what was observed, if I can. Often, I simply receive a blurry video of a light in the sky that the witness says was mysterious. Sometimes, I am even challenged to explain photos and videos, usually without the sender providing any context such as where the images were taken, the date, time, and any other necessary information for evaluation.

In other words, we are given a report of an object that is deemed unexplained and asked to try and explain it.

That’s not the “null hypothesis.”

In the case of a photo of an object in the sky, the null hypothesis would be something like: “This is a photograph of an object in the sky. Determine if it is unexplained.”

Pop ufology starts with the assumption that something is unexplained/unusual/alien and then debunkers are tasked with coming up with a viable explanation.

The Peruvian “mummies” that were trotted out at a UAP conference recently show how this plays out. The sticklike bodies of odd-looking creatures were presented and announced to be aliens. It was then up to others to try and explain them.

In science, however, what would have happened is that such artefacts would have been presented along with all necessary provenance and documentation, offering them to researchers as objects of interest. It would be the researchers who would then test them, analyze them and compare them with other artefacts to see what they might be. Alien mummies would be a possible explanation, but much, much father down the line.

A second important thing in the NASA UAP study was its confirmation of the numbers of UAP reports that the AARO has received during its few years of operation. From page 26:

Between March 5, 2021, and August 30, 2022, DoD received a total of 247 new UAP reports, according to an analysis published by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) in 2022. In contrast, 263 reports had been filed in the 17 years prior to March 2021. Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick reported at this panel’s public meeting that AARO has now collected more than 800 reported events. This includes the addition of data from the FAA.

While these numbers have been bandied about by UFO fans, if you take a good look at the numbers, they aren’t that impressive.

Between about 2005 and 2022, there were a total of 510 UAP reports received by the US Department of Defense. That’s an average of 30 each year, or maybe two each month. Everywhere. Around the world. From all American military bases. (Yes, all the reports were from military personnel only.)

In contrast, the National UFO Reporting Center (NUFORC) receives about 5,000 UAP/UFO reports from civilians (and some military personnel) each year.

The 510 AARO reports were added to by including reports of UAP filed by civilian pilots with the FAA, and so by September 2023, the total number is now above 800 reports. That’s about 50 per year, a factor of 100 less than the rate reported to just one civilian group.

At the moment, there is no way for civilians to file UAP reports with NASA, and it’s not clear how this will change. Civilians also can’t file reports with AARO.

Another point of note from the NASA UAP study is their definition of an unidentified UAP. In her remarks at the news conference, Nicola Fox stated that one problem with UAP is that there is limited high quality data about them, “which renders them unexplained.”

If you missed the implications of that, read it again. NASA’s view is that because there is insufficient data to explain some UAP, they then are considered unexplained.

Not that the UAP in question are truly mysterious, but that there’s just not enough information to rule out other explanations.

That’s not the way most UFO fans consider the term “unexplained.”

This is especially relevant when you look at the original UAPTF report in which 144 UAP reports were examined.

We were able to identify one reported UAP with high confidence. In that case, we identified the object as a large, deflating balloon. The others remain unexplained.

Aha! 143 cases were unexplained!

But—

Yes, that’s not really what “unexplained” means, is it?

In contrast, during my talks and presentations on UFOs, I often use this graph, taken from Project Blue Book Special Report 14, in which 3,201 UFO reports from 1947 to 1952 were analyzed and broken down by classification. There were categories of Astronomical (such as stars, planets, and meteors), Aircraft, Balloon, Other, Insufficient Information, and Unknown.

For now, let’s ignore the fact that there were 19.7% of all cases that didn’t have an explanation.

But consider this: the majority of UFO reports had explanations, about 69%. It’s the category of “Insuf. Info” that’s significant. In other words, only about 10% of the cases didn’t have enough information to rule out a plane or a meteor.

But the UAPTF report had only two categories: explained (1) and unexplained (143).

Why? Because science.

Either the data is sufficient to warrant a definitive conclusion, or not. In a court of law, you are either guilty or not guilty, regardless of circumstances. If you can’t tie the murder weapon to the accused with certainty, including using DNA testing to prove he had actually been in the room with the victim, the murderer walks.

So while the majority of UAP reports examined by the UAPTF are “unexplained,” they are likely only “Insuf. Info.”

The problem is that without the actual case data being made available for us to examine, like for the Blue Book cases or the Canadian UFO Survey, we don’t know for sure what the actual percentage of “unidentified” cases there really are that are held by AARO.

And if NASA is using the AARO process of UAP analysis, who knows what they will find.

Labels: NASA UAP UAPTF UFO report study Blue Book unidentified

# posted by rutkows @ 8:10 AM 0 comments

Next up: one of the few only actual UFO reports that made it through. And it's from Mississippi! On May 29, 2023, the pilot of a Canadian private jet saw something remarkable. It was described as: "...an unidentified object (estimated height six feet with white dome and red device attached under it) visible in the left-hand windshield and estimated at less than half a mile from the plane."

The next incident of concern was a problem affecting the Collision Avoidance Systems of four different aircraft. On June 22, 2023, approximately over Kitchener, Ontario, no less than four different aircraft reported "erroneous targets" on their Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System because of a small private plane in the area. This is a problem because TCAS alerts advise pilots of airborne objects that are too close to their flight paths.

On July 1, 2023 (Canada Day), at 9:14 pm, a helicopter pilot flying near Penticton, British Columbia, filed a "Laser interference" Incident Report. He said that a "flashing blue light source somewhere northeast of the airport, possible laser" while he was flying from the northeast. He noted it was a "Short burst, possibly part of Canada Day celebration, but did not seem directed at aircraft." He was too far away to tell exactly where it was coming from.

Another curious incident occurred on June 12, 2023, at 3:25 pm near Westham Island, BC. A civilian complaint was received because: "A large yellow helicopter overflew a residence from the northwest at approximately 200ft altitude. The helicopter circled back and overflew the house a second time and dropped a burning flare onto the property. The flare set fire to a hedge beside the house. The house resident saw the flare drop and was able to extinguish the fire with a garden hose. The helicopter departed to the northwest."

The follow-up to this was rather odd. After investigation, it was found that: "Contrary to the initial report, the helicopter did not drop a flare. A witness reported seeing a flare being launched, from the ground, in the direction of the helicopter. The Delta Police were contacted and are investigating."

On July 9, 2023, at 11:47 am, a pilot flying near Abbotsford, BC, received a TCAS alert, even though there was: "No reported or observed traffic by air traffic controller (ATC)." How reliable are TCAS systems, anyway?

Next on the list: on July 16, 2023, at 4:27 pm, a bit north of Thurso, Quebec, "A Societe Air France Airbus A330-200 (AFR327) from Ottawa/MacDonald-Cartier Int'l, ON (CYOW) to Paris/Charles de Gaulle, France (LFPG) reported a drone encounter at 13 000 feet. Round Drone approximately 1 meter in diameter."

My colleagues who are knowledgeable about drones were very amazed at this report, as very few drones fly that high, and they are unaware of any that are 1-meter spheres!

Not to be outdone, another high-flying drone was reported over the Alouette Hydroelectric Generating Station near Mt. Robie Reid in the interior of British Columbia. This time, on July 16, 2023 at 12:15 pm, two separate aircraft encountered something strange. 

"An Air Canada Airbus A319 (ACA241) from Edmonton Int'l, AB (CYEG) to Vancouver Int'l, BC (CYVR) and a Jazz Bombardier CL-600-2D24 (JZA8271) from Kelowna, BC (CYLW) to Vancouver Int'l, BC (CYVR) reported a drone encounter in the vicinity of STAVE intersection and an altitude of 15 000 feet. Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) advised."

15,000 feet is more than twice the height of the nearby mountain, so at least the UAP/drone had enough clearance.

An Incident Report that shows the dangers of drones for air safety is a case from June 2023 where a MEDEVAC flight almost had to take evasive action to avoid a collision.

But finally, an actual UFO report! It took a few months to make it through NAV CANADA, but on May 31, 2023, at about 9:30 pm, near London, Ontario, "a member of the public at the Elginfield Observatory reported seeing an unidentified flying object (UFO). The UFO appeared to be a string of overlapping semi-transparent spheres travelling south at a high altitude, then ceased being visible in an instant."

There had been a Starlink launch just before that, so it's likely that the case has a simple explanation. However, this Incident was classified not as a UFO, not as Laser interference, and not as an Operational incident. It was a case involving "clear air turbulence!" NOT!

But still, this shows that Transport Canada continues to include UFO (not UAP) reports among its CADORS files.

Labels: UFO UAP Transport Canada government pilot ATC drone laser

# posted by rutkows @ 9:52 AM 0 comments