Friday, May 24, 2013
Update: 2012 Canadian UFO Survey
Update:
I've been tinkering with the version of the 2012 Canadian UFO Survey that's in this blog, and a slightly revised account is here:
http://uforum.blogspot.ca/2013/05/the-2012-canadian-ufo-survey.html
Lunchtime!
Labels: 2012 Canadian UFO Survey
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
UFO over Calgary on Monday, May 20, 2013
I just received a UFO report from an aviation employee in Calgary. The incident occurred less than 12 hours ago. Here is the witness' description of what was seen:
At approx 2330 local on Monday, May 20, 2013, I was in Calgary, looking towards the west watching planes take off from runway 16 climbing south. The ceiling is broken, scattered clouds. All of a sudden a solid ball of light that looked like a headlight came out from behind a cloud, travelled a slight north east path and then just switched out like a light. No noise, except planes taking off further west and I can tell planes apart by their sound and lights easily.
I have been in aviation for 13 yrs doing flight planning, route building, flight coordinating, aircraft refuelling including commercial, private, military aircraft... any job in aviation, I've done it. I’m not sure what I saw but I know what it's not and that's an airplane or a helicopter. The latter are required to have a red beacon even when they are in "stealth" mode. The light I saw was directly above an active runway... the tower would never let them traverse an active departure path. There was no sound as well, and my trained ear can hear Hawcs (police helicopters) coming from quite a ways away. I hear and see them constantly. About 5 minutes after this happened I heard Hawcs come by and I went to see if maybe they had seen it too and where following it. They appeared to just be doing their normal rounds of the area.
If this person says it was not a helicopter or aircraft, I don't know what else it could have been.
Labels: Calgary UFO sighting report Canada 2013 airport
Monday, May 20, 2013
Reactions to the 2012 Canadian UFO Survey
In a word, none.
Despite the fact that the review of 2012 data on Canadian
UFO cases showed an unprecedented 100% increase in reports, ufological chatter
about the Survey has been almost nonexistent. Yet, whenever the “Ata” skeleton
was mentioned in UFO groups and online lists, the resulting discussions and
flame wars filled volumes – and it doesn’t seem to have anything to do with
UFOs.
Such is the state of popular ufology. Factual data are
irrelevant.
On a more positive note, reaction from media was
interesting. Many reporters across Canada recognized the significance of the
results, and requested interviews. The most responsible reporting was by CTV
News, which ran three different versions of its story on the 2012 Survey, all
of which were fair and balanced. CBC almost had a major story, but a breaking
political scandal the same day as the UFO story was scheduled to run
effectively killed national coverage on that network.
This is an important result especially given the “sour
grapes” attitude of coverage of the Citizens’ Hearings on Disclosure, which was
lauded by organizers and participants as the most significant news story of the
decade, but was upstaged completely by the IRS scandal. It is interesting that
in both the USA and Canada that politics took precedence over UFOs. (And yes,
some have already played the “conspiracy card.”)
Most media were reasonable in their approach. Only one interviewer was a bit of a jerk, out of about 15 or so total interviews. And the Vice Magazine article was, well, a Vice Magazine article.
The media that covered the 2012 Canadian UFO Survey had
some very good questions based on the findings, and that has led to some
follow-up comments that add some background and insight into the nature of UFO investigation
and ufology.
Question #1: “So all these UFO sightings are likely all
just from people making things up or hallucinating, aren’t they?”
Answer: No, not at all. The reason is because we can
actually explain many of the sightings or are able to suggest possible
explanations for what was observed. In other words, there really were objects
in the sky that led people to report seeing them.
Question #2: “Is there any consistency or common
denominator to the sightings?”
Answer: Yes. That’s something the survey was able to
find. We were able to determine that most reports were of orange or white
lights in the sky, seen at about 10:00 or 11:00 pm, and usually seen by more
than one person at a time. With these clues, we were able to show that many of
these were Chinese lanterns or aircraft.
Question #3: “Was there any consistency to the
unexplained cases?”
Answer: Not really. What was most noticeable was that the
high-quality unknowns were definitely out of the ordinary. Flying octagons,
objects shaped like “guitar picks,” a “dradle” and some that changed shape
while in flight. It’s these characteristics that helped classify them as
unknown.
A hexagonal UFO reported in 2012
Question #4: “So doesn’t that speak to the probability
that we’re not dealing with alien spacecraft? Because all the unknowns were
different, and if we were really being visited by aliens, all their ships would
look the same?”
Answer: Now that’s a really good question and
observation. It’s based on our own limited experience with space travel. Yes,
the Space Shuttles all looked the same, and even the SpaceX planes and “pumpkin
seed” crafts have the same basic design. And the LEMs that landed on the Moon
all were identical. Therefore, an alien scout craft or landing craft designed
to descend to Earth should look the same. However, some ufologists have already
pointed out that Volkswagen Beetles, snowplows and Mack Trucks are all very
different, yet all function on land. It’s not out of the question that visiting
aliens would have the same crafts, but there could be variations. This also assumes
that there’s only one visiting alien species. If there are several alien races
visiting Earth (or 57, as Clifford Stone insists), then the variance in the
appearance of UFOs is easily explainable.
As we all know, the Volswagen Beetle was reverse engineered from UFOs. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7cHPBlmVjg
Question #5: “So the Survey proves aliens are visiting
Earth?”
Answer: Nothing of the sort. In fact, the answer to
Question #4 was complete speculation. What the Survey shows is that thousands
of people are reporting UFO sightings each year, and that the number of reports
is increasing. Even the unexplained cases do not prove that aliens are visiting
Earth.
Question #6: “So what use is the Survey?”
Answer: The survey is a comprehensive study of what
people (specifically Canadians) are seeing and reporting as UFOs. This data is the
foundation upon which all the speculation about alien races, crash/retrievals, alien
abductions, UFO propulsion and “disclosure” is based. If this data is
problematic, then the various discussions about the other related subjects have
no bases in reality. Furthermore, this data (and similar data gathering efforts
in other countries) serves to quantify information about UFOs so that useful
discussions within and with the scientific community can be held. Studies such
as the Survey can be used to liaise with serious researchers in an attempt to
better understand the UFO phenomenon.
Question #7: “So, are UFOs real?”
Answer: Semantics is everything. By definition, UFOs are
real because people report seeing unidentified flying objects. UFOs are real
because military documents labeled “UFO Report” and describing observations of
UFOs exist in significant numbers (e.g. the MoD files released by Britain or
those similar files available in the Canadian National Archives).
An official document showing that the government uses "UFO" as a term.
[This is,
essentially, the “Santa Claus” defence as laid out so well in the classic movie
“Miracle on 34th Street.” Santa Claus is real because the US Post
Office, a government body, delivers mail to him.]
Santa Claus, too, is real, since he gets mail delivered by an official government institution
Question #8: “Okay, then, are some reported UFOs alien
spaceships?”
Answer: I have no idea. Most aren’t. The remaining few
percent don’t prove anything of the sort. What they do suggest is that if there
isn’t a physical UFO phenomenon, there is at the very least a psychological or
sociological one, and in any case it should be studied more by science. There’s
certainly enough data.
Question #9: "Then why are more people reporting UFOs?"
Answer: Because they're there. I also think that more people are noticing things in the sky more often, and because they haven't been doing that in previous years, for whatever reason, they're thinking that they're looking at unexplainable objects. The Chris Hadfield Phenomenon has made more people aware of what's going on above their heads, as has Russian bolides and news about drones.
Question #10: "What's the one thing that media should note about UFOs?"
Answer: UFOs have not gone away. They're not a fad. Some factors are driving the phenomenon, and it's worth taking seriously.
Labels: Canadian UFO Survey 2012 ufology reality belief media aliens extraterrestrial sightings reports
Monday, May 13, 2013
The 2012 Canadian UFO Survey
*****
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
/ .................. \
=========================
+ +
++ ++
The 2012
CANADIAN UFO SURVEY:
an analysis of UFO reports
in Canada
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Compiled by
Geoff Dittman
and
Chris A. Rutkowski
Data Sources:
Yukon UFO
UFO Updates
Para-Researchers
of Ontario
National UFO
Reporting Center
Filer’s Files
UFOINFO
UFO*BC
UFOS North
West
Alberta UFO
Study Group
Mutual UFO
Network
Houston, BC,
Centre for UFO Research
Ufology
Research
Transport
Canada
National
Defence and the Canadian Forces
YouTube
Centre Etude d’OVNIs (Quebec)
NOUFORS
OVNI-QUEBEC
PSICan
OVNI-Alerte
Sightings.com
GARPAN
Editor
Chris
Rutkowski, Ufology Research
Data Entry,
Compilation and Analyses
Geoff Dittman,
Ufology Research
Published by
Ufology Research
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
© 2013 Ufology
Research
The 2012 Canadian UFO Survey
Since 1989, Ufology Research
(formerly Ufology Research of Manitoba) has solicited UFO case data from known
and active investigators and researchers in Canada. The goal has been to
provide data for use by researchers trying to understand this controversial
phenomenon. No comparable studies are currently produced by any other research
group in North America. Similar programs exist in several other countries such
as Sweden, where UFO report data is analysed by the Archives for UFO Research,
and in Italy by Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici.
2012 marks the 24th year of
collecting and analysing Canadian UFO report data by Ufology Research.
With some gaps in data, tables of
most Canadian UFO reports included in the annual surveys from 1989 to the
present are available online at: http://survey.canadianuforeport.com
The 2012 Canadian UFO Survey:
Summary of Results
·
There were 1981 UFO sightings
reported in Canada in 2012, or about five each day. This is more than twice the number of reports
in 2011, when 986 reports were recorded.
·
The number of cases in 2012
completely eclipses the previous record for the highest number of reports in
one year, when 1,004 reports were received in 2008. This represents literally a
100 per cent increase in the number of UFO reports between 2011 and 2012.
·
In 2012, there were record numbers
of UFOs reported in all provinces except Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Island.
Ontario had more than 40 per cent of all Canadian UFO reports in 2012, far more
than previous years.
·
In 2012, about 7.5 per cent of all
UFO reports were judged unexplained. This percentage dropped from 11 per cent in
2011.
·
The typical UFO sighting lasted
approximately 15 minutes in 2012.
The study found that more than half
of all UFO sightings were of simple lights in the sky. Witnesses also reported point
sources of light, spheres and boomerangs.
Results of this study show that many people continue to report unusual objects in the sky, and some of these objects do not have obvious explanations. Many witnesses are pilots, police and other individuals with reasonably good observing capabilities and good judgement.
Numbers of reported UFO sightings remain high. Several theories for this can be suggested: more UFOs are present and physically observable by witnesses; more secret or classified military exercises and overflights are occurring over populated areas; more people are unaware of the nature of conventional or natural objects in the sky; more people are taking the time to observe their surroundings; more people are able to report their sightings with easier access to the Internet and portable technology; or even that the downturn in the economy is leading to an increased desire by some people to look skyward for assistance.
Although the largest percentage of reported UFOs is simply lights in the night sky, a small number are objects with definite shapes observed within the witnesses’ frame of reference.
Popular opinion to the contrary, there is no incontrovertible evidence that some UFO cases involve extraterrestrial contact. The continued reporting of UFOs by the public and the yearly increase in numbers of UFO reports suggests a need for further examination of the phenomenon by social, medical and/or physical scientists.
For further information, contact:
Ufology Research,
e-mail:
canadianuforeport@hotmail.com
Twitter: @ufologyresearch
blog: uforum.blogspot.com
blog: uforum.blogspot.com
UFO Reports in Canada
The following table shows the number of reported UFOs per year since
1989, collected by Ufology Research.
Year
|
Number
|
Average
|
1989
|
141
|
141.0
|
1990
|
194
|
167.5
|
1991
|
165
|
166.7
|
1992
|
223
|
180.8
|
1993
|
489
|
242.4
|
1994
|
189
|
233.5
|
1995
|
183
|
226.3
|
1996
|
258
|
230.3
|
1997
|
284
|
236.2
|
1998
|
194
|
232.0
|
1999
|
259
|
234.5
|
2000
|
263
|
236.8
|
2001
|
374
|
247.4
|
2002
|
483
|
264.2
|
2003
|
673
|
291.5
|
2004
|
882
|
328.4
|
2005
|
769
|
354.3
|
2006
|
738
|
375.8
|
2007
|
794
|
399.8
|
2008
|
1004
|
430.0
|
2009*
|
||
2010
|
968
|
438.2
|
2011
|
986
|
461.9
|
2012
|
1981
|
525.3
|
Total
|
12606
|
*― Data for 2009 has not yet been
added to the database.
The number of UFO reports per year
has varied, although there has been a general trend towards a steady increase
in yearly UFO report numbers over 24 years, peaking in 2012 with almost 2,000
reports in one year. Although there may be perceived notion that UFOs are not
being reported with as much frequency as in the past, this is not true. UFOs
have not “gone away.” This data clearly contradicts comments by those who would
assert that UFOs are a ‘passing fad’ or that UFO sightings are decreasing.
Method
Data for each case was obtained by
Ufology Research from participating researchers across Canada or through data
mining of known websites devoted to UFO reports. The information then was coded
by members of Ufology Research and entered into a database and statistically
analysed.
An example of the coding key is as
follows:
Example: 2012 01 09 1530 Vernon BC DD 900 silver 2
ps 6 5
UFOBC p 4 objs. seen
Field: 1
2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15
16
Field 1 is a default YEAR for the
report.
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 the TYPE of report, using
the Modified Hynek Classification System.
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
object(s) seen
Field 12 is the STRANGENESS of the
report.
Field 13 is the RELIABILITY of the
report.
Field 14 is the SOURCE of the
report.
Field 15 is the EVALUATION of the
case.
Field 16 includes any COMMENTS noted
about the case.
Analyses of the
Data
Distribution of UFO Reports Across
Canada
In 2012, Ontario had about 41 per
cent of the total number of UFO sightings reported in Canada, the most reports
of any province, and exactly the same percentage as in 2011. British Columbia
was second, with about 20 per cent of the total. Overall, Ontario cases
represent 31 per cent of all Canadian reports in the Ufology Research database,
only slightly more than BC’s 28 per cent. If UFO reporting was simply a factor
of population, one would expect percentages of 37 per cent for Ontario and 13
per cent for BC. Quebec should therefore have 23 per cent of all cases, but
overall this percentage is less than nine per cent. In 2012, there were record
numbers of UFOs reported in all provinces except Saskatchewan and Prince Edward
Island.
TABLE 1
Distribution of UFO Reports by Province
NT
|
NU
|
YT
|
BC
|
AB
|
SK
|
MB
|
ON
|
PQ
|
NB
|
NS
|
PI
|
NF
|
|
1989
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
15
|
16
|
18
|
22
|
34
|
28
|
1
|
3
|
0
|
3
|
1990
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
76
|
9
|
10
|
20
|
21
|
36
|
7
|
5
|
3
|
4
|
1991
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
59
|
22
|
7
|
6
|
30
|
16
|
9
|
7
|
1
|
4
|
1992
|
1
|
0
|
3
|
90
|
8
|
9
|
23
|
56
|
10
|
9
|
3
|
0
|
4
|
1993
|
5
|
0
|
0
|
157
|
56
|
93
|
74
|
51
|
32
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
7
|
1994
|
3
|
0
|
3
|
14
|
39
|
8
|
10
|
51
|
34
|
6
|
9
|
0
|
6
|
1995
|
4
|
0
|
0
|
45
|
10
|
11
|
48
|
41
|
20
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1996
|
35
|
0
|
0
|
43
|
10
|
11
|
39
|
63
|
45
|
1
|
9
|
0
|
1
|
1997
|
22
|
0
|
8
|
99
|
11
|
5
|
32
|
72
|
24
|
1
|
6
|
1
|
3
|
1998
|
2
|
0
|
22
|
58
|
6
|
14
|
15
|
59
|
15
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
1999
|
0
|
0
|
20
|
118
|
19
|
1
|
6
|
79
|
8
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
6
|
2000
|
0
|
0
|
26
|
102
|
17
|
8
|
19
|
53
|
22
|
0
|
15
|
0
|
0
|
2001
|
1
|
5
|
18
|
123
|
40
|
12
|
20
|
87
|
34
|
5
|
21
|
2
|
6
|
2002
|
0
|
2
|
20
|
176
|
51
|
6
|
36
|
128
|
34
|
4
|
23
|
0
|
3
|
2003
|
2
|
1
|
16
|
304
|
76
|
19
|
25
|
150
|
49
|
4
|
21
|
2
|
4
|
2004
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
247
|
99
|
45
|
112
|
254
|
64
|
21
|
23
|
2
|
9
|
2005
|
1
|
0
|
3
|
209
|
90
|
77
|
43
|
214
|
77
|
15
|
16
|
4
|
12
|
2006
|
2
|
8
|
1
|
209
|
55
|
98
|
54
|
188
|
76
|
12
|
25
|
1
|
5
|
2007
|
6
|
0
|
7
|
192
|
66
|
36
|
44
|
329
|
93
|
24
|
31
|
2
|
6
|
2008
|
0
|
1
|
6
|
272
|
157
|
41
|
52
|
334
|
62
|
28
|
34
|
2
|
10
|
2009*
|
|||||||||||||
2010
|
0
|
0
|
3
|
204
|
85
|
30
|
88
|
405
|
71
|
25
|
42
|
5
|
9
|
2011
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
216
|
101
|
31
|
81
|
406
|
77
|
27
|
31
|
2
|
5
|
2012
|
0
|
0
|
6
|
399
|
323
|
55
|
124
|
822
|
124
|
41
|
61
|
2
|
23
|
NT
|
NU
|
YT
|
BC
|
AB
|
SK
|
MB
|
ON
|
PQ
|
NB
|
NS
|
PI
|
NF
|
|
Total
|
91
|
19
|
169
|
3472
|
1367
|
630
|
1010
|
3948
|
1065
|
246
|
389
|
32
|
132
|
In addition, geographical names of
UFO sighting locations were examined for trends. Many cities were found to have
multiple reports, and these are noted in the following table. Large
metropolitan areas include their suburbs.
Canadian Cities With Most UFO Reports in 2013
Rank
|
City
|
Province
|
Number of Reports
|
1
|
Calgary
|
AB
|
99
|
2
|
Edmonton
|
AB
|
77
|
3
|
Vancouver
|
BC
|
74
|
4
|
Winnipeg
|
MB
|
65
|
5
|
Toronto
|
BC
|
56
|
Metropolitan Areas
|
|||
Vancouver
|
(Incl.New Westminister, W. Van., N. Van.,
Burnaby, Surrey, Abbottsford, Port Coquitlam, Langley, N.Surrey, N.Langley,
Richmond, Delta, N. Delta, Coquitlam, Port Moody)
|
151
|
|
Toronto
|
(Incl. Mississauga, Brampton,
Scarborough, Oshawa, Whitby, Ajax, Pickering, Etobicoke, Newmarket, Richmond
Hill, Markham, Oakville)
|
180
|
Monthly Trends in UFO Reports
Monthly breakdowns of reports during
each year tend to show slightly different patterns. UFO reports are generally
thought to peak in summer and are at minimum in winter, presumably due to the
more pleasant observing conditions during the summer months, when more witnesses
are outside. In Canada in 2012, July and August numbers were again high, but
report numbers were unusually high in the winter as well.
J
|
F
|
M
|
A
|
M
|
J
|
J
|
A
|
S
|
O
|
N
|
D
|
|
1989
|
13
|
9
|
6
|
9
|
5
|
9
|
5
|
5
|
12
|
32
|
27
|
9
|
1990
|
17
|
7
|
6
|
47
|
10
|
10
|
9
|
47
|
15
|
16
|
10
|
0
|
1991
|
13
|
7
|
17
|
12
|
7
|
12
|
16
|
25
|
16
|
12
|
11
|
17
|
1992
|
15
|
16
|
27
|
16
|
22
|
16
|
23
|
19
|
11
|
16
|
21
|
21
|
1993
|
59
|
15
|
20
|
22
|
14
|
38
|
27
|
49
|
41
|
152
|
24
|
21
|
1994
|
16
|
12
|
15
|
21
|
15
|
37
|
19
|
8
|
15
|
10
|
7
|
13
|
1995
|
14
|
12
|
13
|
9
|
9
|
10
|
28
|
33
|
28
|
11
|
11
|
5
|
1996
|
37
|
18
|
20
|
16
|
8
|
20
|
30
|
32
|
10
|
22
|
30
|
11
|
1997
|
19
|
11
|
31
|
29
|
17
|
13
|
29
|
29
|
22
|
16
|
26
|
37
|
1998
|
3
|
4
|
8
|
5
|
9
|
13
|
16
|
40
|
45
|
35
|
7
|
4
|
1999
|
8
|
20
|
22
|
7
|
31
|
10
|
27
|
36
|
30
|
29
|
30
|
7
|
2000
|
21
|
17
|
15
|
21
|
12
|
11
|
19
|
46
|
20
|
44
|
15
|
19
|
2001
|
36
|
19
|
33
|
25
|
17
|
26
|
51
|
81
|
25
|
17
|
27
|
16
|
2002
|
31
|
54
|
41
|
28
|
36
|
44
|
73
|
74
|
42
|
26
|
19
|
14
|
2003
|
41
|
46
|
46
|
46
|
31
|
30
|
131
|
102
|
46
|
64
|
43
|
47
|
2004
|
59
|
53
|
72
|
68
|
82
|
97
|
96
|
113
|
83
|
46
|
56
|
53
|
2005
|
36
|
59
|
81
|
59
|
45
|
50
|
96
|
123
|
70
|
56
|
47
|
45
|
2006
|
33
|
43
|
41
|
66
|
65
|
108
|
113
|
113
|
61
|
36
|
20
|
29
|
2007
|
45
|
35
|
95
|
76
|
56
|
90
|
80
|
105
|
94
|
64
|
50
|
41
|
2008
|
64
|
65
|
66
|
58
|
81
|
71
|
148
|
128
|
114
|
82
|
94
|
33
|
2009
|
||||||||||||
2010
|
40
|
30
|
34
|
38
|
64
|
78
|
196
|
115
|
94
|
106
|
82
|
86
|
2011
|
94
|
64
|
67
|
63
|
76
|
69
|
102
|
142
|
97
|
91
|
48
|
72
|
2012
|
109
|
136
|
150
|
180
|
166
|
140
|
272
|
283
|
194
|
151
|
81
|
116
|
J
|
F
|
M
|
A
|
M
|
J
|
J
|
A
|
S
|
O
|
N
|
D
|
|
Totals
|
835
|
759
|
926
|
926
|
849
|
1013
|
1618
|
1769
|
1191
|
1128
|
791
|
724
|
UFO Report Types
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 some
variations. Proportionally, Daylight Discs dropped somewhat in 2012, with the
lion’s share of cases still being Nocturnal Lights.
Just over two per cent of all reported UFO cases in 2012 were Close
Encounters, emphasizing the reality that very, very few UFO cases involve anything other
than distant objects seen in the sky. This is an important statistic, because
the current popular interest in abductions and sensational UFO encounters is
based not on the vast majority of UFO cases but on the very tiny fraction of
cases which fall into the category of close encounters. Speculation on what
aliens may or may not be doing in our airspace seems almost completely
unconnected to what are actually being reported as UFOs.
TABLE 3
Report Types (Modified Hynek
Classifications)
NL
|
ND
|
DD
|
C1
|
C2
|
C3
|
C4
|
EV
|
RD
|
PH
|
|
1989
|
84
|
20
|
16
|
10
|
7
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
1990
|
141
|
24
|
15
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
4
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
1991
|
110
|
26
|
13
|
7
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1992
|
136
|
44
|
20
|
15
|
5
|
2
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
1993
|
372
|
77
|
26
|
8
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
1994/95
|
234
|
78
|
28
|
21
|
1
|
1
|
5
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
1996
|
170
|
40
|
27
|
8
|
3
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
1997
|
145
|
62
|
52
|
4
|
2
|
5
|
8
|
4
|
0
|
1
|
1998
|
115
|
23
|
25
|
6
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
19
|
0
|
3
|
1999
|
163
|
44
|
37
|
3
|
7
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
2000
|
179
|
31
|
26
|
4
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
3
|
2001
|
218
|
80
|
55
|
8
|
1
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
2002
|
293
|
94
|
76
|
8
|
5
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
2
|
2003
|
431
|
152
|
74
|
5
|
5
|
3
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
2004
|
520
|
203
|
136
|
7
|
6
|
2
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
3
|
2005
|
424
|
169
|
149
|
9
|
5
|
3
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
2006
|
508
|
65
|
85
|
12
|
1
|
4
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
21
|
2007
|
413
|
244
|
153
|
12
|
7
|
4
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
*
|
2008
|
442
|
353
|
175
|
10
|
7
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
8
|
2009*
|
||||||||||
2010
|
467
|
324
|
132
|
14
|
9
|
0
|
4
|
5
|
0
|
13
|
2011
|
559
|
313
|
92
|
15
|
4
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
2012
|
1070
|
673
|
155
|
32
|
8
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
29
|
NL
|
ND
|
DD
|
C1
|
C2
|
C3
|
C4
|
EV
|
RD
|
PH
|
|
Totals
|
7168
|
2538
|
1440
|
189
|
82
|
44
|
42
|
66
|
1
|
60
|
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
C1 (Close Encounter of the First
Kind) - ND or DD occurring within 200 metres of a witness
C2 (Close Encounter of the Second
Kind) - C1 where physical effects left or noted
C3 (Close Encounter of the Third
Kind) - C1 where figures/entities are encountered
C4 (Close Encounter of the Fourth
Kind) - an alleged "abduction" or "contact" experience
Note: The category of Nocturnal
Disc was created in the 1980s by UFOROM originally for differentiation of
cases within its own report files, and has been adopted by many other groups
worldwide.
The category of PH indicates the
sighting was entirely photographic, without any actual object seen visually.
Many reports listed as NL or ND or DD may also have associated photos or video,
so this should not be considered exclusive. EV indicates a case in which
physical evidence was observed (not necessarily related to any observed object)
and RD is a case in which an object was detected with radar but not necessarily
observed. UX cases are listed in the database, but not in the table above.
(UX cases are those in which
anomalous phenomena are reported and believed by witnesses to be UFO-related,
but no UFO was actually seen. These include reports of “odd sounds” and
dreams.)
Hourly Distribution
The hourly distribution of cases has
usually followed a similar pattern every year, with a peak at 2200 hours local
and a trough around 0900 hours local. Since most UFOs are nocturnal lights,
most sightings will occur during the evening hours. Since the number of
possible observers drops off sharply near midnight, we would expect the hourly
rate of UFO reports would vary with two factors: potential observers and
darkness.
Time
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
12:00-12:59
|
8
|
7
|
7
|
13:00-13:59
|
12
|
9
|
8
|
14:00-14:59
|
7
|
8
|
14
|
15:00-15:59
|
13
|
7
|
14
|
16:00-16:59
|
15
|
7
|
15
|
17:00-17:59
|
24
|
19
|
22
|
18:00-18:59
|
33
|
26
|
42
|
19:00-19:59
|
54
|
63
|
84
|
20:00-20:59
|
78
|
96
|
153
|
21:00-21:59
|
107
|
114
|
311
|
22:00-22:59
|
140
|
148
|
363
|
23:00-23:59
|
132
|
109
|
217
|
00:00-00:59
|
53
|
50
|
129
|
01:00-01:59
|
48
|
38
|
66
|
02:00-02:59
|
30
|
27
|
55
|
03:00-03:59
|
22
|
19
|
45
|
04:00-04:59
|
11
|
14
|
33
|
05:00-05:59
|
7
|
15
|
20
|
06:00-06:59
|
17
|
18
|
20
|
07:00-07:59
|
7
|
6
|
14
|
08:00-08:59
|
5
|
1
|
7
|
09:00-09:59
|
5
|
1
|
4
|
10:00-10:59
|
7
|
2
|
8
|
11:00-11:59
|
12
|
3
|
9
|
Duration
The category of Duration is
interesting in that it represents the subjective length of time the UFO
experience lasted. In other words, this is the length of time the sighting
lasted as estimated by the witness. Naturally, these times are greatly
suspect because it is known that most people tend to badly misjudge the flow of
time. Although an estimate of "one hour" may be in error by several
minutes, it is unlikely that the true duration would be, for example, one minute.
Furthermore, there have been cases when a UFO was observed and clocked very
accurately, so that we can be reasonably certain that UFO events can last
considerable periods of time.
The average duration of UFO
sightings in Canada in 2012 was about 15 minutes, down from about 22 minutes in
2011 but comparable to 2010, when the average was 16 minutes. These significant
lengths of time suggest some simple explanations. Previous analyses have shown
that long-duration sightings tend to occur in the early morning hours, from
about midnight until 6:00 a.m.
The duration of a sighting is one of the biggest clues to its explanation. Experience in studying UFO reports has shown us that short duration events are usually fireballs or bolides, and long duration events of an hour or more are very probably astronomical objects moving slowly with Earth’s rotation.
Colour
In cases where colours of an object
were reported by witnesses, the most common colour in 2012 was orange, similar
to 2011. The next most common colours in those years were white, red and
“multi-coloured.” Since most UFOs are nocturnal starlike objects, the abundance
of white objects is not surprising. Colours such as red, orange, blue and green
often are associated with bolides (fireballs). Orange is most often associated
with the observation of a Chinese lanterns, the launching of which became
popular during the past few years. The ‘multicoloured’ designation is
problematic in that it literally covers a wide range of possibilities. This
label has been used, for example, when witnesses described their UFOs as having
white, red and green lights. Many of these are certainly stars or planets,
which flash a variety of colours when seen low on the horizon. Aircraft also
frequently are described as having more than one colour of light, such as
flashing coloured wing lights. However, seen from a distance, aircraft will
often be visible only as moving white lights.
Colour
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
White
|
162
|
164
|
233
|
Multicoloured
|
95
|
82
|
162
|
Orange
|
158
|
219
|
546
|
Yellow
|
26
|
41
|
57
|
Red
|
77
|
103
|
209
|
Green
|
32
|
21
|
69
|
Silver
|
21
|
14
|
21
|
Black
|
26
|
24
|
39
|
Blue
|
30
|
16
|
47
|
Grey
|
8
|
7
|
20
|
Brown
|
0
|
1
|
4
|
Pink
|
2
|
3
|
2
|
Purple
|
1
|
1
|
5
|
Witnesses
The average number of witnesses per
case between 1989 and 2012 is approximately 2.00. This value has fluctuated
between a high of 2.4 in 1996 to as low as 1.4 in 1990. In 2011, the average
number of witnesses per case was 1.74, and the value in 2012 remained about the
same, at 1.79.
This indicates that the typical UFO experience has more than one witness, and supports the contention that UFO sightings represent observations of real, physical phenomena, since there is usually at least one corroborator present to support the sighting.
Shape
Witnesses’ descriptions of the shapes
of UFOs vary greatly. In 2010, about 45 per cent were of “point sources”—that
is, “starlike” objects or distant lights. In 2011, this number was
significantly greater, at 56 per cent, and in 2012, the ratio was about the
same, at 55 per cent. The classic “flying saucer” or disc-shaped object
comprises only around three or four per cent of all UFO reports, contrary to
popular opinion. Even the “triangle” shape, which some ufologists have
suggested has supplanted the classic “saucer,” is only a small percentage of
the total.
The shape of a perceived object depends on many factors such as the witness’ own visual acuity, the angle of viewing, the distance of viewing and the witness’ own biases and descriptive abilities. Nevertheless, in combination with other case data such as duration, shape can be a good clue towards a UFO’s possible explanation.
Shape
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
Ball/Globe/Round/Orb/Sphere
|
186
|
144
|
296
|
Fireball
|
61
|
61
|
158
|
Boomerang/Crescent/Chevron/V/U
|
18
|
7
|
24
|
Cigar/Cylinder
|
35
|
43
|
47
|
Disk/Saucer
|
33
|
42
|
37
|
Irregular
|
130
|
97
|
223
|
Oval/Egg/Elliptical
|
15
|
24
|
30
|
Point Source
|
440
|
554
|
1076
|
Triangle
|
42
|
43
|
62
|
Diamond
|
2
|
1
|
|
Rectangle
|
0
|
3
|
1
|
Strangeness
The assigning of a Strangeness rating to a UFO report is
based on a classification adopted by researchers who noted that the inclusion
of a subjective evaluation of the degree to which a particular case is in
itself unusual might yield some insight into the data. For example, the
observation of a single, stationary, starlike light in the sky, seen for
several hours, is not particularly unusual and might likely have a prosaic
explanation such as that of a star or planet. On the other hand, a detailed
observation of a saucer-shaped object which glides slowly away from a witness
after an encounter with grey-skinned aliens would be considered highly strange.
The numbers of UFO reports according to strangeness rating show an inverse relationship such that the higher the strangeness rating, the fewer reports. The one exception to this relationship occurs in the case of very low strangeness cases, which are relatively few in number compared to those of moderate strangeness. It is suggested this is the case because in order for an observation to be considered a UFO, it must usually rise above an ad hoc level of strangeness, otherwise it would not be considered strange at all.
The average strangeness rating for UFO reports during 2012 was only 3.21, down slightly from the 2011 average of 3.35, where 1 is considered not strange at all and 9 is considered exceptionally unusual. Most UFOs reported are of objects which do not greatly stretch the imagination. Hollywood-style flying saucers are, in reality, relatively uncommon in UFO reports. The overall Strangeness rating of Canadian UFO reports has been sliding slightly over time.
Reliability
The average Reliability rating of Canadian UFO
reports in 2012 was 4.6, down significantly from an average of 5.1 in 2011. In
most years, there are approximately the same number of higher quality cases as
those of low quality. However, in 2012, more reports had minimal information on
the witness, little or no investigation and incomplete data or description of
the object(s) observed. Higher
reliability cases include actual interviews with witnesses, a detailed case
investigation, multiple witnesses, supporting documentation and other evidence.
Since data for many cases are taken from websites and second-hand postings, or
in fact self-postings, there is usually no significant investigation of UFO
sightings. Well-investigated cases likely comprise only a small fraction of all
UFO data, a fact that makes posted UFO case data have limited value.
Reliability and Strangeness ratings tend to vary in classic bell-shaped curves. In other words, there are very few cases which were both highly unusual and well-reported. Most cases are of medium strangeness and medium reliability. These are the “high-quality unknowns” which will be discussed in a later section of this study. However, there are also very few low-strangeness cases with low reliability. Low-strangeness cases, therefore, tend to be well-reported and probably have explanations.
With the number of well-investigated cases declining, it is not at all surprising that the Reliability rating has declined overall.
Sources
UFO data used in this study were
supplied by many different groups, organizations, official agencies and private
individuals. Since this annual survey began in the late 1980s, more and more
cases have been obtained and received via the Internet.
The lion’s share of reports used as data came through Sightings.com, which has been relaying UFO cases reported through the former Houston, BC, Centre for UFOs (HBCCUFO), with about 32 per cent in 2010 and 35 per cent in 2011, but up to 45 per cent in 2012. This is a very popular website found through Google searches, and many people rely on it for UFO information and submit their reports there via a web form.
In 2011, about 15 per cent of the
total cases were obtained through the private and non-profit National UFO
Reporting Center in the USA, but this went down dramatically to nearly eight
per cent in 2012. NUFORC has a toll-free telephone number for reporting UFOs
and a large sightings list created through voluntary submission of online
report forms by witnesses. About 23 per cent cases were reported to the large
organization known as the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON), which has an efficient
reporting system.
This was a large increase from only nine per cent in 2011.
This was a large increase from only nine per cent in 2011.
Less than one per cent of all cases came as a result of information obtained through Transport Canada and the Department of National Defence.
It should be noted that the preparation of this Survey is becoming quite challenging. Few UFO investigators or researchers actually submit case data to UFOROM anymore, requiring considerable searching of online sources. And, although many sites post information about UFO sightings, very little actual UFO investigation is being conducted. In fact, it could be said that the science of UFO investigation has nearly become extinct.
This does not bode well for an area of study that is under constant criticism by debunkers wishing to prove the unscientific nature of the subject.
It is worth considering the Sources as a way of trying to explain the large increase in reports in 2012. Since the percentage of UFO cases from various Sources has remained consistent, the dramatic increase is not due to an increase in reports from one particular Source. Therefore, it is reasonable to suggest that the increase in report numbers in 2012 is due to an actual increase in the overall number of reports across Canada.
Evaluation (Explanations)
The breakdown by Evaluation for 2012 cases was similar
to results from previous years. There
were four operative categories: Explained,
Insufficient Information, Possible
or Probable Explanation, and Unknown
(or Unexplained). It is important to note that a classification of Unknown does not imply that an
alien spacecraft or mysterious natural phenomenon was observed; no such
interpretation can be made with certainty, based solely on the given data.
An Evaluation is made subjectively by either or both the contributing investigators and the compilers of this study. The category of Unknown is adopted if there is extensive information or data available and/or 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. Cases are also re-evaluated periodically as additional data or information is brought to attention or obtained through further investigation.
The level and quality of UFO report investigation varies because there are no explicit and rigorous standards for UFO investigation. Investigators who are “believers” might be inclined to consider most UFO sightings as mysterious, whereas those with more of a skeptical predisposition might tend to subconsciously (or consciously) reduce the Unknowns in their files.
The slight decrease in the percentage of Unknown cases is due to an increase in the number of reports considered to have Insufficient Information or had Possible Explanations. Again, this is related to a need for more well-investigated reports.
TABLE 4
Evaluation of Canadian UFO Data
%
|
||||
Explained
|
Insufficient Evidence
|
Probable
|
Unexplained
|
|
1989
|
0.00%
|
52.50%
|
33.30%
|
14.20%
|
1990
|
0.00%
|
46.40%
|
40.20%
|
13.40%
|
1991
|
1.20%
|
48.50%
|
41.80%
|
8.50%
|
1992
|
8.00%
|
37.00%
|
33.00%
|
22.00%
|
1993
|
31.50%
|
34.80%
|
23.50%
|
10.20%
|
1994/95
|
19.10%
|
33.30%
|
35.20%
|
12.40%
|
1996
|
9.30%
|
40.70%
|
33.70%
|
16.30%
|
1997
|
6.00%
|
37.30%
|
43.00%
|
13.70%
|
1998
|
5.10%
|
38.70%
|
44.80%
|
11.30%
|
1999
|
3.80%
|
31.50%
|
51.90%
|
12.70%
|
2000
|
8.75%
|
35.74%
|
42.59%
|
12.93%
|
2001
|
5.88%
|
34.76%
|
44.12%
|
15.24%
|
2002
|
2.48%
|
39.75%
|
39.75%
|
18.01%
|
2003
|
16.34%
|
24.67%
|
42.50%
|
16.49%
|
2004
|
8.62%
|
22.68%
|
53.17%
|
15.53%
|
2005
|
12.09%
|
25.36%
|
47.85%
|
14.69%
|
2006
|
7.07%
|
44.84%
|
36.28%
|
11.82%
|
2007
|
2.03%
|
32.06%
|
50.12%
|
15.78%
|
2008
|
2.69%
|
27.99%
|
59.46%
|
9.86%
|
2009*
|
||||
2010
|
1.96%
|
38.64%
|
51.34%
|
8.06%
|
2011
|
3.55%
|
40.67%
|
44.83%
|
10.95%
|
2012
|
3.08%
|
39.90%
|
50.55%
|
7.47%
|
Explained
|
Insufficient Evidence
|
Probable
|
Unexplained
|
|
1989
|
0
|
74
|
47
|
20
|
1990
|
0
|
90
|
78
|
26
|
1991
|
2
|
80
|
69
|
14
|
1992
|
17
|
83
|
74
|
49
|
1993
|
154
|
170
|
115
|
50
|
1994/95
|
71
|
124
|
131
|
46
|
1996
|
24
|
105
|
87
|
42
|
1997
|
17
|
106
|
122
|
39
|
1998
|
10
|
75
|
87
|
22
|
1999
|
10
|
82
|
135
|
32
|
2000
|
23
|
94
|
112
|
34
|
2001
|
22
|
130
|
165
|
57
|
2002
|
12
|
192
|
192
|
87
|
2003
|
110
|
166
|
286
|
111
|
2004
|
76
|
200
|
469
|
137
|
2005
|
93
|
195
|
368
|
113
|
2006
|
52
|
330
|
267
|
87
|
2007
|
17
|
268
|
419
|
132
|
2008
|
27
|
281
|
597
|
99
|
2009*
|
||||
2010
|
19
|
374
|
497
|
78
|
2011
|
35
|
401
|
442
|
108
|
2012
|
61
|
771
|
1002
|
148
|
852
|
4391
|
5761
|
1531
|
In 2012, the percentage of Unknowns was just 7.47 per cent, the
lowest ever recorded. There were 148 Unknowns
out of 1981 total cases in 2012.
If we look only at the Unknowns with a Strangeness of 6 or greater and a Reliability rating of 6 or greater, we are left with only 17 high-quality Unknowns in 2012 (less than one per cent of the total). This is much lower than previous studies, where values closer to three or four per cent were noted. As a comparison, USAF Blue Book studies found three to four per cent of their cases were "excellent" Unknowns. As it is, these 17 cases can be reduced further by eliminating those in which investigation is not complete or details not made available for outside evaluation.
It should be emphasized again that even 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 may remain unexplained, but still are not incontrovertible proof of extraterrestrial intervention or some mysterious natural phenomenon.
The interpretation of the 148 Unknowns in 2012 is that these cases were among the most challenging of all the reports received. It should be noted that most UFO cases go unreported, and that there may be ten times as many UFO 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 list of Unknowns. And, above all, these cases are not proof of extraterrestrial visitation.
The increase in the numbers of UFO reports with time likely does not have a simple explanation. It could be related to a growing awareness within the general population that there are agencies which collect UFO reports. It could be that there really are more UFOs physically present in the sky. It could be that the collection of UFO data is becoming more efficient. It could be that there are more private websites allowing or inviting people to report their UFO sightings. While media have been noted as playing a definite role in UFO waves (a national increase in UFO sightings), media coverage of UFO reports has significantly declined over the past decade while the number of reports has risen.
Furthermore, the Internet as a reporting tool for anonymous witnesses is firmly entrenched; one likely cannot claim that an increase in Internet use is to blame for the increase in UFO reports. Also, there was no comparable UFO-related media phenomenon such as The X Files on television in 2012. The media did not seem to have had any greater influence over UFO reporting this past year as years before.
Perhaps a cultural factor is at work as well, where “aliens” and UFOs are now well-entrenched within the societal mindset and are accepted as more probable than fiction. The question of why UFO reports persist when the scientific community is decidedly against the existence of a real phenomenon is itself is deserving of scientific study.
It is likely that an increase in the number of Chinese lanterns sent aloft during celebrations in 2012 led to many of the “orange orb” reports. This, combined with a general lack of familiarity with the night sky, would no doubt have taken into account many of the UFOs reported. It is the more anomalous reports that seem unexplainable are worth pursuing as a way of understanding the UFO phenomenon as a whole, and the nature of human fascination with the subject of aliens and life in the universe.
Most Interesting Canadian “Unknowns”
in 2012
The following are those Canadian UFO
reports in 2012 which had a Reliability Rating of 6 or greater, a Strangeness
Rating of 6 or greater and which were also assigned an Evaluation of Unknown,
and for which details are available for evaluation.
January 1,
2012 9:30 pm Cornwall,
PI
Two
witnesses watched a triangular black craft with pink lights on its wingtips
pass overhead slowly and silently. When it was directly overhead, the object’s
underside looked like a large bright ball of white light. It flew around the
town in an arc, reversed course and eventually flew off to the north over the
treetops. The sighting lasted about five minutes.
February
10, 2012 7:15 pm Winnipeg, MB
A couple
driving on a road in an isolated part of the city was shocked to encounter a
black, flat, octagonal object with flashing lights. After they drove directly
underneath it, it moved across a field and away from them.
February
19, 2012 1:56 am Ottawa, ON
A witness
observed an object shaped like a “huge dradle” with red lights. A loud roaring
sound was seen while it was in view. It moved smoothly out sight.
February
25, 2012 5:00 pm Elmira, ON
Two
witnesses saw two dark objects “shaped like guitar picks” moving silently
overhead at an estimated 200 feet high, heading east.
February
25, 2012 7:00 pm Winnipeg, MB
Two
witnesses observed a flat, disc-shaped object with red lights around its
perimeter. As it flew it in horizontal flight, it turned on its side and then
darted towards the witnesses’ vehicle, then vanished before their eyes when it
was within five metres of them.
April 7,
2012 7:00 pm Saint-Redempteur, Quebec
An object
composed of three rings in a triangle approached the witnesses while they were
driving. It flew overhead and then disappeared. As they drove further, the
witnesses felt something touching or poking them, but could not see anything.
April 7,
2012 10:10 pm Montreal, PQ
An airline
pilot was watching the sky and saw an odd orange light moving SW across the
sky. As he watched, it faded, revealing a triangular object without any lights,
rolling back and forth as it flew.
May 11,
2012 12:37 am Courtenay, BC
A large
square object with more than 30 multicoloured lights hovered over the ocean,
moved from side to side and then in an arc. It was described as a “giant lit up
billboard floating in the sky.” It made “rounds” for 10 minutes before vanished
from sight.
May 24,
2012 7:00 pm Wallaceburg, ON
A silver
“airplane” was seen flying low over a residential area. It proceeded to change
its shape, from that of an airplane to a “musical triangle,” a “bird’s foot,” a
“spinning bangle” and a “snow cone.” It was in sight for about 30 seconds
before it was lost behind some trees.
July 7,
2012 11:30
pm Saint John, NB
An object
like a bright “neon green hexagon” suddenly appeared only 20 feet away from a
witness. It remained motionless and silent, appeared to split in 2 sections
then reformed. When the witness went to get someone else to see it, it
vanished.
July 28, 2012 3:05 am Sault
Ste. Marie, ON
A
pulsating “orb” moved over a witness as he drove, the UFO’s pulses illuminating
its body: a large rectangular object that had a “shimmering” appearance.
August 3,
2012 9:30 pm Shoal Harbour, NF
Four
people saw a disc-shaped, glowing orange object flying west to east across the
sky, then stop suddenly in mid-flight. After about 10 seconds, it resumed its
flight and went out of sight.
August 9,
2012 10:00 pm Thorne, ON
A humming
noise was heard, then a disc-shaped object with red and white lights moved into
view between two farmhouses. It shot into the air, dropped down again, rotated
to reveal a different colour and set of lights and headed off in the direction
from which it came.
November
18, 2012 12:15 pm Brossard, PQ
Three witnesses
observed an object something “twirling” above a field in an industrial area.
After watching it for three minutes, one filmed it with his iPhone as it moved
away towards the west.
Some of the sketches made by witnesses of UFOs in 2012:
Cole Harbour (Dartmouth), NS
December 12, 2012
Spruce Grove, AB
Sept. 15, 2012
Winnipeg, MB
Feb. 10, 2012
Edmonton, AB
Feb. 21, 2012
Brooklin, ON
Dec. 18, 2012
Brossard, PQ
Nov. 18, 2012
Labels: 2012 Canadian UFO Survey reports sightings data analysis statistics Canada
