UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > May > May 6

Re: MoD Opens Its Files On UFO Sightings To Public

From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 13:33:45 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2007 08:02:41 -0400
Subject: Re: MoD Opens Its Files On UFO Sightings To Public


>From: Gerald O'Connell <gac.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 01:05:11 +0100
>Subject: Re: MoD Opens Its Files On UFO Sightings To Public

<snip>

>>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
>>>Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 08:38:27 -0400
>>>Subject: MoD Opens Its Files On UFO Sightings To Public

>>>Source: The Guardian - London, UK
>>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329804654-117780,00.html

>>>Thursday May 3, 2007

>>>MoD Opens Its Files On UFO Sightings To Public

>>>James Randerson
>>>Guardian

<snip>

>The crucial point here is that mere data (albeit in apparently
>impressive volume: 'thousands of UFO files') bereft of rigorous
>critical scrutiny does not, in itself, constitute 'evidence'. As
>Nick Redfern's recent reply to my Anne Henson query suggests,
>there can be serious questions as to the completeness and
>accuracy of information released through official channels.

>When conclusions are drawn as to the significance of data even
>before that data has been released, we would be well advised to
>ask some searching questions as to the nature of the belief
>system that is being supported by such a process.

There's a danger in making generalisations about MoD's handling
of the subject, because policy and practices have varied
considerably over the years. Some sightings were investigated in
details, others were looked at less thoroughly and some weren't
investigated at all.

Variables include which MoD division had lead responsibility for
UFOs at the time (you wouldn't expect copy addresses to
investigate, unless asked), standard operating procedures,
available resources, competing priorities, and the beliefs and
working practices (e.g. reactive or proactive) of the personnel
concerned.

The quality of information supplied by the witness is also a key
factor. Some witnesses make vague reports a long time after a
sighting, and can't even recall the date. And at the time of my
tour of duty, radar data was only kept for around a month. So in
the case of retrospective reports, meaningful investigation can
be difficult or impossible.


Best wishes,

Nick Pope

http://www.nickpope.net


Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast

See:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/


[ Next Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com