UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Oct > Oct 22

Re: Non-Investigated Flying Objects

From: Richard Hall <dh12.nul>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 18:37:28 -0400
Archived: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 07:30:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Non-Investigated Flying Objects


>From: Michael Tarbell <mtarbell.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:38:20 -0600
>Subject: Re: Non-Investigated Flying Objects

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 20:36:21 EDT
>>Subject: Non-Investigated Flying Objects

>>I suggest naming the category of non-investigated or
>>uninvestigated sightings "NFOs" or Non-investigated Flying
>>Objects (NFOs). This is an indeterminate catchall category for
>>initial incoming sighting reports prior to any Hynek screening
>>or investigation. Most cases will fall into this category and
>>never get reclassified as either IFOs or UFOs. The 'NFO' term
>>falls nicely in between IFO and UFO alphabetically which is
>>conceptually where it belongs.

>Hi Brad,

>While I agree this approach is well-motivated, it may be erring
>in the other direction. One must at least consider, how would
>NFOs be distributed if in fact they _were_ all investigated? The
>reasonable default presumption would seem to be that they would
>follow the distribution of the investigated cases, i.e., a 2-to-
>1 ratio of UFOs to IFOs. The implication is that a full
>investigation of every report would reveal that fully 67% of
>them represent genuine unknowns. I think this would strike most
>people, including UFO researchers, as unreasonable.

>Of course, we may suppose (correctly, I think) that the cases
>that get investigated do not represent a random sampling from
>the entire body of reports. Indeed, it is reasonable to think
>that the more anomalous cases would get higher priority for
>investigation, with the result that genuine unknowns are over-
>represented in the UFO/IFO group and under-represented in the
>NFO group. However, without some way to quantify this bias, it
>is difficult to estimate the actual fraction of unknowns in the
>entire data set.

Mike,

I see no point at all in considering or assuming or trying to
calculate how uninvestigated cases might turn out without
actually investigating them! The whole point is the need to
investigate before assuming anything.


Dick




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

See:

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


[ Next Message | Previous 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