UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2012 > May > May 4

Re: UFO Dangers Examined By U.S. News & World

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 12:37:54 -0300
Archived: Fri, 04 May 2012 06:07:33 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Dangers Examined By U.S. News & World 

>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: post.nul
>Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 10:20:03 -0500
>Subject: Re: UFO Dangers Examined By U.S. News & World Report

>>From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <post.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 15:30:48 +0200
>>Subject: Re: UFO Dangers Examined By U.S. News & World Report

>>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <post.nul>
>>>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
>>>Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 12:06 PM
>>>Subject: UFO UpDate: UFO Dangers Examined By U.S. News & World Report

>>>Source: HuffPo


>>>05/ 1/2012

>>>UFO Dangers Examined By U.S. News & World Report
>>>Lee Speigel


>>>Every year, thousands of UFO sightings from around the world are
>>>reported. And, as the magazine points out, about 95 percent of
>>>those reports are explained as ordinary things like military
>>>aircraft, balloons, misidentified astronomical objects - such
>>>as planets or meteors - and meteorological phenomena.

>>Question: where did this 95% come from, and is it a current
>>figure? Has anyone tested it lately?

>As Brad Sparks has pointed out here and elsewhere, it's
>basically an urban legend, based on a very loose definition of
>what observers mean by "UFO" sightings.

>In the days when Blue Book was conducting actual investigations
>of UFO sightings, it concluded that unknowns were between 25 and
>30 percent of the total.  And it got to that figure by
>automatically relegating high-strangeness cases - those
>involving landings, close encounters, occupants - to the
>"psychological" category.

Jerry and Don are both right. An interesting example occurred a
few years back during a debate between myself and sceptic
Michael Shermer on Coast to Coast radio. He started by saying
that with UFOs, as with all paranormal stuff, there is always a
residue of about 5% of the cases for which there isn't enough
information to provide a definitive answer.

I drove my truck through the huge hole he had just created. I
pointed out that what he said wasn't true.

In the biggest study ever done for the US Air Force, Project
Blue Book Special Report 14, it was found that 21.5% of the 3201
cases could NOT be explained completely separate from the 9.3%
for which there was insufficient information.

I noted that the better the quality of the report the more
likely it was an UNKNOWN, that the probability that the UNKNOWNS
were just missed KNOWNS was less than 1% even though no sighting
could be listed as an unknown unless all 4 of the final report
evaluators agreed it was an unknown though any 2 could list a
case as a KNOWN.

I then noted the 30% of Condon's 117 cases that couln't be
explained, the 18% of 4500 of Dick Hall's UFO Evidence cases,

It should be no surprise that the audience vote at the end of
the program was 80% thought I won.

Matter of fact one of my very few complaints about Leslie Kean's
important book is her use of the 95% explainable notion. Let us
not let the nasty noisy negatavists get by with their propaganda

Stan Friedman

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



These contents above are copyright of the author and
UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced
without the express permission of both parties and
are intended for educational use only.

[ 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