From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 18:01:07 +0700 (GMT+07:00) Archived: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 05:39:15 -0500 Subject: Insufficient Data - UFOs BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE UPDATE FOR RES 321 UPDATE #6 DATE: 08 December 03 NAME: Terry W. Colvin Topic: "Insufficient Data - UFOs" Chapter 10: Summarizing the Data Quote: "What I thought at the time to be the only explanation possible - I made the statement it was 'swamp gas', - J. Allen Hynek [The following day eighty-seven women students at Hillsdale College in Hillsdale, Michigan, their dean, and a civil defense director all claimed to have watched for four hours a glowing football-shaped object hovering above a swampy area several hundred yards from the women's dormitory.] WWW Site #1: Printy, T. (2001). Project Blue Book. Retrieved December 5, 2003 from http://members.aol.com/TPrinty/Bluebook.html Insufficient information is when one or more elements of infor- mation essential for evaluation are missing. UFOlogists complain that the insufficient information and identified categories were lumped together to improve their numbers. This is what happened but it seems for less than sinister reasons. Ruppelt just seemed more interested in weeding out the unidentified cases to study them than wasting effort over reports that could never be solved one way or the other. The lumping together with the identifieds became policy and, unfortu- nately, resulted in a somewhat skewed result when examining how many cases were actually unsolved. The United States Air Force saw the greatest number of UFO reports generated in 1952 than in any other year of the project. With such a vast number of reports, Ruppelt, with his small staff, had difficulty in resolving them. They received 1501 reports in 1952 according to USAF records. Of these, 303 were classified as unidentified. Considering the size of his staff, one would think that an 80% solution rate would be impressive but in reality not that many were solved. A significant number of the remaining 1198 were classified as insufficient information (roughly 20% of the total number). WWW Site #2: Brummett, W.E., Zuick, E.R. (1974, May). Should the USAF Reopen Project Blue Book? Retrieved December 5, 2003 from http://www.cufon.org/cufon/afrstdy1.htm This study evaluates factors related to the USAF investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects in an attempt to determine whether or not additional UFO investigation is warranted. The approach to analysis taken by this study was twofold: one writer evaluated evidence justifying the closure of Project Blue Book while the other writer evaluated evidence supporting its reopening. Based on the evidence uncovered, the study concludes that there is a definite need for a new UFO investigation. The study recommends that such an investigation should be a scientific undertaking free from bias, political pressure, and USAF or DoD (Dept. of Defense) jurisdiction. The official Air Force explanation regarding the Hills' UFO sighting turned out to be almost as erratic as the radar and visual sightings themselves. The official explanations in this particular case included "weather inversion", "the Planet Jupiter", "optical condition", and finally "insufficient data". This study recommends a new UFO study should be initiated under the guidance of a congressional sub-committee. No Defense Department agencies should be directly involved in the study. A national UFO organization should be created whose membership is comprised of scientists and astronomers with respected professional reputations and proven ability. Fascinating this apparent anti-USAF study was written by a Major and a Captain in the U.S. Air Force at Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama. WWW Site #3: Clemence, G.M., Crane, H.R., Dennison, D.M., Fenn, W.O., Hartline, H.K., Hilgard, E.R., Kac, M., Reichelderfer, F.W., Rubey, W.W., Shane, C.D., & Villard, O.G. (1969). Review of the University of Colorado report on unidentified flying objects by a panel of the National Academy of Sciences. Retrieved December 5, 2003 from http://www.project1947.com/shg/articles/nascu.html It was not the task of the Panel to conduct its own study of UFOs or to invite advocates, scientifically trained or not, of various points of view to hearings. The task was to study the University's Report and to assess: First, its scope; namely, did the Report, in the opinion of the Panel, cover those topics that a scientific study of UFO phenomena should have embraced? Second, its methodology; namely, did the Report, in the opinion of the Panel, reveal an acceptable scientific methodology and approach to the subject? Third, its findings; namely, were the conclusions and interpreta- tions warranted by the evidence and analyses as pre- sented in the Report and were they reasonable? Ten chapters are devoted to perceptual problems, processes of perception and reporting, psychological aspects of UFO reports, optics, radar, sonic boom, atmospheric electricity and plasma interpretations, balloons, instrumentation for UFO searches, and statistical analyses. (Twenty-four appendices add detailed technical background to the study). In our opinion the scope of the study was adequate to its purpose: a scientific study of UFO phenomena. Resource Type Selected: Article____Book____Magazine____ Other_X (Web Database) Source Citation: Hatch, L. (2003, December 3). *U* UFO Database. Retrieved December 5, 2003, from http://www.larryhatch.net/ Why was this source selected (importance or value/interest to you)? This web site is of interest because it offers maps and statistical analysis in a subject area that is rife with innuendo, skeptics, true believers, and a group of UFO hobbyists and researchers who are better labeled as the "UFO discommunity." Brief summary of source: The *U* UFO DATABASE is a serious 18 year effort to catalog, map, and perform statistical functions on a filtered set of UFO sightings throughout history. Having passed through several platforms, *U* is now a large stand-alone DOS application, written in C-language for PC, with data and other supporting files. As of December, 2003 *U* holds over 18,120 carefully filtered UFO events distilled from hundreds of books, major journals, catalogs, downloads and other sources. Scope is world-wide, for all dates from antiquity to the present. Junk "UFOs" (night-lights, fireballs, discovered hoaxes etc.) are systematically filtered out. Otherwise, *U* would bloat to several times its present size. Implications of this information for Behavioral Research Design, Tests, & Measurement: The implication is that anecdotal data is always suspect information. An observation by one "hostile" skeptic of UFO reports in general and alien abduction in particular is "the plural of anecdote is not data." However, the filtered database developed by Larry Hatch is the most reliable statistical review of UFO sightings. Presentation Strategy: To inform my peers of the need to question statistics and the agenda of the individual or organization presenting the data. Evaluation: on time____appropriate topic___substantive____ summary____oral____ Terry W. Colvin Ladphrao (Bangkok), Thailand Pran Buri (Hua Hin), Thailand http://terrycolvin.freewebsites.com/ [Terry's Fortean & "Work" itty-bitty site] Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ 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.
[ Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp