ufo-tv.com

In one sense, the answer may be as simple as “becausethey’re there.” Polls by both professional and lay organizations have shownthat approximately ten per cent of all North Americans believe they have seenUFOs. Given the population data available, this implies a very large number ofUFO reports. If UFOs are trivial and non-existent, as some claim, then onemight ask why such a large percentage of the population is labouring under thedelusion of seeing things that are “not there.” If, on the other hand, UFOsrepresent a “real” phenomenon, the data should be examined for insight into itsnature. In either situation, it can be argued that UFO reports deserve andmerit serious scientific attention.

Many individuals, associations, clubs and groups claim toinvestigate UFO reports. Many solicit reports from the general public.Comparatively few actually participate in any kind of information sharing ordata gathering for scientific programs. Some are primarily interest groupsbased in museums, planetariums, church basements or individuals’ homes, and doessentially nothing with the sighting reports they receive. Some groups, suchas the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) solicit reports and dispatch regionalinvestigators to interview witnesses about their experiences. 

In recent years, websites have been developed for thepublic to report UFO sightings, some claiming to be major UFO research groupsbut in reality do little more than publish witnesses’ accounts without thoroughinvestigation or even referring witnesses to investigators or researchers intheir area. While witnesses may be applauded for their courage in givingdetails of their UFO sighting to a webmaster, without proper investigationtheir report may be of relatively little use to serious UFO researchers. In fact, the vast majority of UFO reports posted on UFO-related websites are never actually investigated, and neither are most of the cases that are posted on Youtube or make it into mainstream media.

Because there is no way to enforce standards in UFOreport investigations, the quality of case investigations varies considerablybetween groups and across provinces. Quantitative studies are difficult becausesubjective evaluations and differences in investigative techniques do not allowprecise comparisons. UFOROM’s requests for data from Canadian UFO researchersand investigators, and our transcribing of information from others’ websites,unfortunately allow input of only basic information for analyses. 

Most Internet postings of UFO report information areincomplete and do not show any actual case investigation results, often forcingan evaluation of “Insufficient Information.” Case data which can be obtainedfrom such sites usually includes things such as date of the sighting, the time,duration, number of witnesses and their location—facts which are not subjectiveand can be used in scientific studies before interpretation.