*****
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
/
.................. \
=========================
+ +
++ ++
The 2007
CANADIAN UFO
SURVEY:
An Analysis of
UFO Reports
in
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Compiled by
Geoff Dittman
and
Chris A.
Rutkowski
Contributors:
Francois
Bourbeau, OVNI-Alerte
Errol
Bruce-Knapp, MUFON
Barb Campbell,
Sue Darroch,
Para-Researchers of
Peter
Davenport, NUFORC
George Filer,
Filer’s Files
John Hayes,
UFOINFO
Martin Jasek,
UFO*BC
Don Ledger
Dave Pengilly,
UFO*BC
Bill Puckett,
UFOSNW
Joe Trainor,
UFO Roundup
Brian Vike,
HBCCUFO
UFO Watch
Editor
Chris
Rutkowski, UFOROM
Data Entry, Compilation
and Analyses
Geoff Dittman,
UFOROM
Published by
Ufology
Research of
8 2008
The 2007 Canadian UFO Survey
Overview
Since 1989, UFOROM has been soliciting UFO case data from all known and
active investigators and researchers in
2007 marks the eighteenth year of collecting and analysing Canadian UFO
report data. UFOROM presently has UFO data from 1993 to the present available
online, and is working to add earlier national case data to the database.
The 2007 Canadian UFO Survey: Summary of Results
<
There were 836 UFO sightings reported in
<
<
In 2007, about 16 per cent of all UFO reports were
unexplained. This percentage of unknowns falls to less than one per cent when
only higher-quality cases are considered.
<
Most UFO sightings have two witnesses.
<
The typical UFO sighting lasted approximately 17
minutes in 2006.
The most important findings of this study include the fact that the yearly
number of reported UFO sightings in
People continue to report observing unusual objects in the sky, and some
of these objects do not have obvious explanations. Many witnesses are pilots,
police and other individuals with reasonably good observing capabilities and
good judgement. Although most reported UFOs are simply lights in the night sky,
a significant number are objects with definite shapes observed within the
witnesses’ frame of
reference.
Popular opinion to the contrary, there is yet to be any incontrovertible
evidence that some UFO cases involve extraterrestrial contact. The continued
reporting of UFOs by the public and the yearly increase in numbers of UFO
reports suggests a need for further examination of the phenomenon by social,
medical and/or physical scientists.
For further
information, contact:
Ufology Research of
e-mail: canadianuforeport@hotmail.com
Raison
D’etre
Why bother to collect UFO reports?
In one sense, the answer may be as simple as “because
they’re there.” Polls by both professional and lay
organizations have shown that approximately ten per cent of all North Americans
believe they have seen UFOs. Given the population data available, this implies
a very large number of UFO reports. If UFOs are trivial and non-existent, as
some claim, then one might ask why such a large percentage of the population is
labouring under the delusion of seeing things that are “not there.” If, on the other hand, UFOs represent a “real”
phenomenon, the data should be examined for insight into its nature. In either
situation, it can be argued that UFO reports deserve and merit serious
scientific attention.
In general, the
public equates UFOs with alien visitation. However, there is no
incontrovertible proof that this is a real connection. In order to determine if
there might be signs of extraterrestrial contact, research on the actual
characteristics of UFO reports is needed. Do the reports really bear out such a
linkage? What, exactly, are people seeing and reporting as UFOs? Are they
seeing “classic” Hollywood-style flying saucers, like
those portrayed in movies and television shows? Are there really
well-documented and well-witnessed UFO reports, with no explanation as to their
nature? Given the general public perception that aliens exist and are present
in our Solar System, and that the answers to these questions may already exist
in the beliefs and desires of popular culture, a thorough examination of actual
UFO reports would go far to provide necessary insight into the phenomenon.
What is generally
overlooked by most writers and readers on this subject is that UFO reports are
the foundation of ufology (the study of the UFO phenomenon). While this may
seem an obvious fact, many books on UFOs and related subjects proceed on the
basis of assumptions, theories and individual anecdotal accounts. Many books
about UFO abductions on bookstore shelves give the impression that this aspect
of the UFO phenomenon constitutes most of ufology. This is certainly not the
case; UFO research begins with the investigation of UFO reports. It is through
later collection and study that researchers can theorise about the phenomenon
and eventually write papers and books speculating about UFO origins (including
the possible evidence of alien contact.) Abduction cases actually comprise a
very tiny fraction of the bulk of UFO data. The bread and butter of UFO
research lies not in fanciful discourses about aliens’ genetic manipulation of humans but in
what UFO witnesses are actually seeing and reporting.
This last point
cannot be overemphasized. The UFO reports collected and analysed in our annual
Surveys are the only data upon which studies of Canadian UFOs can be reasonably
based. As UFOs are a worldwide phenomenon, the results of analyses of Canadian
UFO reports can easily be applied to cases in other countries. In effect, this
is the empirical data for research in this field. If one wants to know what people
really are seeing in the skies, the answer lies within these reports.
The
General Collection of UFO Data
Many individuals,
associations, clubs and groups claim to investigate UFO reports. Many solicit
reports from the general public. Comparatively few actually participate in any
kind of information sharing or data gathering for scientific programs. Some are
primarily interest groups based in museums, planetariums, church basements or
individuals’ homes, and do essentially
nothing with the sighting reports
they receive. (It should be noted that some of these groups do actively
participate in data collection and research projects, several of which are
noted in the list of contributors at the beginning of this document.) And, in
recent years, several websites have been developed for the public to report UFO
sightings.
Because there is no
way to enforce standards in UFO report investigations, the quality of case
investigations varies considerably between groups and across provinces.
Quantitative studies are difficult because subjective evaluations and
differences in investigative techniques do not allow precise comparisons.
UFOROM’s requests for data
from Canadian UFO researchers and investigators, and our transcribing of
information from others’ websites,
unfortunately allows input of only basic information that can be used in
rigourous analyses. Most Internet postings of UFO report information are
incomplete and do not show any actual case investigation results, often forcing
an evaluation of Insufficient Information. Case data which can be obtained
usually includes things such as date of the sighting, the time, duration,
number of witnesses and their location; facts which are not subjective and can
be used in scientific studies before interpretation.
The
Official Collection of UFO Data
Until 1995, the
National Research Council of Canada (NRC) routinely collected UFO reports from
private citizens, RCMP, civic police and military personnel. This collection of
data was in support of the NRC’s interest in the
retrieval of meteorites, with the idea that witnesses’ reports of bright lights in the sky
were mostly fireballs and meteors which could then be triangulated to locate
fallen meteorites.
This practice ceased
as a result of budgetary restrictions, lowered prioritization of meteoric
research and the perceived reduction in importance of UFO data. However,
included among the NRC reports were many observations of meteors and fireballs,
and these have been added into the UFOROM database since 1989. For several
years, the collection of such reports was in an effective hiatus, but in 2000,
an arrangement facilitated that UFO sightings reported to Transport Canada
could then be referred to UFOROM for research into the phenomenon. This does
not mean that UFOROM receives all official government or military UFO reports.
UFO sightings reported to the RCMP, for example, will normally get sent only to
RCMP Divisional Headquarters.
Another reason why
UFO data should be collected and studied is found in official directives of the
Department of National Defence regarding the actions of all pilots in Canadian
airspace. In documents relating to CIRVIS (Communications Instructions for
Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings), both civilians and military personnel
are instructed that:
CIRVIS
reports should be made immediately upon a vital intelligence sighting of any
airborne, waterborne and ground objects or activities which appear to be
hostile, suspicious, unidentified or engaged in illegal smuggling activity.
Examples
of events requiring CIRVIS reports are:
-
unidentified flying objects;
-
submarines or warships which are not Canadian or American;
-
violent explosions; and
-
unexplained or unusual activity in Polar regions, abandoned airstrips or other
remote, sparsely populated areas.
[DND Flight
Information Publication - GPH 204. Flight Planning and Procedures, Canada and
North Atlantic, Issue No. 57, Effective 0901Z 20 May 1999]
In other words, it is
considered in the best interests of everyone to report UFO sightings, and
certainly of interest to the Department of National Defence. The annual
Canadian UFO Survey looks critically at UFO sightings and assesses their
nature.
For the purposes of
this and other scientific studies of UFO data, UFO sightings which have been
made to recognized contributing and participating groups, associations,
organizations or individuals are considered officially
reported and valid as data in this study. The collection of Canadian UFO data
is challenging. However, the data obtained for analysis yields results that can
be compared with other studies. This is useful in understanding the nature of
UFO reports not only in Canada, but can shed light on the nature of UFO reports
elsewhere in the world.
UFO
Reports in
The following table
shows the number of reported UFOs per year since 1989.
|
Year |
Number |
Average |
|
1989 |
141 |
141.0 |
|
1990 |
194 |
167.5 |
|
1991 |
165 |
166.7 |
|
1992 |
223 |
180.8 |
|
1993 |
489 |
242.4 |
|
1994 |
189 |
233.5 |
|
1995 |
183 |
226.3 |
|
1996 |
258 |
230.3 |
|
1997 |
284 |
236.2 |
|
1998 |
194 |
232.0 |
|
1999 |
259 |
234.5 |
|
2000 |
263 |
236.8 |
|
2001 |
374 |
247.4 |
|
2002 |
483 |
264.2 |
|
2003 |
673 |
291.5 |
|
2004 |
882 |
328.4 |
|
2005 |
769 |
354.3 |
|
2006 |
738 |
375.8 |
|
2007 |
836 |
399.8 |
|
Total |
7597 |
|
The number of UFO reports per year has varied annually, depending on a
number of factors. However, yearly totals generally increased to a peak in 2004
and have remained at a plateau. The average number of UFO reports in Canada per
year has been increasing since 1998. This clearly contradicts comments by those
who would assert that UFOs are a passing fad or that the number of UFO
sightings is decreasing.
UFOs and IFOs
For this study, the working definition of a UFO is an object seen in the sky which its observer cannot identify.
Studies of UFO data routinely include reports of meteors, fireballs and
other conventional objects. In many instances, observers fail to recognize
stars, aircraft and bolides, and therefore report them as UFOs. Witnesses often
report watching stationary flashing lights low on the horizon for hours and
never conclude they are observing a star or planet.
Some UFO investigators spend many hours sorting IFOs from UFOs.
Historically, analyses of UFO data such as the American projects Grudge, Sign
and Blue Book all included raw UFO data which later were resolved into
categories of UFOs and IFOs. Sometimes, observed objects are quickly assigned a
particular IFO explanation even though later investigation suggests such an
explanation was unwarranted. The reverse is also true.
The issue of including IFOs in studies of UFO data is an important one.
One could argue that once a sighting is explained, it has no reason to be
considered as a UFO report. However, this overlooks the fact that the IFO was
originally reported as a UFO and is indeed valid data. It may not be evidence
of extraterrestrial visitation, but as UFO data, it is quite useful. It must be
remembered that all major previous studies of UFOs examined UFO reports with
the intent to explain a certain percentage of cases. IFOs are definitely part
of the UFO report legacy.
IFOs are problematic in that they are not interesting to most
ufologists. In fact, some UFO investigators readily admit they do not record
details about UFO reports that seem easily explained as ordinary objects. This
may be a serious error. The UFO witness may be conscientiously reporting an
object that is mysterious to him or her:
the exact definition of a UFO. Therefore, even late-night, anonymous
telephone calls that are obviously reports of airplanes or planets should be
rightly logged as UFO reports. It seems reasonable that all UFO reports be
included in statistical databases and in later studies on the phenomenon,
regardless of the cases’ later
reclassification as IFOs.
Since 1989, UFOROM has been including astronomers’ reports of fireballs in the annual data analyses. This has been a
matter of some debate within ufology, as fireballs, by definition, are IFOs and
not UFOs. Furthermore, if reported by astronomers, they are considered to have
definitive explanations. Including these reports as UFO data is consistent with
the inclusion of such cases in Blue Book statistics, which had many fireballs
added as UFO data, even though the reports were sometimes made by astronomers
themselves.
The advantage of including astronomer-reported fireballs as UFO data is
that fireballs reported by the lay public are labelled UFOs, and this can allow
comparison between data from both groups. Often, astronomers detect and report
fireballs the same date and time as those reported as UFOs by the public, and
can greatly assist in converting some UFOs to IFOs quickly. However, many
obvious fireballs are reported by civilians without astronomers’ own observations. In addition, some fireballs reported as IFOs by astronomers
have been investigated and found not to have explanations as fireballs at all.
This confusion and inconsistency has encouraged the continued input of fireball
IFO data as UFO data.
Since most UFO reports can be explained and reclassified as IFOs, this
fact attests to the reality of the objects seen. UFO reports actually reflect real events which occur. When a UFO is
reported, a real object has been seen
that was not just a fantasy of a witness’ imagination.
Method
Data for each case was received by UFOROM from participating researchers
across Canada. In addition, existing databases, web pages and other online
sources of UFO sighting information were searched for Canadian reports that
occurred in 2007. The information then was coded by members of UFOROM and
entered into a Microsoft Excel database and statistically analysed.
An example of the coding key is as follows:
Example:
2007 01 09 1530 Vernon BC DD 900
silver 2 ps
6 5 UFOBC
p four objs. seen
Field: 1
2 3
4 5 6
7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14
15 16
Field 1 is a default YEAR for the report.
Field 2 is the MONTH of the incident.
Field 3 is the DATE of the sighting.
Field 4 is the local TIME, on the 24-hour clock.
Field 5 is the geographical LOCATION of the incident.
Field 6 is the PROVINCE where the sighting occurred.
Field 7 is the TYPE of report, using the Modified Hynek Classification
System.
Field 8 is the DURATION of the sighting, in seconds (a value of 600 thus
represents 10 minutes).
Field 9 is the primary COLOUR of the object(s) seen
Field 10 is the number of WITNESSES
Field 11 is the SHAPE of the object(s) seen
Field 12 is the STRANGENESS of the report.
Field 13 is the RELIABILITY of the report.
Field 14 is the SOURCE of the report.
Field 15 is the EVALUATION of the case.
Field 16 includes any COMMENTS noted about the case.
Analyses of the Data
Distribution of
UFO Reports Across
In 2007, Ontario had more than 39 per cent of the total number of UFO
sightings reported in Canada, up from only 25 per cent in 2006. British
Columbia, which boasted twice as many reports as Ontario in previous years, was
down to only 23 per cent of the total in 2007. This past year, the numbers of
UFO reports in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Quebec were the highest
ever recorded.
TABLE 1
Distribution of UFO Reports by Province
|
|
NT |
NU |
YT |
BC |
AB |
SK |
MB |
ON |
PQ |
NB |
NS |
PI |
NF |
|
1989 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
15 |
16 |
18 |
22 |
34 |
28 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
|
1990 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
76 |
9 |
10 |
20 |
21 |
36 |
7 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
|
1991 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
59 |
22 |
7 |
6 |
30 |
16 |
9 |
7 |
1 |
4 |
|
1992 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
90 |
8 |
9 |
23 |
56 |
10 |
9 |
3 |
0 |
4 |
|
1993 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
157 |
56 |
93 |
74 |
51 |
32 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
7 |
|
1994 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
14 |
39 |
8 |
10 |
51 |
34 |
6 |
9 |
0 |
6 |
|
1995 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
45 |
10 |
11 |
48 |
41 |
20 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
1996 |
35 |
0 |
0 |
43 |
10 |
11 |
39 |
63 |
45 |
1 |
9 |
0 |
1 |
|
1997 |
22 |
0 |
8 |
99 |
11 |
5 |
32 |
72 |
24 |
1 |
6 |
1 |
3 |
|
1998 |
2 |
0 |
22 |
58 |
6 |
14 |
15 |
59 |
15 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1999 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
118 |
19 |
1 |
6 |
79 |
8 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
6 |
|
2000 |
0 |
0 |
26 |
102 |
17 |
8 |
19 |
53 |
22 |
0 |
15 |
0 |
0 |
|
2001 |
1 |
5 |
18 |
123 |
40 |
12 |
20 |
87 |
34 |
5 |
21 |
2 |
6 |
|
2002 |
0 |
2 |
20 |
176 |
51 |
6 |
36 |
128 |
34 |
4 |
23 |
0 |
3 |
|
2003 |
2 |
1 |
16 |
304 |
76 |
19 |
25 |
150 |
49 |
4 |
21 |
2 |
4 |
|
2004 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
247 |
99 |
45 |
112 |
254 |
64 |
21 |
23 |
2 |
9 |
|
2005 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
209 |
90 |
77 |
43 |
214 |
77 |
15 |
16 |
4 |
12 |
|
2006 |
2 |
8 |
1 |
209 |
55 |
98 |
54 |
188 |
76 |
12 |
25 |
1 |
5 |
|
2007 |
6 |
0 |
7 |
192 |
66 |
36 |
44 |
329 |
93 |
24 |
31 |
2 |
6 |
|
|
NT |
NU |
YT |
BC |
AB |
SK |
MB |
ON |
PQ |
NB |
NS |
PI |
NF |
|
|
90 |
17 |
151 |
2336 |
700 |
488 |
648 |
1960 |
717 |
124 |
223 |
21 |
84 |
In addition, the geographical names of UFO sighting locations were
examined for trends. Many cities were found to have multiple reports, and these
are noted in the following table. Large metropolitan areas include their
suburbs.
Canadian Cities
With Most UFO Reports in 2007
|
Rank |
City |
|
Province |
Number of Reports |
|
1 |
Toronto |
|
ON |
34 |
|
2 |
Calgary |
|
AB |
26 |
|
3 |
Kelowna |
|
BC |
19 |
|
4 |
Winnipeg |
|
MB |
18 |
|
5 |
Vancouver |
|
BC |
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metropolitan
Areas |
|
|
|
|
|
Vancouver |
(Incl.New Westminister, W. Van., N. Van., Burnaby, Surrey, Abbottsford, Port Coquitlam, Langley, N.Surrey, N.Langley, Richmond, Delta, N. Delta, Coquitlam, Port Moody) |
|
|
44 |
|
Toronto |
(Incl. Mississauga, Brampton, Scarborough, Oshawa, Whitby, Ajax, Pickering, Etobicoke, Newmarket, Richmond Hill, Markham, Oakville) |
|
|
107 |
Monthly Trends
in UFO Reports
Monthly breakdowns of reports during each year tend to show slightly
different patterns. For example, in 1999, UFO cases had no clear peaks in
monthly report numbers, but the year 2003 saw a very significant set of peaks
in July and August and troughs in May and June. UFO reports are generally
thought to peak in summer and trough in winter, presumably due to the more
pleasant observing conditions during the summer months, when more witnesses are
outside. In Canada in 2007, though, the summer peak was not strongly evident.
There was also a notable peak in March and April as well, much of it due to
major fireball observations.
|
|
J |
F |
M |
A |
M |
J |
J |
A |
S |
O |
N |
D |
|
1989 |
13 |
9 |
6 |
9 |
5 |
9 |
5 |
5 |
12 |
32 |
27 |
9 |
|
1990 |
17 |
7 |
6 |
47 |
10 |
10 |
9 |
47 |
15 |
16 |
10 |
0 |
|
1991 |
13 |
7 |
17 |
12 |
7 |
12 |
16 |
25 |
16 |
12 |
11 |
17 |
|
1992 |
15 |
16 |
27 |
16 |
22 |
16 |
23 |
19 |
11 |
16 |
21 |
21 |
|
1993 |
59 |
15 |
20 |
22 |
14 |
38 |
27 |
49 |
41 |
152 |
24 |
21 |
|
1994 |
16 |
12 |
15 |
21 |
15 |
37 |
19 |
8 |
15 |
10 |
7 |
13 |
|
1995 |
14 |
12 |
13 |
9 |
9 |
10 |
28 |
33 |
28 |
11 |
11 |
5 |
|
1996 |
37 |
18 |
20 |
16 |
8 |
20 |
30 |
32 |
10 |
22 |
30 |
11 |
|
1997 |
19 |
11 |
31 |
29 |
17 |
13 |
29 |
29 |
22 |
16 |
26 |
37 |
|
1998 |
3 |
4 |
8 |
5 |
9 |
13 |
16 |
40 |
45 |
35 |
7 |
4 |
|
1999 |
8 |
20 |
22 |
7 |
31 |
10 |
27 |
36 |
30 |
29 |
30 |
7 |
|
2000 |
21 |
17 |
15 |
21 |
12 |
11 |
19 |
46 |
20 |
44 |
15 |
19 |
|
2001 |
36 |
19 |
33 |
25 |
17 |
26 |
51 |
81 |
25 |
17 |
27 |
16 |
|
2002 |
31 |
54 |
41 |
28 |
36 |
44 |
73 |
74 |
42 |
26 |
19 |
14 |
|
2003 |
41 |
46 |
46 |
46 |
31 |
30 |
131 |
102 |
46 |
64 |
43 |
47 |
|
2004 |
59 |
53 |
72 |
68 |
82 |
97 |
96 |
113 |
83 |
46 |
56 |
53 |
|
2005 |
36 |
59 |
81 |
59 |
45 |
50 |
96 |
123 |
70 |
56 |
47 |
45 |
|
2006 |
33 |
43 |
41 |
66 |
65 |
108 |
113 |
113 |
61 |
36 |
20 |
29 |
|
2007 |
45 |
35 |
95 |
76 |
56 |
90 |
80 |
105 |
94 |
64 |
50 |
41 |
|
|
J |
F |
M |
A |
M |
J |
J |
A |
S |
O |
N |
D |
|
Totals |
516 |
457 |
609 |
582 |
491 |
644 |
888 |
1080 |
686 |
704 |
481 |
409 |
UFO Report
Types
An analysis by report type shows a similar breakdown to that found in
previous years. The percentage of cases of a particular type remains roughly
constant from year to year, with some variations. Nocturnal Lights (NLs)
comprised more than 68 per cent of all cases in 2006 but only about 49 per cent
in 2007. Some of this decrease was taken up by more daytime observations;
Daylight Disc reports made up only 11 per cent in 2006 but about 18 per cent in
2007.
Less than 3 per cent
of all reported UFO cases in 2007 were Close Encounters, emphasizing the
reality that very, very few UFO cases involve anything other than
distant objects seen in the sky. This is an important statistic, because the
current popular interest in abductions and sensational UFO encounters is based
not on the vast majority of UFO cases but on the very tiny fraction of cases
which fall into the category of close encounters. The endless speculation of
what aliens may or may not be doing in our airspace seems almost completely
unconnected to what are actually being reported as UFOs.
TABLE 3
Report Types
(Modified Hynek Classifications)
|
|
NL |
ND |
DD |
C1 |
C2 |
C3 |
C4 |
EV |
RD |
PH |
|
1989 |
84 |
20 |
16 |
10 |
7 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
1990 |
141 |
24 |
15 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
4 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
|
1991 |
110 |
26 |
13 |
7 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
1992 |
136 |
44 |
20 |
15 |
5 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
1993 |
372 |
77 |
26 |
8 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
1994/95 |
234 |
78 |
28 |
21 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
1996 |
170 |
40 |
27 |
8 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
1997 |
145 |
62 |
52 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
8 |
4 |
0 |
1 |
|
1998 |
115 |
23 |
25 |
6 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
19 |
0 |
3 |
|
1999 |
163 |
44 |
37 |
3 |
7 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
2000 |
179 |
31 |
26 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
2001 |
218 |
80 |
55 |
8 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
2002 |
293 |
94 |
76 |
8 |
5 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
2003 |
431 |
152 |
74 |
5 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
2004 |
520 |
203 |
136 |
7 |
6 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
2005 |
424 |
169 |
149 |
9 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
2006 |
508 |
65 |
85 |
12 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
21 |
|
2007 |
413 |
244 |
153 |
12 |
7 |
4 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
* |
|
|
NL |
ND |
DD |
C1 |
C2 |
C3 |
C4 |
EV |
RD |
PH |
|
Totals |
4656 |
1476 |
1013 |
149 |
58 |
32 |
38 |
32 |
1 |
36 |
For those unfamiliar with the classifications, a summary follows:
NL (Nocturnal
Light) - light source in night sky
ND (Nocturnal
Disc) - light source in night sky that appears to have a definite shape
DD (Daylight
Disc) - unknown object observed during daytime hours
C1 (Close
Encounter of the First Kind) - ND or DD occurring within 200 metres of a
witness
C2 (Close
Encounter of the Second Kind) - C1 where physical effects left or noted
C3 (Close
Encounter of the Third Kind) - C1 where figures/entities are encountered
C4 (Close
Encounter of the Fourth Kind) - an alleged "abduction" or
"contact" experience
Note: The category of Nocturnal
Disc was created in the 1980s by UFOROM originally for differentiation of
cases within its own report files, and has been adopted by many other groups
worldwide.
Hourly
Distribution
The hourly distribution of cases has usually followed a similar pattern
every year, with a peak around 2300 hours local and a trough around 0900 hours
local. Since most UFOs are nocturnal lights, most sightings will occur during
the evening hours. Since the number of possible observers drops off sharply
near midnight, we would expect the hourly rate of UFO reports would vary with
two factors: potential observers and darkness.
|
Time |
Number |
|
12:00-12:59 |
5 |
|
13:00-13:59 |
10 |
|
14:00-14:59 |
15 |
|
15:00-15:59 |
16 |
|
16:00-16:59 |
23 |
|
17:00-17:59 |
21 |
|
18:00-18:59 |
29 |
|
19:00-19:59 |
44 |
|
20:00-20:59 |
58 |
|
21:00-21:59 |
102 |
|
22:00-22:59 |
119 |
|
23:00-23:59 |
92 |
|
00:00-00:59 |
37 |
|
01:00-01:59 |
40 |
|
02:00-02:59 |
29 |
|
03:00-03:59 |
27 |
|
04:00-04:59 |
21 |
|
05:00-05:59 |
16 |
|
06:00-06:59 |
10 |
|
07:00-07:59 |
5 |
|
08:00-08:59 |
3 |
|
09:00-09:59 |
1 |
|
10:00-10:59 |
6 |
|
11:00-11:59 |
10 |
Duration
The category of Duration is
interesting in that it represents the subjective
length of time the UFO experience lasted. In other words, this is the length of
time the sighting lasted as estimated by
the witness. Naturally, these times are greatly suspect because it is known
that people tend to badly misjudge the flow of time. However, some people can be good at estimating
time, so this value has some importance. Although an estimate of "one
hour" may be in error by several minutes, it is unlikely that the true
duration would be, for example, one minute.
Furthermore, there have been cases when a UFO was observed and clocked very
accurately, so that we can be reasonably certain that UFO events can last
considerable periods of time.
The average duration of UFO sightings in Canada in 2007 was found to be
about 17 minutes. This is a significant length of time, and suggests some
simple explanations. Previous analyses have shown that long-duration sightings
tend to occur in the early morning hours, from about midnight until 6:00 a.m.
It is probable that the majority of these observations are of astronomical
objects, moving slowly with Earth’s rotation.
The duration of a sighting is one of the biggest clues to its
explanation. Experience in studying UFO reports has shown us that short
duration events are usually fireballs or bolides, and long duration events of
an hour or more are very probably astronomical objects. In between, there can
be no way to distinguish conventional objects from UFOs solely with Duration data. One study by an Ontario
UFO group which timed aircraft observations found that the duration of such
sightings varied between 15 seconds to more than eight minutes. Therefore,
sightings with durations in this range could very well be aircraft, providing
other observational data do not contradict such an explanation.
|
Average = 1002 sec. |
|
|
|
|
|
Duration (in seconds) |
Number |
|
1 to 5 |
95 |
|
6 to 10 |
45 |
|
11 to 20 |
29 |
|
21 to 60 |
20 |
|
61 to 120 |
67 |
|
121 to 180 |
32 |
|
181 to 300 |
41 |
|
301 to 600 |
38 |
|
601 to 1800 |
41 |
|
1801 to 3600 |
31 |
|
> 3600 |
31 |
Colour
In cases where a colour of an object was reported by witnesses, the most
common colour in 2007 was “white.” The next most common “colour” was “multicoloured.” This is changed from 2006, when the order was reversed. Next in order
were orange, red and green. Since most UFOs are nocturnal starlike objects, the
abundance of white objects is not surprising. Colours such as red, orange, blue
and green often are associated with bolides (fireballs). The “multicoloured” designation is
problematic in that it literally covers a wide range of possibilities. Some
studies of UFO data have partitioned the category of Colour to include both “primary” and “secondary” colours in cases
where the observed UFO had more than one colour. The multicoloured label has
been used, for example, when witnesses described their UFOs as having white,
red and green lights. (Many of these are certainly stars or planets, which
flash a variety of colours when seen low on the horizon. Aircraft also
frequently are described as having more than one colour of light.) For our
study, the Colour classification
refers only to the primary colour in the witness’ description.
|
ALL SIGHTINGS |
|
|
COLOUR OF NOCTURNAL LIGHTS |
|
|
Colour |
Number |
|
Colour |
Number |
|
Black |
26 |
|
Black |
0 |
|
Blue |
32 |
|
Blue |
18 |
|
|
|
|
Gold |
2 |
|
Gold |
5 |
|
Green |
15 |
|
Green |
39 |
|
Grey |
0 |
|
Grey |
19 |
|
Multi-coloured |
74 |
|
Multi-coloured |
101 |
|
Orange |
30 |
|
Orange |
63 |
|
Pink |
0 |
|
Pink |
1 |
|
Purple |
1 |
|
Purple |
1 |
|
Red |
28 |
|
Red |
47 |
|
Silver |
0 |
|
Silver |
35 |
|
White |
86 |
|
White |
178 |
|
Yellow |
14 |
|
Yellow |
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COLOUR OF |
|
|
COLOUR OF FIREBALLS |
|
|
POINT SOURCE LIGHTS |
|
|
Colour |
Number |
|
Colour |
Number |
|
Blue |
3 |
|
Black |
1 |
|
Gold |
0 |
|
Blue |
12 |
|
Green |
13 |
|
Green |
3 |
|
Muliti |
0 |
|
Grey |
0 |
|
Orange |
2 |
|
Multi-coloured |
72 |
|
Pink |
0 |
|
Orange |
26 |
|
Red |
2 |
|
Pink |
0 |
|
Silver |
0 |
|
Red |
24 |
|
White |
6 |
|