Friday 20 October 2023

UFO Report 2023

The US Office of the Director of National Intelligence has released their annual UAP report. Last year's and 2021's report caused a sensation, see: and: The report for 2023 has splashed down with barely a ripple. Even the UFOlogists who have covered it have done so with far more caution. This new report has sixteen pages instead of the previous nine... virtually an epic! The first two are just the cover and contents. The third page, called "page 2" because the title page is not included, is called "Executive Summary" and provides an introduction. AARO has received a total of 291 reports, including 17 that predate the current period, but were omitted from previous reports for reasons not stated. Page 3 is an overflow of page 2 consisting of only four lines; the rest of the page is blank. This seems a waste of space and if this wasn't an electronic document I'd say it was a waste of trees. Maybe that's standard procedure for ODNI paperwork, but it also serves to make the report look longer than it is. Pages four and five mostly repeat information either from previous documents or from the previous pages in this one. They announce that there is a "US bias" in the geography of reported encounters which is hardly news considering AARO and its partners are American outfits. Page 6 displays a pair of pie graphs breaking down the categories of reported encounters. There are a surprisingly large number of spherical objects when in previous civilian UFO literature this shape of object is quite rare (despite my own sighting of one, see: Only one percent were triangular and two percent disk-shaped, when these are some of the most common morphologies seen by the general public. This might not be just a simple census. It could be because AARO has access to sensor data unobtainable by civilians; or that the disks and triangles habitually fly at lower altitudes and/or in more populated areas where military sensors are less effective or not deployed and yet civilians are more likely to see them. 53% are "not reported". I'm not sure what this means, possibly that they are just lights and not structured craft. However, that doesn't fit with the other graph which states less than a quarter of anomalies show any lighting. Page 7 has a line graph of altitude distribution. The most common is the 20 to 25,000 foot level, below the cruising altitudes of commercial jets, but higher than most mountains. There is a little blip at the 60,000 foot line of just 1.4 % which probably is caused solely by "Objectgate", see:
In terms of geographic distribution, you can see clearly the aforementioned "US bias" and there is a major hotspot in the Persian Gulf, probably because that is where the US military is most active; however I was surprised to see another flap location in the region of Korea and the Yellow Sea. This might be because Japan and South Korea have a "special relationship" with the US intelligence network. On page 8 it is stated that there have been no examples of health problems connected to UAP phenomena. I don't deny this finding at all, but in the history of UFO close encounters the reality is very different. Witnesses such as John Burroughs, Betty Cash and Vickie Landrum all became seriously ill after their close encounters with UFO's. (Interestingly all three had their experiences on the same day, Boxing Day 1980.) Page 9 is just technical waffle and page 10 details some future strategies; this includes integrating the space domain, in other words bringing in the US Space Force. Page 11 has a single paragraph introducing the appendices, and pages 12 and 13 have an example of a "closed case". This doesn't give much identifying details except that it was in 2021 and the western United States which is a large area and a long period of time. It was resolved as almost certainly being commercial air traffic. Why take up an entire page in this meagre document to detail an explained case? This is an example of a strange habit of behaviour I have identified which I call "walking forward while looking over our shoulder". It is typified by Jenny Randles writing an entire book about solved cases, see: Why did she bother? The rest of the report is just a glossary of terms, which I'm sure most people already know. Source: So this 2023 UAP report deserves every bit of the indifference with which it has been received. It is a superficial, dull, evasive and middling publication that says very little about even less. I would prefer to hear more about the closed hearings and SCIF's currently being organized by Tim Burchett and his supporters. Will we ever be told anything about that?
See here for background:

No comments: