*****

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

/ .................. \

=========================

+ +

++ ++

The 2004

CANADIAN UFO SURVEY:

An Analysis of UFO Reports

in Canada

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Compiled by

Geoff Dittman

and

Chris A. Rutkowski

Errol Bruce-Knapp, MUFON Ontario and UFO Updates

Ken Burgess, AUFOSG

Barb Campbell, NWSUFOC

Sue Darroch, Para-Researchers of Ontario

Peter Davenport, NUFORC

Stanton Friedman, Fredericton, New Brunswick

Anita Goodrich, Hauntings Research Group (Ontario)

Hans Grasholm, UFO*BC (Yukon)

Martin Jasek, UFO*BC (Vancouver)

Stephanie Lechniak, Haunted Hamilton

Don Ledger, UFO Nova Scotia

Ken McCracken, Quebec-UFO-Abductions

Joe Trainor, UFO Roundup

Elliott Van Dusen, Paranormal Phenomena Research & Investigation

Brian Vike, HBCCUFO

Scott Young, Manitoba Planetarium

Editor

Chris Rutkowski, UFOROM

Data Entry, Compilation and Analyses

Geoff Dittman, UFOROM

Published by

Ufology Research of Manitoba

Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Since 1989, UFOROM has been soliciting UFO case data from all known and active investigators and researchers in Canada. Our goal has been to provide data for use by researchers as they try to understand this controversial phenomenon. No comparable studies are currently produced by any other research group in North America. The only known similar program is one in Sweden, where UFO report data is analysed by the Archives for UFO Research. They have lists of Swedish UFO sightings from 1997 to the present online. 2004 thus marks our sixteenth 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.

• There were about 31 per cent more UFO reports in 2004 than 2003. The number of UFO reports filed per year in Canada has been increasing steadily since 1998.
• Records show that more than 5,000 UFO sightings have been officially reported in Canada since 1989.
• Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Quebec all had all-time record high numbers of UFOs reported in 2004.

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.

Ufology Research of Manitoba,

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.

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:

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 (for a list of contributors see page 2 of this report) 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.

The following table shows the numbers of reported UFOs per year since 1989.

Still, we must recognize that yearly figures are greatly dependent on many factors, especially the cooperation of contributors to the annual survey. The large number of UFO reports in 1993 was almost entirely due to a single major fireball event which spawned reports by hundreds of independent observers across the country. Similarly, the dramatic increase in UFO reports for 2003 is partly due to a single major event on July 28, 2003, in the Okanagan Valley, in which literally hundreds of people observed and reported seeing a band of white light arching across the sky. This spectacular sight was certainly not a fireball but may still eventually have a conventional explanation. There is no question that something was seen, due to the large number of witnesses reporting it over a very wide area. Nevertheless, the 2004 data represents the largest number of UFO reports ever recorded in a single year in the 15-year history of the annual Canadian UFO Survey.

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 IFO question became more significant in 2004 as many more fireball and meteor reports than usual were added as data from astronomical sources. Brilliant fireballs have always been included within UFO data, especially the American military studies, and have been included in the UFOROM annual studies as a matter of course and to allow better comparisons with historical studies. As fireball reporting networks become more efficient, however, the number of IFOs in the UFO database increases dramatically. Many fireballs are reported as UFOs and are thus justifiably included in the UFO database. Others that are reported as fireballs and bolides might not be considered appropriate for inclusion, and this problem should be addressed in later analyses.

In 2004, 58 sightings of fireballs reported to the Meteorites and Impacts Advisory Committee (MIAC) to the Canadian Space Agency were included as data in the UFO survey. Although the sample size is small, the data seem to indicate that there are differences between MIAC and non-MIAC reports. There are many instances when MIAC recorded fireballs which were not reported to UFO investigators, and many obvious fireballs which were reported as UFOs to UFO investigators but were are not listed by MIAC.

Data for each case was received by UFOROM from participating researchers across Canada. 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: 2004 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

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.

These wildly varying monthly report levels from year to year suggests that the number of UFO sighting reports is not directly related to climate. Whatever stimulus causes UFOs to be reported, it is not linked to warmer weather and the increase in potential witnesses in the outdoors.

For those unfamiliar with the classifications, a summary follows:

Note: The category of Nocturnal Disc was created in the 1980s by UFOROM originally for differentiation of cases within its own report files.

The hourly distribution of cases has usually followed a similar pattern every year, with a peak at 2200 or 2300 hours local and a trough around 1000 hours local. Since most UFOs are nocturnal lights, most sightings will occur during the evening hours. And, 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.

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 a sighting can be calculated as the sum of all given durations divided by the number of cases with a stated duration. This value has varied somewhat, from seven minutes in 1994 to 25 minutes in 1996. In 2004, the average duration of all cases was 1158 seconds, or almost 20 minutes, twice as long as 2003's value of 613 seconds, or about 10 minutes. This increase may be due to more sightings which might be explainable as misidentifications of stars and other long-visible objects. In fact these analyses of case data suggests that any UFO sighting which lasts an hour or more, especially that of a Nocturnal Light, is very likely a misidentified star or planet. Short duration events are usually fireballs or bolides, although 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.

The average number of witnesses per case between 1989 and 2004 is approximately 2.00. This value has fluctuated between a high of 3.1 in 1996 to as low as 1.4 in 1990. In 2003, the average number of witnesses per case was 2.04, but in 2004, this value dropped to only 1.67.

This indicates that the typical UFO experience has more than one witness, and supports the contention that UFO sightings represent observations of real, physical phenomena, since there is usually a corroborator present to support the sighting.

The assigning of a Strangeness rating to a UFO report is based on a classification adopted by researchers who noted that the inclusion of a subjective evaluation of the degree to which a particular case is in itself unusual might yield some insight into the data. For example, the observation of a single, stationary, starlike light in the sky, seen for several hours, is not particularly unusual and might likely have a prosaic explanation such as that of a star or planet. On the other hand, a detailed observation of a saucer-shaped object which glides slowly away from a witness after an encounter with grey-skinned aliens would be considered highly strange.

The numbers of UFO reports according to strangeness rating show an inverse relationship such that the higher the strangeness rating, the fewer reports. The one exception to this relationship occurs in the case of very low strangeness cases, which are relatively few in number compared to those of moderate strangeness. It is suggested this is the case because in order for an observation to be considered a UFO, it must usually rise above an ad hoc level of strangeness, otherwise it would not be considered strange at all.

The average strangeness rating for UFO reports during 2004 was 3.7, close to the 2004 value. The rating system adopts one as a case that is considered not really strange at all and nine is considered exceptionally unusual. Therefore, most UFOs reported are of objects which do not greatly stretch the imagination, and Hollywood-style flying saucers are, in reality, relatively uncommon in UFO reports.

The average Reliability rating of Canadian UFO reports in 2004 was 5.33, similar to 2003, indicating that there were approximately the same number of higher quality cases as those of low quality. Low reliability was assigned to reports with minimal information on the witness, little or no investigation and incomplete data or description of the object(s) observed. Higher reliability cases might include actual interviews with witnesses, a detailed case investigation, multiple witnesses, supporting documentation and other evidence.

UFO data used in this study were supplied by many different groups, organizations, official agencies and private individuals. Since this annual survey began in the late 1980s, more and more cases have been obtained and received via the Internet.

In 2004, about 28.5 per cent of the total cases were obtained through the private and non-profit National UFO Reporting Center (NUFORC) in the USA, which has an international toll-free telephone number for reporting UFOs and a large sightings list created through voluntary submission of online report forms by witnesses. This civilian, public UFO data reporting system allows witnesses to easily and anonymously report their sightings on the Internet or by phone. Since most Internet search engines will quickly find NUFORC as a place to report a UFO sighting, it is not surprising that such a large percentage of Canadian cases come from the NUFORC database.

The breakdown by Evaluation or Conclusion for 2004 cases was similar to results from previous years. There were four operative categories: Explained, Insufficient Information, Possible or Probable Explanation, and Unknown (or Unexplained). It is important to note that a classification of Unknown does not imply that an alien spacecraft or mysterious natural phenomenon was observed; no such interpretation can be made with certainty, based solely on the given data (though the probability of this scenario is technically never zero).

In most cases, an Evaluation is made subjectively by both the contributing investigators and the compilers of this study. The category of Unknown is adopted if the contributed data or case report contains enough information such that a conventional explanation cannot be satisfactorily proposed. This does not mean that the case will never be explained, but only that a viable explanation is not immediately obvious. Cases are also re-evaluated periodically as additional data or information is brought to attention or obtained through further investigation.

Since 1989, the average proportion of Unknowns has been about 13 per cent per year. In 2003, this was about 17 per cent, and in 2004, this dropped slightly to 15.5 per cent. This is still a relatively high figure, implying that almost one in seven UFOs cannot be explained. However, there are several factors which affect this value.

During the first few years of these studies, an evaluation of Explained was almost nonexistent. At first, contributors tended to ignore UFO sightings that had a simple explanation and deleted them as actual UFO data. Hence, the only UFO reports submitted by contributors tended to be high-strangeness cases. Contributors were then encouraged to submit data on all UFO reports they received, so that a more uniform assessment and evaluation process could be realized. Because many IFO cases such as fireballs and meteors are initially reported as UFOs, the Explained category was considered necessary for a full review of UFO data. As noted previously, early American studies of UFO data included such cases, so present-day comparative studies should include such data as well. Furthermore, since there are no absolutes, the subjective nature of assigning Evaluations is actually an interpretation of the facts by individual researchers.

The process of evaluating UFO sightings is often complex, involving a series of steps that take into account errors of observation and unpredictable but natural phenomena. Checks with star charts, police, air traffic control operators and meteorologists are often performed. Where possible, witnesses are interviewed in person, and sketches or photographs of the area may be examined. The intent is to eliminate as many conventional explanations as possible before allowing an evaluation or conclusion.

There were 137 Unknowns out of 882 total cases in 2004. If we look only at the Unknowns with a Reliability rating of 7 or greater, we are left with 41 high-quality Unknowns in 2004 (4.6 per cent of the total). This is in agreement with previous studies. As a comparison, USAF Blue Book studies found three to four per cent of their cases were "excellent" Unknowns.

It should be emphasized again that even high-quality Unknowns do not imply alien visitation. Each case may still have an explanation following further investigation. And of those that remain unexplained, they may remain unexplained, but still are not incontrovertible proof of extraterrestrial intervention or some mysterious natural phenomenon.

As with previous studies, the 2004 Canadian UFO Survey does not offer any positive proof that UFOs are either alien spacecraft or a specific natural phenomenon. However, it does show that some phenomenon which often is called a UFO is continually being observed by witnesses.

The typical UFO sighting is that of two people together observing a moving, distant white or red light for several minutes. In most cases, the UFO is likely to be eventually identified as a conventional object such as an aircraft or astronomical object. However, in a small percentage of cases, some UFOs do not appear to have an easy explanation and may be given the label of "unknown."

All that a study of this kind can do is present the data and some rudimentary analyses. The recognition that there really are only a handful of higher-quality unknowns among the mass of UFO cases might lead a debunker to believe they, too, might find an explanation if enough effort were to be expended, but to a believer this might be the required proof that some UFOs have no explanations.

The Evaluation value is a subjective value imposed by the investigator or compiler (or both) with a scale such that the low values represent cases with little information content and observers of limited observing abilities and the higher values represent those cases with excellent witnesses (pilots, police, etc.) and also are well-investigated. Naturally, cases with higher values are preferred.

The interpretation of the 137 Unknowns is that these cases were among the most challenging of all the reports received in 2004. It should be noted that most UFO cases go unreported, and that there may be ten times as many UFO sightings that go unreported as those which get reported to public, private or military agencies. Furthermore, it should be noted that some cases with lower reliability ratings suffer only from incomplete investigations, and that they may well be more mysterious than those on the list of Unknowns. And, above all, these cases are not proof of extraterrestrial visitation.

In 1989, the rate of UFO reporting in Canada was about 12 cases per month, but the rate has been steadily increasing. In 2002, the monthly rate was 40 per month, or at least one UFO sighting each day somewhere in Canada. The rate jumped significantly in 2003 to more than 50 sightings per month, and in 2004 is now at 75 UFO sightings each month, or more than two each day somewhere in Canada.

UFO witnesses range from farmhands to airline pilots and from teachers to police officers. Witnesses represent all age groups and racial origin. What is being observed? In most cases, only ordinary objects. However, this begs a question. If people are reporting things that can be explained, then the objects they observed were "really" there. Were the objects we can't identify "really" there as well? If so, what were they?

These are questions that only continued and rational research can answer, and only if researchers have the support and encouragement of both scientists and the public.

AUFOSG (Alberta UFO Study Group)

National UFO Reporting Center

UFO Nova Scotia

MUFON Ontario

HBCC UFO Research

UFO*BC

UFOROM (Ufology Research of Manitoba)

Quebec UFO Abductions

UFO Updates

UFO Roundup

Para-Researchers of Ontario

Haunted Hamilton

Hauntings Research Group (Ontario)

Paranormal Phenomena Research & Investigation (PPRI) (Nova Scotia)

Newfoundland UFO Research (NUFOR)

Newfoundland UFOs

Northwest Saskatchewan UFO Research Centre (NWSURC)

Moonbeam Community UFO Project (MCUP)

Also, files from:

Transport Canada

Department of National Defence

Royal Canadian Mounted Police

A large object shaped like a red ring flew over the city in broad daylight.

An odd elongated object with a ring of blue lights around its midsection flew over a mountain, stopped, then began moving again, disappearing into the distance.

Two people were driving in south-central Winnipeg when they saw an oblong object with white lights moving around its midsection fly over they car and move away. When they had driven about a kilometre, the same or similar object rose up out of a clump of trees and swooped over their car.

Five people watched a white, disc-shaped object that was stationary at first, then began to rise, moved sideways left and right, then spiraled downward, over the course of about 15 minutes.

A lone witness saw two lights stationary in the sky for about an hour, at which time a haze or fog filled the area and he became unconscious. He woke up across his yard, with unusual marks on his body, believing he had been abducted by aliens.

A witness heard a whooshing sound and looked up to see a large black triangular object, the size of a house, with three orange lights on its underside, fly quickly overhead from north to south.