Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> Jul -> Here

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 00:52:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 10:33:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Faulty Numbers [Caution - 'umour]


>Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 19:21:48 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Faulty Numbers

>Hi Errol, Hi All

>It has often been quoted that out of all the UFO sightings
>reported that some ninety five percent can be explained one way
>or another.[1] It has also been suggested that only some ten
>percent of actual UFO sightings ever get reported. Is this
>because the sightee fears ridicule or whatever, I don't know.

>_IF_ and that's a BIG if, we have five hundred sightings
>reported each year that cannot be readily explained
>(world-wide), that would mean that we have a nine thousand five
>hundred sightings that can be explained. (Follow the logic here)
>That would also mean that we have one hundred thousand odd of
>actual sightings happening each year, right?

>Being that there are only 525,600 minutes in a calendar year
>does this mean that the good people of earth are seeing
>Unidentified Flying Objects at a rate of one every five and a
>half minutes world-wide?

> Snipped, but respectfully

>1) Project Blue Book claimed 95% IFOs, but their sample was
>highly biased toward NL cases which typically yield more IFOs
>than CE cases. The somewhat better Condon sample attained only
>30% IFOs. It is likely that a CE only investigation would have
>50% or lower IFOs.

>2) The high numbers for abductions come from the Roper poll,
>which most reputable researchers consider highly flawed. Indeed,
>given the various potential psychological side effects if
>abductions are real, it is possible that there are many fewer
>abductions than even reported by the abductee population.

>3) The best database of UFOs is Larry Hatch's *U* Database,
>which contains 16,000 unexplained sightings, with (I believe)
>most in the fifty year interval since 1947. 16,000 sightings
>over 50 years implies 320 a year, or about one a day. However,
>there are some days with many more and many days with none. The
>1952 wave alone contains a significant percentage of all reports
>ever made.
>Snip

OK Jones, I've about had it, Pal.  I've had to listen to
Gesundt, Klass and some others like that Krakow guy.. what's his
face the astrologer, but to hear it from _YOU_ of all people, a
guy I thought had some, je ne sais quoi... is the absolute
limit.

If I have to hear your damned common sense again, I just may
give up any hope that the next debunker will drive me to drink.
In fact, with your kind of common sense, just about everyone
will give up drinking, drugs and the evil weed... the entire
world economy will collapse... bastard.

Now please, _CUT THAT OUT_.

Docca Morty