Mufon 2013 Summary Report and top cases for the year

www.... openminds. tv/top-ufo-cases-2013-identified-mufons-science-review-board/29169

Mufon has just released it's summary report for 2013, which includes statistical breakdowns of the reports they received and investigated during the 2013 investigative year. Despite what some people on various forums seem to want us to believe, UFO reports have not fallen into steep decline in recent years. In fact, 2013 saw the second highest number of reports in the organization's history, following only 2012 in the number of reported sightings. Apparently, the reports of the death of the UFO phenomena have been greatly exaggerated.

Among the statistics, it is shown that the most common form of craft reported for 2013 are Spherical/circular, which is a separate category than Disk shaped craft. A full 32% fell into the first category, while only 6% were identified as disks.

My personally experiences included a very close range sighting of a disk when I was a child, but my most compelling sighting as an adult was of a circular/spherical craft. Interestingly, part of my family's encounter when I was a child included a luminescent sphere identical in appearance to the sighting of the spherical craft I witnessed as an adult. I personally theorize that disk shaped craft are capable of projecting a spherical energy field that has something to do with an aspect of their propulsion systems. Many sightings that involve spheres may be disks at the core, but that is my own theory.

One form of craft that topped the best sightings summaries from Mufon for 2013 and 2012 have been triangular or boomerang shaped craft that seem to have some ability to cloak. Some insist that the flight characteristics of these craft exceed what is likely possible for man-made devices, but we know from non-classified research that strides are being made in achieving near visual invisibility and rumors persist that this technology is already in field development or even in production within classified military programs.

I think the field of Ufology will continue to struggle against even greater thresholds of evidence when trying to categorize those sightings that represent capabilities almost certainly beyond what could be possessed by even the most high tech, deeply classified programs representing terrestrial technology. Many sightings still fall well outside the characteristics of flight possible with unclassified tech, but what seems feasible for black project tech seems to expand on a yearly basis.

According to the 2013 summary report, roughly a third of reported cases could be classified as "identified" after investigation, a third were classified as "unknown", (which essentially represents cases were sufficient detail existed to support the conclusion that something was witnessed that could not be explained), and most of the remaining third represented categories where insufficient information was available to provide a meaningful analysis of the sighting. Only 3% were determined to be a hoax based on actual investigation.

What percentage of those classified as unknown represent compelling cases where something was definitely witnessed which exhibited intelligent control of craft or phenomena beyond terrestrial explanation isn't clear, but even a single case involving non-terrestrial intelligence would of course be significant. It's also always possible that some sightings that fit with a possible terrestrial explanation could be of extra-terrestrial origin, while failing to present observable action outside the realm of possible earthly technology.

I'll leave it to the linked article to present summary of the year's most compelling cases, but I'll provide a list of dates/places for each for those who want to reference them further or look to determine if any of these cases have been previously discussed on ATS:

Case 52339: 6:20 p.m., November 19, 2013; vicinity of Valdosta, Georgia.

Cases 52930, 52934 and 52942: 9:15 p.m., December 24, 2012; Boise, Idaho.

Cases 51156, 51269 and 51270: evenings of September 26-28, 2013; Venice, Florida.

Case 50042: 9:45 p.m., August 20, 2013; Kitchener, Ontario, Canada.

Case 46835: 3:30 p.m., April 13, 2013; pilot near Picayune, Mississippi.

Case 49005: 10 p.m., June 15, 2013; Bellingham, Washington.

Case 45185: 8:20 p.m., January 12, 2013; West Melbourne, Florida.

Case 51360: 9 p.m., October 6, 2013; Steamboat Springs, Colorado.

www.... openminds. tv/top-ufo-cases-2013-identified-mufons-science-review-board/29169

or

GOOGLE: "Top UFO cases from 2013 identified by MUFON"

a reply to: Totemic

Good Thread and S+F for You! Good breakdown of the stats too. This sentence, well part of a sentence is indeed compelling! " ....even a single case involving non-terrestrial intelligence would of course be significant."!!
I will be looking at the link soon. Thanx for The Share!!

Later, Syx


Edit: Please share your experience of seeing the craft, at your leisure. I would love to read it! Thanx, Syx.

a reply to: Totemic
Can you please fix the link in your OP? It's broken. Thanks!
Looks interesting. I'd like to take a look at the top cases for the year...

http://

interesting subject, the link is not working, says site unavailable....found a link www....(nolink)/top-ufo-cases-2013-identified-mufons-science-review-board/29169 you all need to do a copy paste of the above link^







the whole link is in this post, but after I post and click on the link it comes up www. and it is a blank page...is this openminds? mufon or abovtopsecret? and yes I clicked on the thingi to insert the link here and it still didn't work

a reply to: Totemic

Very interesting! I saw a triangle in the early to mid 90's and will never forget it. The craft was completely silent, just hovering there like it was no big deal. I was with a few friends and we freaked out. I live close to Travis AFB so we figured it was something from there or aliens, lol.

One day I hope to see another one, triangle, disk, sphere, anything!! Always look up!

Here's the link, hopefully it works

Open Minds Top UFO Cases 2013

Foreign Cases
MUFON received 930 reports of UFOs from foreign countries in 2013; clearly UFOs are not a phenomenon unique to the United States. Four countries comprise 62% of our foreign cases as shown in the following pie chart:

The proper link will not show up correctly when posted, which is why I gave a google search option as well in order to find it.


www....(nolink)/top-ufo-cases-2013-identified-mufons-science-review-board/29169 is the attempt at the proper link. As you can see, the forum completely removes the web site address from the URL.

I inserted a couple spaces in the original post, just need to copy/paste and delete the spaces.

www . openminds . tv/top-ufo-cases-2013-identified-mufons-science-review-board/29169

There are spaces in the line above before and after the "." Copy/paste that into your address bar or a notepad doc and remove those four spaces.

If, for some reason, links to that site are not allowed here, the mods are free to remove them and leave a notation as such.

I hope the google search to find it is at least allowed. Just google "Top UFO cases from 2013 identified by MUFON" and it should be the first link.

originally posted by: Totemic
If, for some reason, links to that site are not allowed here, the mods are free to remove them and leave a notation as such.

I'm not sure why it's banned but apparently it is:

originally posted by: IsaacKoi
Unfortunately, links to that website (the openminds tv website) have been banned on ATS for quite a while

The same article shows up on beforeitsnews and I know why that site is banned, they post hoaxes. BIN cites openminds as the source, but I'm not familiar enough with openminds to know if they post hoaxes or why they are banned. I looked for a report on the MUFON website and apparently all the data is there, but not the analysis.

Since everyone has a cell phone now and they all have cameras I'd expect to see a lot of UFO pictures if there are a lot of UFO reports, so I looked at some of the top photos on the MUFON site, here's one:

www.mufon.com...

The thing above the helicopter is the UFO, could be a "blurd" for all the detail we see. The bad pictures like this don't look like hoaxes, but the "good" pictures of something clear usually look like hoaxes.

So yes there may be a lot of reports, but more reports aren't very helpful to me; I'd like to see some good photos, that aren't hoaxes, and that don't look like blurds.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Personally, I dislike the trend among forums related to these subjects to ban links to sites they have a beef with, for what ever reason. I'd prefer an automatic annotation of a warning that "the site being linked to has been determined by the owners of this site to be less than reputable in some instances, enter at your own risk", or some such.

In regards to the particular site in question, it appears to mostly be an aggregation of news from many sources, so disregarding everything posted there seems like the epitome of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I really hate the wide spread infighting around these subjects. If not initially instigated by those who wish to obscure the truth, it's easy to see why they would want to fan those flames once they got started.

As far as cell phone photos, I think short of an extremely close, well lit, unblurred series of photos or videos, they aren't ever going to convince anyone that requires a very high burden of proof. I had a cell phone with an early generation camera on me at the time of two sightings I had between five and ten years ago. In neither case did I even think about the camera until the sighting was well over, so I know how probable it is for people to be so wrapped up in the event so as to forget entirely about the opportunity to capture evidence.

Even when someone does capture something, as in the photo shared in the post above, it most often serves little purpose other than to prove to the witness and those willing to believe them they they saw something physical and weren't just imagining the entire affair.

Even when pictures show a form inconsistent with conventional craft and consistent with what witnesses have described seeing, it's far too easy for most to dismiss them as inconclusive or hoaxed.

Things may change if more people were to adopt the wide spread fascination with high quality dash cams that seems to be gaining popularity in some parts of Eastern Europe. Reportedly, the main motivation for that equipment is to have concrete evidence in the case of a dispute over traffic accidents or law enforcement in a society where the law is considered corrupt. The trend allowed the air burst bolide event over Russia to be captured by many recorders, some of which captured the event in reasonably high definition.

Even then, though, if that same event had captured a UFO of similar size, brightness and fidelity at those levels of resolution and from many different angles, the vast majority of skeptics would still have discredited the quality of the evidence. Bolide? Yes, because meteors fit their understanding of reality. UFO video of similar fidelity? Absolutely not, because it runs contrary to their view of reality.

The other issue, of course, is that the ability to hoax becomes greater with advances in video and cgi technology. Even the most expensive sci-fi, FX driven extravaganzas fail to produce effect shots that do not require suspension of disbelief to be considered 100% indistinguishable from actual objects, but we nudge closer to that threshold every year. Eventually, we will reach a point where no level of photographic or video evidence will convince those who refuse to entertain the notion of alien visitation.

I don't resist the notion of visitation, as a result of personal experience, study of the subject an an open minded consideration of the probable abundance of life in the universe and the level of technology likely available to species that could be thousands, millions or billions of years more technologically advanced.

In trying to understand the nature of their visitation, I am willing to consider data that seems credible from my perspective, even if it would never change the mind of someone convinced we are not being visited by non-terrestrial entities. I don't assume that all individual reports are genuine or useful, but trends and patterns can be discerned from the whole.

Of course, I have never been the kind of person who needs to seek validation of my thoughts, beliefs and being by seeking to bend others to my point of view, nor am I threatened by beliefs that are contrary to mine. Too much energy is wasted on arguments destined to go absolutely no where.