Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo
From: kymhorsell@gmail.com
Subject: factors that influence UFO activity

[uploaded 46 times; last 26/10/2024]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
- We look at the "explanatory factors" for UFO activity as determined
  from a new tweak of a novel AI s/w.
- The new patterns are supposedly far more predictive than those
  previously determined by a robust correlation of individual
  datasets against UFO sightings data.
- Some explanatory "Themes" in the new approach can be split between 1
  or more effects that might influence observers and therefore
  monthly UFO sightings and effects that certain natural phenomena
  might have on UFO activity directly.
- But some Themes likely do not relate much to the behaviour of
  observers and likely "mostly" effect UFO activity directly.
- Taking these factors into account it seems the biggest direct
  influence on UFO activity seen here is cosmic rays.  Cosmic rays
  detected in some locations predict a greater UFO activity (as
  typically observed in N Am); some locations link more cosmic rays
  with lower UFO activity. The division between +ve and -ve influences
  might tag some regions as "home" locations to UFO's and some regions
  as "areas of interest" for UFO's.
- Our old friends of the world's oceans, N Pole and S Pole figure
  highly as influences of UFO activity. It's almost like these regions
  feature as UFO bases of operations. But the Theme of "astronomical
  data" features even more. While UFO's may work here the modeling
  suggests they call some of the outer planets or moons thereof home.


We've looked before at which data -- selected from 1000s of "comma
separated values" (CSV) files maintained by different agencies
around the world and generally down-loadable monthly via anon ftp or
similar -- seem to strongly correlate with UFO activity (I generally
use adjusted NUFORC monthly sighting counts 1950-present).

This work is part of a long term study I'm progressing into "unmanned
science" -- where computer s/w plays the part of a scientist or
scientists and tries to knit together everything it "knows" to
estimate how likely various theories about the world of its own
creation are to be true.

The AI-based programs have now upped the ante and moved from
individual data series as a basis for judging various "target" data
that it is trying to "explain", to a scenario where it groups
"explanation" datasets into "themes" that are meant to improve the
robustness of its decision processes as well as make its explanations
more intelligible to poor dumb humans.

It's a work in progress. This post will summaries a re-hash of trying
to understand UFOs via this procedure -- this time using the "themes" idea.

It does change the mental picture of who, what, where and why funny
objects are seen buzzing around the skies in almost every part of the
world. And while the Big Pentagon Report to be released at least to
Congress in the next few weeks may or may not tell the public anything
new or particularly interesting, we can try to preview what it might
reveal in the best of all possible worlds by looking at these latest numbers.

The AI has been hunting up many new data series and now has a
collection of many 10s of 1000s -- mostly satellite data averaged over
the world and produced monthly. But some are "gridded" that average
weather or other data over grid squares across the planet by latitude,
longitude, height/depth relative to MSL, and sometimes other
dimensions as well.

The latest run of the s/w to "explain" UFO activity produces the
following summary table:

Theme		"Explanation power" for adjusted 
		monthly UFO sightings (R2)
npole	         0.90156
cosmic	         0.88612
clouds	         0.56150
cem	         0.55404
z	         0.53668
ocean	         0.53042
spole	         0.51988
ca	         0.49304
astro	         0.47792
q	         0.47556
seg	         0.44700
dep1.	         0.37424
rrg	         0.37424
ecl	         0.36502
 r.	         0.36047
neptune	         0.35572
dep100.	         0.33925
RA(7)            0.33553
DecRA	         0.33111
uranus(7)        0.32529
pluto(6)         0.32222
dep10.           0.32048
gas(7)           0.31443
lon              0.31172
phyto(4)         0.29312
saturn(7)        0.24937
Dec(7)           0.24119
dep1000.         0.23808
lat              0.21242
 rg(2)           0.20792
msl(5)           0.17274
tmp              0.16318
jma              0.16279
band             0.16062
arc              0.15234
sunmoon(6)       0.14372
wind             0.12643
sun(2)           0.12547
storm            0.12048
ant              0.11930
stormseg         0.10293
torn             0.08886
pre              0.08832
stormband(5)     0.08776
jupiter(5)       0.07538
hail             0.07357
radar            0.06714
chlor(2)         0.06454
 elong(2)        0.06129
mercury(4)       0.05471
moon(3)          0.05425
venus(2)         0.05406
 mag(3)          0.05223
land(5)          0.03455
 FV(3)           0.02722
mars(2)          0.00346


The "theme" is a short code that indicates the commonality between a
bunch of datasets that are used to build models of the target dataset
(UFO sightings) from members of the bunch. The s/w tries to be super
robust in building all its models. If there is any doubt that a model
actually predicts something about UFO activity it is ignored.  The s/s
uses the selected explanatory data in several different ways to build
its models. The overall "score" for the Theme is the MINIMUM of all
the models that are built to explain the target. IOW the scoring is a
"minimax" procedure. Again, intended to produce statistically (very)
robust assessments of the various models being built inside the s/w.

So line 1 of the table scores the Theme "npole" as the "best
explanation" for UFO activity. Datasets such as cloud height, surface
temperature, water salinity, etc etc related to the region 60N-90N
when combined in various ways produces models that explain a minimum
of 90% of UFO sightings reports.

This might sound like an extraordinary high level. UFO sightings,
after all, are "mostly" mistakes or hoaxes -- they don't represent
anything more real than that. Estimates vary but we might assume about
95% of sighting reports are not anything of any real interest to us
here (although some of them may represent interesting new atmospheric
physics if nothing else ;).

But what is going on with this model building -- we are explaining
something about the observers as well as something about what they
might be seeing. The "north pole" has a strong affinity for UFO
sightings because it says something about how observers behave as well
as something about what Our Friends (tm; not necessarily friendly) are doing.

Given no other knowledge about the observers in question -- mostly
random citizens across the US and Canada -- standard rules of thumb
assign equal weight to each of the possible alternatives.  I.e. if
the "npole" explains 90% of UFO sightings then we might by rule of
thumb assign 45% to "what the observers are doing" and 45% to "what
the UFO's are doing".

So we might therefore say the affinity between the NPOLE and UFO
sightings is "45%" rather than "90%", meaning 1/2 the explanation
the models in this Theme are producing tell us when and where
observers go out and look up in the sky, and 1/2 relates to what there
is up there to see. The NPOLE maybe influences the weather strongly
across N Am and the weather may push people inside where they don't
look up the sky much and see those damn orange orbs and black
triangles. But it also likely influences about 45% of the direct
reason why there are more orange orbs and black triangles in some
months than others. If some UFO's "originate" in the Arctic then 45%
of the weather in the region may model when they decide to go out and
play.  Some weather encourages UFO's to be more active; some weather
encourages them to stay home and be less active across N Am.

But this procedure of splitting a Theme into effects it might have on
the phenomena and effects it might have on the observers of same is
not quite so appropriate for the Theme "cosmic". This cluster of
datasets relates to cosmic rays and "space radiation" detected by
dozens of sites around the world since approx the 1950s.

It turns out this radiation "explains" a minimum of around 89% of the
comings and going of UFO sightings month by month.  This is also an
extraordinary amount. But its hard to imagine how cosmic rays coming
down from space can influence observers to go out and look in the
sky. For this Theme we might imagine "most" of it goes to influence
the phenomena in question.  For some reason cosmic rays push UFO's
around quite a lot.  Our reasoning suggests cosmic rays are "twice as
good" in their effect on UFO sightings variations from month to month
as weather and other data related to the NPOLE. It is the "real"
Number One influence on UFO activity.

A more detailed look at what kinds of models are being built under
this Theme shows the locations where cosmic rays are being detected
across the world divide into 2 roughly equal camps.  Some locations
seem to link increased UFO activity with MORE cosmic rays (measured
here as average number of events per minute over a month) and some
locations associate more cosmic rays with LESS UFO activity. E.g. the
detector in Hawaii suggests more cosmic rays associate with way more
UFO activity in NAm while the detector in Tibet associates more
activity with modestly less UFO activity.

The properties of the regions that produce how much association
between cosmic rays and UFO sightings can then be analyzed to see what
quality(s) of the various locations produce what kind of
association. But we wont go into that here.  Suffice to say there are
statistically robust patterns that may suggest some regions are host to
UFO "centres of operation" while other regions may be "centers of
interest" for UFO's themselves.

Back to the table, above, we can skip down a bit but note that many
old Themes we've seen in previous posts rear their interesting heads
again. The "ocean" Theme seems to figure highly in explaining UFO
activity -- suggesting perhaps some part of that is indirectly
influencing observers but some part influences UFO activity because
maybe some part of UFO activity is "inside" the oceans.

The "z" Theme is about "cloud heights". These data come from long term
satellite observations of the top of clouds as seen from orbit.  For
each grid square since the 1970s the height of the top of clouds has
been monitored by various satellites. It seems the height of clouds is
a big explanation why UFO activity is observed to vary from month to
month. And, like the NPOLE Theme we might expect cloud height can
obscure objects that might be travelling above them and boost
sightings if clouds are so high many UFO's travel beneath them. But --
unusually -- the detailed models built under this Theme show that
increased cloud height in SOME locations is associated with MORE UFO
sightings but in other locations is associated with FEWER UFO
sightings. IOW some part of cloud height may influence observers in
some obvious way but part of it seems to influence the phenomena as
well. Again, we might split the 54% explanation power of the Theme
50/50 -- so clouds have only around a 27% direct explanation for UFO
activity with the other 1/2 assigned to explaining why people can see
the phenomena in the first place.

The final item I'll address here is the "astro" Theme.  This is a
grab-bag of all the things associated with "not on Earth".  It
includes observations of "space weather" incl geomagnetic storms, solar
flares, sunspots and suchlike. And it includes all the orbital
parameters of the planets incl distance from the Sun, distance from
Earth, Ecliptic latitude and longitude, Right Ascension and
Declination, phase and observational magnitude, etc etc.

It seems this bag of "what the planets and sun are doing" explains a
minimum of around 48% of UFO sightings. But like the "cosmic" Theme
it's hard to ascribe much of this to pushing observers around. It
*might* be the case a particularly bright Saturn could be mistaken for
a UFO, but the detailed models actually suggest people are well aware
of this possible mistake and do not report more or less UFO's just
because Saturn is in the night sky and/or particularly bright or
tilted. In particular, the planets that seem to influence UFO
sightings most are our Old Friends Neptune, Uranus and Pluto. It's hard
to imagine objects that are hard to spot even with a telescope can
push observers to mistakenly see a UFO. Far more likely the whole 48%
links the position and distance of these planets with an "actual"
increase/decrease in UFO activity. It seems, e.g., that when some
planets are closer to the sun UFO activity increases; when they are
further from the sun activity decreases. And for the outer planets
these variations are rarely correlated with seasons in NAm which
might be another way they indirectly influence UFO observers even when
they cant see the planets in question.`

It seems if weather &ct at the NPOLE affects UFO's an estimated 45%
then the outer planets influence UFO activity slightly more, with
cosmic radiation being (above) the number one factor influencing when
and likely where UFO's are observed and reported.  They have an
affinity with the world's oceans, particularly the NPOLE (and
secondarily, above, the SPOLE), but a slightly greater connection
with the outer planets and even more cosmic rays.

Hard to imagine this has much to do with Russia or China high-tech
drones, although it seems possible there is some of that going on, too.

--
Upcoming events:
9 Jul 2021		NOAA billion Dollar Disasters Q2

`Incredibly loud' bang before drone is sent hurtling to the ground on
the Gold Coast
News.com.au, 17 May 2021 11:59Z
A Gold Coast man believes he has captured footage of his drone being
hit by a UFO in a quiet suburban area.... A Gold Coast ...

'Sightings all over the world.' Another former federal official
discusses UFOs, upcoming congressional report
USA Today, 17 May 2021 17:57Z
The director of National Intelligence and secretary of defense were
tasked with creating the upcoming report for Congress, ...

UFO Capabilities, 'Compelling' Evidence Revealed by Former Official on 
Pentagon Program
Newsweek, 17 May 2021 09:45Z
A report by the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of
Defense on UFO analysis is due to be released by next ...

[The Truth Is Way Out There:]
Navy pilots witnessed `unsettling' UFO off San Diego that `looked like a 
Tic-Tac' and traveled 60 miles within SECONDS
The Sun, 17 May 2021 04:22Z
TWO former Navy pilots said they saw a UFO when they were flying over the 
Pacific Ocean in 2004. Commander Dave Fravor and Lt. Commander Alex Dietrich 
spoke to CBS News about the harrowing ...

Sen. Marco Rubio calls on US to take UFO reports `seriously'
New York Post, 17 May 2021 03:22Z
Sen. Marco Rubio said the US should take the "threat" of UFOs "seriously" in 
an interview aired Sunday. The Florida ...

`60 Minutes' Aired A Segment In Which Navy Pilots Detailed Encounters With 
UFOs And Maybe The Truth Is Out There After All
Uproxx, 17 May 2021 03:21Z
While most people will admit earthlings are almost certainly not alone in 
the vast expanses of the universe, UFOs - which is ...

UFOs are very real, 60 Minutes reports, they're still unidentified, and they 
aren't American
Yahoo News, 17 May 2021 07:28Z
A declassified report from the directorate of national intelligence and the 
Pentagon is due to be handed over to the Senate Intelligence Committee in June.

[Bogies!]
Former US Navy pilot describes UFO encounter
Nine News Australia, 17 May 2021 0:50Z
After decades of denial, the Pentagon is releasing details of UFO activity. 
The CEO of Japan's top e-commerce company said ...

Rubio raises UFO concerns in "60 Minutes" interview
YAHOO!News, 17 May 2021 0:33Z
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is leading calls to take reports of UFOs more 
seriously ahead of the expected release next month of ...