EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
- We reprise modelling of UFO activity with jellyfish sightings, this
time separated into N Hem and S Hem sub-populations.
- Some UFO types seem to respond +ve to an increase in jellyfish
activity in the NH but -ve to an increase in jellyfish activity in
the SH. This suggests possibly some UFO types are "mostly based" in
the South.
- Other UFO types have a +ve response to both jelly-hemispheres. This
suggests that are "mostly" based in the North.
- We can divide UFO sightings by "location" (US state). We find those
states nr the coast tend to see "jellyfish response" like a NH-based
UFO population. "Just passing through" on the way to any massing in
the South.
- We can divide UFO activity by time-of-day. Some jellyfish rise from
the deep at dusk to feed. UFO activity at that time suggests another
pattern -- NH-based but "busy" when fishing in the NH at dusk; "seen
going south" when going down South to fishing at dusk.
- At least some fraction of UFO activity seems to behave as if they
use e.g. jellyfish and e.g. certain species of phytoplankton
(tellingly, the edible-to-mammal types) as a food supply.
- It is possible to use the "gravity satellite(s)" (GRACE, GRACE-FO)
to weigh e.g. the Southern Ocean and determine whether an anomalous
mass "goes missing" in certain seasons. It maybe be possible to
differentiate activity that appears to be farming (i.e. growing)
versus gathering. From ice cores we know certain patterns that may
represent cycles in phytoplankton growth and death have apparently
been going on for 1000s of years.


We've previously looked at the relationship between UFO activity and
the seasonal ebb and flow of phytoplankton and jellyfish.

Both phytoplankton and jellyfish suggest themselves to be possible
food sources or other resources for groups or whatever may be
operating the strange objects increasingly seen by the public and
members of the military, police and govt.

In a previous post we look in particular at several types of
phytoplankton research in the 1990s tracked via satellite in
detail. It turned out UFO activity seemed to "follow" a (human/mammal)
edible form of plankton, was neutral with respect to another type that
is responsible for a large chunk of the oxygen in out atmosphere, and
behaved negatively with respect to a type that in mammals can cause poisoning.

We have also looked at a similar influence of jellyfish blooms that
seem to predict changes in UFO activity in a "causal-like" way.

The jellyfish data has significantly been updated over the past few
years with several databases tracking sightings all over the world and
mapping jellyfish types and sighting dates with locations and other
relevant details.

It's this detailed data that now may allow us to characterise various
UFO "types" (e.g. shapes and colors, as reported) as to behaviour and
possible location in various regions of the world. It seems some types
react to assumed jellyfish population variations as tho some originate (unsurprisingly) in the north polar region, some behave as if they
originate in the south polar region, and some behave as if they
originate "outside the system" -- as if they do not originate from any particular region on the planet.

Some of these suggestions recapitulate some UFO folklore and/or work
posted here or published by others.

It has been supposed by this author that barring any good evidence to
the contrary the UFO phenomena seem too diverse to pin down to a
"single thing". Some is probably new physical phenomena. Some may be
caused by some military or other groups in country or countries
unknown. Some may be an offshoot of some previous known civilization.
It may also be some are related to an older human and/or non-human
civilization based on Earth. And some may be related to
interplanetary, interstellar, or inter-dimensional groups.

So it is not too surprising we might find evidence of some groups
either harvesting the oceans, possibly for a long time, while some
other groups seem to be independent of obvious local food or
industrial resources.

The new data on jellyfish allows us to probe several different things
at the same time. I've split the sightings data up by hemisphere.
Using UFO sightings data we can determine simple models that predict
UFO activity as a result of the "stimuli" from each hemisphere month
by month.

We can further split the UFO sighting data up by type (color, shape)
and location (e.g. by US state). The series of "all by all" regression
models can then suggest whether any UFO sub-population seems to be
ebbing and flowing in response to jellyfish activity, and determine
the relative effect of the N Hem and S Hem jellyfish on the response.

Out of ~300 UFO types around 1/3 of them seem to behave is if they are
based either in the N Hem or the S Hem. Some behave as if they are
based in both hemispheres. While 2/3 of the UFO types do not seem to
respond to jellyfish activity in a statistically robust way a small
group behaves as if they have 0 interest in jellyfish.

There is a sometimes subtle difference between "no provable interest"
and "probable disinterest".

As a sample of a UFO type that seems to respond to jellyfish activity
as if they were based in the N Hem we can look at the model for DISK
UFO activity 2006-2020. (The interval is related to the part of the
NUFORC dataset that was reported via a web-based system rather than
the previous telephone-based system).

The model looks like:

REWEIGHTED LEAST SQUARES BASED ON THE LMS
VARIABLE COEFFICIENT STAND. ERROR T - VALUE P - VALUE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
year -0.12669 0.08163 -1.55198 0.12252
nh 0.05544 0.01309 4.23635 0.00004
sh -0.13654 0.07821 -1.74576 0.08265
CONSTANT 273.36823 164.26340 1.66421 0.09790
WEIGHTED SUM OF SQUARES = 8550.58105
DEGREES OF FREEDOM = 171
SCALE ESTIMATE = 7.07131
COEFFICIENT OF DETERMINATION (R SQUARED) = 0.10973
THE F-VALUE = 7.026 (WITH 3 AND 171 DF) P - VALUE = 0.00018
THERE ARE 175 POINTS WITH NON-ZERO WEIGHT.
AVERAGE WEIGHT = 0.96685

There are 175 months in the data. The P-value of the F-test shows the
model is highly statistically significant. Each coeff p-val also shows
high relevance and narrow certainty bands for the coeffs. Between the
"year" (fractional to allow for months), the number of N Hem and S Hem jellyfish sightings, explain about 11% of month-to-month variation in
Disk sightings mostly across the US. (It is widely believed only
about 10% of UFO sightings are non-mundane phenomena). The model can
generally predict the monthly sightings of Disk UFOs to within +-7
("scale estimate").

The interesting bits are the coefficients. The "year" coeff shows
there is an underlying decline in Disk-type UFO sightings. Over a
decade there has been around 1.3 fewer Disk sightings per month.

For each (e.g.) 100 jellyfish sighted in the N H the Disk sightings
have increased by around 5.5 (+-1.3 stderr). But for each 100
sightings in the S Hem there is an associated DECLINE of around 13.7 (+-8).

While the jellyfish database used has a heavy bias toward sightings in
the N Hem that alone doesn't explain the big disparity between the NH
and SH coeff.

But we do know the cool waters of the S Ocean are believed to have a
much higher jellyfish population than the oceans of the N Hem.

However the signs of the coeff also suggest something else. If an
increase in NH jellyfish leads to a rise in Disk sightings but an
increase in SH jellyfish leads to a decline it may be Disk UFO's are
based in the S Hem. When they are "fishing" in the N Hem they
sometimes are seen over the US. When they are fishing in the remote S
Hem "at home" they are NOT seen flying over the US. If Disk UFO's was
based equally numerous in each hemisphere we might expect both coeff to
be +ve. At least it would seem unlikely the SH coeff would be robustly negative.

An example of the other +ve/+ve pattern is "Formation" UFOs. It would
seem these are based in the N Hem:

REWEIGHTED LEAST SQUARES BASED ON THE LMS
VARIABLE COEFFICIENT STAND. ERROR T - VALUE P - VALUE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
year -0.09776 0.06576 -1.48668 0.13904
x1 0.08297 0.01089 7.61599 0.00000
x2 0.10073 0.06781 1.48553 0.13935
CONSTANT 208.67290 132.22162 1.57821 0.11647
WEIGHTED SUM OF SQUARES = 5954.99121
DEGREES OF FREEDOM = 162
SCALE ESTIMATE = 6.06294
COEFFICIENT OF DETERMINATION (R SQUARED) = 0.27000
THE F-VALUE = 19.972 (WITH 3 AND 162 DF) P - VALUE = 0.00000
THERE ARE 166 POINTS WITH NON-ZERO WEIGHT.
AVERAGE WEIGHT = 0.91713

We see again there seems to be a gradual decline in Formation
sightings over time. Sightings of more jellyfish in the NH are
associated with a modest up-tick in Formation sightings. More
jellyfish sightings in the SH are associated with an ostensibly (not statistically robust -- see the stderr's or coeff p-vals) larger
up-tick in sightings.

We might interpret this is "when we are fishing locally you might see
us; when we fly down south to fish there you see even more of us pass
along the coasts and other major flight corridors".

We can check this. We can divide UFO sightings up by US state of
sighting. It turns out some states show a +ve coeff for both NH and
SH jellyfish but some show a +ve/-ve pattern like Disk UFO's.

It turns out states with an ocean coast generally have the 2 +ve
coeffs and land-locked and mostly far-from-the-sea states have a
+ve/-ve pattern. There is a strong correlation between distance from
the nearest coast and which pattern is displayed.

It seems coastal states see a +ve NH and even larger +ve SH jellyfish
coeff that might be interpreted as "you see us a bit when we're
fishing in the North; but when we fly en masse down to the South you
see us even more".

Another interesting slit is by time of day. I've split it up into 4
sets -- daylight hours, nighttime hours, dawn, dusk.

If turns out only daytime and dawn show any response to jellyfish
activity. UFO's operating at night behave as if they have never heard
of jellyfish. :)

The DAYLIGHT (8am to 8pm) model looks like:

REWEIGHTED LEAST SQUARES BASED ON THE LMS
VARIABLE COEFFICIENT STAND. ERROR T - VALUE P - VALUE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
year -6.50828 1.15490 -5.63538 0.00000
x1 0.17551 0.10779 1.62831 0.10571
x2 0.69760 0.74913 0.93121 0.35335
CONSTANT 13300.87012 2326.20093 5.71785 0.00000
WEIGHTED SUM OF SQUARES = 498410.90625
DEGREES OF FREEDOM = 140
SCALE ESTIMATE = 59.66639
COEFFICIENT OF DETERMINATION (R SQUARED) = 0.19907
THE F-VALUE = 11.599 (WITH 3 AND 140 DF) P - VALUE = 0.00000
THERE ARE 144 POINTS WITH NON-ZERO WEIGHT.
AVERAGE WEIGHT = 0.87273

It seems "daylight" UFO's seen over the US are of the "just passing
through" bunch. Or 20% of the daylight sightings as per the R2 value, above.

The DUSK (6pm to 8pm) model looks like:

REWEIGHTED LEAST SQUARES BASED ON THE LMS
VARIABLE COEFFICIENT STAND. ERROR T - VALUE P - VALUE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
year -0.50541 0.54847 -0.92150 0.35850
x1 -0.09574 0.05077 -1.88575 0.06156
x2 0.42868 0.35057 1.22282 0.22361
CONSTANT 1075.85657 1104.67542 0.97391 0.33191
WEIGHTED SUM OF SQUARES = 100408.82812
DEGREES OF FREEDOM = 130
SCALE ESTIMATE = 27.79165
COEFFICIENT OF DETERMINATION (R SQUARED) = 0.04661
THE F-VALUE = 2.118 (WITH 3 AND 130 DF) P - VALUE = 0.10101
THERE ARE 134 POINTS WITH NON-ZERO WEIGHT.
AVERAGE WEIGHT = 0.81212

This shows another totally believable pattern. During "dusk" when
supposedly some jellyfish are prone to dive deeper during daylight
hours but mass near the surface to feed when the sun goes down.

The more jellyfish in the NH in the hours of dusk the LESS UFO
sightings are likely over the US. They are "busy". The R2 is low --
about 5%. Again, this is near the estimate of the totality of
sightings that are "interesting".

When jellyfish are massing in the Southern Ocean the SH coeff suggests
you might see a stream of NH-based fisherfolk flying south at dusk to
catch the action down there.

Tellingly, the UFO sightings as DAWN show no interest in jellyfish at
all. Jellyfish apparently are not doing anything useful around that
time. Diving deeper, maybe.

The data suggests lots of interesting things about different UFO
activity. It suggests jellyfish of certain species (that e.g. rise
from the deeps at dusk) may be a food or other resource for certain
sub-groups of UFO folk. It suggests if they can maybe *eat* jellyfish
they have close to a earth-normal physiology. They may even be human
or near-human. But they need not even be mammals. Foxes and penguins
eat jellyfish. But so to turtles, mollusks, and other jellyfish.

When in doubt, assume equal proportions of all logical possibilities. :)

--
Pentagon announces plans to streamline UFO reports and analysis
CNN, 23 Nov 2021 23:54Z
The Dept of Defense announced its plans to streamline the collection
and analysis of UFO reports across the govt ...

`This is urgent': Bipartisan proposal for UFO office pushes new boundaries Politico, 18 Nov 2021

Exposure to harmless coronaviruses boosts SARS-CoV-2 immunity
Medical Xpress, 22 Nov 2021 22:16Z

Secrets Of The UFOs: Australian military witnesses to UFOs speak out 7news/Spotlight, 20 Nov 2021 04:16Z
"I went to the communications centre and checked if there was any comms'
with aircraft or passing ships. There was nothing ...
[I watched the news special. Mostly a repeat of material used in
previous programs.
One new case came to light involving AUS Navy. Supposedly RAN
personnel regularly "see things" off the AUS coast. One witness
related a "light" that hovered and zig-zagged away after appearing
somewhere off Cairns.
The program went again through the Westall HS sighting in the 60s.
Mostly old information and old footage from same witnesses. New claims
that a report had been written but has become "lost" despite 30y
release rule. Other UFO reports are in National Archives. Not Westall case.
New witnesses claim they were silenced by US military people. Then 12

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)