Documents / Report
The Office of the Chief Science Advisor of Canada issued this June 2025 report of the Sky Canada Project, which reviewed how public reports of unidentified aerial phenomena are handled in Canada. It finds no cohesive, standardized reporting system, no official public platform, limited analysis and little scientific involvement. It compares approaches in the United States, France and Chile, includes a commissioned public survey, and makes fourteen recommendations, including naming a lead federal agency, creating a dedicated reporting service and cooperating with AARO, NASA, GEIPAN and SEFAA.
“Sky Canada Project”26 pages
REPORT OF THE SKY CANADA PROJECT# 19 Tackling the Puzzle: Using Technology to Study UAP Sightings New technologies can contribute to UAP reporting and anal- ysis. For example, the tech startup Enigma Labs launched a real-time iOS application5 for smartphones in 2023. This application captures sightings and compiles them into a stan- dardized, easily searchable database that can be analyzed by the public and researchers alike. It also allows users to share information about their observations. The Enigma app includes over 14,000 UAP sighting reports from Canada, some of which cover historical sighting reports downloaded from other sourc- es. Interestingly, the survey by Earnscliffe Strategies for the Sky Canada Project found that two in five respondents are interest- ed in using a mobile phone application to document UAPs (see Appendix B). The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in this context is particu- larly promising. With the growing volume of data enabled by smart-phone technologies such as Enigma Labs’ application, AI could significantly streamline and standardize the process of examining and assessing UAP sightings. AI can assist in sifting through vast amounts of data from various sources, such as databases tracking airplane locations, satellites, stars, planets and weather conditions. This capability could aid in interpreting visual data from UAP sightings more accurately, and in identify- ing trends. Another example is Harvard University’s Galileo Project6 which is developing instruments specifically designed to monitor the sky in an empirical, systematic way. The Galileo Project uses technology, including AI tools, to analyze collected data and detect anomalies that might otherwise go unnoticed. By apply- ing a data-driven approach, the Galileo Project aims to bring more scientific rigour to UAP studies. Such initiatives could be crucial in transitioning from anecdotal evidence to more scientifically rigorous analysis and may con- tribute to enhancing the quality of UAP research. Common Explanations for UAPs Most UAP sightings can be explained through careful investiga- tion and analysis, given sufficient reliable data. For example, France’s GEIPAN (Groupe d’Études et d’Informations sur les Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non-identifiés, or Unidentified Aerospace Phenomenon Research and Information Group), which investigates UAP sightings in France, reports that of the 3,188 cases collected by 2025, only 3.2% of cases remained unidentified after investigation. Furthermore, 31.4% of cas- es could not be explained due to insufficient data.4 Similarly, Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) Canada reports that, of the 321 sightings it investigated in 2023, 31% could not be conclu- sively explained due to information being too vague. In most instances, UAP observations can be accounted for by relatively simple explanations, including: • Conventional Aircraft: UAPs can be conventional aircraft that are not immediately recognized, especially if they are seen from a distance or in poor visibility conditions. • Weather Phenomena: Atmospheric conditions can create unusual visual effects. For example, ice crystals, storms, clouds, or temperature inversions can sometimes make lights or objects appear in unusual and hard-to-identify ways. • Astronomical Objects: Planets, stars or meteors can sometimes be misidentified because their appearance can change based on atmospheric conditions or their position in the sky. • Man-Made Objects: Weather balloons, drones, telecom- munication balloons and satellites, sky lanterns or experi- mental aircraft can also be classified as UAPs by observers. These objects may have unusual flight patterns or lighting that can cause confusion. • Optical Illusions: Reflections, lens flares or other optical effects can create the appearance of something unusual in the sky. • Human Error: Misinterpretation of everyday objects or phe- nomena, such as aircraft lights seen from a different angle, can lead to UAP reports. Nonetheless, some UAP sightings—for which data exist—remain unexplained even after investigation. Observatories, like the one on Mont-Mégantic in Québec, use telescopes to look at objects in the night sky, helping us better understand the cosmos. Sprites are a natural phenomena that occur high above thun- derstorm clouds and produce luminous red-orange flashes that last only a few milliseconds. Photo credit: Nicolas Escurat Lenticular clouds can have shapes similar to that of a saucer.
Report, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 30 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.