It's hard to believe some of these documents.

I fully agree. Unsubstantiated eye-witness reports whom really don't know what they saw.


I still like the one test that was done to determine the veracity of eye-witness recounts (it was actually for criminal identification and not UFOs, but the results of the test still hold true).

People were asked to observe each other in a busy airplane terminal. A plant was setup to "pickpocket" a victim that would be easy to see from the vantage point of those they wanted to take part in this test.

These people were asked to correctly identify the thief in a police lineup, and describe the thief to a police artist.

They did this test in three different cities with different groups of people. Out of the 20 from each sample group, none of them came even close to an accurate description of the criminal. The artist had about 20 different drawings of the same man, and none of them were even accurate.


Scientifically, when you're looking for empirical evidence, eye-witness reports are the most unreliable kind. Even if they all say they saw the same thing, doesn't mean they actually know what it is that they saw. It simply means they saw something.

Again, people described what they think they saw, and the government was required to write it down and take notes. Now those notes, or "cables" have been released to the public and people think that because there's so many of them, and they were investigated by the U.S. government, there must be truth to them.

That thought process couldn't be any more wrong.