home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
DP Tool Club 31
/
CDASC_31_1996_juillet_aout.iso
/
vrac
/
ufobase7.zip
/
HYNEK.ASC
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1991-03-02
|
6KB
|
74 lines
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│THE HYNEK RATING SYSTEM │
│----------------------- │
│As a tribute to Dr. Hynek, I have proposed that his matrix of │
│Strangeness vs. Probability be effectuated and calibrated as outlined │
│below, and named "the Hynek Scale" or "the Hynek Rating System" in his │
│honor. │
│. │
│S: Strangeness │
│The "Strangeness" factor of a case description shall be rated from 1 to │
│5 as follows: │
│. │
│ 1 - Explained or Explainable │
│ 2 - Probably Explainable, with more data │
│ 3 - Possibly Explainable, but with elements of strangeness │
│ 4 - Strange; Does not conform with known principles │
│ 5 - Highly Strange; Definitely indicative of intelligent guidance │
│. │
│Examples: │
│ S1 - Aircraft, meteor, etc. │
│ S2 - Experimental aircraft; planet or star │
│ S3 - Slow, low flying objects in formation │
│ S4 - BOL (Ball of Light Phenomena); physical traces │
│ S5 - Close Encounters, Abductions, etc. │
│. │
│P: Probability │
│The "Probability" factor of a case relates to the credibility, number │
│and separation of witnesses and/or the soundness of evidence gathered. │
│It shall be rated from 1 to 5 as follows: │
│. │
│ 1 - Not Credible or Sound │
│ 2 - Unreliable; Smacks of Hoax │
│ 3 - Somewhat credible or indeterminate │
│ 4 - Credible; Sound │
│ 5 - Highly Credible, leaving almost no doubt │
│. │
│Examples: │
│ P1 - Known Hoaxer or UFO "Flake"; Hoax Photo │
│ P2 - Repeat Witness; Conflicting Testimony │
│ P3 - Standard, first-time witness; slight radiation reading │
│ P4 - Multiple witnesses; pilot; clear photo │
│ P5 - National Figure; Multiple independent witnesses; videotape │
│. │
│The composite Hynek Rating of a case shall consist of the combined S & │
│P factors, stated as Sn/Pn, e.g. S3/P5; except that cases with an S │
│factor of 1 shall simply be stated as S1. │
│. │
│Examples using recent or famous cases: │
│ S1 - Wickenburg, AZ, July 10 (explanation:Mars) │
│ S5/P1 - Billy Meier │
│ S2/P5 - X-shaped UFO, Petaluma, CA May 28 │
│ S4/P5 - Brazilian "Ping Pong Balls" │
│ S5/P4 - Betty & Barney Hill │
│ S4/P4 - Lubbock Lights │
│ S5/P5 - MedEvac Helicopter ("Coyne" Case) │
│ S3/P2 - Delphos │
│ S4/P2 - Anything published in SAUCER SMEAR │
│. │
│Discussion: │
│I believe this rating system will be a useful tool to investigators who │
│wish to narrow their focus to the most promising cases. It is not my │
│intention that any one group "stake a claim" to this system; rather, │
│I'd like to see several groups or investigators rate cases according to │
│their own view, merely using this system as a standard. │
│. │
│The rating of a particular case may, indeed perhaps should, change from time │
│time as new evidence is gathered. │
│. │
│Your comments are welcome. │
│. │
│Jim Speiser │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘