https://preview.redd.it/1fyuifiakxqg1.png?width=2384&format=png&auto=webp&s=d60674815cb1c7aa36dff5581d658cdea5b5f977 I've been building a tool that cross-references UAP sighting data against environmental datasets — geomagnetic storms, earthquakes, NASA fireballs, nuclear facilities. Last week I ran a formal hypothesis test across all 199,276 sighting records in the database and the results challenged some assumptions I had going in. The clearest signal: days with NASA-confirmed fireball events have 1.87x the sighting reports compared to non-fireball days (14.2 vs 7.6 daily average, Cohen's d = 0.731). This makes sense — a bright bolide enters the atmosphere, people look up, some report it as a UAP, and the heightened attention drives additional reports that night. But the finding I didn't expect: the nuclear facility clustering effect isn't real. When I first mapped sightings against nuclear facilities, 22.7% of geocoded sightings fell within 80 km of a facility. That looked significant. But when I ran 20 control tests — each placing 140 random points at actual sighting locations (controlling for where people live and report) — those random points captured 54% of sightings. Nuclear facilities actually have fewer nearby sightings than random population centers because they're built in rural areas. The 12x overrepresentation I posted about before was comparing against Earth's total land area, which doesn't account for the fact that 93% of sightings are in the US. Once you correct for that, the effect reverses. Same story with geomagnetic storms — storm days have 30% fewer sightings, not more. Probably because storms correlate with cloud cover. What did hold up: - Summer seasonality (Jul peak, 22% overrepresentation Jun–Aug) - Weekend effect (45.3% on Fri–Sun vs expected 42.9%) - Fireball coincidence (1.87x) - Sighting distribution across Kp bands is non-uniform (χ² = 8,877) even though the direction isn't what you'd expect The tool runs 8 hypotheses against 5 datasets (sightings, geomagnetic Kp, USGS earthquakes, NASA CNEOS fireballs, nuclear facilities). All tests use proper controls — time-shifted baselines for seismic, population-density-controlled sets for nuclear. 6 of 8 supported. 2 overturned prior assumptions. All data and methodology publicly auditable at https://uapmonitor.org submitted by /u/moe_sidani [link] [comments]