The report reads "No evidence exists to suggest that the phenomena seen are hostile or under any type of control, other than that of natural physical forces."
It adds: "There is no evidence that 'solid' objects exist which could cause a collision hazard. Evidence suggests that meteors and their well-known effects and, possibly some other less-known effects are responsible for some unidentified aerial phenomena," concludes the report.
"Considerable evidence exists to support the thesis that the events are almost certainly attributable to physical, electrical and magnetic phenomena in the atmosphere, mesosphere and ionosphere.
"They appear to originate due to more than one set of weather and electrically charged conditions, and are observed so infrequently as to make them unique to the majority of observers."
People who claim to have had a "close encounter" are often difficult to persuade that they did not really see what they thought they saw. The report offers a possible medical explanation.
"The close proximity of plasma related fields can adversely affect a vehicle or person," states the report.
"Local fields of this type have been medically proven to cause responses in the temporal lobes of the human brain. These result in the observer sustaining (and later describing and retaining) his or her own vivid, but mainly incorrect, description of what is experienced."
There are, of course, other causes of UFOs - aeroplanes with particularly bright lights, stray odd-shaped balloons and strange flocks of birds, to name but a few.
Dr David Clarke and Gary Anthony of
Sheffield Hallam University,
will present findings from the report
Unidentified Aerial Phenomena in the UK Air Defence
Region later this week.
The report, which they obtained under a Freedom of Information request, will also appear on the UK Ministry of Defence's website next week.
Editors Comment: Here we are once again reading an official Government UFO file that is full of hot air! This is just as ridiculous as the US Military's 'crash test dummy' or 'weather balloon' explanation for the Roswell crash of 1947. Natural phenomenon such as plasma clouds do not explain recorded military encounters with structured craft that have been observed by pilots and radar simultaneously.
The UFO believer isn't helped by such organisations as the BBC who run an article on the MOD report (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4981720.stm) and ask readers to submit a comment, only to cherry pick the replies and misrepresent the publics view. The readers comments regarding this paper stretches to 10 pages with replies mainly coming from UFO believers, and what quote do they include to go alongside their article? 'Never in thirty years of working out of doors at all hours have I seen anything that cannot be explained by a few seconds reasoned thought.' And that's the biggest problem of trying to get the UFO message across, the mainstream media closes ranks to make a mockery of the subject.
That's the reason why readers post uninformed opinions such as 'Why is it that no astronomers ever see UFO's?', or 'There is no UFO footage that has not been explained as being faked.' If such readers had just spent 5 minute researching on the internet they would soon realise that there is plenty of very good evidence that shows several thousands of people witnessing UFOs - I refer specifically to the Mexican footage taken by several cameramen during the 1990 solar eclipse above Mexico City, or that Carl Sagan believed in both aliens and UFOs. And the big problem with such statements is that most people who know nothing about the subject will believe them without even bothering to find out otherwise.
Why would the MOD's former head of UFO investigations, Nick Pope, claims that there was a considerable amount of cases that he investigated during the early 90's that could not be rationally explained. Also why does Mr. Pope, a one-time sceptic, now lecture about UFO encounters if UFOs are nothing but gas?
Many people will
try and convince you that UFOs are secret military
black projects, but the problem with that conclusion
is we've been told that since the 1950's. If it were
the truth why haven't we seen these 50 year old UFO
shaped black projects in regular use by now? Look at today's current technology - the space shuttle
cannot fly in rain or fog and its tiles are
constantly falling off - doesn't seem very advanced
compared to the manoeuvres and capabilities
displayed by real UFOs.
The MOD claim that UFOs over the UK have never presented a national security risk to these shores. That's an interesting claim when you consider that the 1980 Rendlesham Forest incident happened over a US Military base that housed nuclear weapons!