Explore the accounts, documents and research behind UFOs and UAP.
We add newly reviewed sources as they are ready. Not all of our research is public yet.
381 sources so far
Loeb announces a planned May2025 congressional presentation, proposes new observations and offers to help analyze any government-held extrasolar information. That conditional offer originates with Loeb; it does not establish a government approach or access. Natural IM1 origins, funding contingencies and an all-human UAP outcome remain explicit possibilities.
Complete supplied public essay; planned event and original records qualifiedBarlow, Nolan and colleagues examine spatial immune patterns in a small diabetes donor study. The paper and its public reviews retain limits on selection, marker interpretation and causal inference; this is background biomedical research with no UAP-exposure cohort.
Paper text, figures and reviews readThis computational study reanalyses existing tissue datasets to describe spatial cell diversity and infer molecular relationships. Its liver comparison has one tissue per condition, subdivided into ten regions; these are not ten patients. Colorectal-cancer survival models use internal validation. Nolan is explicitly acknowledged for NIH support and two FDA Medical Countermeasures Initiative contracts. Those public acknowledgements establish reported research support, without verifying contract scope or a classified UAP approach.
Complete specialist supplied XML text; native apparatus unreviewedThis preprint infers large sizes, speeds and low albedo from Kyiv observations and third-party lunar and combat videos. The interpretation depends on calibration and geometry assumptions; original recordings and raw data are absent. Repeated events, conflicting numbers and uncertain video custody remain explicit.
Supplied preprint text and figures readThis serology technology article was reviewed only for descriptive background, author roles, funding, disclosures and bibliography. Aggregate assay counts do not establish independent participant counts or clinical performance; their target-count arithmetic remains unresolved within this scope. Nolan shares an acknowledged NIH award with Julien Sage and is a corresponding author/joint supervisor. Patent and company interests are declared. Results, Discussion, Methods and figure captions remain excluded; no UAP or private-approach inference follows.
Partial descriptive XML; Results, Discussion and Methods excludedDolan offers qualified expectations about the first weeks of the Trump administration. Comments disagree about policy, funding and disclosure. This is political author context, with predictions and UFO-related inferences retained as unverified interpretations.
Supplied context article and comments readThis mouse-intestine study combines spatial imaging, gene-expression and glycan measurements to examine inflammation-associated patterns. Its many cells and regions come from eight main-cohort mice, and correlations do not establish microbial causation or clinical performance. Nolan is a corresponding author and joint supervisor. The reviewed scope is partial, with biological-validation sections and Methods excluded; public support and commercial disclosures do not establish a UAP programme or private approach.
Partial specialist XML; validation and Methods excludedThis coauthored review surveys reported aerospace and undersea phenomena, historical cases and proposed research. Selected figure pages distinguish drawings, photographs, material reports and hypothetical interpretations. Its coauthors and reproduced cases do not supply independent verification of underlying events, anomalous materials or government programmes.
Prior supplied HTML; all 195 retained native layouts viewedElizondo’s written replies attribute material-possession and transfer claims to contractor executives and a Lacatski statement. Publication clearance is not verification. He reports visiting a PAX hangar but says no materials had yet transferred there; he lacks direct knowledge of Lockheed identification. A White House conversation, agency obstruction and retaliation are attributed accounts with missing originals. Biological-specimen status is unknown, and scientists’ origin hypotheses remain conjecture. Conditional offers of secure details do not establish a completed briefing.
Received written text and native layouts; originals and interpretation gapsPowell recounts SCU correspondence requesting AARO’s public analysis and his own witness interviews and Stephenville investigation. The aerial events remain witnesses’ accounts and analytical claims without their original records. He distinguishes those activities from alleged hidden craft documents and acknowledges evidence and access gaps.
Supplied transcript text readThis HCA perspective, coauthored by Garry Nolan, describes equitable participation, local research leadership, informed consent, privacy and open versus managed data access. Its claims concern consortium aims and reported activities, rather than a clinical trial or proof of universal benefits. Public scientific collaboration and institutional affiliations do not demonstrate a secret government approach or UAP programme.
Complete supplied XML text; original figure pixels unreviewedGallaudet reports receiving and later losing a Navy email, a personal communication from Chris Mellon about alleged satellite imagery, and a meeting with AARO staff. His reported contacts are distinguished from relayed imagery claims, inferred programme explanations and characterizations of agency motives. He expressly says he was not read into a special access programme. Proposed closed briefings and oversight measures remain proposals. Original messages, imagery, meeting records and independent accounts were not received.
Supplied written text and all seven received native layouts; contact and original-record gapsA curated public selection. Source review describes what was read; it does not establish that a claim is true. Our research approach