How We Score UAP Evidence
Methodology version 1.0. Every point in a score is attributable to a named component. Nothing is a black box.
What this archive is for
The purpose of this system is not to prove or disprove extraterrestrial explanations. It separates what the government record actually says, what evidence is available, what is independently corroborated, what has a plausible conventional explanation, what remains unresolved, and what 2nd City Standard concludes from the available evidence.
Unidentified is not extraterrestrial. A government document is not confirmation of an extraordinary origin. A radar return is not a spacecraft. Unresolved is not alien. Explained is not hoax.
Source hierarchy
- Priority 1National Archives original records
- Priority 2Original issuing government agency
- Priority 3Congressional and government testimony
- Priority 4Academic and scientific sources
- Priority 5Reputable journalism
- Priority 6Commentary and secondary analysis
News coverage is context, not evidence. Journalism can lead us toward primary documents; it does not replace them.
The 2CS UAP Evidence Score
Components total 100 points before deductions. The final score is stored with the methodology version so every case can be recalculated when the methodology changes.
| Component | Max | What it considers |
|---|---|---|
| Source Reliability | 0–20 | Official government record · Chain of provenance · Contemporaneous documentation · Original vs. secondary source |
| Witness Quality | 0–15 | Number of witnesses · Trained observers · Independence of witnesses · Consistency of testimony |
| Sensor Corroboration | 0–20 | Radar · Infrared · Optical · Satellite · Multiple independent sensors |
| Media / Physical Evidence | 0–15 | Photograph · Video · Physical evidence · Metadata integrity · Provenance |
| Data Completeness | 0–10 | Time · Location · Duration · Weather · Sensor information · Investigative documentation |
| Independent Corroboration | 0–10 | Separate agencies · Separate witnesses · Separate datasets |
| Anomalous Characteristics | 0–10 | Observed performance · Kinematics inconsistent with known craft · Sensor-consistent anomaly |
| Conventional Explanation Penalty | deduction | aircraft · balloon · drone · satellite · astronomical object · atmospheric phenomenon · sensor artifact · parallax · classified or known technology · hoax · insufficient observation |
Separate axes
Source confidence, evidence strength, anomaly level and data completeness are tracked separately. An authentic National Archives document can faithfully record a weak UFO report — a credible source is not the same thing as an extraordinary phenomenon.
Case statuses
- Unreviewed
- Under Review
- Insufficient Data
- Conventionally Explained
- Likely Explained
- Disputed
- Unresolved
- High-Interest Unresolved
There is deliberately no status implying extraterrestrial origin has been established.
AI usage, review and corrections
Machine extraction is labeled as machine-generated until an editor reviews it. AI inference is never silently converted into historical fact, and the research assistant may not manufacture citations — if the archive holds no supporting record, it says so.
When new evidence appears, a government assessment changes, source metadata changes, a conventional explanation strengthens, or a prior extraction proves incorrect, the case is updated and the revision history is preserved with a visible last-reviewed date and methodology version.