📊 Our Scoring Methodology

How we calculate credibility scores for UFO/UAP news and why you can trust our analysis.

🎯 The 100-Point System

Every article receives a credibility score from 0-100 based on five weighted factors. This system is designed to be objective, consistent, and transparent. Higher scores indicate stronger evidence and more reliable sources.

80+
High Evidence
60-79
Moderate
40-59
Limited
20-39
Low
<20
Unverified

⚖️ The Five Scoring Factors

30%

Source Reliability

The historical accuracy and journalistic standards of the publishing source. Government sources, major news networks, and peer-reviewed publications score highest. Unknown or historically inaccurate sources score lower.

High (85-100): Pentagon, NASA, major news networks, scientific journals
Moderate (60-84): Established specialty publications, regional news
Low (<60): Unknown sources, sites with history of inaccuracy
25%

Evidence Quality

The type and strength of supporting evidence. Physical evidence, official documents, and multi-sensor data score highest. Unsupported claims or anonymous sources score lowest.

Strong: Video/radar data, official documents, physical evidence
Moderate: Photographs, named witness testimony
Weak: Anonymous sources, unsupported claims
20%

Corroboration

Whether multiple independent sources confirm the information. Stories verified by multiple outlets or featuring multiple witnesses score higher than single-source reports.

Strong: Multiple independent sources, verified by other outlets
Moderate: Some corroboration, multiple witnesses
Weak: Single source, exclusive/unverified claims
15%

Official Acknowledgment

Whether government, military, or scientific institutions have acknowledged the phenomenon or information. Official statements and declassified documents significantly boost scores.

Strong: Official government statements, congressional testimony
Moderate: Acknowledged by agencies but not explained
Weak: No official acknowledgment
10%

Expert Analysis

Whether qualified experts (scientists, former officials, analysts) have weighed in on the claims. Expert endorsement increases credibility; expert debunking decreases it.

Strong: Multiple qualified experts support claims
Moderate: Some expert commentary, mixed opinions
Weak: No expert analysis or experts dispute claims

⚙️ Our Analysis Process

1. Aggregation

We continuously monitor news APIs and RSS feeds from trusted sources. When new UFO/UAP content is detected, it enters our analysis queue.

2. Source Evaluation

Each source is assigned a base reliability score from our database. Unknown sources receive a default neutral score of 50.

3. Content Analysis

AI-powered analysis identifies evidence types, checks for corroboration, and detects potential bias or sensationalism in the reporting.

4. Score Calculation

Each of the five factors is scored 0-100, then weighted according to the percentages above to produce a final credibility score.

5. Report Generation

A detailed report is generated explaining the score breakdown, key findings, and any concerns identified during analysis.

⚠️ Limitations & Disclaimers

No system is perfect. Our scoring methodology is designed to be objective, but it has inherent limitations:

  • AI analysis can make errors — we recommend reading full reports
  • Source scores are estimates — individual articles may vary in quality
  • New evidence can change scores — we update analyses as facts emerge
  • A high score doesn't mean "true" — it means strong supporting evidence
  • A low score doesn't mean "false" — it means limited verifiable evidence

We encourage readers to review our full analyses, check original sources, and form their own conclusions.

📰 See It In Action