Jen Buss

The panel's draft answer to statement-of-task Question 1 is that NASA/NOAA/FAA/Commerce data reviewed was not collected for the purpose of identifying UAP, introducing bias, and that despite an immense amount of data being available, it is hard to access and the sensors used were not well calibrated for identifying anomalous phenomena.

the panel reviewed data sources... the data that we recognize were not collected for the purpose of identifying UAP, which leaves bias in the data that was collected

The panel's draft answer to statement-of-task Question 2 is that data collected by nonprofits and companies tracking UAP sightings is generally not considered rigorous scientific data: it is not repeatable, is largely based on eyewitness accounts, and is not unbiased.

the study panel concluded that much of the inputs collected by these organizations are not considered scientific data in nature, and that they do not contain unbiased information