Peter Leeson is the BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism at George Mason University. He is particularly interested in the economics of 18th-century pirates, as reflected in his forthcoming book “The Invisible Hook: The Hidden Economics of Pirates.” His other interests include dominoes and U.F.O.’s. With such an odd and diverse portfolio, he is a natural fit with Freakonomics, and he has agreed to guest-blog here this week. This is his first of three posts.
Flying saucers and little green men? The idea that extraterrestrials might be visiting earth became popular in the U.S. at least 60 years ago. But over the last several months, a series of U.F.O.-related events — impressive enough to catch even the most hardened skeptic’s attention — have burst onto the scene.
In late July, respected Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell publicly announced that Pentagon officials confirmed for him that aliens exist, that they have visited earth, and that a U.F.O. really did crash in the infamous Roswell, N.M., incident in 1947. Mitchell’s comments came only a few months after the British Ministry of Defense released its “X files” to the public, documenting U.F.O. sightings going back to 1978.
Could the tools of economics help us get to the bottom of the U.F.O. phenomenon? That’s what fellow economist Claudia Williamson and I are hoping in our latest project that uses economics to analyze the American flying saucer phenomenon.
We’re still in the early data-collecting stages of our project; but in doing so we’ve come across an intriguing pattern. The figure below plots total U.F.O. sightings in the U.S. for each state (per 10,000 residents) between 1997 and 2007 against total Bigfoot sightings in each state (per 10,000 residents) for the same period.
The relationship is strong and positive. States with more U.F.O. sightings also have more Bigfoot sightings. In fact, six of the top ten U.F.O. and Bigfoot states are the same: Washington, Oregon, New Mexico, Alaska, Wyoming, and Colorado. Two states, Washington and Oregon, are among both categories’ top five.
If you’re like many people, you may think it’s at least possible, though perhaps very unlikely, that U.F.O.’s are real. When it comes to Bigfoot, on the other hand, you’re quite certain he’s not real. If this is you, how should the pattern in this figure influence your beliefs?
At first blush, I think it should reduce your confidence in the validity of the U.F.O. phenomenon. The data suggest that alien spacecraft and Bigfoot tend to visit the same states with similar relative frequencies. Since you think Bigfoot sightings are bogus, this should raise red flags about U.F.O. sightings too. Whatever more mundane factors may be driving Bigfoot sightings are likely driving U.F.O. sightings as well.
A believer might point out that the top ten U.F.O. and Bigfoot states are all “great outdoors” states — states with lots of sightseeing, and therefore lots of opportunities to observe U.F.O.’s if they’re real, and apparently to mistake bears for sasquatches as well. So the pattern in the figure need not increase doubts about the U.F.O. phenomenon’s legitimacy.
There’s something to this response, but I don’t think it saves the U.F.O. phenomenon from additional doubt. First, although sightseeing may be more prominent in some states (on the surface at least), this wouldn’t explain why U.F.O.’s (airborne craft seen against the night sky) tend to be observed in the same places that Bigfoot (a woods-inhabiting creature seen mostly only in daylight) sightings occur — even if both phenomena are “real.”
Second, a number of the top ten U.F.O. and Bigfoot states share more in common than ample sightseeing opportunities. For instance, Washington, Oregon, Alaska, and Colorado — both U.F.O. and Bigfoot hot spots — are among the least religious states in the country, which might impact their citizens’ likelihood of “seeing” both phenomena.
Finally, and (at least from this economist’s perspective) potentially most critically, tourism is an important industry in nearly all major U.F.O. and Bigfoot states. States with more frequent U.F.O. and Bigfoot “visits” attract curious tourists who bring their wallets with their curiosity. (Note: the pizza joint in the picture below is in Portland, Ore., a top-three U.F.O. state.) This may provide an incentive for locals to “see” U.F.O.’s and Bigfoot more often.
I’m curious as to what others think may be responsible for the U.F.O./Bigfoot relationship. I should point out that, despite nearly all my friends’ ridicule, I’m open-minded about the possibility that both Bigfoot and U.F.O.’s exist. Skeptics and believers: what say you?
and 
. You can also watch it on 
You’re missing another obvious solution: “Big Foot” is actually a Wookie, an alien from outer space, and thus the alien sightings and Big Foot sightings are actually two sides of the same coin!
I am curious about how you collected your data. Are there organizations that collect this data? Are they national or statewide? If they are statewide, do some states have better data collection agencies? If so, could that be drawing this correlation? States with better data collection agencies will report more sitings of both phenomeon, and states with poor data collection agencies will report less sitings of both phenomeon.
The two phenomenons are very similar: They both might exist but probably not; all “sightings” can be explained by bears on their hind legs or lights that are just lights, or are hoaxes. If there is a “bigfoot” to back up all the alleged sightings, then where is the spoor? The DNA from a little fur left behind? Where is something that positively is not a known earth species? Of course the possibility of extraterrestrial life is possible, even assuredly likely given the odds of something as vast as the Universe; but what is unlikely to the point of impossibility (as we understand physics currently) is the ability of an extraterrestrial to travel to earth, hang about a bit, do some medical experiments on an Oklahoma farmer, and then depart without anyone else noticing. The commonality of these witnesses is gullibility, ignorance, and a desire to be someone more important than they are. What the states with high incidences of “sightings” have in common is high incidences of the aforementioned human
This seems to be more a sociological study, than ufology at first glance. The Bigfoot connection seems to imply a sociological & debunking angle to their study. With their scientific backgrounds to carefully uphold, I guess we can still be patient I suppose. I suppose one or two real scientists can find the guts to be an objective study. God forbid they become soild by being accused of being a ‘UFO believer.’ LOL
I guess I don’t wish to see repeated another pat ‘sleep paralysis answer to the abduction phenomenon by Richard McNally or Susan Clancy. Most of us know that many to most abductions, certainly in the first 20 years of the phenomenon, the abductees were wide awake, up and about, driving a car, taking a walk, playing in the front yard, or even, in one case, driving a tractor. As science decrees, if a theory does not fit the data, it must be rejected. More swamp gas.
We should all contact them with questions and suggestions, maybe we can lead them home gently. lol.
I have been plotting UFO sightings from the MUFON CMS and the NUFORC data bases for years. I beg to differ regarding Alaska & Wyoming. I get, if I am lucky only one UFO report from Alaska & Wyoming a month on average. Same with Montana, and the Dakotas.
I personally suspect there is actually much UFO activity there, just few are around per square mile to both see and report them. I have been in both Alaska and Wyoming, both are quite pristine and amazingly beautiful. Little population, and a huge state geographically.
What my findings show consistently over the years show is that New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, Indiana, Ohio, California, Colorado, Florida, Oregon, Washington are very active. Abroad, the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Italy, eastern Europe, and Australia. Sightings also tend to be along interstate highways, but from reading the witness reports, they generally tell the reports are from residents along these highways, not from travelers passing through. If you include the District of Columbia, Washington DC actually has more UFO reports per square mile anywhere in the world! New York City a close second.
I would like to know what data sources they are using for their study. I do not accept any Bigfoot and UFO connection at present, but show me the data, my mind is open.
Steve Reichmuth
@11, bears on their hind legs?!
You’re really not aware of what it is people are seeing, or at least, claiming they’re seeing. Bears don’t sprint 100 yards on their hind feet and hurdle a 4 foot barbed wire fence with ease.
As for spoor, what makes you think it hasn’t been found? Scat and hair have been found. Without a body, it’s not proof enough.
There’s more to it than you might suspect. Oh wait, I’m sorry, anybody who saw one is a rube and a bumpkin, problem solved!
What’s really surprising is how much of the behavior reported of these creatures by (rube, bumpkin) witnesses matches that of great apes. I guess these mentally unstable hayseeds sneakily read George Schaller and Jane Goodall books in between trips to the tractor pull.
If you’ve got any curiosity, look into what Jane Goodall thinks about this subject.
If UFOs weren’t real, then both kinds of sightings would be proportional to credulity, and the line would pass through the origin. It doesn’t. Ergo, the ‘baseline’ level of 1 UFO per 10,000 people represents real alien visitors.
That’s MATH.
If you wonder if aliens are real.. just watch this short 4 minute video from the Disclosure Project.. then watch the other videos online related to it.
57 varieties of alien beings catalogued by 1989
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xV9Wt_BCI-U
If you want on my list about the truth.. google AngelsForTruth and check out my site.. email Lisa at that email above to get on the list.
Thank you for posting my comment.
God Bless YOU!
Lisa