Opinions come in a wide variety of flavors. Experience tells us this is the case, as well as a quick glance around social media and the podcast circuit. How does one even begin to sort out all the conflicting proclamations and identify reasonably accurate information? For starters, some of us feel it's important to recognize whether we're observing, by definition, a stated opinion or an assertion of fact. The former may be allowed much tolerance, up to a point of irresponsibly promoting what might be considered harmful beliefs which are easily proven false. Otherwise, someone is pretty much entitled to whatever opinions they choose. It might be questioned if an individual seems disproportionately concerned about leading others to agree with their chosen opinion, but they are nonetheless entitled to believe as they wish. An assertion of fact, however, is another matter. Suggestions of the reality of certain phenomena, occurrence of supposed events, accusations leveled against people, and similar circumstances carry burdens of proof. Many people and even organizations show no interest in meeting such burdens. They are often content to do no more than post on social media and casually chat about their unverified assertions. In contrast, some others are much more rigorous in their research activities. Standards of evidence are essential to the rigorous researcher and those who wish to separate the proverbial signal from noise. Science journalist and author Sarah Scoles aptly addressed the topic when asked to provide content for a 2021 blogpost at The UFO Trail, Discerning Truth. Scoles pointed out how sources and attribution are key parts of a functional reporting process. “[L]ook at how much the piece relies on the word of its sources (turns out, people can say pretty much anything they want!), versus harder, more verifiable evidence,” Scoles wrote. “For example, 'Aliens landed on the White House roof, according to a guy who says he saw it happen' versus 'four people who described the same thing independently' versus 'security footage and genetic analysis' versus 'a declassified document.'” A challenge when failing to remain actively aware of the standards as described by Scoles often arises due to the utter volume of subpar articles, misleading statements, and outright incorrect assertions. We are regularly (and effectively, it might be added) bombarded from a host of platforms with simply wrong information. Compounding the problem is the likelihood we tend to start believing that which we hear most often. It, therefore, takes ongoing conscious decisions to remain vigilant in separating fact from fiction through embracing quality standards of evidence. Otherwise, we are at high risk of succumbing to confirmation bias and unwittingly spreading false or, at best, yet to be verified notions and concepts. When it comes to making assertions as compared to casually stating opinions, “Show, don't tell” is a good rule to both adopt and note in the work of others. Or, as recently suggested to me, the phrase is known in Latin, Ostende, non dice. Jack Brewer

It's been an exciting few weeks since our plans for launching the organization began to come to fruition. After months of detailed discussion and years of informal collaborations, co-founders Erica Lukes and Jack Brewer, along with the support of Barry Greenwood, filed EFR as a nonprofit corporation with the State of Utah. Shortly thereafter, we sought and received nonprofit status under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, effective August 17, 2022. So why did we do it? The short answer is to provide a platform for presenting original research; facilitating a supportive group for those who respect standards of evidence recognized by the professional research community; and maintaining and growing an archive of historic records. A bit more detailed answer follows. There is an abundantly clear need to provide the public with both reliable research as well as resources with which to conduct such research. This is evident in virtually every aspect of Western culture, including fringe topics such as UFOs and conspiracies that overlap with politics and extremist ideologies. The harm has been apparent in aspects of life ranging from public health safety to election integrity. EFR is confident it will make significant and positive contributions. Original research will be posted using sources that include documents obtained via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and records obtained through requests submitted to regional law enforcement and government agencies. Universally recognized standards of evidence will be respected in the pursuit of providing reliable reports on a wide range of subject matter, but EFR is much more than just a publicly supported news or research site. Our organization aims to additionally facilitate the sharing of research techniques, ideas, mentoring, and moral support. This will be accomplished through activities including conducting virtual events and organizing committees with a variety of goals and objectives. A network of competent and supportive research associates will be achieved and maintained. The research process will be as emphasized as the subject of inquiry. Another tier of our organization is archiving. EFR is currently storing special collections generously contributed by UFO investigators and their families, as well as a variety of materials of interest to researchers and the public at large. These collections will be preserved and maintained for public benefit. We are pleased to report we have already been contacted by individuals and journalists, asking about our intentions and funding sources. We find these to be more than reasonable lines of inquiry and we welcome more of same. Perhaps it will be helpful to explain we are currently operating out of pocket; we do not have a specific financial sponsor. The purpose of incorporating a nonprofit was multi-fold: seek crowdsource funding for research projects which require expenses such as FOIA fees, various types of equipment, occasional travel, and miscellaneous costs while offering tax deductible donations; qualify ourselves as a media organization per the FOIA as it relates to requests, resulting appeals, and potential lawsuits; seek grant funding exclusively offered to 501(c)(3) corporations; create a platform for our research, and other benefits we envision. Thank you again for your interest in Expanding Frontiers Research. We sincerely hope you find our work meaningful and worthy of your interest. We hope to impress you soon.