Testimony-Weighted Infrastructure Estimate
Idea
A scoring method for claims about secret facilities: rate each claim on how close the witness actually was to what they describe (built it, worked there, visited, heard about it) and on whether independent evidence — satellite imagery, seismic data, declassified documents — backs it up. High-proximity, corroborated claims get treated as likely real; well-attested but uncorroborated ones stay contested, and the method exists to avoid both knee-jerk dismissal and knee-jerk belief — it revised one famous claim of '131 underground bases' down to roughly 20-40.
The engine's definition — word for word
**Plain read:** A methodology for evaluating secret-infrastructure claims rigorously. Every claim gets scored on two axes: (1) how close was the witness to what they're describing (did they build it / work there / visit / hear about it), and (2) is there independent evidence (commodity flows, satellite imagery, seismology, declassified documents)? Claims that score high on proximity and high on corroboration get treated as likely real. Claims with high testimony but zero corroboration (Dulce Base) get treated as contested. This prevents both default-dismissal and default-credulity. Report #75 uses this methodology to revise Phil Schneider's '131 underground bases' claim down to a ~20-40 node synthesis.
TECHNICAL: Every facility claim is scored along witness proximity (0-5) + independent corroboration (commodity-flow, seismic, InSAR, satellite-thermal, declassified-document evidence). Prevents both default-dismissal (C-hypothesis collapse) and default-credulity (H-hypothesis inflation).
Walk this on the live map →