Witnessed a UFO?

Well ... I suppose having written a UFO story establishes the peculiar details of what I witnessed.

Given that any video or photographic "evidence" is wholly untrustworthy and that eyewitness reports from even the sane and honest are prone to errors and uncertainties, I wonder what kind of reports are meaningful in trying to establish whether there are real unexplained aerial phenomena or simply biological/electronic perception mistakes of phenomena that would be quite explicable if those mistakes were not made?

I'm no UFO enthusiast, but I know of a handful of 'exceptional cases', such as the Rendlesham Forest and Belgian Triangle cases, where there is correlation between individuals' accounts. Even in these most outstanding of instances, there are a range of alternative explanations which accord with the facts just as well as the UFO theory.

And as we've all seen convincing ghosts, aliens and monsters at the cinema, would even a spaceship's public landing on the White House lawn constitute 'proof' for the millions that saw it second hand? And if the spaceship were to land in your own back garden, would you be able to trust your own senses when your prior exposure to the UFO meme means that this same landing has been conjured by your mind several times before?

With uncertainties like these, I think those who wish to preserve a genuine objectivity on such an intriguing issue will have to wait for a correspondingly exceptional case, experienced immediately by a large number of people and of sufficient clarity and simplicity that only one interpretation is sustainable.

This is asking a lot, but as they say "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".