Within Ille et Vilaine UFOs
Why Etrelles Still Resists a Simple Answer
The Etrelles file is Ille-et-Vilaine's strongest modern unresolved report, but its limits are as important as its mystery.
On this page
- What the witnesses reported
- How GEIPAN tested the main explanations
- What an unresolved D1 case can and cannot prove
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
Etrelles is the Ille-et-Vilaine case that best shows both the attraction and the limits of a strong modern UFO file. On 1 June 2014, shortly after 23:00, two professional witnesses in a slow-moving service car reported a dark mass above or near their vehicle, carrying two small pale greenish-white lights, followed by an extremely fast silent departure towards the east. GEIPAN, the French space agency unit that collects and investigates reports of unidentified aerospace phenomena, sent investigators to the site, interviewed both witnesses, checked meteor, satellite, aircraft, lantern, laser and reflection explanations, and still classed the event as unexplained in its investigation report.[Geipan]geipan.frCompte rendu enquete113Modéle de document par défaut CNES version 1.5 mars 1999…
That does not make Etrelles proof of an extraordinary craft. It makes it a carefully documented unresolved report: two apparently reliable witnesses, good viewing conditions, a short but consistent narrative, and a stubborn timing dispute over whether the event could have been a meteor. The case matters because it is stronger than most casual night-light reports, yet still too brief and under-recorded to carry the weight that believers, sceptics or local legend might want to place on it.
What the witnesses reported
The observation took place in the Piquet industrial zone on the northern edge of Etrelles, a commune near Vitré in Ille-et-Vilaine. The two witnesses were travelling very slowly, about 15–20 km/h, in the same vehicle. GEIPAN’s investigation report says the phenomenon was seen through the windscreen at around 23:07 local time, almost vertically in front of or above the car, for only two or three seconds before it disappeared at what both witnesses described as a startling speed.[Geipan]geipan.frCompte rendu enquete113Modéle de document par défaut CNES version 1.5 mars 1999…
The core description is unusually specific for such a short event. Both witnesses reported two small round lights, white with a slight green tint, fixed in relation to one another and not producing a halo or beam towards the ground. One witness, referred to as T1 in the GEIPAN file, believed the lights were under a compact dark mass that briefly blocked out stars. He compared the apparent volume to roughly two Renault Espace-type vehicles, while also acknowledging that precise size and distance were hard to judge in the night sky.[Geipan]geipan.frCompte rendu enquete113Modéle de document par défaut CNES version 1.5 mars 1999…
The movement is the part that made the report stand out. According to the file, the phenomenon appeared briefly stationary, then moved eastwards in the direction of Laval, silently and at very high apparent speed. T2, the passenger, added a more complex detail: an apparent change of direction, first coming from the right over nearby industrial buildings and then turning towards the east. GEIPAN treated that possible bent trajectory as one of the key points in deciding whether a simple meteor explanation could fit.[Geipan]geipan.frCompte rendu enquete113Modéle de document par défaut CNES version 1.5 mars 1999…
The immediate aftermath also matters. The two witnesses did speak for a few minutes about what they thought the object could not be, but GEIPAN records that they then deliberately avoided a long “hot” discussion because they did not want to influence one another before writing their accounts. This does not make their testimony independent in the strict sense — they were together, saw the event from the same vehicle, and did exchange impressions — but it is one reason GEIPAN rated the witness material as unusually good for a short night observation.[Geipan]geipan.frCompte rendu enquete113Modéle de document par défaut CNES version 1.5 mars 1999…
Why GEIPAN treated the file seriously
GEIPAN is not a private UFO club; it is a technical group within CNES, the French space agency, with a mission to collect, analyse, investigate, publish and archive reports of unidentified aerospace phenomena. Its published method includes testimony collection, case creation, first analysis, investigation, classification, anonymisation and publication. It also openly stresses that human testimony is fragile: distance, speed, trajectory and strangeness can all be altered by perception, emotion and memory.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
Etrelles received more than a desk review. Two GEIPAN investigators went to the site on 30 June 2014, interviewed both witnesses separately using a cognitive interview method, and carried out an on-site reconstruction with environmental measurements such as azimuths, elevation, orientation, built surroundings and natural horizon features. The official report also records follow-up telephone interviews to clarify the precise time and the possible bent trajectory.[Geipan]geipan.frCompte rendu enquete113Modéle de document par défaut CNES version 1.5 mars 1999…
How GEIPAN tested the main explanations
The most important proposed explanation was a meteor, or more precisely a bolide: a bright meteor that can appear as a fast, silent light crossing the sky. The reason this hypothesis could not simply be ignored is that the French amateur meteor observer database recorded a meteor at 21:12:30 universal time, or 23:12:30 local summer time, on the same night. GEIPAN’s attached BOAM extract gives the date, time, camera records, speed, magnitude and azimuth data for the meteor event.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frGeipan BOAM.pdfGeipan BOAM.pdf
That meteor was not an abstract possibility. GEIPAN linked it to another case from the same evening at Fere-en-Tardenois, in Aisne, where a witness reported a very fast silent movement of luminous points; GEIPAN classified that separate case as a probable meteor or atmospheric re-entry-type observation.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
Etrelles resisted the meteor explanation for three main reasons. First, the witnesses placed their observation at 23:07, about five and a half minutes before the recorded meteor. T1 said he made a phone call at 23:12 after several minutes of discussion, and GEIPAN considered that sequence plausible. Second, the report included a brief stationary phase, which is awkward for a meteor. Third, T2’s account suggested a bent trajectory, also hard to reconcile with a simple straight meteor path.[Geipan]geipan.frCompte rendu enquete113Modéle de document par défaut CNES version 1.5 mars 1999…
The meteor hypothesis was not entirely defeated, however. GEIPAN noted that the recorded meteor fragmented into two masses, one smaller than the other, which could resemble the two lights reported by the witnesses. The strongest sceptical reading is therefore not “the witnesses invented it”, but “a real meteor may have been perceived, timed or reconstructed imperfectly”. The case survives because the timing, direction and motion details do not fit cleanly enough for GEIPAN to adopt that explanation.[Geipan]geipan.frCompte rendu enquete113Modéle de document par défaut CNES version 1.5 mars 1999…
Other explanations were tested and found weaker. Military air control reported no particular radar trace at the relevant place and time beyond normal airliners. Satellite possibilities were checked using astronomical listings; GEIPAN’s report rejected the International Space Station and satellite explanations because the timing, direction and apparent movement did not match the observation. Lanterns or wind-borne objects were judged very weak because the reported departure speed and colour were not compatible. Lasers or sky tracers were also considered very weak, partly because the relevant local environment and nearby venues did not fit. Reflections from car headlights on the windscreen were considered but downgraded because both witnesses saw the same phenomenon from different positions and the two lights kept a constant separation.[Geipan+2Geipan]geipan.frCompte rendu enquete113Modéle de document par défaut CNES version 1.5 mars 1999…
Why this is the best unresolved Ille-et-Vilaine case
Within Ille-et-Vilaine’s public UFO record, many cases end up as explained or only weakly unresolved: balloons, satellites, aircraft, lanterns, astronomical misidentifications or reports too thin to analyse. Etrelles is different because it combines a modern date, two named-but-anonymised professional witnesses, a field investigation, environmental reconstruction, competing hypotheses, and a formal GEIPAN conclusion that no tested explanation fitted well. GEIPAN’s case page states that the field investigation confirmed the witness reports and that the proposed hypotheses did not correspond well to the observation.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
It is also notable because GEIPAN publicly highlighted it at the time as one of two recent D1 cases. In that 2014 notice, GEIPAN explained that D1 cases are strange but of medium consistency, commonly lacking photo or video evidence, while D2 cases require stronger consistency such as independent witnesses, recordings or physical traces. The same notice listed Etrelles as a D1 case with two non-independent witnesses.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frdeux nouveaux cas d1deux nouveaux cas d1
There is a small but important classification nuance. The original investigation report explicitly says GEIPAN classed Etrelles as D1: unexplained, high consistency because of two good witness accounts, and medium strangeness because the material nature of the object was possible but not certain. The current GEIPAN case page displays the classification as D after a later update, while still retaining the report language and documents. GEIPAN’s classification page explains that D1 and D2 were sub-classifications used from 2008 and that a D1 or D2 case remains a D case. In plain English: Etrelles is still in the unresolved-after-investigation family, but readers should not treat the label alone as more precise than the underlying report.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
That is why “best unresolved” does not mean “most spectacular”. It means the case has enough documentation to be worth discussing after the obvious explanations have been tried, and enough limits to stop it becoming a claim of proof.
What an unresolved D1 case can and cannot prove
An unresolved GEIPAN case proves less than many UFO enthusiasts hope, but more than many casual sceptics assume. It proves that trained investigators could not match the report to a known explanation using the information available. It does not prove that an unknown machine crossed Etrelles, that the witnesses correctly estimated distance or speed, or that the dark mass was physically present rather than inferred around two lights. GEIPAN itself warns that beyond short distances the human eye and brain cannot reliably estimate the distance of an unknown phenomenon; a mistake in distance also produces a mistake in real speed.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frGeipan Comprendre un Phénomène | GEIPANGeipan Comprendre un Phénomène | GEIPAN
Etrelles is especially vulnerable to that problem because the observation lasted only seconds and had no photograph, video, radar trace or physical mark. The official report says there were no ground traces, no environmental effects and no recording. GEIPAN therefore had to weigh testimony, timing, reconstruction and hypothesis testing rather than independent sensor evidence.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
The case also illustrates why witness reliability and evidential strength are not identical. The witnesses may be sincere, observant and professionally credible, while still being subject to the ordinary limits of perception under surprise. GEIPAN’s own methodology page stresses that testimony can be affected by autokinetic effects, wrong distance and speed estimates, trajectory reconstruction errors, emotional response and memory changes. Those caveats are not special pleading against Etrelles; they are the normal conditions under which any brief night-sky report must be assessed.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
The most balanced reading is therefore this: Etrelles remains unresolved because the meteor, satellite, aircraft, lantern, laser and reflection explanations do not fit the file cleanly enough. It remains limited because the observation was extremely brief, the two witnesses were not independent, the apparent object was not recorded, and the most plausible ordinary explanation — a meteor on the same evening — is weakened but not erased.
Why the case still resists a simple answer
The heart of Etrelles is the five-minute problem. If the witnesses’ 23:07 timing is right, the recorded 23:12:30 meteor is too late. If the witnesses were wrong about the time, the meteor becomes a much stronger candidate. GEIPAN found the witnesses’ timing plausible because the 23:12 phone call reportedly came after several minutes of discussion, but this still relies on memory of a fast, surprising event and on reconstruction after the fact.[Geipan]geipan.frCompte rendu enquete113Modéle de document par défaut CNES version 1.5 mars 1999…
The second sticking point is movement. A meteor can be fast, silent and fragmented. It cannot normally hover above a car, turn sharply, or sit under a dark mass. Yet those are precisely the kinds of features that can become uncertain in a dark sky with few reference points, especially when a witness tries to interpret two lights as parts of one object. GEIPAN’s report recognised this tension by rating the material object as possible, not certain.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
The third sticking point is absence. There is no image, no video, no radar confirmation, no trace and no independent second location. That absence is why Etrelles was not upgraded to D2. But the absence does not flatten the case into nothing: GEIPAN still considered the testimony high quality, the conditions ideal and the available explanations poor.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frdeux nouveaux cas d1deux nouveaux cas d1
For Ille-et-Vilaine’s UFO history, that is the value of Etrelles. It is not a dramatic local legend that settles the UFO question. It is a disciplined unresolved file that shows how a case can remain genuinely puzzling after official scrutiny while still falling far short of proof.
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to Why Etrelles Still Resists a Simple Answer. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
UFOs
Focuses on documented cases, witness testimony, and official investigations, matching the article's emphasis on an unresolved but careful...
The UFO Experience
Explores classification and investigation of UFO reports, directly relevant to understanding unresolved cases such as Etrelles.
The Believing Brain
Helps readers understand perception, memory, and belief formation when assessing eyewitness reports and unexplained events.
Identified Flying Objects
Examines how unusual aerial reports are interpreted and investigated, complementing discussion of competing explanations.
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Endnotes
1.
Source: geipan.fr
Title: Compte rendu enquete113
Link:https://geipan.fr/sites/default/files/Compte%20rendu%20enquete113.pdf
2.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/sites/default/files/PV%20n%C2%B02851%20%282014311435%29.pdf
3.
Source: cnes.fr
Link:https://cnes.fr/en/projects/geipan
4.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_date_d_observation_value%255Bmax%255D=&field_date_d_observation_value%255Bmin%255D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%255Bmax%255D=&field_latitude_value%255Bmin%255D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_longitude_value%255Bmax%255D=&field_longitude_value%255Bmin%255D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date_d_observation_textuel&page=159&sort=desc
5.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=c&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=title&page=101&sort=desc
6.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B12%5D=12&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B13%5D=13&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B14%5D=14&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B15%5D=15&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B16%5D=16&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=1&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_departement_textuel&page=64&select-category-export=nothing&sort=desc&video=on
7.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date_d_observation_textuel&page=7&sort=asc
8.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?customGetLattitude=46.124763699209396&customGetLongitude=2.406005859375001&customGetZoom=6&field_agregation_index_value=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=50.52739681329302&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=41.72213058512578&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=8.745117187500002&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=-3.9331054687500004&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date_d_observation_textuel&page=148&sort=desc&undefined=
9.
Source: boam.fr
Link:https://boam.fr/?lang=en
10.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Unexplained UFOs near Rennes: filmed reenactment of the Étrelles case
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7MToY5eaBY
11.
Source: youtube.com
Title: GEIPAN: Tout savoir sur les OVNIS et Phénomènes Aérospatiaux (PAN)
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWt2zkuxRNQ
12.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Feuilleton phénomènes étranges 2/4
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpFFKUk5uXc
13.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn2xTieploU
14.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2014-06-50078
15.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/56695
16.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/missions-methodes-et-resultats
17.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58788
18.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: Geipan BOAM.pdf
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/sites/default/files/BOAM.pdf
19.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2014-06-08707
20.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: Compte rendu enquete433
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/sites/default/files/Compte%20rendu%20enquete433.pdf
21.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: Geipan Celestial Calendar at Cal Sky
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/sites/default/files/Calsky.pdf
22.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: Geipan Statistiques | GEIPAN
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/stats
23.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: deux nouveaux cas d1
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/actualites/deux-nouveaux-cas-d1
24.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: Geipan Classification | GEIPAN
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/node/58787
25.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: Geipan Comprendre un Phénomène | GEIPAN
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/qu-ai-je-vu/etape-1
26.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/search/cas?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B14%5D=14&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B15%5D=15&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=%2C2&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
27.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: Compte rendu enquete113
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/sites/default/files/Compte%20rendu%20enquete113.pdf
28.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/search/cas?field_date_valu_valu=04-23&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&page=%2C168
29.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=c&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=title&page=41&sort=asc
30.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B14%5D=14&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B15%5D=15&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=%2C2&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
31.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?customGetLattitude=49.42700809484137&customGetLongitude=-0.9608752280473711&customGetZoom=7&field_agregation_index_value=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=51.49757451349519&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=47.35644167618756&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=2.2526257485151295&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=-4.174376204609872&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=16%2C0&sort=asc
32.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B0%5D=15&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B1%5D=16&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=50.52739681329302&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=41.72213058512578&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=9.865722656250002&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=-5.075683593750001&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_classification_des_cas&page=1&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
33.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=06&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=19&sort=desc
34.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58791
35.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/sites/default/files/News-V3-VBA-February20-2018_V1.pdf
36.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=116&order=field_classification_des_cas&page=%2C52&select-category-export=nothing&sort=desc
37.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/search/cas?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B0%5D=15&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=%2C1&select-category-export=nothing&sort=desc
38.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/search/cas?field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_departement_textuel&page=%2C168&sort=desc
39.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B0%5D=15&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B1%5D=16&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=50.52739681329302&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=41.72213058512578&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=9.865722656250002&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=-5.075683593750001&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=title&page=%2C1&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
40.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/search/cas?field_agregation_index_value=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=116&order=field_date&page=%2C316&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
41.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/temoignage/8214
42.
Source: Wikipedia
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEIPAN
43.
Source: uapedia.ai
Link:https://uapedia.ai/wiki/geipan-frances-official-uap-unit/
44.
Source: academieairespace.com
Title: geipan studies uaps ufos
Link:https://academieairespace.com/documents-et-medias/geipan-studies-uaps-ufos/?lang=en
Additional References
45.
Source: skepticalinquirer.org
Link:https://skepticalinquirer.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2009/01/p47.pdf?ref=thegalacticmind.com
46.
Source: x.com
Link:https://x.com/BOAM_meteore
47.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/ScienceetVieMag/posts/comment-le-geipan-trie-t-il-les-t%C3%A9moignages-dovni-/1240982891514879/
48.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/FRANCE24.English/posts/-franceinfocus-is-there-anybody-out-there-in-france-an-organisation-exists-whose/860539629578748/
49.
Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ronald-Fisher-2/publication/20362017_Field_Test_of_the_Cognitive_Interview_Enhancing_the_Recollection_of_Actual_Victims_and_Witnesses_of_Crime/links/54902c880cf2d1800d8647aa/Field-Test-of-the-Cognitive-Interview-Enhancing-the-Recollection-of-Actual-Victims-and-Witnesses-of-Crime.pdf
50.
Source: reddit.com
Link:https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cc1tve/the_debrief_the_new_director_of_geipan_frances/
51.
Source: semanticscholar.org
Link:https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Field-test-of-the-Cognitive-Interview%3A-enhancing-of-Fisher/3a0916793572f78cb373ae537e848fecd50c6679
52.
Source: oamonitor.ireland.openaire.eu
Link:https://oamonitor.ireland.openaire.eu/national/search/publication?pid=10.1037%2F0021-9010.74.5.722
53.
Source: astro.oma.be
Link:https://www.astro.oma.be/fr/samedi-18-janvier-2014-21h20-un-meteore-tres-lumineux-au-dessus-des-pays-bas-et-de-la-belgique/
54.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/ladepechedumidi/posts/-lhypoth%C3%A8se-extraterrestre-est-peut-%C3%AAtre-celle-qui-explique-le-mieux-certains-ph/1414617404033337/
Topic Tree