Within Vosges UFOs
How Vosges UFOs Became Ordinary Again
Many Vosges reports became less mysterious after checks against flares, lanterns, balloons, aircraft, satellites and stars.
On this page
- Military flares and sky lanterns
- Balloons, stars and satellite checks
- Why honest witnesses can still be mistaken
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
Many Vosges UFO reports became ordinary again not because witnesses were careless, but because investigators were able to compare what was seen with known sky activity: military flares, lanterns, balloons, aircraft, satellites, bright stars, atmospheric re-entry and even projected light on clouds. In GEIPAN’s system, a case classed A is “perfectly identified” after investigation, while B means “probably identified”; C means there is too little reliable information, and D remains unidentified after investigation.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.fr· Classification B: Phenomenon probably identified after investigation. · Classification C:…Read more…
For Vosges, that distinction matters. The department’s public UFO record is not a simple split between “believers” and “sceptics”. It is a practical archive showing how strange-looking lights can be reduced case by case: a yellow glow becomes military flare activity near Rupt-sur-Moselle, a bright point near Gérardmer becomes a satellite flash, orange balls near Darnieulles become probable lanterns, and a colourful low light at Thaon-les-Vosges becomes Sirius setting behind the local horizon.[cnes-geipan.fr+3cnes-geipan.fr+3cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
Why “explained” does not mean “worthless”
A solved Vosges case can be more useful than a dramatic unresolved one. It shows which details actually changed the assessment: time, direction, duration, colour, wind, terrain, air traffic, astronomy, photographs, local activity and witness position. GEIPAN says its classification method depends on both the remaining strangeness after investigation and the consistency of the information available; a high-strangeness story with weak data can end up in a different category from a modest story with strong cross-checks.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frmethodologie classification geipanmethodologie classification geipan
This is why Vosges is a good department for studying “ordinary sky phenomena” in UFO history. The archive contains several cases where the initial testimony sounds genuinely puzzling: silent lights, apparent hovering, colour changes, sudden appearances, objects seeming to follow a vehicle, or a shape that looks structured. Yet the final explanation often rests on something quite concrete: a known aircraft track, a military exercise, a satellite position, a nearby venue’s lighting equipment, or a bright star near the horizon.[cnes-geipan.fr+2cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
That does not make the witnesses foolish. It shows that night observation is hard. Humans are poor at judging distance, size and altitude in a dark sky, especially when the object is silent, bright, partly hidden by terrain, or seen for only a few seconds. In Vosges, hills, forests, cloud bases and small settlements can make familiar phenomena look disconnected from their source.
Military flares and lanterns
The clearest Vosges example of a striking report becoming ordinary is Rupt-sur-Moselle on 25 May 2018. A witness saw vivid yellow lights appearing and disappearing at intervals in the night sky, with brightness compared to the Moon and visible beams. The scene lasted around five to ten minutes and was reported to the gendarmerie. GEIPAN later classed the case A: a confusion with illuminating flares used during a military manoeuvre. The key local clue was the direction of the sighting towards the fort of Rupt-sur-Moselle, about two kilometres away, and later information that soldiers from the 1st Tirailleurs Regiment of Épinal had been conducting manoeuvres in the sector.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
This case matters because it shows the value of local geography. A flare does not have to look like a “flare” to a witness sitting indoors and looking towards wooded or hilly ground. It can appear as a brilliant light source with beams, regular disappearances and reappearances, and an uncertain distance. Without the later military-context check, the report could have remained a vivid but poorly understood night-light incident.
Darnieulles on 5 August 2015 shows the softer version of the same problem. Two witnesses in the same commune saw several silent orange balls crossing a clear night sky between about 10 pm and 10.30 pm. The lights scintillated and faded gradually. GEIPAN classed the case B, not A, because the evidence supported but did not absolutely prove Thai lanterns. The clue was the pattern: orange lights, silent motion, summer evening timing, gradual extinction and one witness noticing a flicker like a candle flame.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
The difference between Rupt-sur-Moselle and Darnieulles is important. The flare case had stronger local corroboration. The lantern case had a good pattern match but lacked firm confirmation of a nearby release. That is why Vosges explained cases are not all equally “closed”. Some are identified with high confidence; others are best treated as probable explanations.
Balloons, aircraft and projected light
Older Vosges files show how slow daytime objects can become UFO reports before anyone checks local context. At Anglemont on 3 August 1976, an agricultural witness watched a shiny aluminium-coloured cylindrical object moving slowly for around 30 minutes before it disappeared towards the horizon. Neighbourhood enquiries found that several people recognised the description as an advertising balloon for a tyre manufacturer, seen several times that day. GEIPAN classed the case A.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
A similar balloon-like case appears at Remiremont on 24 September 1978. Three witnesses saw a silent, silver-coloured luminous object that seemed to sway and slowly disappeared behind the landscape. GEIPAN classed it B, saying the witnesses probably observed a balloon.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
Aircraft cases add a different lesson: a known plane can look unlike a plane when the viewing angle, lighting and witness expectation are unusual. At Dompaire on the night of 30–31 March 2007, four young witnesses reported white and red lights forming what they perceived as a metallic triangle, moving back and forth at varying speed and apparently passing very low above their vehicle. GEIPAN’s investigation connected the main observations to a DC9 of the Swiss company Hello AG performing repeated training circuits at Épinal-Mirecourt airport, including repeated “touch and go” exercises. The case was classed A: the witnesses were under the aircraft’s path in unusual observing conditions.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
Rambervillers on 25 July 2016 is quieter but just as instructive. A witness saw a fast, silent, spherical-looking object with an apparent ring reflecting sunlight. GEIPAN used on-site measurements, a witness interview, Flightradar replay and weather archives, then concluded that the object was a passenger aircraft. The apparent sphere and ring were compatible with uneven sunlight reflection on the fuselage and partial perception of the wings.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
Then there is the Remiremont-to-Dinozé case of 6 July 2007, one of the most memorable explained Vosges reports because it felt active and personal to the witnesses. A couple driving at about 1 am saw a silent, white-blue, vapour-like oval ring in cloudy sky, with several light circles around it. It seemed to follow their vehicle over more than twenty kilometres. GEIPAN found that the appearance and behaviour matched a sky tracer, a multi-beam projector casting light onto cloud, and confirmed that a discotheque in Épinal had such equipment at the time. The “following” sensation came from the projected pattern being visible over a wide area as the witnesses moved beneath the cloud base.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
Stars, satellites and re-entry checks
Some of the most persuasive explanations in the Vosges archive come from astronomy. Thaon-les-Vosges on 24 March 2021 involved repeated observations over several nights of a low, colourful point of light, with photographs and video. The witness saw colour changes and a slight movement, then disappearance. GEIPAN identified the object as Sirius setting. The explanation used the star’s brightness, its apparent movement due to Earth’s rotation, the local horizon and atmospheric effects such as turbulence, refraction and diffraction, which can make a bright low star shimmer and change colour.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
That case is a useful antidote to a common misunderstanding: a star does not always look like a steady white point. Near the horizon, especially through layers of moving air, a bright star can flash colours, distort on a camera, appear larger than expected and seem to vanish suddenly behind terrain or obstacles. In Thaon-les-Vosges, the witness’s repeated observations made the case easier to solve, not harder, because the timing and position could be checked against the sky.
Gérardmer on 18 August 2018 shows a different astronomical mechanism. A witness and a friend were in the forest taking astronomical photographs when a very bright point appeared near the Little Bear and Cepheus area of the sky at 11.08 pm. It seemed almost static and was seen very briefly. GEIPAN classed it A as a flash from the Iridium 33 P satellite debris, noting that the apparent stability could be explained by the geometry of a satellite passing nearly overhead and appearing to come towards the observer.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
Remiremont on 13 September 2007 was not quite so definitive. A witness saw two white points with reddish reflections moving north to south between 5.08 am and 5.13 am, separated by about two degrees and making no sound. GEIPAN classed it B as a probable satellite passage, possibly connected with a satellite and launcher in a near-polar orbit, while noting uncertainties about the reported brightness and an initial impression of immobility.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
Mirecourt on 22 November 1989 is a stronger example of an old dramatic case becoming less mysterious after later review. Two witnesses saw a fast, silent, very bright red phenomenon with sparks, flames and a trailing effect. GEIPAN noted that the file had previously been classed D, but was re-examined with newer tools and experience. The revised conclusion was A: a near-certain confusion with the atmospheric re-entry of the Soviet satellite Cosmos 2047.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
That reassessment is important for Vosges UFO history because it shows how a case can change category without any change in the witnesses’ sincerity. The decisive improvement was not a new confession or a debunking flourish. It was a better technical match between the reported time, trajectory, visual effects and a known re-entry event.
Why honest witnesses can still be mistaken
Vosges explained cases repeatedly show the same practical traps. They are ordinary, but not trivial.
Distance and altitude are easy to misread. A flare beyond a fort, an aircraft on approach, a satellite overhead or a projected pattern on cloud can all be placed mentally at the wrong distance. Once the distance is wrong, size and speed become wrong as well.
Silence is not proof of strangeness. Many Vosges reports mention silent objects, but satellites, lanterns, balloons and distant aircraft can be silent to the observer. Even a real aircraft can seem noiseless if the viewing conditions, wind, terrain and engine direction reduce or delay sound.
The eye turns points into objects. Several cases began with lights rather than a clearly seen craft. At Dompaire, lights were perceived as a triangular metallic form; in satellite re-entry cases, multiple bright fragments can look like a structured object; in the Remiremont-to-Dinozé sky-tracer case, cloud projections produced a ring-like form. GEIPAN’s own public guidance on space debris notes that organised groups of bright fragments can be interpreted as one large dark object outlined by lights, an illusion of shape or contour.[cnes-geipan.fr+2cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
Cameras can add false detail. Thaon-les-Vosges is a good example: GEIPAN found that the non-point-like appearance visible in images was generated by the camera rather than visible to the naked eye. This matters because modern reports often feel stronger when photos or videos exist, even though poor focus, digital zoom, exposure and movement can make a star or aircraft look more exotic.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
Repetition can either solve or confuse a case. Repeated sightings over several nights may feel like evidence of agency, but they can also point to a star setting at predictable times. Repeated passes near an airport can feel like a patrolling object, but may be training circuits. The useful question is not “was it seen more than once?” but “does the recurrence match a known source?”[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
What the Vosges pattern teaches
The explained Vosges cases do not erase the department’s unresolved or thinly documented files. They do, however, set a standard for reading them. A strong case should survive the same checks that solved the weaker or more ordinary ones: aircraft data, astronomy, weather, wind, local events, terrain, military activity, photography artefacts and witness geometry.
GEIPAN itself exists to collect, analyse, archive and inform the public about unidentified aerospace phenomena, and CNES describes rational explanations such as satellites, lanterns, balloons and aircraft as common possibilities for strange lights reported by citizens.[CNES]cnes.frOpen source on cnes.fr. In Vosges, that general statement has a concrete local record: Rupt-sur-Moselle’s flare activity, Darnieulles’ probable lanterns, Anglemont’s advertising balloon, Dompaire and Rambervillers’ aircraft, Gérardmer’s satellite flash, Thaon-les-Vosges’ Sirius, Mirecourt’s satellite re-entry, and Remiremont’s cloud-projected light.
The fairest conclusion is not that every Vosges UFO has been explained. It is that many of the department’s most striking ordinary cases only became ordinary after careful checking. That is the real value of the archive: it turns “I saw something impossible” into a more useful question — what known sky phenomenon could look impossible from this place, at this time, to this witness?
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to How Vosges UFOs Became Ordinary Again. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
The Demon-haunted World
Ideal for a page about ordinary explanations for strange sky phenomena.
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Endnotes
1.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/412
2.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2018-05-50534
3.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2018-08-50610
4.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2015-08-09265
5.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2021-03-51182
6.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: methodologie classification geipan
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/actualites/methodologie-classification-geipan
7.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/glossaire
8.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2007-07-08259
9.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2007-03-01763
10.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/1976-08-00329
11.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/1978-09-00547
12.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2016-07-09492
13.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2007-09-01801?order=field_date_d_observation&page=100&sort=desc
14.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/1989-11-01191
15.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/qu-ai-je-vu/etape-1
16.
Source: cnes.fr
Link:https://cnes.fr/en/projects/geipan
17.
Source: cnes.fr
Link:https://cnes.fr/projets/geipan
18.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2013-12-08633
19.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/1976-07-00316?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B13%5D=13&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_d_observation&page=46&sort=desc
20.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/1993-01-01279
21.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58788
22.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: evolution classification des cas
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/actualites/evolution-classification-des-cas
23.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: baisse cas d
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/actualites/baisse-cas-d
24.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/missions-methodes-et-resultats
25.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/faq-page
26.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/histoire-du-geipan
27.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: geipan revisite cas
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/actualites/geipan-revisite-cas
28.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/stats
29.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: missions methodes et resultat
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/actualites/missions-methodes-et-resultat
30.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/60779
31.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.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=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&page=10&select-category-export=nothing&video=on
32.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?customGetLattitude=46.94358292648825&customGetLongitude=4.4989013671875&customGetZoom=7&field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id=All&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=49.11702904077932&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=44.77013681219717&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=7.668457031250001&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=1.329345703125&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date_d_observation&page=3%2C16&sort=desc
33.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas?field_agregation_index_value=Vid%C3%A9o&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=title&page=%2C23&sort=asc
34.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas?field_agregation_index_value=Ain&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=title&page=%2C27&sort=asc
35.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-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_departement_textuel&page=4%2C30&sort=desc&undefined=
36.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=c&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_classification_des_cas&page=17&sort=asc
37.
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=2024-07-23&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=1&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_d_observation&page=3&sort=asc
38.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?field_date_value=2020-11-18&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=1&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_departement_textuel&page=0&sort=desc
39.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/en/documentation-tab/?page=0
40.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/en/search/cas?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B0%5D=11&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=title&page=26%2C17&sort=desc
41.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_date_value=2019-08-31&field_is_new_value=1&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date_d_observation&page=10&sort=desc
42.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B11%5D=11&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=5&select-category-export=nothing&sort=desc
43.
Source: Wikipedia
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEIPAN
Additional References
44.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn2xTieploU
45.
Source: youtube.com
Title: GEIPAN: Tout savoir sur les OVNIS et Phenomenes Aerospatiaux (PAN)
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWt2zkuxRNQ
46.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Ovnis: le Geipan, au CNES, enquet-e sur ces phenomenes
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeznl3GM0vs
47.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Meeting France’s UFO detectives • FRANCE 24 English
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zczcBLukQ6s
48.
Source: pariscience.fr
Link:https://pariscience.fr/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/MAGAZINE-10ans.pdf
49.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/CanalplusSeries/posts/astrophysicien-ing%C3%A9nieur-mais-avant-tout-directeur-du-gepan-et-il-nen-est-pas-ra/3508629252526031/
50.
Source: grafiati.com
Link:https://www.grafiati.com/en/literature-selections/psychologie-cognitive-etudes-comparatives/dissertation/
51.
Source: academia.edu
Link:https://www.academia.edu/99067452/GEIPAN_classification_with_text_mining_and_machine_learning
52.
Source: academieairespace.com
Link:https://academieairespace.com/event/geipan-studies-uaps-ufos/?lang=en
53.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/parismatchmag/posts/grande-figure-de-lufologie-fran%C3%A7aise-jean-jacques-velasco-ancien-directeur-du-ge/1374427691387881/
Topic Tree