Within Hauts UFOs
When City Lights Become UFO Reports
Many Hauts-de-Seine UFO reports make more sense as lanterns, balloons or debris once wind, timing and witness position are checked.
On this page
- Lantern cases in Montrouge and Asnières
- Balloons, debris and scale mistakes
- How urban reports are tested
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
Orange lights over Hauts-de-Seine are often less mysterious than they first appear. In the official French UFO record, several reports from this dense western suburban department of Paris have been assessed as probable lanterns, balloons, wind-blown debris, illuminated party objects, or other ordinary objects seen briefly from awkward urban viewpoints. That does not make the witnesses careless. It shows how city skies can distort scale, distance and motion, especially at night, when a small flame-lit or reflective object may look like a silent craft moving above roofs and tower blocks. GEIPAN, the French official body within CNES that collects and analyses unidentified aerospace phenomenon reports, records Hauts-de-Seine cases in which orange or reddish lights at Montrouge, Bagneux, Clamart, Asnières-sur-Seine and Châtillon were judged likely to have mundane explanations, usually because colour, silence, wind direction, fading light and short duration all pointed the same way.[Geipan+5CNES+5GEIPAN]cnes.frGEIPAN7 Jul 2025 — GEIPAN, the French UAP research and information group created by CNES in 1977, collects, analyses and archives inf…
This matters for the department’s UFO history because Hauts-de-Seine is not open countryside. INSEE gives the department’s 2023 population as 1,654,712, with a density of 9,422.7 people per square kilometre, so a large, low, spectacular object crossing the sky should often have more than one witness or a strong trail of corroboration.[Insee]insee.frOpen source on insee.fr. When a report instead involves one observer, a short view, no sound, no clear distance estimate and a path compatible with the wind, the case usually becomes a lesson in misidentification rather than a lasting mystery.
Why orange lights are so persuasive in city skies
The most misleading feature of a lantern-style sighting is also the most memorable: a warm orange, red or yellow light moving without engine noise. GEIPAN’s own public material on flying lanterns says that since around 2008 it has received many reports of orange balls moving silently in the night sky, with early investigations concluding that many were small hot-air lanterns, also known as Chinese or sky lanterns.[GEIPAN]cnes-geipan.frINFORMATION GEIPAN LES LANTERNES VOLANTES UNE MEPRISE COURANTE GPUBLICINFORMATION GEIPAN LES LANTERNES VOLANTES UNE MEPRISE COURANTE GPUBLIC That description fits a recurring pattern in Hauts-de-Seine: a witness sees a light or group of lights, often late at night or around a festive period, and the object appears too smooth, too quiet or too oddly coloured to be a normal aircraft.
The difficulty is that the eye has very little to work with. A small orange flame against a dark sky provides colour and brightness, but not reliable size, range or altitude. Without a known reference object at the same distance, the same point of light can be read as a small object nearby, a larger object farther away, or a formation of separate objects. GEIPAN’s Asnières-sur-Seine case from 7 June 2014 is a good example. The witness reported around twenty orange balls at 23:53 on a Friday night. GEIPAN noted that they were almost stationary, shifted slightly left and faded progressively, and that wind data from Roissy showed a light west or north-westerly wind of 13 to 19 km/h. It classified the case as category B: a probable observation of sky lanterns.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.
Urban geometry adds another trap. In a city, a witness may see an object only while it passes between buildings, above a roofline, or through a narrow window view. That can make a gentle drift seem like a purposeful crossing, a fade-out seem like sudden disappearance, and a change in perspective seem like a climb or turn. The Montrouge case from 21 July 2009 shows this neatly: a witness saw four red lights around 00:40, moving north-south for about two minutes, with no sound. GEIPAN reported no photos, no film and no other witness, but said the red-orange colour, silence, low apparent altitude, sudden extinction and repeated national pattern of such reports supported a probable sky-lantern explanation.[GEIPAN]cnes-geipan.frGEIPANMONTROUGE (92) 21.07.2009 | GEIPAN…
Lantern cases in Montrouge and Asnières
The Montrouge and Asnières cases are useful because they sit at different ends of the same lantern pattern. Montrouge was a compact report: four red or red-orange lights, late at night, silent, brief, and without supporting imagery. The witness’s own questionnaire data, published by GEIPAN, describes an urban setting, a night or clear-sky condition, a distance estimate of at least several hundred metres but uncertain, four objects, a spherical or ball-like form, red-orange “fire” colour, and total silence.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr. Those details do not prove lanterns by themselves, but they are exactly the kind of details that make a lantern explanation stronger than an exotic one.
Asnières-sur-Seine was more striking because the witness described a larger group: about twenty orange balls. A group can feel more extraordinary than a single light because the witness may interpret it as a formation. Yet for lanterns, groups are actually less surprising than lone objects. They are often released together at parties or celebrations, then spread, rise, drift and fade at slightly different rates. In Asnières, GEIPAN specifically read the timing — a Friday night at 23:53 — and the behaviour — a group of orange balls fading while drifting slightly — as consistent with a festive lantern release.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.
The two cases also show the value of wind checks. In a night sighting, witnesses often describe direction in relation to themselves: left, right, towards Paris, behind a building, over a roof. Investigators need to translate that into a real-world trajectory and compare it with weather records. In Asnières, GEIPAN linked the apparent movement to the recorded wind. In Clamart on 26 December 2011, another Hauts-de-Seine lantern case, a witness south-south-east of Paris saw an orange luminous ball flying at low altitude towards Paris; GEIPAN said the description and movement with a southerly wind were fully consistent with a sky lantern, and noted that the Christmas period was favourable to lantern releases.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.
That does not mean every orange light is automatically a lantern. It means a lantern hypothesis becomes strong when several independent features converge: orange or red flame-like colour, silence, slow drift, disappearance by fading, weekend or holiday timing, and motion compatible with wind rather than aircraft routes. In Hauts-de-Seine, the official files show this convergence several times.
Balloons, debris and scale mistakes
Not all urban misidentifications in Hauts-de-Seine are lanterns. Some are balloons, reflective party objects, weather balloons, or debris carried by wind. These cases matter because they show the same core problem from a different angle: people are often poor at judging the size, height and speed of unfamiliar objects in the sky when there is no reliable distance cue.
In Issy-les-Moulineaux on 29 March 2008, a witness saw three dark circular objects pass silently through the sky for about 30 seconds before the urban landscape hid them. GEIPAN listed the objective factors behind its category B conclusion: rounded shape, movement on the same south-to-north axis as the wind, possible maximum size of about one to three metres, possible maximum altitude of about 30 to 38.5 metres, and an appearance similar to transparent balloons. It concluded that the objects were probably wind-borne balloons, although their precise origin and release point were not identified.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.
The Courbevoie case from 27 July 2012 is even more revealing because it happened in daylight, at 08:23, during a busy urban period. The witness saw a large, dark, silent object moving at constant speed. GEIPAN described the testimony as relatively consistent but noted that the object’s speed and direction were compatible with the wind, and that no other witness came forward despite the supposed overflight of a densely populated area at rush hour. It classified the case as category B: probably flying debris carried by the wind.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr. In a department as crowded as Hauts-de-Seine, that absence of corroboration is not decisive, but it is significant.
More recent files show how video can improve the analysis without necessarily making a case more mysterious. In Sceaux on 4 June 2023, a witness filmed a dark round form with what looked like “flames” from a third-floor flat at 21:29. GEIPAN classified the case as category A, a very probable Mylar balloon. The analysis found that the object’s real track differed from the witness’s stated direction, that the track matched the wind, and that the apparent flames could be reflections from the setting sun on a rotating metallic balloon surface. GEIPAN estimated the object was about 100 metres from the witness.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.
This is one of the most useful Hauts-de-Seine examples because it shows a witness honestly reporting something strange while a video allows investigators to correct the geometry. The “flames” were not dismissed as imaginary; they were explained as a lighting effect on a reflective surface. That is often how good sceptical analysis works: it preserves what the witness saw, but changes what the sighting means.
Châtillon and the blurred line between lanterns and party balloons
The Châtillon report of 29 August 2015 sits between the lantern and balloon categories. At about 14:00 on a Saturday, a witness noticed four separate round yellow-orange objects with bright red centres. They moved slowly and silently, seemed to form a single phenomenon, passed above a building and were lost from view. The witness managed to take a photograph, and GEIPAN later classified the case as category B: probable balloons.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.
The interesting point is not simply the conclusion; it is the ambiguity. GEIPAN said the slow movement and approach over the building were compatible with a light north-easterly wind. It also noted that the round form suggested balloons, while the red or orange luminous appearance could fit sky lanterns or helium balloons fitted with LEDs.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr. In other words, the official conclusion did not require one perfect match. It was enough that the objects behaved like passive wind-borne objects and did not require controlled flight.
That distinction is important for public-facing UFO history. Many readers expect investigations to produce a single named object: “it was this aircraft”, “it was that lantern release”, or “it was this balloon”. Urban cases often cannot do that. A category B conclusion may instead mean “the most likely family of explanations is clear, but the exact source is unknown”. For Châtillon, the difference between LED balloons and lantern-like objects is less important than the shared mechanism: small, light, drifting objects seen briefly from below in a built-up area.
How urban reports are tested
GEIPAN’s method matters because it prevents both easy dismissal and easy sensationalism. The organisation says human testimony is central to its process, but witnesses are expected to complete a technical questionnaire, and photos, videos, sketches or other records may supplement the account. Its classification system separates identified cases, probably identified cases, insufficient-information cases and cases that remain unidentified after investigation.[GEIPAN]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr. That framework is especially useful in Hauts-de-Seine, where many reports are brief, single-witness and shaped by urban viewing conditions.
For orange-light and drifting-object reports, the practical tests are usually straightforward:<div class="content-enhancement content-enhancement--insight-grid" markdown="1">
- Colour and light behaviour: orange, red, yellow or flame-like lights that fade progressively are more consistent with lanterns than with aircraft navigation lights.
- Sound: silence can feel mysterious, but small passive objects and distant aircraft may produce no audible sound from a city street or flat.
- Wind match: if the object moves in the same direction and speed range as the wind at the time, the lantern, balloon or debris hypothesis becomes stronger.
- Duration and disappearance: a few seconds to a few minutes, ending behind buildings or by fading, is a common urban misidentification pattern.
- Witness count: in a dense department, a spectacular low object with only one witness should be treated carefully, especially if no photo, video, radar track or independent report appears.
- Perspective correction: video, buildings, rooflines and known landmarks can reveal that a witness’s first direction or altitude estimate was wrong, as in the Sceaux Mylar-balloon case.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.</div>
These tests do not assume witnesses are unreliable. They recognise that normal perception evolved for nearby objects, not for estimating the distance of a glowing dot in a dark, cluttered sky. A lantern a few hundred metres away and a much larger object farther away can look similar if both are reduced to a silent light.
Why these cases still belong in Hauts-de-Seine UFO history
It may seem odd to give explained or probably explained cases a place in a department-level UFO history. Yet for Hauts-de-Seine, they are central. The department’s official case list includes the famous unresolved Vaucresson report from 1 January 1981, but it also includes a wider pattern of category A, B and C cases involving balloons, lanterns, debris, aircraft, drones, the International Space Station and light effects. GEIPAN’s case table for Hauts-de-Seine lists, among others, Issy-les-Moulineaux 2008 as a balloon, Bagneux and Montrouge 2009 as sky lanterns, Courbevoie 2012 as debris, Asnières-sur-Seine 2014 as sky lanterns, Châtillon 2015 as balloons, Sceaux 2023 as a Mylar balloon, and other recent identified cases.[Geipan]geipan.frRecherche de cas | GEIPANRecherche de cas | GEIPAN
That pattern changes how the strongest local cases should be read. A report is more impressive when it resists the same tests that explain weaker cases. If a sighting has multiple independent witnesses, a longer duration, a well-constrained direction, no wind-compatible passive-object explanation, and stronger documentation, it deserves more attention. If it has only a short view of orange lights drifting silently and fading near a weekend or holiday, the Hauts-de-Seine record shows why lanterns and balloons should be considered first.
There is also a public education value. Many people first encounter UFO reporting through dramatic descriptions: “silent orange spheres”, “formation of lights”, “object over the buildings”, “sudden disappearance”. The local GEIPAN files show how ordinary objects can generate exactly those phrases. In Montrouge, four red-orange lights became probable lanterns. In Asnières, twenty orange balls became a probable festive release. In Châtillon, yellow-orange objects with red centres became probable balloons, possibly with LEDs. In Sceaux, “flames” became sunset reflections on Mylar.[Geipan+3GEIPAN+3Geipan]cnes-geipan.frGEIPANMONTROUGE (92) 21.07.2009 | GEIPAN…
The takeaway is not that Hauts-de-Seine has no UFO history. It is that its UFO history is heavily shaped by urban misidentification. In a compact, brightly lit and densely populated department, the most valuable investigations often do not reveal extraordinary craft; they reveal how easily ordinary floating objects become extraordinary when seen briefly, silently and without scale.
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to When City Lights Become UFO Reports. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
The UFO Experience
Provides frameworks for separating misidentifications from stronger cases.
The Demon-haunted World
Directly addresses misinterpretation, perception, and evidence.
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Endnotes
1.
Source: cnes.fr
Link:https://cnes.fr/en/projects/geipan
2.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/en/node/54049?field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B12%5D=12&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&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_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=title&page=4&sort=asc
3.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/fr/cas/2011-12-08163?field_agregation_index_value=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_valu_valu=04-23&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=%2C239&sort=desc
4.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/cas/2014-06-08712
5.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/cas/2015-08-09302
6.
Source: insee.fr
Link:https://www.insee.fr/fr/statistiques/1405599?geo=DEP-92+FE-1
7.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/en/node/54054
8.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/cas/2008-03-01957
9.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/cas/2012-07-08273
10.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/cas/2023-06-51444?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B11%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=field_date_d_observation&page=5%2C10&sort=desc
11.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/cas/2006-04-08197
12.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58788
13.
Source: geipan.fr
Title: Recherche de cas | GEIPAN
Link:https://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_departement_textuel&page=68&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
14.
Source: insee.fr
Link:https://www.insee.fr/fr/statistiques/fichier/7728806/dep92.pdf
15.
Source: insee.fr
Link:https://www.insee.fr/fr/metadonnees/geographie/departement/92-hauts-de-seine
16.
Source: insee.fr
Title: Dossier complet − Département des Hauts-de-Seine (92)Hauts-de-Seine (92)
Link:https://www.insee.fr/fr/statistiques/2011101?geo=DEP-92
17.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/en/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=All&order=field_date_d_observation&page=49&sort=desc&undefined=
18.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://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_date&page=68&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
19.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_date_value=2007-03-01&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_departement_textuel&page=69&sort=asc
20.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/en/node/54048
21.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=116&order=field_classification_des_cas&page=32&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
22.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?customGetLattitude=46.124763699209396&customGetLongitude=2.3840332031249996&customGetZoom=6&field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B12%5D=12&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=9.42626953125&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=-4.658203125000001&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=36&sort=desc
23.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.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_d_observation&page=18&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
24.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?fbclid=IwAR32Xw4FPA6L6uMbDrVI3ET3EnoPyLceNnyDp2Blb9uRHMC5hwUcF_wg6Fk&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=All&order=field_date&page=69&sort=asc
25.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/sites/default/files/Questionnaire%20terre-R317.pdf
26.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/fr/cas/2016-08-09518?field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=title&page=10&sort=asc
27.
Source: cnes.fr
Link:https://cnes.fr/projets/geipan
28.
Source: applis.hauts-de-seine.fr
Link:https://applis.hauts-de-seine.fr/v3fichiers/HDS%20PLUS/HDSplus27.pdf
29.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/54055?page=%2C282
30.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: INFORMATION GEIPAN LES LANTERNES VOLANTES UNE MEPRISE COURANTE GPUBLIC
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/sites/default/files/INFORMATION_GEIPAN_-LES_LANTERNES_VOLANTES__UNE_MEPRISE_COURANTE_GPUBLIC.pdf
31.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2015-12-09389?field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&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_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_classification_des_cas&page=99&sort=asc
32.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B12%5D=12&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_departement_textuel&page=27%2C4&sort=asc
33.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/2014-06-08712
34.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: Compte rendu enquete515
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/sites/default/files/Compte%20rendu%20enquete515.pdf
35.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/55712
36.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?customGetLattitude=48.86996345993287&customGetLongitude=2.399826049804688&customGetZoom=11&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=49.00094298321503&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=48.738983936650705&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=2.633285522460938&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=2.166366577148438&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=3%2C4&sort=asc
37.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B12%5D=12&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=40%2C3&sort=desc
38.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?customGetLattitude=43.9503570933062&customGetLongitude=-3.31787109375&customGetZoom=5&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B0%5D=11&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=53.014783245859235&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=34.88593094075317&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=8.920898437500002&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=-15.556640625000002&order=field_classification_des_cas&page=17&sort=asc
39.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&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_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date_d_observation&page=91&sort=desc
40.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?customGetLattitude=48.86996345993287&customGetLongitude=2.399826049804688&customGetZoom=11&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=49.00094298321503&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=48.738983936650705&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=2.633285522460938&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=2.166366577148438&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_departement_textuel&page=%2C25&sort=asc
41.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/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=11&sort=asc
42.
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=2007-03-01&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_departement_textuel&page=98%2C0&sort=desc
43.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/what-did-i-see/step-1
44.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: lanternes thailandaises
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/actualites/lanternes-thailandaises
45.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn2xTieploU
46.
Source: academieairespace.com
Link:https://academieairespace.com/event/geipan-studies-uaps-ufos/?lang=en
Additional References
47.
Source: youtube.com
Title: The Proof Is Out There: UFO Lights CONFOUND Investigators | History
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buoMqlBVhsg
48.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0PpY51BSgM
49.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Did you spot a chain of lights in the sky over Chicago? Here’s what it was
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om8hDmKkcmg
50.
Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381332965A_blind_test_on_wind_turbine_wake_modelling_based_on_wind_tunnel_experiments_Phase_I-_The_benchmark_case
51.
Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278390344Instrumented_Monitoring_of_Aerial_Anomalies-_A_Scientific_Approach_to_the_Investigation_On_Anomalous_Atmospheric_Light_Phenomena
52.
Source: meprises-du-ciel.fr
Link:https://meprises-du-ciel.fr/sources-artificielles/lanternes-thailandaises/
53.
Source: skylantern.fr
Link:https://www.skylantern.fr/blog/le-geipan-et-skylantern/?srsltid=AfmBOornZVlsJ_piz8pIdFwOyj0VyaeGbf24Rz4l99VS30UGWSw-SJsy
54.
Source: mappemonde.net
Link:https://www.mappemonde.net/en/map-of-france/hauts-de-seine-map/
55.
Source: palomano.com
Link:https://www.palomano.com/parcs/montrouge/
56.
Source: eawe.eu
Link:https://www.eawe.eu/site/assets/files/downloads/committees/twtc/TWTC-WiValdi-research-wind-farm.pdf
Topic Tree