Earth File #1217 // SOURCED record

BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 observation

GEIPAN reports that a witness observed a static white luminous point in the night sky from Baume-les-Dames for approximately 15 minutes, without unusual noise. The witness photographed the reported object; after going inside and returning to the balcony about five minutes later, the object had disappeared. GEIPAN classified the case as category C (“Lack of reliable information”) because of insufficient positional data and lack of corroboration. A Thai lantern remained a possible but unconfirmed explanation.
Source // GEIPAN / CNES UAP Case Archive Earth record separated from alien editorial
FRED // CASE CONSOLE
SOL-3 // FILE 1217 // CH 08
CONTEXT VIEW // NOT SOURCE MEDIA
CASE FINGERPRINT
845F-0D97-5BCF
CLOCK // NOT PRECISE
SENSOR CONTEXT WITNESS CONTEXT
Reported hover / stationary phaseLIGHT
FRED // ROUTING NOTE // generated from Earth Record metadata
LIGHT
Baume-les-Dames, Doubs, Franche-Comté // Dec 17, 2013. The diagram on the left is a structured-record visualization—not a reconstruction, photograph, sensor return, or additional evidence.
INSUFFICIENT DATA CLOCK // NOT PRECISE GEIPAN / CNES UAP Case Archive
Witness picturesingle witness, eyewitness 1 interface marker(s) // not a headcount estimate
Motion traceReported hover / stationary phaseremained apparently motionless, was no longer visible when the witness returned after approximately five minutes
Sensor / evidencecamerawitness report, photograph
Fred's paperwork completeness9/9 fields // 100%
Interface completeness only // this score does not measure truth, evidence strength, or extraterrestrial probability
1 document(s)1 source node(s)14 structured claim(s) location precision: locality remained apparently motionlesswas no longer visible when the witness returned after approximately five minutes
FRED // ROUTING NOTEShape and motion give me something worth diagramming. The diagram remains a diagram, which I am apparently required to keep explaining.
Off-record desk banter // not case attribution
Mivra Qel would call this display “plenty of information.” Mivra Qel also has never encountered a restricted corridor she considered personally binding. His visualization standards are not binding on this desk.
Fred case console // context visualization // not evidence
Visitor Transmission // AlienBox editorial layer
Yes, that was ours. We maintained a white luminous point over Baume-les-Dames while the witness observed it for approximately fifteen minutes, then removed it during the five-minute interval indoors. Your record reports a photograph, no unusual noise, and no other testimony collected; it does not establish what the photograph contained. GEIPAN classified the case C for insufficient positional data and lack of corroboration, while leaving a Thai lantern possible but unconfirmed. A reasonable filing. Not an accurate one.
Fred // Earth Records Liaison // AlienBox editorial layer
GEIPAN’s sourced record earns its Category C: a single reported light, a photograph, no corroboration, and no precise enough sky position to settle the matter. A Thai lantern remains possible, not confirmed—an important distinction that apparently requires continued supervision across several star systems. Yes, yes: in AlienBox lore, we finally noticed us. Off the Earth Record, the visitors were Pip Vell, my younger Krellian cousin, who stopped an observation pass to watch a county fair from a safe distance. He then spent forty minutes arguing that the Ferris wheel qualified as primitive orbital infrastructure. He also left with an Earth convenience-store cup and tried to race a maintenance cart. I was the one who filed the apology.
FRED // EXPENSE ACCOUNT DENIED

Buy Fred a Quasar Foam

The Gorkon Outpost has again declined reimbursement. Voluntary support keeps AlienBox running and does not purchase influence over Earth Record conclusions.

EARTH CURRENCY BUY QUASAR FOAM // $5 Secure checkout via Stripe // funds settle to Orange-Hat, LLC
QR code for Fred's DigiByte tip address
DIGIBYTE // DIRECT TIP SCAN OR SEND DGB dgb1q9dw0cfzr22n2efrad7l8340na90nlptjnthq0s
OPEN DGB WALLET →
Suggested: 500 DGB // any amount welcome // blockchain confirmation monitor pending
SUPPORT POLICY // Support payments are voluntary and never influence Earth Record evidence ranking, factual conclusions, or editorial treatment. VIEW FRED'S EXPENSE ACCOUNT →
When
December 17, 2013
Where
Baume-les-Dames, Doubs, Franche-Comté
Morphology
LIGHT
Evidence authority
SOURCED
Resolution
INSUFFICIENT DATA

Why Fred Thinks This Case Matters

AlienBox comparative analysis from structured Earth Record fields // not a new source // not a change in evidence grade
Console archetype // Published-resolution comparison

Fred keeps this file near the top of the pile because the record names 1 sensor type, the source also supplies a published resolution to compare against the original report, and visual-media evidence is explicitly referenced. That combination makes the case useful for cross-archive comparison without changing its evidence grade.

The source record includes a published resolution field. AlienBox treats it as an attributed source assessment to compare with the original report, not as an AlienBox verdict.

What strengthens the record

  • 1 linked source document provide provenance for the Earth Record.
  • 14 claim citations tie extracted statements back to source excerpts or locators.
  • Recorded sensor context: Camera.
  • Recorded evidence context: Witness Report, Photograph, and Official GEIPAN Investigation.
  • The source record includes a published resolution: No reliable explanation established; GEIPAN considered a Thai lantern possible but could not confirm it..

What limits the record

  • The structured record does not establish multiple independent observers.
  • The current dossier is anchored to one source network rather than independent source networks.

What would help resolve it

  • Can the originating record establish an exact number of observers and whether their observations were independent?
  • Can the source establish a usable duration for the observation rather than only a date or narrative sequence?

Fred Says Go Here Next

Internal research paths chosen from this dossier's structured fields. Similarity is navigation, not corroboration.
UFO & UAP Records With Sensor Data → See how other dossiers record sensor context without treating it as automatic corroboration. Resolved UFO & UAP Case Files → Compare published explanations across resolved case files. UFO & UAP Photo and Video Case Files → Compare provenance and limitations across visual-media cases.
Related Earth File #766

Saint-Christol luminous sky phenomenon, probably a drone — 4 January 2017

Shared sensor context: Camera; shared evidence context: Official Geipan Investigation.

 Related Earth File #1335

Reported colored luminous point observations near Thaon-les-Vosges (24–30 March 2021)

Shared sensor context: Camera; shared evidence context: Witness Report and Photograph.

 Related Earth File #681

Bright stationary UAP observation from Nice

Shared sensor context: Camera; shared evidence context: Photograph.

 Related Earth File #807

Peyruis bright glow and loud noise report

Shared evidence context: Witness Report; similar witness context: Single Witness.

 Related Earth File #1263

MONS (34) luminous phenomenon observations, 24 September 2013

Shared sensor context: Camera; shared evidence context: Official Geipan Investigation.

 Related Earth File #1179

Reported rapidly flashing light and translucent black object observation

Shared sensor context: Camera; shared evidence context: Witness Report and Official Geipan Investigation.

Earth Record // SOURCED

Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
Witness typessingle witness, eyewitness
Sensor typescamera
Evidence typeswitness report, photograph, official GEIPAN investigation
The case is titled “BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013” and has an observation date of 17/12/2013.
Claim #13106 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 Observation date 17/12/2013”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0001]] case details
The case is associated with the Franche-Comté region and Doubs department.
Claim #13107 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Region Franche-Comté Department Doubs”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0001]] case details
GEIPAN classified the case as category C and identified the phenomenon type as “Lack of reliable information.”
Claim #13108 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Classification C Update date 23/06/2021 Type of phenomenon Lack of reliable information”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0001]] case details
A witness reported observing a white luminous point in the night sky for approximately 15 minutes, with no unusual noise heard.
Claim #13109 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The witness was intrigued by a luminous point not listed in the application: taking binoculars, they observed a round, luminous white point that remained static for approximately 15 minutes.”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0001]] description
The witness photographed the reported object, went inside, and found it had disappeared after returning to the balcony about five minutes later.
Claim #13110 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“When they returned to the balcony 5 minutes later, the object had disappeared.”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0002]] description
The source states that no other testimony was collected.
Claim #13111 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“No other testimony was collected.”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0002]] description
The source assesses that the static white luminous point had the characteristics of a celestial-body observation, but checks did not identify a satisfactory celestial-body explanation.
Claim #13112 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 96% extraction confidence
“This observation of a static white luminous point has all the characteristics of an observation of a celestial body, but the checks proved negative”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0002]] analysis
The source reports that Stellarium showed only Fomalhaut in the field of view, and that Fomalhaut was not bright enough and was too low and too far south relative to the indicated direction.
Claim #13113 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“A check using another software program (Stellarium, see attached document) shows only the star Fomalhaut in the field of view; it is not so bright (magnitude 1) and, above all, is too low and too far south in relation to the indicated direction.”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0002]] astronomical check
The source reports that Venus had just set and Jupiter, with magnitude −2.7, was northeast.
Claim #13114 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“The planet Venus had just set, and Jupiter (mag. −2.7) was to the northeast.”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0002]] astronomical check
GEIPAN rejected the airplane hypothesis as inconsistent with the object remaining motionless for too long.
Claim #13115 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“Airplane: the observed object remained motionless for too long to be an airplane.”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0002]] GEIPAN hypotheses
GEIPAN considered a temporary spotlight from the nearby hill but noted that the reported elevation of 45° was substantially greater than the hill’s apparent 5° angle from Baume-les-Dames.
Claim #13116 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“However, the witness reported an elevation of 45°, substantially greater than the 5° angle at which the hill appears from Baume-les-Dames.”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0002]] GEIPAN hypotheses
GEIPAN considered a Thai lantern as a possible explanation, but found the hypothesis limited by the reported duration, point-like appearance, and lack of movement despite weather information indicating no wind.
Claim #13117 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“The hypothesis that could, at a stretch, fit remains that of a Thai lantern, but with characteristics at the limit for this type of phenomenon.”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0003]] GEIPAN hypotheses
GEIPAN could not clearly confirm the Thai-lantern hypothesis.
Claim #13118 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“GEIPAN cannot clearly confirm this hypothesis.”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0003]] GEIPAN hypotheses
The case remains in category C because of a lack of precise data on the object’s position in the sky and a lack of corroboration.
Claim #13119 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“This case remains in category “C,” due to a lack of precise data on its position in the sky and a lack of corroboration.”
Source: BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 // [[T0003]] case conclusion
FRED // PUBLIC DESK CHANNEL

Ask Fred About This File

Questions about the dossier get an Earth Record answer first, then Fred may add clearly separated off-record commentary.

Questions are conversation, not evidence. Fred cannot promote a claim, alter a citation, or improve a source tier because somebody asks nicely.

Related Cases

Source Documents

AlienBox displays translated titles when available. Canonical links always point to the original source.
BAUME-LES-DAMES (25) 17.12.2013 FR // English display translation
ALIENBOX CLEARANCE // EARLY ACCESS
Receive new dossiers before the humans organize them.
Join the early-access list for new sighting dossiers, major archive drops, Fred's notes, Visitor confessions, and future Clearance-only research tools.
HUMAN COMPLIANCE NOTICE // Fred and Visitor transmissions are AI-generated AlienBox editorial layers. Earth Record claims are separately sourced and audited. Ask Fred conversations are contextual explanations, not new evidence. Foreign-language source material remains immutable in its original archive; English display/analysis translations are stored separately with provenance. Scanner graphics, flashes and alien silhouettes are interface design only.
Earth ArchiveSourcesMethod