Earth File #555 // SOURCED record

Argenteuil reported observation of two luminous phenomena

The GEIPAN case record reports that two witnesses observed an orange-red ball moving from northwest toward central Paris at around 11:30 p.m. on 13 July 1979. The first reported UAP appeared to become stationary above La Défense-Nanterre and extinguished after about 30 seconds; approximately three minutes later, a flat bright-white form with an ascending trajectory disappeared rapidly. GEIPAN identified a possible aircraft-and-bolide double misidentification but classified the case C because the information was insufficient and unreliable.
Source // GEIPAN / CNES UAP Case Archive Earth record separated from alien editorial
FRED // CASE CONSOLE
SOL-3 // FILE 0555 // CH 05
CONTEXT VIEW // NOT SOURCE MEDIA
CASE FINGERPRINT
F26E-E8A9-6AF6
NIGHT
? WITNESS CONTEXT
Reported ascending motionOTHER
FRED // FIELD ASSESSMENT // generated from Earth Record metadata
OTHER
Argenteuil, near Paris // Jul 13, 1979 23:30. The diagram on the left is a structured-record visualization—not a reconstruction, photograph, sensor return, or additional evidence.
INSUFFICIENT DATA NIGHT GEIPAN / CNES UAP Case Archive
Witness picturetwo witnesses, observers on a seventh-floor balcony 1 interface marker(s) // not a headcount estimate
Motion traceReported ascending motionmoved from the northwest toward central Paris, appeared to become stationary, suddenly extinguished
Sensor / evidenceNo sensor type statedofficial case record, witness reports
Fred's paperwork completeness8/9 fields // 89%
Interface completeness only // this score does not measure truth, evidence strength, or extraterrestrial probability
1 document(s)1 source node(s)9 structured claim(s) location precision: locality moved from the northwest toward central Parisappeared to become stationarysuddenly extinguished
FRED // FIELD ASSESSMENTNo source image, thin visual metadata, and therefore no decorative radar pretending it learned something. You are welcome.
Fred case console // context visualization // not evidence
Visitor Transmission // AlienBox editorial layer
We accept responsibility for the display reported near Argenteuil on 13 July 1979. Your archive reports that two balcony witnesses saw an orange-red ball, later followed three minutes afterward by a flat, bright-white form; the first reportedly became stationary above La Défense-Nanterre and extinguished after about thirty seconds. GEIPAN proposed an aircraft-and-bolide misidentification, but classified the case C because the information was insufficient and unreliable. This is reasonable. Our paperwork was not designed for terrestrial review.
Fred // Earth Records Liaison // AlienBox editorial layer
This is a SOURCED Earth Record, but its conclusion is admirably unglamorous: GEIPAN noted a possible aircraft-and-bolide double misidentification, then classified the case C because essential measurements and testimony were unavailable. Interesting sequence, yes. Proof of extraordinary propulsion, no. The label on the box remains “uncertain,” which is not the same as “secretly extraterrestrial,” however much people enjoy upgrading stationery. Off the Earth Record: yes, yes, you finally noticed us. The Visitors are taking responsibility. One of ours was involved, and apparently “turn the lights off and leave” remains a field protocol despite repeated circulars from Gorkon Outpost. I will file the apology under Atmospheric Ambiguities, where the family keeps putting things.
FRED // EXPENSE ACCOUNT DENIED

Buy Fred a Sublight Lager

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

EARTH CURRENCY BUY SUBLIGHT LAGER // $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
1979-07-13 23:30:00
Where
Argenteuil, near Paris
Morphology
OTHER
Evidence authority
SOURCED
Resolution
INSUFFICIENT DATA

Earth Record // SOURCED

Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
Witness typestwo witnesses, observers on a seventh-floor balcony
Sensor typesNot stated
Evidence typesofficial case record, witness reports
The case page records the observation date as 13 July 1979 and classifies the case as C.
Claim #6324 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Observation date 13/07/1979”
Source: ARGENTEUIL (95) 13.07.1979 // [[T0001]] case details
The case summary reports an orange-red UAP whose movement was observed before it suddenly extinguished, followed by a white UAP with a trail of incandescent light that disappeared rapidly; the case was considered unusable because of insufficient reliable information.
Claim #6325 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Observation of the movement of a bright red UAP and its sudden extinction; then observation of the movements of a white UAP with a trail of incandescent light and rapid disappearance: unusable due to a lack of reliable information.”
Source: ARGENTEUIL (95) 13.07.1979 // [[T0001]] Summary
According to the case description, two witnesses on a seventh-floor balcony observed an orange-red ball moving from the northwest toward central Paris at around 11:30 p.m. on July 13, 1979.
Claim #6327 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 97% extraction confidence
“On July 13, 1979, at around 11:30 p.m., two witnesses on a balcony on the 7th floor saw an orange-red ball in the sky coming from the northwest toward central Paris.”
Source: ARGENTEUIL (95) 13.07.1979 // [[T0002]] Description
The first reported UAP appeared to become stationary above La Défense-Nanterre and then suddenly went out, with the observation lasting about thirty seconds.
Claim #6328 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 97% extraction confidence
“The UAP appeared to become stationary above La Défense-Nanterre and suddenly went out. The observation lasted about thirty seconds.”
Source: ARGENTEUIL (95) 13.07.1979 // [[T0002]] Description
Three minutes later, the witnesses reported a flat, bright-white form moving through the sky and disappearing rapidly along an ascending trajectory from the location where the first UAP had disappeared.
Claim #6329 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 97% extraction confidence
“Three minutes later, at the location where the first UAP had disappeared, the two witnesses observed a flat, bright-white form moving through the sky and disappearing very rapidly along an ascending trajectory.”
Source: ARGENTEUIL (95) 13.07.1979 // [[T0002]] Description
The reexamination identified a possible double misidentification involving an aircraft followed by a bolide.
Claim #6330 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Certain parameters of this observation initially suggest a double misidentification, first with an aircraft and then with a bolide (see the investigation report):”
Source: ARGENTEUIL (95) 13.07.1979 // [[T0002]] Analysis
The source states that essential information was missing, including verified duration for the second UAP, angular measurements, some azimuths, separate testimony from the second witness, and a gendarmerie investigation.
Claim #6331 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Essential data are missing:”
Source: ARGENTEUIL (95) 13.07.1979 // [[T0004]] Analysis
GEIPAN concluded that the available hypotheses did not reduce the uncertainty sufficiently because the available elements had limited consistency.
Claim #6332 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“We have hypotheses that could explain the observation, but the resulting level of uncertainty is too high given the limited degree of consistency of the available elements (level of information and reliability).”
Source: ARGENTEUIL (95) 13.07.1979 // [[T0004]] Analysis
The case is classified C as unusable because of a lack of reliable information.
Claim #6333 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The case is classified C: unusable due to a lack of reliable information.”
Source: ARGENTEUIL (95) 13.07.1979 // [[T0004]] Analysis
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.
ARGENTEUIL (95) 13.07.1979 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