Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
The observation date for the BIERRE-LES-SEMUR case was July 18, 1978.
Claim #6919 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Observation date
18/07/1978”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0001]] case details
The case is listed in the Burgundy region and Côte-d'Or department.
Claim #6920 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Region
Burgundy
Department
Côte-d'Or”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0001]] case details
The case was classified as B.
Claim #6921 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Classification
B”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0001]] case details
The case summary describes a brief observation of a stationary, luminous orange object shaped like an upside-down saucer and identifies the Moon as the probable explanation.
Claim #6922 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Brief observation of a stationary, luminous orange object shaped like an upside-down saucer: probable observation of the Moon.”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0001]] Summary
Around 4 a.m. during the night of July 17–18, 1978, a camper observed a stationary luminous phenomenon in the sky at low altitude.
Claim #6923 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Around 4 a.m. during the night of July 17–18, 1978, a camper observed a stationary luminous phenomenon in the sky at low altitude.”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0001]] Description
The witness described an orange ball shaped like a saucer or an upside-down plate, took three photographs, and reported that the phenomenon disappeared first slowly and then rapidly toward the south.
Claim #6924 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The witness described an orange ball shaped like a saucer or an upside-down plate.”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0002]] case description
No sound was heard during the observation.
Claim #6925 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“No sound was heard during the observation.”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0002]] case description
The gendarmerie collected no other testimony in the surrounding area, and developing the photographs yielded nothing.
Claim #6926 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The gendarmerie collected no other testimony in the surrounding area concerning this phenomenon, and developing the photographs yielded nothing.”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0002]] case description
GEIPAN states that the Moon was present at an azimuth of 240°, matching the direction attributed to the initial phase of the reported phenomenon.
Claim #6927 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 96% extraction confidence
“Indeed, the Moon was present (verified with Stellarium) at an azimuth of 240°, which is precisely the direction of Dompierre-en-Morvan (as seen by the witness from Lucenay, approximately 240°), the direction attributed to the initial phase of the UAP.”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0002]] case explanation
GEIPAN states that the Moon's angular altitude of 2° is consistent with a low-altitude, fire-colored phenomenon and that clouds could make part of the Moon appear in the shape described by the witness.
Claim #6928 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 97% extraction confidence
“The hypothesis of a misidentification of the Moon would be reinforced by the fact that its angular altitude of 2° is perfectly consistent with a description of a low-altitude, fire-colored UAP (the color of the red Moon as it sets).”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0002]] case explanation
GEIPAN assesses that the final movement toward the south is poorly documented but remains compatible with a misidentification of the Moon.
Claim #6929 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The final movement toward the south is very poorly documented.”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0002]] case explanation
GEIPAN states that the strong consistency between the Moon's true position and the reported position and description gives the Moon explanation a good probability.
Claim #6930 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The very strong consistency between the true position of the Moon and the position and description of the UAP gives the Moon explanation a good probability,”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0003]] case explanation
Under GEIPAN's current classification, the case is classified as UAP B, a probable observation associated with a misidentification of the Moon.
Claim #6931 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Under GEIPAN’s current classification, this low-strangeness case is classified as UAP B, a probable observation associated with a misidentification of the Moon.”
Source: BIERRE-LES-SEMUR (21) 18.07.1978
// [[T0003]] case conclusion