Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
Witness typeswitness
Sensor typesNot stated
Evidence typeswitness report, field investigation, cognitive interview, official case assessment
The GEIPAN case concerns a 2 August 2016 nighttime observation in which a witness reported five dark, triangle-shaped objects with very low-intensity red points at their extremities.
Claim #8929 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“On 02 August 2016, a witness observed for 5 seconds, in the clear night sky, the silent and linear passage of 5 dark, triangle-shaped objects with very low-intensity red points at the”
Source: LES PENNES-MIRABEAU (13) 02.08.2016
// [[T0001]] case description
The objects reportedly moved in a V formation and were lost from view after moving away fairly quickly.
Claim #8930 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The group, in a V formation, moved away fairly quickly and was then lost from view.”
Source: LES PENNES-MIRABEAU (13) 02.08.2016
// [[T0002]] case description
The witness reported that the observation lasted approximately five seconds and that the objects made no sound.
Claim #8931 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“These shadows were moving fairly quickly (my observation lasted approximately 5 seconds)”
Source: LES PENNES-MIRABEAU (13) 02.08.2016
// [[T0002]] witness testimony
A field investigation and cognitive interview were conducted at the witness’s home on 26 June 2017.
Claim #8932 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“A field investigation, together with a cognitive interview, was carried out on 26/06/2017 at the witness’s home.”
Source: LES PENNES-MIRABEAU (13) 02.08.2016
// [[T0003]] investigation section
The investigation recorded a silent passage from north toward northeast at an elevation of approximately 25 degrees, with an estimated observation duration of 5 to 9 seconds.
Claim #8933 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“Details reported by the witness made it possible to clarify certain points: silent passage from north 360° (+ or - 5°) toward northeast 65° (+ or - 5°), at 25° (+ or - 3°) elevation; most probable time between 11:00 p.m. and 11:20 p.m.; observation duration between 5 and 9 seconds.”
Source: LES PENNES-MIRABEAU (13) 02.08.2016
// [[T0003]] investigation findings
After considering several weakly consistent hypotheses, the investigator proposed classification B with a drone as the remaining possible explanation.
Claim #8934 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Following this investigation, and having explored several weakly consistent hypotheses (Thai lanterns, aircraft in formation, migratory birds, laser), the investigator proposed a classification B, drone”
Source: LES PENNES-MIRABEAU (13) 02.08.2016
// [[T0003]] hypothesis assessment
The 2019 analyses brought forward the hypothesis that birds had passed overhead, but the reported red lights remained a discriminating element.
Claim #8935 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The outcome of the various analyses conducted in 2019 brought forward the hypothesis that birds had passed overhead. However, the presence of red lights, even of low intensity, remains a discriminating element.”
Source: LES PENNES-MIRABEAU (13) 02.08.2016
// [[T0003]] hypothesis assessment
GEIPAN concluded that the available information did not permit further identification of the lights and shapes explaining the phenomenon.
Claim #8936 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Despite the witness’s good cooperation, the consistency of the case (a single witness, no photograph of the UAP) and the small amount of available data do not allow the identification of the lights and shapes explaining the phenomenon to be taken any further.”
Source: LES PENNES-MIRABEAU (13) 02.08.2016
// [[T0003]] conclusion
The case has average consistency and average strangeness and is classified as C according to GEIPAN methodology.
Claim #8937 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The consistency is average. The strangeness is also average. The case is classified as “C” according to the GEIPAN methodology.”
Source: LES PENNES-MIRABEAU (13) 02.08.2016
// [[T0003]] conclusion
The case record labels the phenomenon type as lack of reliable information.
Claim #8938 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Lack of reliable information”
Source: LES PENNES-MIRABEAU (13) 02.08.2016
// [[T0001]] case details
