Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
Witness typesFour occupants of a car, One adult and three children; the adult and one child testified to gendarmes
Sensor typesNot stated
Evidence typesWitness reports, Official GEIPAN investigation, Official assessment and classification
The case observation date is 25 November 1990.
Claim #10520 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 100% extraction confidence
“Observation date
25/11/1990”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0001]] case details
The case is located in Pays de la Loire, department Loire-Atlantique.
Claim #10521 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 100% extraction confidence
“Region
Pays de la Loire
Department
Loire-Atlantique”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0001]] case details
The case has classification A.
Claim #10522 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 100% extraction confidence
“Classification
A”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0001]] case details
The listed phenomenon type is Laser.
Claim #10523 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 100% extraction confidence
“Type of phenomenon
Laser”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0001]] case details
The summary describes observations from a vehicle of three fluorescent-green shapes moving silently in the sky and identifies them as very probably beams and impacts on clouds from skytracker-type spotlights.
Claim #10524 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“Summary
NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990. Observations from a vehicle of the silent movement of three varied fluorescent-green shapes in the sky: very probable observations of beams and impacts on clouds from “skytracker”-type spotlights.”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0001]] Summary
Four witnesses were traveling by car during the night from Saturday, November 24, to Sunday, November 25, 1990, at around 00:45; one adult and three children gave the witness group composition, while only the adult and one child testified to the gendarmes.
Claim #10526 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“It concerns the observation of luminous phenomena at night by four witnesses traveling by car during the night from Saturday, November 24, to Sunday, November 25, 1990, at around 00:45.”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0002]] Description
The witnesses reported seeing three fluorescent-green UAPs of varying shapes and sizes while driving from Nort-Sur-Erdre toward Casson; the objects moved silently and remained grouped together.
Claim #10527 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“The witnesses reported that, while driving from Nort-Sur-Erdre (44) toward Casson (44), they successively saw three fluorescent-green UAPs of varying shapes and sizes (elongated, rounded, oval) appear in the night sky.”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0002]] Description
The phenomena were last seen heading toward the municipality of Suce-Sur-Erdre.
Claim #10528 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“The last time they were seen, they were heading toward the municipality of Suce-Sur-Erdre (44).”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0002]] Description
GEIPAN assessed that the witnesses very probably observed the effects of a ground-based spotlight beam passing through the atmosphere and producing an impact spot on a cloud screen.
Claim #10529 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The witnesses very probably observed the effects of a spotlight located on the ground, whose beam passed through areas of the atmosphere that made it partially visible and then created an impact spot when it ultimately encountered a cloud screen.”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0002]] explanation
GEIPAN identified cloud cover, skytracker-like movements, intermittent disappearances, luminosity changes, and the probable location near Nantes as consistent with the spotlight explanation.
Claim #10530 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 97% extraction confidence
“These “objects” moved sometimes to the right and sometimes to the left of the roadway, silently and while remaining grouped together.”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0002]] Description
The case consistency was assessed as poor because of missing angular information and the absence of an observation duration.
Claim #10531 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The consistency of the case is poor, due to a lack of angular information (dimensions of the UAP, heights above the horizon, etc.) and the absence of any mention of the observation’s duration.”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0005]] explanation
GEIPAN stated that it could not determine the origin of the display because the observation dated back nearly 30 years and the search area would cover several dozen kilometers.
Claim #10532 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“It is not possible today to determine the origin of this display, given that it dates back nearly 30 years and that the search would have to be conducted within a radius of several dozen kilometers from the observation site.”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0005]] explanation
GEIPAN concluded with classification A that the observation was very probably caused by beams and cloud impacts from skytracker-type spotlights, probably from a nightclub in Nantes or its outskirts.
Claim #10533 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 100% extraction confidence
“GEIPAN concludes with “A”: very probable observation of beams and cloud impacts from “skytracker”-type spotlights, probably from a nightclub located in Nantes or its outskirts.”
Source: NORT-SUR-ERDRE (44) 25.11.1990
// [[T0006]] conclusion