Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
Witness typesgendarmerie helicopter patrol personnel
Sensor typesonboard camera, naked-eye observation
Evidence typesvideo recording, testimony, official GEIPAN case record
On May 15, 2014, at around 11 p.m., the gendarmerie was patrolling by helicopter above Lyon.
Claim #16221 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“On May 15, 2014, at around 11 p.m., the gendarmerie was patrolling by helicopter above Lyon.”
Source: LYON (69) 15.05.2014
// [[T0001]] Description paragraph
An onboard camera filmed a luminous UAP with strong scintillation for more than 10 minutes.
Claim #16222 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“An onboard camera filmed a luminous UAP with strong scintillation for more than 10 minutes.”
Source: LYON (69) 15.05.2014
// [[T0001]] Description paragraph
The fixed luminous object was visible to the naked eye for 2½ hours.
Claim #16223 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The fixed luminous object was visible to the naked eye for 2½ hours.”
Source: LYON (69) 15.05.2014
// [[T0001]] Description paragraph
The case record states that numerous parameters make it possible to conclude that the observation was a confusion with the star Antares.
Claim #16224 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“Numerous parameters make it possible to conclude that it was a confusion with the star Antares (see the investigation report):”
Source: LYON (69) 15.05.2014
// [[T0001]] Description section
The record identifies a long observation lasting more than two and a half hours as one of the parameters supporting its conclusion.
Claim #16225 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Long observation, more than two and a half hours.”
Source: LYON (69) 15.05.2014
// [[T0001]] Description numbered list
The record identifies the object's fixed position in the sky as one of the parameters supporting its conclusion.
Claim #16226 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Fixed position in the sky.”
Source: LYON (69) 15.05.2014
// [[T0001]] Description numbered list
The record states that strong scintillation was clearly visible in the video and that, at low elevation, stellar scintillation is often very pronounced.
Claim #16227 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Presence of strong scintillation clearly visible in the video, even when the luminous point appears in the form of an artifact (“truncated crown”). At this low elevation, the scintillation of stars is often very pronounced.”
Source: LYON (69) 15.05.2014
// [[T0001]] Description numbered list
The record identifies angular proximity of the Moon and the UAP as another relevant parameter.
Claim #16228 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Angular proximity of the Moon and the UAP, the latter being located in the video.”
Source: LYON (69) 15.05.2014
// [[T0001]] Description numbered list
The case's strangeness is assessed as low and attributed mainly to the unusual appearance of the UAP and its strong scintillation.
Claim #16229 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The strangeness of this case is low: it is mainly caused by the unusual appearance of the UAP, with its strong scintillation, as perceived by witnesses who had never previously used the camera to observe the sky.”
Source: LYON (69) 15.05.2014
// [[T0001]] Description section
The testimony is assessed as not very consistent, although a video was made and could be analyzed.
Claim #16230 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The testimony is not very consistent, with relatively little data provided by the witness, but a video was made of the phenomenon and could be analyzed.”
Source: LYON (69) 15.05.2014
// [[T0001]] Description section
The case is classified as A because of a certain confusion with the star Antares.
Claim #16231 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“This case is to be classified as “A” as a certain confusion with the star Antares.”
Source: LYON (69) 15.05.2014
// [[T0002]] Classification conclusion
