Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
Witness typessingle witness
Sensor typesNot stated
Evidence typeswitness testimony, official GEIPAN investigation
The observation occurred on August 29, 2008, at 10:45 p.m.
Claim #23500 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“On August 29, 2008, at 10:45 p.m., a witness looked through a closed window”
Source: ATHIS-MONS (91) 29.08.2008
// [[T0001]] Description paragraph
A witness observed a white light resembling a much brighter star to the northwest through a closed window.
Claim #23501 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“a witness looked through a closed window and was intrigued by the presence of a white light resembling a star but much brighter, to the northwest.”
Source: ATHIS-MONS (91) 29.08.2008
// [[T0001]] Description paragraph
The observation lasted approximately six seconds, during which the witness reported that the light moved, stopped, and disappeared.
Claim #23502 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The observation lasted approximately 6 seconds, during which the witness saw the UAP move, stop, and then disappear.”
Source: ATHIS-MONS (91) 29.08.2008
// [[T0001]] Description paragraph
No other testimony was collected.
Claim #23503 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“No other testimony was collected.”
Source: ATHIS-MONS (91) 29.08.2008
// [[T0001]] Description paragraph
GEIPAN stated that the testimony represented little strangeness and that the descriptions referred to a star.
Claim #23504 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 96% extraction confidence
“This testimony represents little strangeness. The various descriptions moreover refer to a star.”
Source: ATHIS-MONS (91) 29.08.2008
// [[T0001]] Assessment paragraph
GEIPAN noted that the observation lasted six seconds and that the testimony was given nearly 18 months after the observation.
Claim #23505 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Furthermore, the observation lasted a short time (6 seconds). It is also noted that this testimony was given nearly 18 months after the observation.”
Source: ATHIS-MONS (91) 29.08.2008
// [[T0002]] Assessment paragraph
GEIPAN stated that it did not have sufficient reliable information to reach a conclusion, and that a star or a Thai lantern could not be ruled out.
Claim #23506 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Overall, GEIPAN considers that it does not have sufficient reliable information to reach a conclusion regarding a situation in which nothing rules out a star (the proximity of a moving cloud may create the impression of movement before the gradual extinction is interpreted as rapid departure into the distance) or a Thai lantern.”
Source: ATHIS-MONS (91) 29.08.2008
// [[T0002]] Assessment paragraph
GEIPAN classified the case as C, meaning lack of information.
Claim #23507 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“GEIPAN classifies this case as C: lack of information.”
Source: ATHIS-MONS (91) 29.08.2008
// [[T0002]] Final assessment
The case is listed with the phenomenon type 'Lack of reliable information.'
Claim #23508 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Type of phenomenon
Lack of reliable information”
Source: ATHIS-MONS (91) 29.08.2008
// [[T0001]] Case details
The case is associated with the Île-de-France region and Essonne department.
Claim #23509 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Region
Île-de-France
Department
Essonne”
Source: ATHIS-MONS (91) 29.08.2008
// [[T0001]] Case details
