Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
Witness typesfour people in a garden, another person
Sensor typesNot stated
Evidence typeswitness reports, official GEIPAN investigation, official case classification
On October 1, 2011, at around 5 p.m., four people in a garden in Carrières-Sous-Poissy reported seeing an oval-shaped object falling rapidly from the sky.
Claim #25047 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“On October 1, 2011, at around 5 p.m., four people sitting in the garden of a house in Carrières-Sous-Poissy (78) were frightened by the sight of an oval-shaped object falling rapidly from the sky.”
Source: CARRIERES-SOUS-POISSY (78) 01.10.2011
// [[T0001]] Description paragraph
The reported object was described as capsule-shaped, horizontal, oscillating, spinning around its own axis, gray, and metallic in appearance.
Claim #25048 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“In the shape of a “capsule,” the object was horizontal, oscillating and spinning around its own axis. It was gray in color, with a metallic appearance.”
Source: CARRIERES-SOUS-POISSY (78) 01.10.2011
// [[T0001]] Description paragraph
Another person reportedly saw the object leave toward Triel-sur-Seine, heading north-northwest.
Claim #25049 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“Another person encountered by the principal witness stated that they had seen the craft leave in the direction of Triel-Sur-Seine (78), heading north-northwest.”
Source: CARRIERES-SOUS-POISSY (78) 01.10.2011
// [[T0002]] Case description
The hypothesis of a balloon lighter than air was favored because the object was moving in the direction of the wind.
Claim #25050 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Since the object was moving in the direction of the wind (see investigation report), the hypothesis of a balloon lighter than air is favored.”
Source: CARRIERES-SOUS-POISSY (78) 01.10.2011
// [[T0002]] Case description
The tube shape was described as known among some enthusiasts, and the rotating movement was considered consistent with the balloon hypothesis.
Claim #25051 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 97% extraction confidence
“The tube shape is known among some enthusiasts. The rotating movement, in accordance with the wind, is consistent with this hypothesis.”
Source: CARRIERES-SOUS-POISSY (78) 01.10.2011
// [[T0002]] Case description
The gray plastic film used for these balloons was said to give them a metallic appearance when inflated and exposed to sunlight.
Claim #25052 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“The gray plastic film used for these balloons gives them a metallic appearance once inflated and exposed to sunlight.”
Source: CARRIERES-SOUS-POISSY (78) 01.10.2011
// [[T0002]] Case description
GEIPAN classified the case as B, meaning a probable observation of a tubular thermal balloon.
Claim #25053 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“GEIPAN classifies this case as “B”: probable observation of a tubular thermal balloon.”
Source: CARRIERES-SOUS-POISSY (78) 01.10.2011
// [[T0002]] Case description
The case record lists the phenomenon type as Thermal balloon.
Claim #25054 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Phenomenon type
Thermal balloon”
Source: CARRIERES-SOUS-POISSY (78) 01.10.2011
// [[T0001]] Case details
The case record lists the observation date as 01/10/2011.
Claim #25055 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Observation date
01/10/2011”
Source: CARRIERES-SOUS-POISSY (78) 01.10.2011
// [[T0001]] Case details
