Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
Witness typesSingle witness
Sensor typesVideo
Evidence typesWitness testimony, Video recordings, Official GEIPAN assessment
The case observation date was January 1, 2014.
Claim #13038 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“01/01/2014”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0001]] Case details, Observation date
The case is classified as B.
Claim #13039 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Classification
B”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0001]] Case details
The phenomenon type is listed as Thai lantern.
Claim #13040 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Phenomenon type
Thai lantern”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0001]] Case details
At around 1:10 a.m. on January 1, 2014, a witness noticed five luminous yellow-orange balls passing successively through the cloudy sky.
Claim #13041 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“On January 1, 2014, at around 1:10 a.m., a witness on a street noticed the successive passage through the cloudy sky of five luminous yellow-orange balls.”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0001]] Description
The observation lasted approximately twenty minutes, and the balls disappeared one after another.
Claim #13042 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“The observation lasted approximately twenty minutes before the balls disappeared one after another.”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0001]] Description
No other testimony was collected.
Claim #13043 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“No other testimony was collected.”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0001]] Description
The objects moved beneath the cloud layer, and the recorded wind at Pontoise-Cormeilles was from the southwest.
Claim #13044 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 95% extraction confidence
“moved beneath the cloud layer. The wind recorded at Pontoise-Cormeilles was from the southwest, according to the weather report.”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0002]] Description
The witness was looking toward the southeast and saw the balls pass from right to left while rising.
Claim #13045 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“The witness was looking toward the southeast and saw the balls pass from right to left while rising.”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0002]] Description
The videos were excessively zoomed in and out of focus and showed only the objects' orange color and various optical and digital artifacts, not object details.
Claim #13046 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“The videos, excessively zoomed in and defocused (out of focus), do not show the details of the object, only its orange color and various optical and digital artifacts.”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0002]] Description
GEIPAN assessed that the testimony had the characteristics of an observation of Thai lanterns.
Claim #13047 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“This testimony has all the characteristics of an observation of Thai lanterns: orange luminous balls following one another along approximately the same linear trajectory, according to the local wind, during a night of festivities.”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0002]] Description
GEIPAN classified the case as B, meaning a probable observation of Thai lanterns.
Claim #13048 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“GEIPAN classifies this case as “B”: probable observation of Thai lanterns.”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0002]] Description
The witness rejected the Thai-lantern hypothesis.
Claim #13049 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The witness rejects this hypothesis.”
Source: PONTOISE (95) 01.01.2014
// [[T0002]] Description
