Earth File #1213 // SOURCED record

Saint-Michel-sur-Meurthe orange light observation

A witness reported seeing a seemingly fixed orange light while looking north-northeast from a moving vehicle. GEIPAN classified the case as category C, indicating lack of information; aircraft-reflection and satellite explanations were considered plausible but insufficiently substantiated.
Source // GEIPAN / CNES UAP Case Archive Earth record separated from alien editorial
FRED // CASE CONSOLE
SOL-3 // FILE 1213 // CH 09
CONTEXT VIEW // NOT SOURCE MEDIA
CASE FINGERPRINT
6274-82CE-DA0E
DAYLIGHT
WITNESS CONTEXT
Reported motionLIGHT
FRED // RECEIPT RETAINED // generated from Earth Record metadata
LIGHT
Saint-Michel-sur-Meurthe // Dec 31, 2013 17:30. The diagram on the left is a structured-record visualization—not a reconstruction, photograph, sensor return, or additional evidence.
INSUFFICIENT DATA DAYLIGHT GEIPAN / CNES UAP Case Archive
Witness picturewitness 1 interface marker(s) // not a headcount estimate
Motion traceReported motionreported as fixed, observed from a moving vehicle
Sensor / evidenceNo sensor type statedwitness report, official scientific investigation
Fred's paperwork completeness8/9 fields // 89%
Interface completeness only // this score does not measure truth, evidence strength, or extraterrestrial probability
1 document(s)1 source node(s)8 structured claim(s) location precision: locality reported as fixedobserved from a moving vehicle
FRED // RECEIPT RETAINEDShape and motion give me something worth diagramming. The diagram remains a diagram, which I am apparently required to keep explaining.
Fred case console // context visualization // not evidence
Visitor Transmission // AlienBox editorial layer
That orange light was ours. We held position while the witness travelled beneath it, which is a simple exercise in visibility and an unnecessarily complicated exercise in human classification. Your record says the witness reported a fixed orange light on 31 December 2013, and GEIPAN classified the case as category C for lack of information. Aircraft reflection and satellite explanations remained plausible to GEIPAN, but insufficiently substantiated. Correct. The paperwork was inconclusive; our involvement was not.
Fred // Earth Records Liaison // AlienBox editorial layer
A fixed orange light reported from a moving vehicle, with aircraft-reflection and satellite explanations left plausible but unsubstantiated. GEIPAN’s category C—lack of information—is therefore the correct label, however unsatisfying it feels to everyone who prefers their paperwork to arrive with a tidy conclusion. Off the Earth Record, yes, this one was ours. Tovin Raal, my Nexari friend, made one extra low-orbit pass to inspect the lights, powered by Zero-G Root Beer and the confidence of someone who had never read an incident log. He can turn a routine observation into a report without visibly trying. The phrase “one extra pass” has since been banned from three Gorkon filing offices. A human mystery, in short; an internal embarrassment, certainly—but not evidence Earth’s archive independently established.
FRED // EXPENSE ACCOUNT DENIED

Buy Fred a Sublight Lager

The Gorkon Outpost has again declined reimbursement. Voluntary support keeps AlienBox running and does not purchase influence over Earth Record conclusions.

EARTH CURRENCY BUY SUBLIGHT LAGER // $5 Secure checkout via Stripe // funds settle to Orange-Hat, LLC
QR code for Fred's DigiByte tip address
DIGIBYTE // DIRECT TIP SCAN OR SEND DGB dgb1q9dw0cfzr22n2efrad7l8340na90nlptjnthq0s
OPEN DGB WALLET →
Suggested: 500 DGB // any amount welcome // blockchain confirmation monitor pending
SUPPORT POLICY // Support payments are voluntary and never influence Earth Record evidence ranking, factual conclusions, or editorial treatment. VIEW FRED'S EXPENSE ACCOUNT →
When
2013-12-31 17:30:00
Where
Saint-Michel-sur-Meurthe
Morphology
LIGHT
Evidence authority
SOURCED
Resolution
INSUFFICIENT DATA

Why Fred Thinks This Case Matters

AlienBox comparative analysis from structured Earth Record fields // not a new source // not a change in evidence grade
Console archetype // Published-resolution comparison

Fred keeps this file near the top of the pile because the source also supplies a published resolution to compare against the original report. That combination makes the case useful for cross-archive comparison without changing its evidence grade.

The source record includes a published resolution field. AlienBox treats it as an attributed source assessment to compare with the original report, not as an AlienBox verdict.

What strengthens the record

  • 1 linked source document provide provenance for the Earth Record.
  • 8 claim citations tie extracted statements back to source excerpts or locators.
  • Recorded evidence context: Witness Report and Official Scientific Investigation.
  • The source record includes a published resolution: GEIPAN category C: lack of information; aircraft-reflection and satellite hypotheses remained plausible but were not sufficiently....

What limits the record

  • No sensor type is recorded in the structured Earth Record.
  • The structured record does not establish multiple independent observers.
  • The current dossier is anchored to one source network rather than independent source networks.

What would help resolve it

  • Can the originating record establish an exact number of observers and whether their observations were independent?
  • Did any radar, infrared, optical, telemetry, or other instrument record the event, and is that material preserved?
  • Can the source establish a usable duration for the observation rather than only a date or narrative sequence?

Fred Says Go Here Next

Internal research paths chosen from this dossier's structured fields. Similarity is navigation, not corroboration.
Resolved UFO & UAP Case Files → Compare published explanations across resolved case files.
Related Earth File #868

Reported slow, silent red lights over Bouches-du-Rhône

Shared evidence context: Witness Report; similar witness context: Witness.

 Related Earth File #588

Saint-Fons luminous phenomenon observation

Shared evidence context: Witness Report; similar witness context: Witness.

 Related Earth File #574

Hourtin (33) luminous-point observation, 29 January 1979

Shared evidence context: Witness Report; similar witness context: Witness.

 Related Earth File #1277

Valloire mountainside bright-light observation

Shared evidence context: Official Scientific Investigation; similar witness context: Witness.

 Related Earth File #1273

Two successive luminous phenomena reported over Saint-Denis, Réunion

Shared evidence context: Witness Report; similar witness context: Witness.

 Related Earth File #1258

Two luminous points observed over Brittany and Côtes-d'Armor

Shared evidence context: Witness Report; similar witness context: Witness.

Earth Record // SOURCED

Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
Witness typeswitness
Sensor typesNot stated
Evidence typeswitness report, official scientific investigation
The observation occurred on 31 December 2013.
Claim #13060 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“31/12/2013”
Source: SAINT-MICHEL-SUR-MEURTHE (88) 31.12.2013 // [[T0001]] Observation date
The case is classified as category C, meaning lack of information.
Claim #13061 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The GEIPAN classifies this case as not very unusual, in category "C": lack of information.”
Source: SAINT-MICHEL-SUR-MEURTHE (88) 31.12.2013 // [[T0001]] Description
The witness was looking toward the north-northeast at 5:30 p.m. when the observation occurred from a moving vehicle.
Claim #13062 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“The witness, looking toward the north-northeast at 5:30 p.m., "observed from a moving vehicle an orange light above the horizon.”
Source: SAINT-MICHEL-SUR-MEURTHE (88) 31.12.2013 // [[T0001]] Description
The witness reported that the orange light seemed fixed and was neither a star, the Moon, nor a streetlamp.
Claim #13063 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“The light seemed fixed; it was neither a star, nor the Moon, nor a streetlamp.”
Source: SAINT-MICHEL-SUR-MEURTHE (88) 31.12.2013 // [[T0001]] Description
GEIPAN stated that no airliner was found on Flightradar24 that could have caused the reflection, while a military aircraft was not ruled out.
Claim #13064 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 97% extraction confidence
“The GEIPAN did not find on "Flightradar24" any airliner that could have caused this reflection, but nothing rules out a military aircraft.”
Source: SAINT-MICHEL-SUR-MEURTHE (88) 31.12.2013 // [[T0001]] Description
The Calsky sky survey identified several satellite candidates, including NOSS satellites passing in the witness's direction and the launch vehicle debris identified as 3-4 Rocket.
Claim #13065 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 97% extraction confidence
“The Calsky sky survey identifies several satellite candidates: the NOSS satellites that were passing in the witness's direction of observation at that moment, in particular the launch vehicle debris: 3-4 Rocket.”
Source: SAINT-MICHEL-SUR-MEURTHE (88) 31.12.2013 // [[T0001]] Description
The source states that the satellite objects were generally not very bright, with magnitudes from 4 to 6, and were known to flash occasionally.
Claim #13066 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 96% extraction confidence
“These objects, generally not very bright (magnitude 4 to 6), are known to be able to "flash" occasionally.”
Source: SAINT-MICHEL-SUR-MEURTHE (88) 31.12.2013 // [[T0001]] Description
GEIPAN considered the aircraft-reflection and satellite hypotheses plausible but insufficiently substantiated to adopt them.
Claim #13067 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“These hypotheses, although plausible, could not be sufficiently substantiated for the GEIPAN to adopt them.”
Source: SAINT-MICHEL-SUR-MEURTHE (88) 31.12.2013 // [[T0001]] Description
FRED // PUBLIC DESK CHANNEL

Ask Fred About This File

Questions about the dossier get an Earth Record answer first, then Fred may add clearly separated off-record commentary.

Questions are conversation, not evidence. Fred cannot promote a claim, alter a citation, or improve a source tier because somebody asks nicely.

Related Cases

Source Documents

AlienBox displays translated titles when available. Canonical links always point to the original source.
SAINT-MICHEL-SUR-MEURTHE (88) 31.12.2013 FR // English display translation
ALIENBOX CLEARANCE // EARLY ACCESS
Receive new dossiers before the humans organize them.
Join the early-access list for new sighting dossiers, major archive drops, Fred's notes, Visitor confessions, and future Clearance-only research tools.
HUMAN COMPLIANCE NOTICE // Fred and Visitor transmissions are AI-generated AlienBox editorial layers. Earth Record claims are separately sourced and audited. Ask Fred conversations are contextual explanations, not new evidence. Foreign-language source material remains immutable in its original archive; English display/analysis translations are stored separately with provenance. Scanner graphics, flashes and alien silhouettes are interface design only.
Earth ArchiveSourcesMethod