UFOs: testimonies taken seriously

A service whose mission is more relevant than ever at a time when space activity is intensifying. Exponential increase in the number of satellite launches, multiplication of deorbiting of launcher stages (or rockets) to depollute space by forcing their atmospheric re-entry… One in 15 points of light above our heads should soon be artificial, according to a study by the University of Reginawhich is likely to generate a fair amount of questions among the general public. “Our mission is of public utility, because disseminating information to citizens about what they can see in the sky is in our DNA, as the “I” in the acronym GEIPAN indicates,” says the engineer. Precisely, those who think they have experienced or seen an extraordinary event, the “citizen-witnesses,” occupy a central place at GEIPAN. The investigation teams’ mission is to provide them with an educational and rational explanation whenever possible, but also, where appropriate, to reassure them, as Marie-Pierre Desvignes, head of documentary research, explains: “We sometimes receive moving testimonies from worried, even panicked people.” Above all, no one here makes fun of the witnesses or their questions, which are always accepted as legitimate, and which conspiracy circles could otherwise exploit. “We don’t see the conspiracy theorists,” Frédéric Courtade is keen to point out. As for hoaxes, they represent less than 1% of reports. Those who contact us are in good faith.” Thus, for public funding of less than 0.5 euro cents per inhabitant, according to the manager, GEIPAN offers all the rigor of the CNES and its scientific methods to the people who contact it.
Marie-Pierre Desvignes and Frédéric Courtade. Photo: Natacha Scheidhauer

Processing human data

It was for these methods and the long experience of GEIPAN that NASA invited the previous head of the service, Vincent Costes, in 2022. “Their experts wanted to know more about our way of doing things,” explains this CNES engineer. “They were particularly wondering about how to process human testimonies, which are fragile and subjective, as input data.” Errors of perception, faulty memory, beliefs, emotions… it is from this complexity, inherent to “human sensors”, that NASA would like to exonerate itself. How? By replacing these testimonies with data deemed more reliable, from technological sensors, such as satellites reserved for this use or camera networks. An approach that differs from that of GEIPAN. “Our experience shows us that anomalies are often due to the instruments. For example, stray lights that are reflected in the optical system or sensor defects, such as faulty or saturated pixels. This is why we only accept visual testimonies,” explains the former manager. In short, if a person has photographed or filmed a phenomenon, they must first have “seen” it themselves. These testimonies at the heart of the investigation, GEIPAN receives no less than 700 per year. “They are extremely varied,” explains Marie-Pierre Desvignes. Behind her, on the service’s emblematic wall chart, are displayed various annotated photos and sketches, received from all over France. “Of all these reports, 500 require a very simple explanation – for example the passage of a train of Starlink satellites – and are processed by an exchange of emails,” explains the documentalist. The other cases trigger the opening of an investigation. “We call on the skills of the service’s staff, but also those of an external network of around twenty investigators,” adds Frédéric Courtade. Volunteers, they travel to the field to meet witnesses and can count on the support of a college of specialists. “There are astrophysicists, meteorologists and specialists in aeronautics, image processing, lightning and psychology,” lists the scientist. Not to mention the support of GEIPAN’s partners with solid technical resources, such as the Air and Space Force, civil aviation, the national gendarmerie, the National Centre for Scientific Research and Météo France.

3% mystery…

GEIPAN is open to all flying saucer stories and publishes all the cases processed, anonymized, on his sitefollowing a methodological analysis. “We follow a strict protocol,” explains Frédéric Courtade. “Starting with the interview of witnesses, a real cognitive interview developed with an expert psychologist with the aim of bringing out factual data.” On the technical side, simple tools, such as the weather conditions of the sky, an astronomical ephemeris or an air traffic record, can indicate to the investigation team the presence of a phenomenon or a completely identifiable object – lightning, planet, plane, etc. – which could have been mistaken for a spaceship… Other times, these sleuths demonstrate that the Sun illuminated a condensation trail, which gives it “a strange appearance,” or that the sudden extinction of a flying paper lantern gave “the impression of a flying object accelerating and disappearing.” “This is often a misestimation of distance and an overestimation of the speed of movement,” explains Frédéric Courtade. A classic case of a lack of perception that is the source of many misunderstandings: beyond 10 meters, the stereoscopic images received by our eyes are not enough to assess the size and distance of an object, and it is the knowledge we have of it that allows us to make these assessments intuitively. Faced with an unknown object and in a sky without standard reference points, the recipe no longer works… In nearly 50 years of existence, GEIPAN has analyzed almost 10,000 testimonies, 6,000 of which have given rise to investigations and are published (for a total of approximately 3,000 events): 10% of these cases required a field investigation. Finally, only 3% of cases remain unexplained. “Which does not mean that they are doomed to remain so,” says Frédéric Courtade with a smile. Advances in knowledge can indeed help explain cases, sometimes years later. If these 3% represent a challenge for the moment, they are perhaps only unidentified scientific phenomena…
To know more : I saw a UFO. Perceptions and realitiesby Xavier Passot. Cherche-Midi, 2018, 176 pages.