Declassified UFO / UAP Document

ENQUETE 86 / 06 «L'AMARANTE» NOTE TECHNIQUE No 17

📅 21 October 1982 📍 V1, suburb of V2 🏛 GEPAN 📄 Technical Note

Ever wanted to host your own late-night paranormal radio show?

Across the Airwaves · Narrative Sim · Windows · $2.95

You're on the air. Callers bring Mothman, Fresno Nightcrawlers, UFO sightings, reptilian autopsies, and whispers about AATIP and Project Blue Book. Every reply shapes how the night goes.

UFO & UAP Cryptids Paranormal Government Secrets Classified Files High Strangeness Strange Creatures
The night is long. The lines are open →

AI-Generated Summary

TL;DR

A biologist reported a 20-minute hovering UAP sighting in his garden in October 1982. GEPAN investigated the case, including biochemical analysis of withered plants, but found no definitive explanation for the phenomenon.

This technical note, issued by the GEPAN (Groupe d'Etude des Phénomenes Aérospatiaux Non-Identifiés) on March 21, 1983, details the investigation into a UAP sighting reported by a 30-year-old biologist, Monsieur Henri, in V1, France. On October 21, 1982, at approximately 12:35, the witness observed an ovoid, metallic object, approximately 1.5 meters in diameter and 0.8 meters thick, hovering one meter above his garden. The object, which had a blue-green upper section and a metallic lower section, remained stationary for 20 minutes before ascending vertically at high speed. The witness reported no sound, heat, or radiation. Following the event, the witness discovered that amaranth plants in his garden had withered. The Gendarmerie and later GEPAN investigators collected plant samples for biochemical analysis. The investigation included a detailed reconstruction of the witness's movements, meteorological data, and radar records from the CODA, which showed no significant anomalies. Biochemical analyses of the plants were conducted at the University Paul Sabatier, but results were inconclusive due to delays in sample preservation and handling. The report concludes that while the witness's account is consistent and credible, the physical evidence is insufficient to draw definitive conclusions. The investigators suggest that an intense electric field at the moment of the object's departure might explain the observed effects on the vegetation, but this remains a hypothesis. The document underscores the challenges of investigating such phenomena and the necessity for rigorous, standardized scientific protocols in future cases.

Le témoin dit souhaiter une grande discrétion quant à son témoignage, mais a cependant été, de lui-même, en parler à la Gendarmerie, en acceptant la rédaction du P.V.

Official Assessment

The investigation found no evidence of hoax or psychological pathology in the witness. The physical evidence (withered plants) was inconclusive due to poor preservation and handling. The hypothesis of an intense electric field at the moment of departure was proposed to explain the observed grass movement and potential plant stress, but remains speculative.

Witnesses

Key Persons

  • MauriceFather of the witness
  • Geneviève LAURENTMother of the witness
  • Monsieur CHAUZYResearcher at the Laboratory of Atmospheric Physics of the University Paul Sabatier
  • ABRAVANELResearcher at the Centre of Plant Physiology of the University Paul Sabatier
  • JUSTResearcher at the Centre of Plant Physiology of the University Paul Sabatier