Groupe 5255 - No 05

Magazine Overview

This issue, N°5, of GROUPE 52 55, titled "GROUPE 52 55 GROUPE DÉPARTEMENTAL D'ENQUÊTE ET DE RECHERCHE SUR LE PHÉNOMÈNE O.V.N.I. HAUTE-MARNE/MEUSE", was published on Wednesday, February 5, 1975. It is a French publication focused on UFO phenomena.

Editorial

The editorial, signed by Le GROUPE 5255, addresses the purpose of the current issue, which is to provide supplementary information on the Lac du Der observations previously presented in issues 3 and 4. The goals are to better situate the context and conditions of these observations, clarify points that may have been insufficiently developed or appear contradictory, and respond to reader questions and suggestions. The editorial laments the current state of ufology, characterized by polemics between different schools of thought and a climate of intolerance, which it believes hinders progress. It advocates for a more open-minded yet prudent approach, rejecting the need to adhere to a single theory and suggesting that multiple phenomena might be involved. The group emphasizes the importance of field research and the complexity of the subject.

Observations at Lac du Der-Chantecoq (Haute-Marne) - January-February 1975 (Supplement)

This section provides complementary information about the environment surrounding the Lac du Der-Chantecoq. It details the history of the Der region, a bocage area of forests and water in the South of the Marne, North of Haute-Marne, and part of the Aube. The Lac du Der-Chantecoq, originally the Champaubert reservoir, was enlarged to become the Lac du Der-Chantecoq or Réservoir Marne. This artificial lake, covering 4800 hectares, is the largest in France and was created to regulate the Marne and Seine rivers. Its construction in 1974 led to the submersion of several villages: Champaubert-aux-Bois, Chantecoq, Giffaumont, and Nuisement-aux-Bois. Only the churches of Champaubert and Nuisement were preserved, with Champaubert's church now situated in the middle of the lake. The village of Chantecoq is now an island. The text also touches upon the historical significance of the region, including the deforestation by monks in the 7th century and the famous Montier-en-Der stud farm, which supplied horses for Napoleon I's army. It also mentions the commune of Wassy and the historical massacre that occurred there in 1562, which is linked to the French Wars of Religion.

Climate

The climate of the Der region is described as relatively favorable for tourism, contrary to popular opinion. Despite its proximity to Lorraine, it benefits from good sunshine from April to October, with correct average minimum temperatures from May to October. Precipitation is low from February to May, increasing in July but decreasing again in September and October. Dominant winds are from the Southwest, with oscillations, and their speed is generally below 15m/s. The source for this information is 'Objectifs Haute-Marne' nº 27, June 1979.

Tectonics and Geology

The geological structure of the area shows a gentle westward slope towards the Paris Basin. The text describes geological faults, including the fault of the Forêt du Val, the fault of St-Dizier, and the fault of Blumerey-Mertrud. These Hercynian fractures are noted to have reactivated during the Tertiary period, alongside epeirogenic movements that caused transgressions and regressions, leading to changes in facies.

Historical Context

Les Moines du Der

This section references historical works related to the monks of the Der. It mentions "Les Moines du Der" by M. l'abbé R.A. BOUILLEVAUX, published in 1845 by Jules THIEBAUT and Charles SACHER in Montier-en-Der. The text also refers to the municipal library of Saint-Dizier. A narrative excerpt describes Saint Berchaire, the founder of a monastery, who redeemed eight young men and eight young women from captivity. The young women were placed in his convent at Mangevillers, which became known as Puellemontier. The text also recounts an episode where Berchaire, after giving alms to some shepherds, was led to a sacred but feared place in the forest, inhabited by a demon, where he later founded a monastery.

The Massacre of Vassy

A historical account details the massacre of Vassy, which occurred on March 1, 1562. François de Guise, returning from Alsace, arrived in Wassy (Haute-Marne) and, with his entourage and a troop of 2000 men, attended mass. During the service, Protestants gathered in a nearby barn to hear their pastor. A confrontation erupted between the Duke's men and the Huguenots, resulting in 25 deaths, including women and children. This event is described as the "famous massacre of the barn of WASSY" and is considered a significant factor in the French Wars of Religion. The text notes that Wassy is located about 12 km from the Lac du Der-Chantecoq. References include Emile JOLIBOIS's "La Haute-Marne ancienne et moderne" and editions from F.E.R.N.

Organization and Contact Information

GROUPE 5255 is presented as an association (Asbl. 1901) with its headquarters at 20 rue de la Maladière, 52000 CHAUMONT, and a phone number of 25.03.77.02. The bureau members are listed: Roger THOME (President), Christine ZWYGART (Secretary-Treasurer), Edith THOME (Assistant Secretary), René THOLME (Assistant Treasurer), and members Lionel DANIZEL and Jean-Luc THIEBAUD. Annual membership is 70.00 francs, with benefactor members (including the review) contributing a minimum of 40.00 francs. Payments can be made to C.C.P. GROUPE 5255 N° 1816 32 B CHALONS/MARNE. Correspondence for the South of Haute-Marne should be sent to the Chaumont address, while correspondence for the North of Haute-Marne and Meuse should be sent to La Pointerie nº 6, 55170 ANCERVILLE GUE. The group also operates a telephone alert network ('Réseau d'alerte téléphonique') with contact numbers for Mlle C. ZWYGART (03.77.02), Mr L. DANIZEL (31.77.26), and Mr R. THOME (75.36.33).

C.N.E.G.U. Meeting

The 23rd session of the Comité Nord-Est des Groupements Ufologiques (C.N.E.G.U.), organized by GROUPE 5255, was scheduled for March 8 and 9, 1986, at the Municipal Leisure Center of Saint-Roch, route d'Arc-en-Barrois in CHAUMONT (Haute-Marne). Inquiries could be made at the CHAUMONT number 03.77.02.

Call for Reader Contributions

Readers are encouraged to share their observations, both recent and old, to help the group grow in numbers, equipment, information, and effectiveness. The group emphasizes the importance of knowing about past sightings.

Reproduction Rights

Reproduction of articles and documents is authorized, provided the source is clearly indicated, including the names of investigators, references to the review, and GROUPE 5255.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue include UFO sightings, regional geography and history, and the organizational activities of GROUPE 5255. The editorial stance is one of open-mindedness, caution, and a rejection of dogmatic adherence to specific theories within ufology. The group prioritizes empirical research and field investigation, advocating for a balanced perspective that acknowledges the complexity of the phenomenon and the possibility of multiple contributing factors rather than a single explanation. They express a desire to avoid the polemics that plague the ufological community and focus on advancing the field through diligent work.

This issue of 'Le Der' (Volume 372, October-December 1971) focuses on the natural environment of the Der region in France, detailing its hydrology, flora, and fauna, alongside a significant section on unexplained aerial phenomena (UAP) observed in 1975.

Hydrogeology The region's watercourses belong to the Seine Basin, divided into two main groups: the Marne and its tributary the Blaise, and the Voire with its numerous tributaries, including the Héronne. Gravel deposits suggest these rivers were powerful during the Pleistocene. The Marne valley is less represented at Eurville, while the Blaise valley widens downstream from Wassy. The Voire and its tributaries meander through a gently rolling landscape characterized by numerous lakes and marshy areas.

Vegetation of the Der Located at the confluence of Haute-Marne, Marne, and Aube departments, the Der region's distinctiveness comes from its argilo-sandy subsoil, characteristic of the humid Champagne region. Its soil is often poorly drained and acidic, contrasting sharply with the dry Champagne and neighboring Barrois. The Forêt du Der is notable for its oak trees, with some specimens in the Bois du Ham being 300 years old and reaching 35 meters in height. Other trees include beech, lime, ash, and alder. The vegetation is detailed by families, including tall-leafed deciduous trees like pedunculate oaks, marsh oaks, red horse chestnuts, and various others such as alders, birches, hornbeams, hawthorns, walnuts, plane trees, and poplars. Conifers include trees like the '40 écus' and Austrian black pines. Shrubs and climbers are also listed, along with specific plant groupings found along the edges of ponds, such as wet meadows, water buttercups, and Canadian elodea.

Fauna of the Der The waters of the Der host various fish species, including pike, perch, black-bass, carp, tench, bream, catfish, and oysters. Mammals observed include wild boar, roe deer, and foxes. Deer are transient visitors. Other residents include badgers, martens, polecats, wildcats, weasels, and various rodents. Beavers were reintroduced in 1965. The Lac du Der is a significant habitat for birds, with 220 species recorded in the past decade, 90 of which are aquatic. These are categorized into winter visitors, main migrants, nesting raptors, and year-round nesting water birds. Principal bird species mentioned include grebes, geese, ducks, kingfishers, terns, gulls, coots, divers, herons, spoonbills, cranes, cormorants, lapwings, teals, plovers, sandpipers, snipes, woodcocks, stints, avocets, swans, buzzards, red kites, and eagles. The article notes a decline in passerines and swallows, likely due to intensive insecticide use by farmers. The white-tailed eagle, one of Europe's largest raptors, is mentioned as a rare visitor, suffering from water pollution. Cranes regularly migrate through the region, with major passages in October and November, flying at high altitudes. The Lac du Der serves as a known stopover and wintering area for these migratory birds.

Complementary Information on the Facts This section details observations of UAP that occurred between January 25 and February 5, 1975. The witnesses were in good physical and mental health, sober, and had no visual impairments.

Observation of Tuesday, February 4, 1975, between 19:50 and 20:00 Jany Sauvanet reported observing a large red luminous ball about thirty meters above the lake, which ascended vertically and disappeared instantly without sound. The witness excluded any possibility of confusion. The observers were facing east, towards the Bois du Ham, and did not see this phenomenon.

Attitude of Régis Sauvanet While most witnesses were skeptical, Régis Sauvanet, Jany's brother, had a particular reaction. He initially felt the phenomenon was 'demonic'. During a discussion about taking infrared photos on February 3rd, Régis expressed doubt about the effectiveness of photography for these phenomena, referring to them as 'forces of evil'. Despite his apprehension, Jany insisted, and infrared photos were taken of a white sphere about 250 meters away. The text suggests Régis's fear and emotional state might have influenced his perception, viewing the Der phenomena as demonic.

About Distances Distances between witnesses and observed phenomena were recorded at the time of the observations.

About Traces Searches for physical traces at sites of reported phenomena, including 'humanoid' shapes and white balls, yielded no suspicious findings on the ground, trees, or vegetation. However, a circular area of disturbed, damp earth, approximately 10-20 cm deep, was found near where a 'humanoid' silhouette had been observed. This trace was fresh and its origin, possibly from wild boars, could not be definitively ruled out.

Return to the Observation of the Luminous Tube on Monday, February 3, 1975 René and Jany, while attempting to circle a 'humanoid' shape, encountered a luminous white tube. The second team, remaining in place, saw the luminous form move into the woods. René and Jany then advanced along the woods and found themselves facing the white light. The object was described as a clearly defined, white opaline light, not illuminating the surroundings, and appearing to be about 4 meters above the ground. It moved silently and rapidly over the former Lac du Der, just centimeters above the water. It seemed to accelerate its rotation and flee when Jany began taking photos, as if reacting to the witnesses' presence.

Witness Testimonies on the Luminous Tube René described the object as being about 10-15 centimeters from the ground, vertically oriented, with pointed and rounded extremities. He noted a slow, counter-clockwise rotation and a darker area on the object. Jany confirmed the object was net and silent. René estimated its size to be approximately 3.30 meters in height and 25-30 centimeters in width or thickness, based on later measurements. The light was described as bearable and not dazzling. Jany took infrared photos of the object. Both witnesses approached the object without fear, despite its unknown nature. They described the light as opaline white, milky, and cold, unlike artificial lighting. René further elaborated on the object's dimensions and pointed extremities, noting its slow rotation and a darker section. Jany confirmed the object's net appearance and silence. René provided a more precise size estimate and noted the light was not dazzling. Jany took infrared photos and they intended to approach the object directly. Both witnesses expressed a lack of fear, attributing it to their focus on approaching the object. They found the situation 'dingue' (crazy) and felt they could have passed through the luminous object.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance The magazine presents a detailed exploration of the natural environment of the Der region, highlighting its ecological significance. The inclusion of UAP reports, particularly the detailed witness testimonies and photographic attempts, suggests an editorial stance that is open to investigating unexplained phenomena, while also grounding the reports in factual accounts of the witnesses' conditions and the environment. The emphasis on witness credibility and the detailed descriptions of the phenomena indicate a serious approach to the subject matter.

This document, an issue of the magazine "OVNI" (issue number 4), details a series of unusual events that occurred in the Bois du Ham, near the Lac du Der in Haute-Marne, France, primarily on February 2nd, 1975, and extending into the following days. The central focus is on the observations of luminous white spheres and a tube-like object by a group of witnesses, including Jany, René, Roger, and Régis Sauvanet. The narrative is presented through witness testimonies, dialogues, and analytical notes.

The Bois du Ham Encounters (February 2, 1975)

The main event described took place on the evening of Sunday, February 2nd, 1975, starting around 19:00 local time in the Bois du Ham. Four witnesses (Jany, Roger, Régis, and René) discovered a "white light" in the undergrowth. Upon closer inspection, they identified two "opaline white balls" (boules blanches), each between 80 cm and 1 meter in diameter, separated by about 2.50 to 3 meters. The phenomena were silent, emitted no heat or smell, and did not illuminate the surroundings.

The witnesses engaged in several "experiments" to study the phenomena. They approached cautiously, separated into groups to attempt flanking maneuvers, and observed the spheres' reactions. The phenomena appeared to respond to their presence, moving to maintain a certain distance, sometimes mirroring the witnesses' movements or repositioning themselves. The spheres moved silently, at a pace comparable to a person walking, and maintained their appearance, color, and luminosity throughout the approximately thirty-minute observation period.

Radio Interference and Communication Issues

A recurring theme throughout the observations was significant interference on the talkies-walkies used by the witnesses. During the February 2nd encounter, communication between the groups was repeatedly hampered by strong static, preventing effective coordination. This interference was also noted during other encounters, such as on February 3rd when Jany and René lost contact with their team, and on February 4th when Jany's attempt to call René and Roger was unsuccessful due to static.

Subsequent Observations and Related Incidents

The document also recounts other related events:

• February 3rd, 20:45-21:15 HL: Régis Sauvanet, accompanied by five other witnesses, photographed a moving sphere using infrarred film. The resulting images showed a partially lit white spheroid, with one side dark, which contrasted with the witnesses' visual perception of a perfectly illuminated sphere.
• February 3rd, 21:40 HL: While moving through the woods, René and Jany lost radio contact with their team due to strong parasites and then encountered a luminous white tube.
• February 4th, 18:45 HL: Jany photographed a sphere about 4-5 meters away and then heard "footsteps," but the phenomenon disappeared.
• February 5th, 22:20 HL: Roger and Jany, patrolling near the church of Champaubert, received a radio message from René and Régis about two large orange spheres that appeared and then vanished instantly. Notably, no radio interference occurred during this specific event.

Analysis and Hypotheses

The article explores several aspects of these encounters:

• Photographic Passivity: The authors express puzzlement over the witnesses' general lack of successful photographic documentation, despite having equipment ready. They speculate on possible reasons, including the phenomena's potential ability to influence observers or the time constraints for obtaining specialized film.
• "Waking Dream" Theory: The document dismisses the "waking dream" theory as an explanation for the events, arguing that the witnesses' actions and reactions indicated a clear awareness of their surroundings and a logical thought process, not a dream-like state.
• Psychological Effects: The possibility of unknown phenomena causing psychological or physiological disturbances is raised, citing other reports of UFOs emitting signals that cause radio interference and affect animal behavior. The text suggests that certain light sources might produce "cold light" or ultrasounds that could impact observers.
• Object Characteristics: The observed phenomena (spheres and tubes) are described as having distinct characteristics: silent, non-rotating, non-transparent, with sharp outlines, no halos or trails, and consistent appearance. Their behavior suggested an awareness of the observers.

Conclusion and Recurring Themes

The issue concludes by emphasizing the detailed nature of the witness testimonies and the challenges in fully explaining the observed events. The recurring themes include the silent and responsive nature of the phenomena, the pervasive radio interference, the difficulty in obtaining clear photographic evidence, and the witnesses' attempts to rationalize and document their experiences. The article highlights the importance of witness accounts, even in the absence of conclusive physical proof, and suggests that further investigation into the nature of these phenomena is warranted.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine "OVNI" consistently focuses on detailed accounts of UFO sightings and encounters, prioritizing witness testimony and attempting to analyze the events through various lenses, including scientific and psychological perspectives. The editorial stance appears to be one of open inquiry, presenting evidence and witness narratives without definitive conclusions, but encouraging further research and discussion within the ufological community. The recurring themes in this issue are the unexplained aerial phenomena themselves, the challenges of documentation (especially photography), the impact of these events on witnesses, and the potential for unknown physical or psychological effects associated with UFO sightings. The magazine also seems to explore the possibility of intelligent control or influence behind these phenomena, as suggested by their responsive behavior.

This issue of L.D.L.N. (likely a French ufology publication) details a series of unusual aerial and ground phenomena observed in the Bois du Ham, near the ancien Der in Haute-Marne, France, between January 25 and February 3, 1975. The main focus is on "experiences" with "white spheres" on the ground, witnessed by four individuals: MM. Jany, Régis Sauvanet, René Thomé, and Roger Thomé. The cover features an illustration of the observation scene with two white spheres and two observers, accompanied by a map of the area.

The Bois du Ham Incident: January 25 - February 3, 1975

The report meticulously documents the events, including meteorological conditions, witness accounts, and attempts to understand the phenomena. The initial observation on Sunday, February 2, 1975, at 19:00 local time, involved four witnesses in the Bois du Ham. They observed "white spheres" on the ground. The total duration of this close observation was approximately 30 minutes.

Meteorological and Environmental Conditions

The weather on February 2, 1975, was characterized by 12 km visibility, no fog or mist, no local storms, a North-East wind at 6 meters/second (22 km/h), a cloud ceiling of Stratocumulus at 960 meters, a temperature of +8.0°C, and 83% humidity. The barometric pressure was 1018.5 mb. The article notes that no weather balloons were launched that evening, with the last launch being at 14:00 from St-Dizier.

Witness Accounts and Object Characteristics

The "spheres" were described as white and sometimes red. Their behavior was a key aspect of the investigation. The witnesses noted that the spheres seemed to react to light. For instance, during the first "ballet" of luminous spheres on January 25, René and Jany used a powerful electronic flash. The stationary sphere intensified its light, illuminating the treetops, then descended and disappeared behind the woods. This led the witnesses to believe that their actions might provoke a reaction.

Another incident on February 1 involved a white sphere on a path. When a flashlight beam inadvertently hit it, the sphere moved away. On February 2, a white sphere, described as opalescent, with a diameter of 80 cm to 1 meter, was observed on a forest path. It appeared immobile, as if waiting. The witnesses engaged in a detailed conversation, trying to identify the phenomenon, comparing it to kitchen lamps or gas marsh lights, but ultimately concluding it was something more distinct and net.

"Experiments" with the Phenomenon

The witnesses, particularly René and Jany, conducted several "experiments" to understand the spheres' nature. They deliberately used flashlights and other light sources to observe the reaction. A notable observation was that the spheres did not illuminate the surrounding landscape. The witnesses also noted a faint humming sound when they were still and silent, which they attributed to the phenomenon.

One of the most curious instructions was the agreement among witnesses not to turn on their lamps in the presence of the phenomena. This was a direct result of their "experiments." The first incident, on January 25, saw a sphere intensify its light and move when illuminated by a flash. The second incident, on February 1, involved a sphere retreating when a flashlight beam hit it. These reactions led them to believe that light might attract or provoke the phenomena, and they decided to avoid using lights to prevent the spheres from disappearing or reacting negatively.

Locations and Measurements

The report includes detailed descriptions of the locations where the phenomena were observed, including the Bois du Ham, the edge of the ancien Der, and the vicinity of the Réservoir de Champaubert. Precise measurements of distances, azimuts (using a compass), and apparent sizes (using an LDLN comparator) are provided for various sightings. For example, the width of a path in the Bois du Ham varied between 1.90m and 2.10m, and the distance between a pile of deadwood and a "humanoid" form was measured at 28.20 meters (47 paces).

Additional Witnesses and Investigations

To confirm their observations, the original witnesses invited others who had no prior knowledge of ufology. Régis, Jany's 17-year-old brother, initially skeptical, accompanied them and admitted the presence of unusual phenomena, even describing one aspect as "demonic." Later, Alain Coquie (a police inspector trainee) and Christian Asche (a laboratory assistant) were invited. They also witnessed the same phenomena without being able to explain their nature.

The article also addresses why the witnesses did not immediately contact the Gendarmerie. They were unaware of the reporting procedures at the time and doubted they would be believed. They also felt that the phenomena did not fit the typical "saucer" or "disk" UFO descriptions, and they were concerned about being dismissed, especially given the involvement of ufologists.

Appeals for Information

The publication includes appeals for additional witnesses who may have noted reactions from UFO detectors or observed similar phenomena in the region between January 25 and February 6, 1975. They also seek any other witnesses of unusual phenomena during that period, promising anonymity.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the detailed, almost scientific, investigation of unexplained aerial phenomena. The publication emphasizes empirical observation, measurement, and witness corroboration. The editorial stance appears to be one of serious inquiry into UAP, seeking to document and understand these events through careful reporting and by encouraging further investigation and witness participation. There is a clear effort to distinguish these observations from typical UFO reports and to explore the possibility of intelligent interaction with the phenomena, particularly in response to human actions like the use of light.

This document, likely an issue of a French ufology magazine titled "Phénomènes Aériens", focuses on a series of unexplained aerial phenomena observed at the Der region in France during January and February 1975. The issue details witness testimonies, investigative efforts, and potential hypotheses, with a particular emphasis on the observations made by the Sauvanet family.

The Der Events of January-February 1975 The core of the document recounts a series of encounters with luminous objects, primarily referred to as "boules" (balls) and a "tube" of light. The initial dialogue captures a conversation between witnesses Roger, René, and Jany, describing the behavior of a luminous object that stops and starts in unison with their movements. They note its consistent height above the ground and its sudden extinguishment.

One of the most striking aspects is the testimony of Myriam Sauvanet, the two-year-old daughter of Jany and Annie Sauvanet. Despite her young age, her observations are presented as credible, partly due to her parents' and other witnesses' initial skepticism towards UFOs. Myriam compared the luminous balls to "Christmas tree ornaments" and described them as beautiful. Her lack of nightmares or fear after the sightings is also noted.

The article details specific dates and times of observations:

• Saturday, January 25, 1975, 18:30 HL: Five witnesses observed aerial "ballets" of luminous balls.
• Saturday, February 1, 1975, 19:30 HL: Five witnesses, including Myriam, observed similar luminous balls.
• Sunday, February 2, 1975, 23:00 HL: René and Régis observed a white sphere accompanied by a dark "tube" near the water's edge.
• Monday, February 3, 1975, 21:40 HL: Jany and René approached a luminous "tube" of light.

The witnesses, including Jany Sauvanet, were initially skeptical, viewing UFOs as "sheet metal and bolts" or attributing sightings to hallucinations or misidentifications. Their primary interests were nature, ornithology, photography, and wildlife observation, suggesting they were not predisposed to believe in UFOs.

Investigation and Hypotheses The document describes the investigative process, including attempts to replicate the conditions and rule out conventional explanations. The investigators conducted experiments using various cars (CV Break, Opel Record, Fiat 850, Peugeot 204) to see if car headlights could explain the observed phenomena. They concluded that car headlights could not account for the shape, behavior, or lack of noise associated with the observed objects.

Several hypotheses are explored and largely dismissed:

• Car Headlights: Ruled out due to the inaccessibility of the locations by vehicle and the distinct characteristics of the observed phenomena.
• Natural Phenomena: The possibility of phosphorescent moss or luminous fungi was considered. While some mosses do exhibit faint fluorescence, it was deemed insufficient to explain the observed phenomena. The article also mentions the Clitocybe clearia mushroom, known for its phosphorescence, but notes that not all specimens are luminous and it doesn't explain the observed shapes or behaviors.
• Radioactivity: The presence of radioactive ore was investigated using a Geiger counter, but geological documentation of the region contradicted this hypothesis.
• Parapsychological Hypothesis: The possibility that witnesses, particularly those described as more sensitive, might have involuntarily created the phenomena was raised but not elaborated upon.

Later Sightings The document also includes accounts of later sightings by Annie Sauvanet:

• Saturday, February 18, 1978, 06:15: Annie observed a static, luminous object shaped like a vertical crescent with pointed horns near Rupt-aux-Nonains.
• Thursday, February 14, 1980, 21:45: Annie observed a luminous white rectangular object with sharp edges, which moved and then disappeared.

Opinions The issue includes an opinion from Claude MAUGE, an independent researcher, who found the detailed reports and diagrams of the Der events interesting but expressed a subjective doubt about the "strangeness" based solely on the drawings. He emphasized that even if the observations were misidentifications, the detailed and serious nature of the report would still contribute to understanding their mechanism.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance The recurring themes in this issue are the detailed reporting of unexplained aerial phenomena, the rigorous investigation of witness testimonies, and the exploration of various hypotheses. The editorial stance appears to be one of open-minded inquiry, acknowledging the limitations of conventional explanations and valuing firsthand, detailed accounts. The emphasis on empirical investigation, even through direct experience and experimentation, suggests a belief that understanding these phenomena requires more than just theoretical discussion. The article highlights the importance of credible witness testimony, even from young children, and the challenges of explaining anomalous events that defy easy categorization.

This issue of "LUMIÈRES DANS LA NUIT" (Lights in the Night), specifically issue number 107 from August 1970, delves into the complex and multifaceted "Der" case, a series of unexplained phenomena observed near the Der lake in France during the winter of 1975. The magazine, published by the "Groupement LUMIERES DANS LA NUIT," presents a thorough investigation, exploring various hypotheses and witness accounts.

The Der Case: A Multifaceted Phenomenon

The core of the issue revolves around the events at Der, which occurred over five consecutive days. The phenomena were observed by multiple witnesses, including members of the Sauvanet family and Roger Thomé, who also acted as an investigator. The article highlights the unusual characteristics of these sightings, such as luminous spheres, their geometric movements, and the complete absence of sound, which distinguish them from conventional explanations.

Hypotheses Explored

The magazine meticulously examines several potential explanations for the Der phenomena:

• Collective Consciousness and Spiritualism: One hypothesis suggests that the phenomena might originate from the collective psychic energy of observers, drawing parallels to spiritualist beliefs about levitation, citing the case of D.D. Home.
• Unconscious Contactees: This theory posits that certain individuals are more receptive to unexplained phenomena without necessarily being extraterrestrial messengers. Some witnesses from the Der case later reported other UFO sightings and paranormal events, including precognition.
• Socio-Psychological Explanations: The article considers the possibility of misinterpretations of known astronomical, meteorological, or natural phenomena, leading to a transposition into dream-like scenes. It also touches upon collective psychosis, autosuggestion, and hallucinations, though the authors express skepticism regarding these explanations for the Der case due to the witnesses' consistent accounts and the physical evidence (a photograph).
• Natural Phenomena: The possibility of natural electrical phenomena, ionized gases (plasma), marsh gases, or will-o'-the-wisps is explored. While these can create fleeting luminous effects, the article argues that the observed phenomena's duration, geometric cohesion, and distinct forms do not align with typical natural gas emissions.
• Mystifiers and Pranksters: The idea of a sophisticated hoax is considered, but dismissed due to the lack of any claims of responsibility and the considerable resources required to stage such events over several days.
• Poachers: Similar to the prankster hypothesis, this suggests that poachers might have been involved, but the lack of any traces or evidence on the scene makes this unlikely.
• Weather Balloons: The hypothesis of meteorological balloons is examined, but deemed incompatible with the observed phenomena's behavior, altitude control, and luminescence.
• Military Maneuvers: The possibility of secret military exercises is discussed. However, the authors rule this out due to the lack of noise, the unusual luminosity, the specific location (not a military zone), and the absence of typical military traces.
• Secret Prototypes: The article questions whether the phenomena could be experimental aircraft, noting that current technology (even years later) does not match the described capabilities, particularly the silent operation and unique luminescence.
• Meteors or Space Debris: The possibility of meteors or falling space debris is considered, but rejected due to the controlled, non-ballistic movements and hovering observed.
• High-Tension Lines and Plasma Balls: The phenomena are compared to plasma balls generated by corona discharge from high-tension electrical lines, such as "Saint-Elme's fire." However, the sustained, coordinated movements of the Der phenomena are presented as distinct from the spontaneous nature of plasma discharges.

Witness Credibility and Case Details

A significant portion of the article is dedicated to establishing the credibility of the witnesses. The authors emphasize that the witnesses were not seeking attention and had no personal gain from reporting their experiences. They consistently described the phenomena using terms like "balls," "tube," "beam," "shape," or "humanoid silhouette." The article notes that the events occurred by chance and that the witnesses actively tried to understand what they were observing, even approaching the phenomena.

Comparison with Other Cases

The "Der" case is explicitly compared to the "boules" (balls) of Aveyron, which occurred between 1966 and 1967. The article presents drawings and descriptions of the Aveyron case, suggesting potential similarities in the nature of the phenomena observed.

Conclusion and Future Research

The authors conclude that while conventional explanations are difficult to apply to the Der case, they remain open to future research. They acknowledge that the possibility of experimental aircraft or other advanced technologies cannot be entirely dismissed and urge investigators to remain vigilant and informed about new technological developments. The article invites specialists to contribute their insights.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine consistently adopts a stance of open-minded inquiry, presenting various hypotheses without definitively endorsing any single one. The emphasis is on rigorous investigation, witness credibility, and the exploration of unconventional explanations for unexplained aerial phenomena. The recurring themes include the psychological aspects of perception, the potential for misinterpretation, the characteristics of UFO sightings, and the limitations of current scientific understanding in explaining anomalous events. The editorial stance encourages further research and public contribution to understanding these mysteries.

This document, likely an excerpt from a publication focused on unexplained phenomena, delves into the investigation of luminous events that occurred at Lac du Der, France. The content critically examines various hypotheses to explain these sightings, emphasizing witness testimony and scientific analysis.

The Lac du Der Phenomena

The article begins by discussing the nature of luminous phenomena, noting their silent disappearance, sometimes abrupt, and the emission of whistling or humming sounds. It then addresses the temptation to link these to UFOs but highlights a key limitation: the 'Corona discharge' phenomenon requires proximity to an electric field generator, typically within a few meters.

The investigation into the Lac du Der events is presented as objective, with a focus on ruling out proximity to high or medium voltage lines. The document asserts that the events at Lac du Der had no apparent connection to electrical phenomena, as there were no power lines, pylons, or transformers in the vicinity. The area is described as wild and a protected ornithological reserve, further supporting the absence of electrical infrastructure.

This lack of electrical networks is presented as evidence against confusion with phenomena like corona discharges, St. Elmo's fire, or atmospheric plasmas linked to climatic conditions. The article suggests that if the phenomena were indeed of this nature, their duration, varied aspects (spheres, beams, 'humanoid' silhouettes), and apparent 'games' with witnesses, suggesting a form of intelligence, need to be explained.

Crucially, witnesses did not report explosion sounds, luminous afterglows, trails, or other luminescent traces, which contradicts the idea of moving atmospheric plasma.

Sources and Consulted Documentation

A list of sources is provided, including private conversations with the Chief of the Météo Station of B.A. 113 in Saint-Dizier (1976), publications like "Inforespace" and "L.D.L.N.", a book "Phénomènes étranges dans l'atmosphère et sur la terre" by V. Mésentsev (1970), articles from "Science et Vie" (1978) and "New Scientist" (1976), a paper on ball lightning by W.N. Charman in "American Journal of Physics", and "UFO Informations" (special issue on lightning). It also mentions private correspondence with the Chief of the Météo Station of Essey-les-Nancy.

Luminous Objects?

Statistical data indicates that 90% of UFO observations occur at night, dawn, or dusk. The article posits that non-luminous, non-illuminated phenomena might have occurred, potentially unnoticed even when close to observers. It highlights the limitations of human vision, which is sensitive to only a narrow range of luminous radiation, unlike reptiles (infrared) or bees (ultraviolet).

If the spheres had emitted light in the conventional sense, they would have illuminated the ground and surroundings. The text questions how light spheres could not illuminate the area around them, unlike a simple candle. An hypothesis is proposed: the spheres might have emitted a 'cold' light or an unknown radiation that affected the witnesses' eyes similarly to classical luminous radiation, but without illuminating the surroundings. This light was described as constant, without flickering, and the spheres were sharply defined, without halos or trails.

The article discusses the possibility that this unknown light was absorbed by the ground or was merely a visual illusion. It acknowledges that witnesses reported what their eyes and brains perceived, and that their detailed accounts, if intended to deceive, would have been less plausible. The constant light emission, without flickering, is noted. The possibility of a discontinuous light emission at a frequency of 3000 Hz, making the spheres appear constantly luminous, is also considered.

Witnesses' observations and movements helped establish the volume and size of these phenomena. However, the article questions the certainty of the described forms (spheres, tubes, beams, 'humanoid' silhouettes), suggesting these are human interpretations of unknown entities, possibly intelligent energy concentrations or projections.

Mini-Guided Probes?

This hypothesis suggests the phenomena could be miniaturized, guided, and highly effective 'apparatus' with a specific mission. The luminous spheres and other phenomena might have served as 'bait' or 'lures' to analyze the witnesses' behavior, turning the witnesses into unwitting subjects of an experiment.

The article notes a strange mix of concealment and deliberate manifestation in these cases, questioning the actual activity of the phenomena in these isolated locations. It warns against delving too deeply into science fiction territory.

It concludes that no known natural phenomenon, in physics or meteorology, fully corresponds to these silent, luminous spheres that seem to play with witnesses. They do not resemble hypothetical 'extra-terrestrial vessels'. The article cautions against dismissing the affair as mere confusion or the inventions of 'ufomaniacs' seeking attention.

Ball Lightning

Ball lightning is presented as a last resort hypothesis for unexplained phenomena. It is itself poorly understood. Camille Flammarion's interest in trees and lightning is mentioned, noting that oaks are most frequently struck by lightning, followed by poplars, while birches and maples are rarely struck. This is attributed to factors like tree height, soil type, and foliage spread. Insulating terrains like granite and schist are more affected. Trees with highly insulating wood, like conifers, are more susceptible. The article cites statistics: 54% of strikes hit oaks, 24% poplars, 10% firs, and 6% pines. Birches and maples are not struck if in a dense forest but can be if isolated.

A comparative table shows the relative frequency of lightning strikes on different tree species, with oak at 54 and poplar at 24.

Sources for this section include "Phénomènes étranges dans l'atmosphère et sur la terre" by V. Mézentsev, "Technique forestière" edited by P. Guinier, "Météorologie - Micro-climats" by Ilya Virgatchik, "UFO Informations" (special issue on lightning), and personal contacts with meteorological and forestry officials.

Ball Lightning (Continued)

Ball lightning typically occurs after a storm or lightning strike. Its shape is usually spherical, sometimes ovoid or pear-shaped, with variable size (10 cm to over 1 meter) and intense brightness, ranging in color from red to pale white. It lasts from seconds to minutes and disappears silently or with a small explosion. It is considered as frequent as large lightning strikes.

Witnesses observe it moving slowly, at a walking pace, and its trajectory often follows the wind. It can hover, burst on impact, vanish with a faint noise, or emit a slight whistling sound. Despite numerous hypotheses (around twenty), none have achieved unanimous acceptance. Ball lightning, like UFOs, is considered random and difficult to study or reproduce.

Photographic documentation is rare. The existence of ball lightning relies solely on human testimony. Some luminous balls are seen on high-voltage lines during storms, and on ski lifts, cranes, and other energy conductors. However, specialists consider drops of light sliding down wires as not true ball lightning. A second category involves luminous spheroids preceding lightning strikes, with varying size and color, always occurring outdoors.

These phenomena are believed to be electrical in origin, possibly a concentration of electromagnetic waves. The energy is thought to be accumulated in the ball as molecular excitation in a metastable state, explaining its longevity. The term 'electroluminescence moléculaire' is mentioned in relation to Barry's work. The formation and persistence of ball lightning remain an enigma.

The article notes the existence of 'fireball' phenomena independent of electrical manifestations, which seem to possess their own logic. Ball lightning exhibits curious and unexpected behaviors, sometimes leading to questions about whether it is truly ball lightning. The complexity and vagueness of its characteristics are acknowledged.

While the ball lightning hypothesis can offer a rational explanation for the Der events, it is crucial not to ignore the specific data: the non-stormy atmosphere, the forms, evolutions, duration, and recurrence of the phenomena. Transferring a problem from one category to another does not necessarily solve it. Attributing curious manifestations to ball lightning while persisting in labeling everything similar, even remotely, is a flawed approach, applicable to all hypotheses from socio-psychology to H.E.T.

Sources for Ball Lightning

Sources cited include "Les grands mystères" by Jérémy Klingston, "Phénomènes étranges dans l'atmosphère et sur la terre" by V. Mézentsev, "Science et Vie" (November 1981), and "Revue Inexpliqué" (No. 8).

Return to Two Developed Points

Optical Illusions and Hallucinations

The article argues that the sustained attention required for continuous perception during night-time observations in wild areas, coupled with the adaptation of witnesses' motor skills and vision, makes individual or collective optical illusions unlikely. The proximity of the phenomena and the 'experiments' conducted also seem to exclude this hypothesis.

Regarding hallucinations, the text states that a delirious account typically involves excessive emotional and interpretive elements, with a lack of objective detail and inconsistencies. The narrative would be distorted by the individual's delirium.

In contrast, witnesses at Lac du Der showed no alteration of consciousness, intact instincts and judgment, preserved ego integrity, and unaffected affects. Their behavior remained coherent and rational. The phenomena were clearly observed and described, without the vagueness or indefinability characteristic of hallucinations. Witnesses reported their observations eight years later, with initial reticence due to fear of skepticism, but without altering their accounts.

Invented stories are seen as serving an ulterior motive, such as seeking affection, financial gain, or self-aggrandizement. The Der witnesses, however, gained more trouble than satisfaction. Their 'field experiences' were driven by understandable curiosity, leading to intuitive ideas that never became exaggerated. The witnesses showed no signs of alcoholism, personality disorders, neurotic syndromes, or psychosis, nor did they develop religious sentiments or become mythomaniacs.

Mystifiers and Pranksters

This hypothesis is briefly considered. The witnesses are described as 'active' rather than 'passive', driven by curiosity and a desire to understand, which explains their initiatives. They had no prior belief in 'ET contact' and maintained a rational mindset until they realized that existing hypotheses could not explain what they witnessed.

Four specific witnesses (Jany, Annie, René, Roger) knew the area of the former Der reservoir and its surroundings too well to be fooled by pranksters. They provided detailed accounts of their familiarity with the location, emphasizing that any elaborate prank involving special equipment, lights, or cables would have been noticed.

The complexity and duration of the observations make it improbable that a prankster, however skilled, could have orchestrated such an event. A large-scale mystification would have required a powerful organization with perfect knowledge of the terrain (especially at night) and sophisticated equipment, comparable to film special effects.

Addendum

Sources for the hypothesis on luminous mushrooms are listed, including "Encyclopédie pratique du naturaliste" (Les champignons de France) by A. MAUBLANC, "Les champignons" by Hervé CHAUMETON and Jean-Louis LAMAISON, and "Les champignons des bois feuillus" by Hervé CHAUMETON, as well as an article from "Ca m'intéresse" magazine.

Title: Mystères et Inexpliqués
Issue: 3
Issue Date: January and February 1975
Publisher: GROUPE 5255
Country: France
Language: French

This issue of Mystères et Inexpliqués focuses on several UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) sightings that occurred in the Lac du Der region of France during February 1975. The content is primarily based on witness testimonies, photographic evidence, and detailed analysis, including attempts to calculate the dimensions of the observed phenomena.

Detailed Accounts of Sightings

Tuesday, February 4, 1975 - Bois du Ham (18:45 HL)

Jany Sauvanet was observing in the Bois du Ham, near the old Lac du Der, when he noticed a white, opalescent sphere, approximately 1 meter in diameter, with sharp contours and no halo or trail. The phenomenon stopped suddenly about 4-5 meters from him. He attempted to photograph it with a 135mm telephoto lens, but the result was negative. Shortly after, he heard heavy, 'strange footsteps' that startled him. When he looked back at the sphere, it had disappeared. He noted that the phenomenon was very close to the ground and near him. Sauvanet speculated that the footsteps might have been a deliberate sonic effect to distract him from the sphere, though he admitted this was a gratuitous supposition.

Tuesday, February 4, 1975 - Bois du Ham (19:55 HL)

Following the earlier event, Jany Sauvanet moved closer to the Lac du Der and observed the vertical ascent of a large, bright red sphere (Warm Red U) behind the 'La Brêche' dike, where Roger and René were also present. The sphere's contours were sharply defined, without any halo, trail, or smoke. Its apparent size was comparable to the full moon, estimated as N°5 on the LDLN comparator held at arm's length (5 mm). Silently, it rose 30 meters vertically from the water, about 10 meters from the dike, and then abruptly extinguished after 5-8 seconds of naked-eye observation. Calculations based on a goniometer and a 1:25,000 scale map indicated a real diameter of approximately 4.44 meters for the red sphere observed at a distance of 510 meters.

Sunday, February 2, 1975 - Bois du Ham (19:00 HL)

This section, titled 'Return to the "experiences" with the white balls in the Bois du Ham', describes an event involving four witnesses over approximately 30 minutes. The initial bright white light observed had an ovoid aspect, which was rounded to 5 millimeters at arm's length, corresponding to 0.57 m. Using a 1:25,000 map and witness recollections, the distance was estimated between 190 and 200 meters. A 5-millimeter apparent diameter at arm's length corresponds to 30' of arc. At 200 meters, this translates to a real diameter of 1.74 meters. However, during reconstructions, the witnesses estimated the real diameter to be between 80 cm and 1 meter. The article suggests that the two spheres might have been initially very close together, producing a combined light effect that prevented them from being distinguished separately, but which corresponded to the 5 mm apparent dimension (30' arc) at 200 meters, resulting in a 1.74 m real dimension (or two spheres of 87 cm diameter).

Wednesday, February 5, 1975 - Near Champaubert Church (22:20 HL)

This event involved two teams of witnesses communicating via walkie-talkie. The first team (René and Régis) was stationed on a dike between the old and new Lac du Der, while the second team (Roger and Jany) was investigating the area around the old religious building. Initially, the teams confirmed their positions and reported no unusual activity. However, the first team then reported seeing two large orange spheres appear suddenly, described as immobile and then moving, following them. The second team had difficulty hearing due to static. The spheres were described as luminous oranges, with sharp contours, no halo, and not illuminating the landscape. They appeared suddenly above the roof of the old church, at a height of about 7.40 to 8 meters, and moved slowly towards the old cemetery before stopping and then disappearing. The witnesses emphasized the silence of the phenomena, noting that even with binoculars, they appeared identical and slightly closer, but without further detail. They confirmed there was no storm, fog, or atmospheric phenomena like ball lightning at the time, only a cold winter wind.

Technical Details and Analysis

Calculations of Real Diameter

The magazine provides detailed calculations for determining the real diameter of the observed spheres. For the red sphere on February 4th, observed at 510 meters, a 30' arc measurement (corresponding to 5 mm at arm's length) resulted in an estimated diameter of 4.44 meters. For the white sphere on February 2nd, observed at approximately 200 meters, a similar calculation yielded a diameter of 1.74 meters, which was then halved to 0.87 meters, closer to the witnesses' direct estimation of 80 cm to 1 meter. The article discusses the possibility of two spheres being very close together.

Equipment Mentioned

A SAFT-MAZDA electric torch (made in Japan) was mentioned as being used at Lac du Der in January and February 1975. It had three functions: front light, fixed rear light, and flashing rear light, powered by 6 R 20 S / C.E.I. / 1.5 volt batteries.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme in this issue is the detailed investigation and reporting of UAP sightings, specifically focusing on spherical objects. The magazine presents witness accounts, attempts to quantify the observations through measurements and calculations, and discusses potential explanations or hypotheses. The editorial stance appears to be one of serious inquiry into unexplained aerial phenomena, presenting the evidence and witness testimonies in a factual manner, while acknowledging the speculative nature of some interpretations. The use of technical terms, calculations, and detailed witness dialogues suggests a commitment to thoroughness in exploring these cases.

This document details a significant nocturnal observation of two unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) that occurred on February 5, 1975, in Champaubert-aux-Bois, France. The report is based on interviews with two primary witnesses, René and Régis, and includes detailed descriptions, measurements, and analysis of the event. The magazine issue appears to be focused on ufology and investigative reporting of such phenomena.

The Observation

The observation took place around 10:20 PM local time on a cold, windy night. René and Régis were positioned on the dike of "La Brêche," overlooking the old church of Champaubert-aux-Bois. They observed two large, orange, luminous spheres that were distinct, silent, and appeared to be moving parallel to the church's roof.

Object Description

The spheres were described as having sharp contours and a distinct volume, not like flat discs but more like large, solid balls. Their apparent size was noted as being larger than the full moon. When viewed through 12x50 binoculars, they appeared perfectly round and smooth, with no discernible features like wings, lights, or openings. The color was consistently described as orange, and the luminosity was soft and bearable, not dazzling. They were entirely luminous, without any halo or corona.

Object Movement and Behavior

Initially, the spheres were observed to be stationary at an altitude of approximately 7.50 to 8 meters above the ground. They then began a slow, silent progression towards the southeast, maintaining their separation and altitude. After a brief immobilization, they moved again. Suddenly, they extinguished simultaneously. Shortly after, they reappeared, relit, and then extinguished permanently. The entire observation period was estimated to be between 30 and 40 seconds, though some accounts suggest up to a minute.

Witness Testimony and Corroboration

René and Régis alerted two other individuals, Jany and Roger, who were patrolling nearby, via walkie-talkie. However, Jany and Roger did not witness the phenomena directly. The witnesses emphasized that the objects were not natural phenomena like lightning, St. Elmo's fire, or meteors, nor were they aircraft or balloons. They found the objects to be "not natural."

Environmental Conditions

The weather was cold, with a wind from the southwest. The moon was absent that night, having set earlier. The witnesses also reported hearing distant dog barks and experiencing significant radio interference, described as strong static and whistling sounds, which made communication difficult. This interference ceased after the objects disappeared.

Measurements and Analysis

Following the observation, an investigation was conducted, including on-site measurements and calculations to determine the real size and speed of the UAP. Using geometric and trigonometric methods, based on the witnesses' distance from the church (1.125 km) and the apparent diameter (estimated at 7 mm, corrected from an initial erroneous report), the real diameter of each sphere was calculated to be approximately 13.74 meters. The distance covered during the observation was measured at 137.60 meters. Based on the estimated duration (30-40 seconds), the speed was calculated to be between 12 and 16 km/hour.

Meteorological Data

Meteorological data from the Air Base 113 at Saint-Dizier for the night of February 5, 1975, indicated a light wind (1 m/s), good visibility (10 km), clear skies with some cirrus clouds, a temperature of 0.6°C, and 86% humidity. No unusual atmospheric phenomena, lightning, or satellite re-entries were recorded.

Challenges and Missed Opportunities

The witnesses expressed regret at not being able to capture photographic evidence. They explained that the strong wind and cold made it difficult to set up their camera equipment, particularly a Canon Ftb with a 300mm telephoto lens. The time spent trying to observe the phenomena through binoculars and a telescope, combined with the challenging conditions, prevented them from taking photos. They also noted that the radio interference added to the difficulty of communicating their observations.

Conclusion and Context

The report concludes that the observed phenomena were not attributable to known aircraft, meteorological events, or natural occurrences. The detailed descriptions, measurements, and the lack of conventional explanations suggest a genuine anomalous event. The article also provides background information on the location, noting that the village of Champaubert-aux-Bois was largely submerged to create the Lac du Der-Chantecoq, leaving only the old church as a vestige.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this document are detailed witness testimony, rigorous measurement and analysis of UAP events, and the elimination of conventional explanations. The editorial stance appears to be one of serious investigation and reporting of unexplained aerial phenomena, presenting the evidence and witness accounts in a factual and analytical manner. The focus on precise measurements and meteorological data highlights a commitment to scientific rigor in exploring these events. The article implicitly suggests that such phenomena warrant serious consideration and further study.

This issue of "Science et Vie" (N°143, June 1983) is a special edition focusing on a detailed investigation into a series of unexplained aerial phenomena (UAP) sightings, primarily centered around an event that occurred on the night of Wednesday, February 5, 1975, near Champaubert, France. The magazine delves into witness testimonies, analyzes the characteristics of the observed objects, and systematically debunks conventional explanations.

The Champaubert Observation (February 5, 1975)

The core of the investigation revolves around an observation made by two witnesses on the dike near the church of Champaubert. They reported seeing two large, silent, orange spheres (Pantone N° 164 U) that did not illuminate the surrounding area, including the church, cemetery, trees, and ground. The spheres had sharply defined contours and detached clearly from the night sky. The observation lasted until the definitive disappearance of the objects.

A striking detail reported by the witnesses was the intense and prolonged reaction of local dogs. The dogs barked incessantly, whimpered, and howled mournfully throughout the entire duration of the phenomenon, from its appearance to its disappearance. The article notes that dogs possess highly developed senses and can perceive infrasound and ultrasound, suggesting their reaction might be linked to the UAP.

Object Characteristics

The observed spheres were described as being orange, with sharp contours, and emitting a light that was not dazzling. Despite their size (estimated to be several meters in diameter), they did not illuminate the environment. This lack of illumination is a key point of analysis, as normal light sources would have cast shadows and lit up the surroundings. The article emphasizes that the human eye has cones sensitive to blue-violet, dark green, and dark yellow, and that the perception of orange is due to the absence of excitation in these cones. The absence of any halo, corona, or diffuse glow around the spheres further distinguished them from known luminous phenomena.

Exclusion of Conventional Explanations

The magazine dedicates significant space to systematically refuting various hypotheses:

• Confusion with the Moon: The lunar phase and position on February 5, 1975, are analyzed using astronomical data. The moon was absent from the sky at the time of the observation, making this explanation impossible. Furthermore, the apparent diameter and behavior of the observed objects did not match lunar characteristics.
• Bolides (Meteors): The absence of any noise, trails, smoke, or explosions, as well as the slow and silent movement, ruled out the possibility of meteors. The low altitude and significant apparent size also did not align with typical meteor behavior.
• Temperature Inversion or Mirage: While acknowledging that atmospheric conditions can create optical illusions, the article points out that the observed phenomena had sharp contours and were not blurred, which is contrary to mirage effects. Official meteorological data confirmed the absence of conditions conducive to such inversions or optical aberrations.
• Aircraft (Planes and Helicopters): This hypothesis is considered more plausible but is ultimately rejected. The witnesses reported a complete absence of engine noise, exhaust sounds, or rotor noise, which would be expected from aircraft operating at such low altitudes (7.50-8 meters). The lack of standard aircraft lights (position, anti-collision) and the orange, non-dazzling light also did not fit the profile of conventional aircraft. Furthermore, official sources from the French Army's light aviation (A.L.A.T.) confirmed that no flights or maneuvers took place in the area on the dates in question.
• Post-combustion of Military Aircraft: The characteristics of post-combustion (orange and blue flames, significant thrust) were deemed inconsistent with the observed silent, slow-moving spheres. Military personnel from the 7th Fighter Wing at Saint-Dizier Air Base also excluded confusion with their aircraft, such as "Mirages" or "Jaguars."
• Ultralight Motorized Aircraft (U.L.M.): These are strictly forbidden to fly at night, and their operation at such low altitudes would have generated significant noise, which was absent.
• Hot Air Balloons (Montgolfières): While the visual aspect of some hot air balloons can be similar (large, colored spheres), the absence of noise, intermittent flame jets, and the specific circumstances of the sighting (night flight, low altitude, lack of official notification) made this explanation unlikely. Meteorological stations confirmed the absence of hot air balloons or dirigibles in the area.

Other Sightings

The magazine also briefly touches upon other related sightings in the Lac du Der region:

• February 2, 1975: Four witnesses observed a white-opaline sphere and a black "tube" near the former Lac du Der. The sphere was about 80 cm above the ground, with a sharp contour, and moved silently across the terrain before disappearing rapidly.
• February 1, 1975: Three witnesses patrolling in the Bois du Ham observed a white-opaline sphere with sharp contours, moving silently at low altitude.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue is the rigorous, scientific approach to analyzing unexplained phenomena. The magazine emphasizes the importance of detailed witness testimony, cross-referencing with official data (meteorological, astronomical, military), and systematically eliminating conventional explanations. The editorial stance is one of open-minded inquiry, acknowledging the possibility of unknown phenomena while demanding robust evidence and logical deduction. The article highlights the limitations of human perception and the potential for unknown physical principles to be at play, as suggested by the dogs' reactions and the unusual light characteristics of the observed objects. The investigation aims to provide a credible and well-documented account, leaving the reader to ponder the nature of these unexplained events.

This issue of "Lumières dans la Nuit" (Lights in the Night), identified as issue number 143 and covering January-February 1975, delves into a specific UFO sighting and provides astronomical data for the period. The primary focus is on an unusual observation that occurred on the evening of February 5, 1975, near the old church of Champaubert-aux-Bois, in the Haute-Marne region of France.

The Saint-Dizier Sighting

The article details an event where witnesses observed two unidentified objects described as having a water-drop shape, with the pointed part directed downwards. These objects were seen at an altitude of 7-8 meters, with a nacelle attached to the envelope. The witnesses, using 12x50 binoculars, noted the absence of any visible flames, lamps, silhouettes, markings, or bright colors typically associated with dirigible balloons. The report states that individuals near the church also observed these hypothetical montgolfières and noted similar details. The objects were described as being close to each other.

The article explores several potential explanations for this sighting.

Hypothesis 1: Hot Air Balloons (Montgolfières)

This hypothesis was investigated by contacting the local aerodrome control (C.L.A.) at Base Aérienne 113 of Saint-Dizier and the President of the Aéroclub of Saint-Dizier-Robinson. Both confirmed the absence of such balloons in the region on the dates in question. The witnesses also reported that the objects' edges were not perfectly spherical but had a water-drop shape, with the pointed part facing downwards and a hole at the base. The presence of a nacelle was also noted. The article questions the likelihood of balloonists engaging in such low-altitude, nighttime maneuvers directly above a church, given the inherent risks.

Hypothesis 2: Weather Balloons (Ballons-sondes)

This explanation was rejected by both the meteorological stations consulted and the witnesses themselves. However, the possibility of highly unusual weather balloons with unidentified energy sources, flight stabilizers, and propulsion systems is tentatively considered.

Hypothesis 3: Hunters or Poachers

This idea was also raised as a potential rational explanation. The article points out that hunting in the region is regulated and typically occurs during daylight hours, not at night. The area is also a protected ornithological reserve. Federal game wardens consulted dismissed the idea of nighttime hunting with illuminated balloons as "far-fetched." The article notes that such activity at night would constitute poaching and would be too visible to game wardens or foresters. Poachers typically use isolated locations and powerful spotlights or auxiliary lamps. The Office des Eaux et Forêts of Saint-Dizier found the idea of poachers using balloons to be "delirious" and "ridiculous," deeming it completely unsuitable and too conspicuous for illegal activities. The author concludes that this hypothesis lacks seriousness.

The author also briefly dismisses the hypothesis of automobile headlights, referencing a discussion on page 47 of the review, noting the presence of two people who searched the area around the church without finding any other presence.

Opinions and Correspondence

The issue includes a section titled "OPINIONS" featuring correspondence and commentary from various individuals and organizations.

Pascal Grousset of G.R.E.M.O.C., in a letter dated April 19, 1984, discusses the SAUDUN ponds observation published in L.D.L.N. He suggests that while no "intelligent" behavior was observed, the SAUDUN case, like the DER events, remains "troubling" due to the number of witnesses and the conditions of observation, including multiple witness perspectives and photographic evidence.

• Notes are provided for several publications and organizations:
• C.P.C.G.U. (Comité Poitou-Charentes des Groupements Ufologiques), Bulletin N° 2, pp. 7-8.
• C.P.C.G.U. address: 16 Chemin de Balet, 44300 NANTES.
• G.R.E.M.O.C. address: 16 rue du Recteur Schmitt, 44300 NANTES.
• L.D.L.N. N° 229-230 (July-August 1983), pp. 32-39, featuring an article "Exceptionnel : près de La Baule (44) - Dix photos qui pourraient être celles du phénomène OVNI posé sur un pré?" by Gérard BENETEAU.
• L.D.L.N. N° 235-236 (January-February 1984), pp. 44-45, with an article "A propos du cas des Etangs de SAUDUN, près de La Baule (44)" by Gérard BENETEAU.

Correspondence Regarding Photographs

A letter dated March 3, 1975, from Michel MONNERIE in Paris to a "cher Ami" discusses observations and his own suggestions. A handwritten note indicates that the first page of this letter is unrelated to the DER cases and concerns general ufological matters.

Another letter, dated March 3, 1975, from Jany SAUVANET to Mr. F. LAGARDES (LDLN) in Tarbes, urgently requests that photos sent on March 4th not be considered, acknowledging an error in film manipulation. A response from F. LAGARDES to Jany SAUVANET, dated March 13, 1975, acknowledges the information but seems to misunderstand the situation, appreciating the "beautiful moon photos" as a testament to SAUVANET's talent.

A photograph is presented, described as similar to one taken by Jany SAUVANET in autumn 1974 at the Lac du Der, depicting a setting sun through branches. The original negative is said to have disappeared.

Photographic Evidence and Analysis

A detailed explanation follows regarding the photographs. It states that following unusual events observed by several witnesses, including Jany SAUVANET, between February 1st and 5th, 1975, some photos were taken, either by SAUVANET or his brother Régis. Due to an error and haste, black and white prints of a setting sun were mistakenly sent to Mr. Fernand LAGARDE (LDLN) on March 4, 1975. Mr. F. LAGARDE, not fully understanding, forwarded these photos to Mr. M. MONNERIE in Paris-XV, who was responsible for RESUFO within the "LUMIÈRES DANS LA NUIT" group.

Realizing the film error, Jany SAUVANET informed Mr. F. LAGARDE on March 8, 1975, emphasizing that the photographic prints should not be considered and that it was a film manipulation error. Everyone was thus notified. Only the black and white infra-red film, corresponding to photos taken by Mr. Régis SAUVANET on February 3, 1975, with a "CANON" FTQL and a 135mm telephoto lens, remained in Paris with Mr. MONNERIE. Jany SAUVANET informed Mr. MONNERIE by phone about his error and requested that he disregard the prints, focusing solely on the infra-red film, which was the only chance for a conclusive result.

The article notes that this photo of a setting sun between branches is also found in Michel MONNERIE's book, "Le Naufrage des Extraterrestres" (The Shipwreck of the Extraterrestrials), published in the third quarter of 1979, on page 7 of the supplementary documents. The caption in the book reads: "At the horizon, Sun, Moon, Venus transform into 'following balls' for motorists and other travelers." (Cliché R. Thomé - Doc. Résufo) - No comment.

Astronomical Ephemerides

The issue includes extensive astronomical data and calculations for January and February 1975. This section, titled "OU FAUT-IL CHERCHER LES PLANÈTES EN JANVIER FÉVRIER 1975," provides details on the visibility and positions of planets.

• Mercury: Observable in the evening (W.S.W.) during the second half of January, particularly around its greatest elongation on January 23rd. It is visible to the naked eye, but magnification is needed to observe its phases.
• Venus: Becomes more easily observable in the evening (W.S.W.) in January and especially in February in the West. It is one of the two brightest celestial bodies after sunset, along with Jupiter. The difference in brightness and color between Venus and Jupiter on their conjunction on February 17th is highlighted.
• Mars: Becomes slightly visible in the morning in Ophiuchus and then Sagittarius, appearing very low on the horizon for the region. Due to its great distance from Earth, it holds little observational interest.
• Jupiter: Visible in the evening (S.W.) in Aquarius in January, and in the West in February. By the end of February, it practically disappears in the twilight.
• Saturn: Located in Gemini, it culminates high in the sky. In opposition to the Sun on January 6th, Saturn is visible all night and can be seen shortly after sunset.
• Uranus: In Virgo, it becomes observable during the second half of the night. Magnitude: 5.8.
• Neptune: In Ophiuchus, magnitude 7.8. Its position on January 15th and February 15th is given.

Complementary calculations provide the apparent separation in degrees between Venus and Jupiter for specific dates in February 1975 (16°, 15°, 13°, 12°).

Latitudes and Longitudes for various locations related to the unusual events are listed: Bois de Han (ancient Der), 2ème pont (ancient Der), and the church of Champanbert-a-Bois (new Der).

Detailed astronomical calculations (CALCUL ASTRO EFFECTUE SUR CANON X-07) are presented for various dates in January and February 1975, covering the Sun, Moon, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. These calculations include azimuth, altitude, rise/set times, phase, magnitude, and diameter for each celestial body.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the investigation of unexplained aerial phenomena (UAP) and the provision of detailed astronomical data. The editorial stance appears to be one of rigorous investigation, seeking rational explanations while acknowledging the puzzling nature of certain observations. The magazine emphasizes the importance of witness testimony, photographic evidence, and scientific analysis, including astronomical calculations, in understanding these phenomena. The dismissal of simplistic explanations for the Saint-Dizier sighting suggests a preference for more thorough, evidence-based analysis. The inclusion of astronomical ephemerides indicates a broader interest in celestial events and their potential relation to or confusion with UAP sightings.

This document is a collection of astronomical calculation tables, likely from a specialized publication or a personal compilation, titled 'CALCUL ASTRO EFFECTUE SUR CANON X-07'. The calculations were performed by Y. Chosson on January 6, 1986, using the CANON X-07 software. The data pertains to specific dates in January and February 1975, with a fixed geographical location set at Latitude 53.960 degrees and Longitude -2.755 degrees, which corresponds to Paris, France. The primary focus is on providing precise astronomical data for celestial bodies.

Astronomical Data

The tables detail the following for each specified date and time (TU - Temps Universel):

• Sun (SOLEIL): Azimuth (Az), Altitude (Haut.), Lever (Rise), Couchers (Set), and Crépuscules (Twilight) times.
• Moon (LUNE): Azimuth (Az), Altitude (Haut.), Lever (Rise), Couchers (Set), Phase, and Angle.
• Venus (VENUS): Azimuth (Az), Altitude (Haut.), Lever (Rise), Couchers (Set), Phase, Magnitude, Diamètre (Diameter), and Angle.
• Mars (MARS): Azimuth (Az), Altitude (Haut.), Lever (Rise), Couchers (Set), Phase, Magnitude, and Diamètre (Diameter).
• Jupiter (JUPITER): Azimuth (Az), Altitude (Haut.), Lever (Rise), Couchers (Set), Phase, Magnitude, and Diamètre (Diameter).
• Saturn (SATURNE): Azimuth (Az), Altitude (Haut.), Lever (Rise), Couchers (Set), Phase, Magnitude, and Diamètre (Diameter).

Each entry includes specific values for Azimuth and Altitude, along with rise and set times. For the Moon, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, additional parameters like Phase, Magnitude, and Diameter are provided. A note at the end of each Saturn entry states: "(La hauteur (positive) est corrigée de la réfraction)", indicating that the altitude values have been adjusted for atmospheric refraction.

Dates and Times Covered

The calculations span multiple entries for dates within January and February 1975, with varying Universal Times (TU) such as 17:45, 18:00, 18:15, 18:30, 18:35, 18:50, 19:15, 19:20, 19:45, 19:57, 20:15, 22:00, 22:15, 22:30, and 23:30. The specific dates are presented as 1/2/1975, 2/2/1975, 3/2/1975, and 4/2/1975, suggesting a focus on early February 1975, with some entries possibly referring to January 1975 based on the page numbering and layout.

Additional Information

Page 107 includes a table titled "LEVERS ET COUCHERS DU SOLEIL ET DE LA LUNE A PARIS" (Sunrise and Sunset of the Sun and Moon in Paris) for January, February, March, and April 1975. This table provides daily sunrise and sunset times for the Sun and Moon, along with other astronomical data like "Nombre d'or 19" (Golden Number 19), "Cycle solaire 24" (Solar Cycle 24), and "Épacte 17" (Epact 17), and "Lettre dominicale E" (Dominical Letter E), "Indiction romaine 13" (Roman Indiction 13).

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The document's sole focus is on precise astronomical data and calculations. There is no discernible editorial stance or thematic content beyond the presentation of scientific information. The recurring theme is the detailed ephemerides for celestial bodies, presented in a tabular format for a specific location and time period. The use of technical terms and precise numerical data indicates a scientific or technical audience interested in astronomy, celestial mechanics, or potentially related fields like astrology that rely on such positional data.

This document is a collection of pages from a publication titled "MINICIEL," primarily featuring celestial maps, alongside a detailed investigation into unexplained aerial phenomena (UAP) reported near the Lac du Der in the Haute-Marne region of France during the winter of 1975. The publication includes astronomical calculations, meteorological data, and correspondence related to the investigation.

Astronomical Calculations and Celestial Maps

The first page presents astronomical calculations performed by Y. CHOSSON on January 1, 1986, for the date of February 5, 1975, at 21:20 TU. These calculations provide the azimuth and altitude for the Sun, Moon, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, along with their rise and set times and phase information. The subsequent pages (113-116) feature "MINICIEL" celestial charts created by Pierre BOURGE. These charts are mobile and designed to show the visible sky in France for each hour of the night throughout the year. Specific charts are shown for various dates and times in January and February 1975, illustrating the night sky during the period of the reported phenomena.

Investigation into Aerial Phenomena at Lac du Der

A significant portion of the document details an investigation conducted by GROUPE 5255, led by M. THOME Roger, concerning unusual aerial phenomena observed at the Lac du Der reservoir (also referred to as Champaubert-aux-Bois) in Haute-Marne during late January and early February 1975. The group, a departmental inquiry and research group on UFOs, sought meteorological and atmospheric explanations for these events.

Meteorological Data Requests

Pages 5 through 10 reveal extensive requests for meteorological information sent to various civilian and military meteorological stations across France. These requests, dated October 23, 1985, and later, were part of a follow-up investigation. The primary recipient of these detailed requests was the Station Météo of Saint-Dizier.

The questions posed to the meteorological experts were highly specific, aiming to correlate the observed phenomena with known atmospheric and meteorological events. Key areas of inquiry included:

• Timing of Observations: Precise local hours of UAP sightings, particularly during the evenings and nights of January 25th and February 1st-5th, 1975.
• Weather Balloon Data: Local winter hours for weather balloon launches, their characteristics (diameter, color, shape, ascent speed, altitude reached, bursting altitude, lighting systems), and whether they could have been in the Lac du Der region at the specified times.
• Atmospheric Conditions: Visibility, cloud types and altitudes, humidity, wind direction and speed, temperature, atmospheric pressure, presence of fog, mist, drizzle, snow, ice, or frost.
• Unusual Atmospheric Phenomena: Reports of artificial satellite re-entries or falling rocket fragments, exceptionally bright meteors or bolides, ball lightning, St. Elmo's fire, parhelia, unusual thermal inversions, aberrant atmospheric reflections, mirages, or unusual light phenomena.
• Local Microclimates and Storm Activity: Inquiries about local microclimates around the Lac du Der and any unusual storm activity, including the frequency of lightning strikes.
• Other Aerial Objects: Information on the possible passage of dirigibles, hot air balloons (Montgolfières), or ultralight aircraft (ULM) in the area.

Responses and Hypotheses

Pages 5 and 6 list the meteorological stations contacted, both civilian and military, along with their responses (indicated by 'R' for response and 'SR' for sans réponse/no response). A total of 23 experts were solicited.

Page 7 presents a summary of the questions asked, categorized into hypotheses for rational explanations. These include:

• A) Meteorological Balloons: Lost balloons with special lighting, influenced by wind speed and direction.
• B) Natural Gas Phenomena: Will-o'-the-wisps or marsh gas (despite low winter temperatures), or St. Elmo's fire.
• C) Atmospheric Plasma: Atmospheric plasma or ball lightning, even without typical storm conditions.
• E) Optical Phenomena: Parhelia (sun dogs) or halos around celestial bodies.
• F) Thermal Inversions: Unusual thermal inversions in the region.
• G) Aberrant Atmospheric Reflections: Unusual atmospheric conditions causing reflections, mirages, or light refractions from celestial bodies or artificial lights.
• H) Local Microclimate: Microclimates affecting specific zones around the Lac du Der.
• I) Exceptional Meteorological Activity: Unusually active meteorological conditions.
• J) Satellite/Rocket Re-entries: Re-entries of artificial satellites or falling rocket fragments.
• K) Bright Meteors/Bolides: Extremely bright meteors or bolides visible over long distances.
• L) Rocket Launches: Repeated launches of very bright, long-duration flares.
• M) Dirigibles/Balloons/ULM: Possible presence of dirigibles, Montgolfières, or ULM.

Investigation Context

Page 8 provides context for the investigation, emphasizing the need for rigorous, objective study of these phenomena, which are often confused with conventional aircraft, meteorological events, or psychological cases. The document highlights the difficulty of relying solely on human testimony and the importance of detailed, scientific analysis.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the systematic investigation of unexplained aerial phenomena through scientific and meteorological analysis. The publication demonstrates a commitment to rational explanations, meticulously gathering data from various sources, including astronomical observations, meteorological records, and eyewitness accounts. The editorial stance appears to be one of open-minded inquiry, seeking to demystify reported UAP events by correlating them with known natural phenomena or, if necessary, acknowledging the unexplained. The use of detailed questionnaires and the solicitation of expert opinions underscore a thorough, methodical approach to ufology.

This document is a collection of official responses and meteorological data from various French meteorological stations, primarily concerning the period of January 25 to February 6, 1975. The information was compiled in response to inquiries about unusual aerial phenomena observed during that time, particularly around the Lac de Der and Saint-Dizier areas. The publication appears to be a specialized report or newsletter, possibly from a meteorological or research organization, focusing on the intersection of weather data and unexplained aerial phenomena.

Meteorological Data and Station Responses

The core of the document consists of detailed meteorological reports from several stations:

Saint-Dizier Station

Page 1 provides official meteorological parameters and responses from the Chief of the Saint-Dizier Meteorological Station (Base Aérienne 113 "St-Exupéry"). It includes surface situation data for January 25, 1975, at 19:00, noting partly cloudy skies at 1500m, humidity, wind speed, and atmospheric pressure. Responses to specific questionnaire items confirm the absence of unusual meteorological events and the non-operation of radiosonde launches at that specific station.

Reims Station

Pages 2 and 4 present meteorological observations from the Reims station for various dates in January and February 1975. This includes data on wind, visibility, temperature, humidity, pressure, phenomena, and cloud cover. A letter from the Chief of Station, J-L. COMEES, dated November 25, 1985, confirms the provision of these data and states that no exceptional phenomena were observed, nor did the observation times coincide with national meteorological sounding hours. The letter also notes that the distance between Reims and the observed phenomena makes meteorological explanation difficult.

Langres Station

Page 5 contains a response from the Langres Meteorological Station, signed by PH. BERTHET. It states that during the period of January 25 to February 6, 1975, the station did not conduct radiosonde launches and was only open during specific hours (06:45 to 13:15 legal time), during which no particular phenomena were observed. The response dismisses several hypotheses, including the possibility of weather balloons, dirigibles, or montgolfières, and concludes that the described phenomena cannot be confused with meteorological or atmospheric events.

Luxeuil Station

Page 6 features a letter from Jean-Michel Cosse, Chief of the Meteorological Station of Luxeuil, dated January 23, 1986. He states that his station does not conduct radiosonde launches and only uses simple weather balloons for low-altitude wind measurements. He believes it is impossible for these balloons to explain the phenomena described, given the distances involved. He also notes that the observation times do not align with national radiosonde launch times (Trappes at 07:00 and 13:00, Nancy at 13:00), making it unlikely for balloons to be involved. He suggests that the phenomena might be related to other domains of investigation, such as aircraft or hot air balloons.

Lyon-Satolas Station

Page 7 includes a response from M. ROUGEOLLES of the Lyon-Satolas Meteorological Station, dated January 20, 1986. He provides details on radiosonde launches conducted by the Lyon-BROWN station (Satolas opened later in 1975), including launch times (morning, midday, evening, midnight) and the characteristics of the balloons (diameter, ascent speed, altitude, color, and payload). He confirms that the observed phenomena could not have originated from balloons launched by the Lyon station, as wind patterns at the time would have carried them towards Italy or Switzerland on January 25/February 1, and towards the Massif Central or Southwest France from February 2 onwards. He also points out that other organizations like EDF, the army, and scientific establishments also conduct balloon launches.

Strasbourg/Colmar/Entzheim Stations

Page 9 contains a response from M. REYNAUD, Chief of the Climatological Bureau Interregional of Strasbourg, dated January 13, 1986. He states that the meteorological stations of Colmar-Meyenheim and Strasbourg-Entzheim do not launch balloons. He directs the inquirer to the Chief of the Nancy-Essey station for information on radiosonde launches. He confirms that no exceptional phenomena were noted at Entzheim and Colmar-Meyenheim during the specified period.

Nancy-Essey Station

Page 10 provides a detailed response from the Departmental Center of Meteorology of Nancy, signed by G. PALME. It confirms that the Nancy-Essey station conducted radiosonde launches twice daily at 06:00 and 12:00 local time. It describes the balloons, their inflation with hydrogen, ascent speed, and typical altitude before bursting. It also details the payload, which included a parachute, radar reflector, and a radiosonde. The station did not observe any exceptional phenomena during the period of January 25 to February 6, 1975. The response also addresses the proposed hypotheses, suggesting that a weather balloon from their station is a possibility, as are phenomena related to thunderstorms or other meteorological activities. They invite the inquirer to visit the station.

Other Correspondence

Pages 3, 8, and 10 also contain invoices and administrative correspondence related to the request for meteorological information, including fees for the services provided.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout the document is the official meteorological response to reports of unusual aerial phenomena. The general stance of the meteorological services is one of caution and adherence to scientific explanation. They consistently state that no exceptional meteorological events were observed during the specified period and that the described phenomena are generally outside their purview. While they provide detailed data on weather balloons, suggesting them as a potential, albeit unlikely, explanation for some sightings, they often defer to other scientific disciplines (astronomy, UFO research) for explanations of truly anomalous events. The document highlights the structured and bureaucratic nature of official scientific inquiry, where data is provided, but definitive explanations for unexplained phenomena are not offered by meteorological bodies.

This issue of 'l'union' magazine, dated October and November 1985, focuses on a detailed investigation into unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) that reportedly occurred at the Lac du Der in January and February 1975. The publication compiles a series of official correspondences and a comprehensive report by Roger THOME, who appears to be the primary investigator and witness.

Correspondence from French Authorities

The core of the issue consists of letters from various French military and Gendarmerie units responding to an inquiry from Roger THOME regarding the 1975 Lac du Der sightings. These letters, dated from October to December 1985, largely indicate an inability to provide information.

• The 1st Army Corps, 6th Military Region, and its associated divisions (10th Armored, 63rd Territorial Military) state that archives concerning events from 1975 are not kept for long periods and that only significant exercises are formally requested. The 1st Army Corps, 6th Military Region, 4th Aeromobile Division, and 61st Territorial Military Division, via the Etat-Major Bureau EMPLOI/RENS in Nancy, acknowledge the request but state that documents from 1975 are destroyed or archived at the Central Bureau of Military Administrative Archives. They promise to search units that might have been involved.

• The 7th Regiment of Helicopters of Combat (7e RHC), formerly 11th GHL, in Essey-les-Nancy, states that they no longer possess archives from that period.

• The Gendarmerie Nationale, through various brigades (Montier-en-Der, Vitry-le-François, Eclaron, Wassy, Saint-Dizier), consistently responds that they cannot provide information. The Montier-en-Der brigade indicates that their unit does not have complementary information. The Eclaron brigade, created in 1976, notes that the Lac du Der area was previously under the surveillance of the Saint-Dizier brigade, suggesting contact with them. The Wassy brigade states the area of interest is not within their jurisdiction. The Saint-Dizier brigade, after reviewing its archives, confirms no investigation was conducted on the dates mentioned and that no military maneuvers occurred in the area during January-February 1975. They also direct the inquirer to the GEPAN (Groupe d'études des phénomènes aérospatiaux non identifiés) in Toulouse as the official body for such matters.

• The Bureau de Saint-Dizier of 'l'union' newspaper also states their archives do not go back to 1975 and suggests questioning the army about potential maneuvers.

• The Association Française d'Astronomie (AFA), represented by Alain Cirou, also expresses a lack of archives for observer data from 1975, suggesting that phenomena like Venus and Mercury were noted, but specific details on 'bolides' or particularly bright meteors are scarce. They recommend consulting CNES for satellite data and acknowledge the difficulty in confirming such events from that era.

The Investigator's Report and Analysis

Roger THOME's report, titled 'SUR LES HYPOTHESES EMISES' (On the Hypotheses Put Forward) and 'EN GUISE DE CONCLUSION PROVISOIRE' (As a Provisional Conclusion), forms the analytical part of the issue.

Hypotheses and Witness Testimony

THOME notes that witness accounts of the Lac du Der events are varied, reflecting the multiplicity and diversity of the manifestations. He discusses how some witnesses perceived the events as 'demonic' or related to a parallel reality, while others considered rare or poorly understood natural phenomena. He draws parallels between UAP and ball lightning, acknowledging the blurred lines and shared characteristics, though questioning if 'intelligent' ball lightning is still just ball lightning.

He emphasizes that while the events at Lac du Der may seem linked by time and space, a single explanation might not suffice. He clarifies that labeling a phenomenon as 'OVNI' (UFO) simply means 'unidentified' and does not automatically imply extraterrestrial origin. The 'Extraterrestrial Hypothesis' (ETH) is just one among many possibilities.

THOME highlights the collective weight of multiple testimonies over isolated ones, suggesting it's unlikely that witnesses were collectively mistaken for several days. He states that at the current stage, the observed phenomena have not been definitively identified by investigations, and no single hypothesis, including the ETH, predominates. He stresses the need to study all hypotheses, from the most 'rational' to the most 'irrational', due to a lack of sufficient scientific knowledge.

Challenges and Conclusions

THOME acknowledges that the investigation was 'shoddily' conducted in parts, with weak points that may be apparent to readers. He hopes the work will offer new insights to researchers. He admits to potential errors and omissions due to pagination issues.

He defends the decision to publish the report, arguing that a lack of reciprocal trust and published reports hinders research in ufology. He states that he and his colleagues chose to take the risk.

THOME addresses the issue of 'ufologist witnesses,' noting that some regret going too far, which he finds unfortunate. He also points out the paradox of skeptics who doubt ufologists' observations but seriously propose surveillance nights, calling it a 'non-sense.'

He asserts that they are neither credulous nor obstinate. Ten years later, the witnesses have not become 'contactees' or sensationalists. He believes they have honestly and calmly reported unusual events experienced 'hot.' He acknowledges the need for caution and constant questioning in this field.

Despite new technologies, THOME admits they have not succeeded in rationally explaining the Lac du Der events. He notes the subjective impression of 'intelligent' phenomena, based on reactions that seemed to denote intelligence by human concepts, but he does not claim this definitively.

He warns against easy explanations like hallucinations, misperceptions, or fabricated cases, especially when considering the Lac du Der events as an inseparable set of facts occurring over a short period, possibly part of a programmed schema.

THOME concludes that his judgment, like any human judgment, is subjective. The case is not closed, and new information could emerge. The report aims to provide information on curious facts that remain unexplained. He states that they have not found an explanation among the cited hypotheses but do not exclude others, including the possibility that they are mistaken.

He reiterates his gratitude to his friends for their support and courage during this investigation, hoping to have reported their 'little adventure into the unknown' as faithfully as possible.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes are the difficulty of investigating historical UAP cases due to lost or inaccessible archives, the official stance of military and police bodies on such matters (often deferring to specialized agencies like GEPAN), and the inherent challenges and subjective nature of UAP investigation. The editorial stance, as expressed by THOME, is one of cautious inquiry, a commitment to reporting facts honestly, and an openness to exploring all hypotheses, even those that seem improbable, while acknowledging the limitations of current knowledge and the potential for error. There is a clear emphasis on the importance of collaboration and the need for transparency in ufological research.

This document is issue N°5 of GROUPE 5255, a publication from the "Groupe Départemental d'Enquête et de Recherche sur le phénomène O.V.N.I." (Departmental Group for the Investigation and Research of UFO phenomena). It is dated April 1982 and focuses on UFO observations and related aeronautical information for the Haute-Marne and Meuse regions of France.

UFO Observation Guidance and Appeals

The central theme of this issue is how to respond to a UFO sighting. Under the headline "QUE FAIRE EN CAS D'OBSERVATION D'OVNI?" (What to do in case of a UFO observation?), the group provides detailed instructions for witnesses. They emphasize the importance of noting down as many useful details as possible, including the date, time, location, meteorological conditions, the state of the sky, the presence of stars, planets, or the moon, and the coordinates of the phenomenon. For photographic documentation, witnesses are advised to take multiple shots, including elements of the surrounding landscape. For night photography, it's recommended to avoid using flash and to open the camera's diaphragm to its maximum.

The publication also includes an "APPEL A TEMOINS" (Call for Witnesses), where GROUPE 5255 and the regional delegation "LUMIERES DANS LA NUIT" seek individuals who have witnessed UFOs or other unusual manifestations in the Haute-Marne and Meuse departments, whether recent or historical. They assure discretion and anonymity for all participants.

An editorial note highlights the importance of collective effort: "Soyez actifs : seule l'union de tous nos efforts nous permettra d'avancer dans l'étude du phénomène." (Be active: only the union of all our efforts will allow us to advance in the study of the phenomenon.) They also request that subscribers inform them of any address changes to ensure regular delivery of the publication.

Aeronautical Information

Complementing the UFO-related content, the document includes extensive aeronautical charts. Page 1 displays a "Carte des couloirs aériens civils" (Map of Civil Air Corridors), which is a supplement to the "Carte de FRANCE RADIONAVIGATION A VUE, 1ère Edition 1980." This map covers the NORD-EST (North-East) region of France, specifically the area around Saint-Dizier and Lac du Der-Chantecoq in the Haute-Marne department, at a scale of 1:1,000,000.

Pages 2 and 3 present "Carte des couloirs aériens militaires" (Map of Military Air Corridors), divided into "Espace inférieur" (Lower Airspace) and "Espace supérieur" (Upper Airspace). These maps are part of the "ROUTIER CAG ESPACE INFERIEUR / SUPERIEUR GENERAL AIR TRAFIC EN ROUTE LOW ALTITUDE FRANCE" series, with an edition date of April 15, 1982. They detail air traffic routes, control frequencies, and flight levels for military aviation in the specified regions, including Brussels and Frankfurt control zones.

Publication Details and Contact

The publication is produced by GROUPE 5255, with a listed headquarters at 20, rue de la Maladière, 52000 CHAUMONT (France). Their phone number is (25)03.77.02. The group expresses gratitude to all contributors who made the review possible and apologizes for any involuntary delays in its release.

Reproduction of articles and documents is authorized, provided the source is clearly indicated, including the names of investigators and references to the review and GROUPE 5255.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes are UFO sightings, witness testimony, and aeronautical navigation. The editorial stance is one of active investigation and data collection, encouraging public participation and emphasizing the scientific study of unexplained aerial phenomena. The inclusion of detailed aeronautical charts suggests a connection between UFO sightings and air traffic, or a need to provide comprehensive information to their readership, which likely includes individuals interested in aviation as well as ufology.