Police witness in Hautes-Pyrénées, France

Thanks to new technical means (software) and the investigation experience acquired over all these recent years, this re-examination sometimes leads to new remarks or even a change of classification. This observation case, previously classified D and named LE LAC D'OPALE (65) 1989, is part of a set of cases recently re-examined (see the investigation report). On 18 July 1989 at around 4:00 PM, two witnesses are at the top of a pass overlooking the great Lac d'Opale in the municipality of Estaing (65). They then spot a UAP moving slowly from the middle of the lake toward one edge of the lake. The UAP continues its movement above the pebbles of the shore and a snowfield before climbing back up through a scree zone to the ridge. The witnesses lose sight of it in the clear sky. Despite the distance, the witnesses describe an object of elongated shape with a red flicker and "white lights," then luminous and bright in the sun. No particular noise is heard during the long observation (about 25 minutes). The intrigued witnesses go back up to the site the next day but no trace on the ground is noticed (particularly on the snowfield). Only these two testimonies are collected (police report and questionnaire). The case is remarkable, both for the strong strangeness that emerges from the description of the phenomenon (appearance and behavior) and for the equally strong consistency, with two witnesses (especially T1) having described their observation in detail, as well as two investigations afterward, including one on site carried out by the police. The strangeness consists of the UAP's characteristics: elongated in shape, rather small, luminous red, and moving silently for 25 minutes just above the water, the pebbles, and a snowfield, then in the air, in broad daylight in a rather deserted mountain area. Added to this are the jerky movements over the pebbles and the intermittent observation of two white lights described by the witnesses as "eyes." The few hypotheses put forward, by the witnesses or the police, have, after examination, zero to low reliability with regard to what characterizes this strangeness. Several other hypotheses were studied in this new investigation. That of the "super trailer's" backpack would be acceptable on many points but is not with regard to the UAP's disappearance into the air. On the other hand, an in-depth analysis allows the Mylar balloon to be retained as probable at more than 50%. The lack of meeting with the witnesses (at the time) is regrettable, but the consistency of the testimony is sufficient with regard to the hypothesis retained. Consequently, GEIPAN classifies the case as "B": probable observation of a red novelty Mylar balloon.