An account in Alpes-de-Haute-Provence, France

The witness is in bed when a bright glow lights up their room, followed by a loud noise. Afterwards, they notice traces of burned grass in a neighbor's field. No other testimony is collected. The observation is extremely short (1 second) and above all it is only that of a glow and a noise perceived from the bed in the room. The witness did not go outside the house, and therefore cannot give a description of a UAP (Unidentified Aerospace Phenomenon) with any possible shape, position, etc. The glow could thus have various origins (storm, spotlight, meteorite re-entry...). Furthermore, the witness found a round mark on the ground the next day. In the absence of observation of a UAP, there is no particular reason to investigate such marks in relation to a UAP, especially since round marks can also have various origins (examples: fairy ring mushrooms, traces of an old inflatable pool, motorcycle skid marks...), marks that are more or less old and that may have escaped the witness's notice (they are moreover not in the immediate vicinity of the house) until they went looking for marks. Consequently, GEIPAN classifies the case as C: insufficient observation data.