Electrical interference in Morbihan, France

On September 2, 2017 at 10:30 PM, a witness observed for 1 to 2 minutes the silent passage over Ploemeur and Lorient of about twenty whitish-colored lights. The witness called a neighbor on his mobile phone. The lights were quickly lost from sight because they were hidden by the trees of a wooded area near the witness's home. Only one questionnaire was collected. The witness most likely saw a flight of Thai lanterns; everything in his testimony reflects the multitude of testimonies recorded at GEIPAN for lantern releases presumed to be confirmed: - the witness says, "They were silent. A light flickered beneath each device and illuminated it. However, no navigation lights or strobe lights were visible," which is indeed the typical appearance of a lantern; - the whole group moved in the direction of the wind, which is indeed from SSW to NNE, see measurement taken 4 km away (Infoclimat). - it was a weekend night, with clear skies, conducive to festive events. The witness refutes this GEIPAN explanation because: - it's too big: it is usual for a witness to poorly judge the distance of an object unknown to him, and thereby he poorly judges the size of the object, as well as its speed. It was closer than he thinks; - there was no wind: the witness was at the doorstep of his house, which is not an ideal place to judge the wind, and even less so regarding the wind at 100 or 200 meters altitude (the altitude of the lanterns); - the witness is strongly impressed and seems not to believe in such a simple explanation. It is common for witnesses to be impressed, see for example this testimony (CHATEAUFORT (78) 10.07.2011). It is also because many people know how to recognize lanterns that no other witness came forward that night. Our witness thinks the opposite and tells himself that lanterns would necessarily have triggered other testimonies. The witness "experienced a unique moment," which is understandable, but the most likely explanation is that it was lanterns. Consequently, GEIPAN classifies the case as B: probable observation of Thai lanterns.