An account in Dr�me, France

GEIPAN continues to publish all of its archives on its public website www.geipan.fr. Among its publications are old cases classified at the time (A, B, C or D) which are now being re-examined, with the sole aim of being more relevant in the conclusions, by making use of new technical means (software) and the investigation experience acquired over all these recent years. This re-examination sometimes results in a change of classification. This observation case, previously classified D and named SAINT-VALLIER (26) 1980, is part of a set of cases recently re-examined (see the investigation report). During trips, several people in two cars observe the westward movement of a circular luminous phenomenon in the sky. The UAP is described as a very bright ball of color (white phosphorescent, orange, red depending on the witnesses) with "green reflections" in the shape of "feet". Once everyone has arrived at the same spot, they continue their observations until the UAP disappears behind the mountains toward the northwest. The observations lasted between 5 and 20 minutes. The witnesses most likely observed VENUS. The significant observation duration is typical of this type of confusion with a celestial body. The observation took place toward the northwest or west and at a low angular elevation, which corresponds well to the position of Venus at the time of the observation, which was located at around 6 degrees of elevation, to the west-northwest. The appearance of the UAP, mainly described as white, point-like and strongly luminous, corresponds perfectly with the hypothesis. The variations in the accounts of some witnesses regarding this appearance reflect the fact that Venus was very low on the horizon and was subject to atmospheric turbulence that could temporarily and randomly vary its brightness and produce brief color effects (red, green), but also produce strong flashes, which the witnesses would describe as "luminous feet". The perception of rapid movement of the UAP is explained by the movement of the witnesses in their cars. The unrecognized celestial body moves along and behind the environment traveled by the vehicle and is perceived as a following UAP. Other perceived rapid movements, but with the witness stationary, result from the decrease in the light intensity of the celestial body (thickness of the atmospheric veil) which the witness logically interprets as the UAP moving away. The perception of slow movement of the UAP corresponds indeed to the setting of Venus and its disappearance to that of Venus behind the mountains of Forez. The only element that could limit this hypothesis would be the presence of a cloudy obstacle preventing Venus from being seen that evening. Nevertheless, the only indication available being that of a generally clear sky (2/8) at 35 km, given the strong correspondence with Venus, the probability that it was another phenomenon against a background of clouds hiding Venus is very low. In conclusion, GEIPAN classifies the case as A, very probable observation of the planet Venus.