Trans-en-Provence case
{{short description|1981 UFO sighting in France}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=January 2021}}
In the Trans-en-Provence case, an unidentified flying object is claimed to have left physical evidence in the form of burnt residue on a field. The event took place on 8 January 1981, outside the town of Trans-en-Provence in the French department of Var.{{Cite web |url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11443-france-opens-up-its-ufo-files/ |title=France opens up its UFO files|date=22 March 2007 |website=New Scientist | location=London | publisher=New Scientist Ltd}} It was described in Popular Mechanics as "perhaps the most completely and carefully documented sighting of all time."{{cite journal |title=When UFOs Land |first=Jim |last=Wilson |journal=Popular Mechanics |date=May 2001 |volume=178 |issue=5 |page=66 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Ts8DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA64 }}
Renato Nicolaï account
The case began on 8 January 1981 at 5 pm. Renato Nicolaï, a 55-year-old farmer,{{cite web |url=http://www.nicap.org/1981.htm | website=National Investigations Committee On Aerial Phenomena |last=Ridge | first=Francis L. | title=UFO Casebook: 1981 | date=15 December 1997}} heard a strange whistling sound while performing agricultural work on his property. He then saw a saucer-shaped object about {{cvt|2.5|m|ft|0}} in diameter land about {{cvt|50|m}} away at a lower elevation.
According to the witness,
The device had the shape of two saucers, one inverted on top of the other. It must have measured about 1.5 metres in height. It was the color of lead. This device had a ridge all the way around its circumference. Under the machine I saw two kinds of pieces as it was lifting off. They could be reactors or feet. There were also two other circles which looked like trapdoors. The two reactors, or feet, extended about {{cvt|20|cm|0}} below the body of the machine.{{cite web| last=Cashman | first=Mark |url=http://www.ufoevidence.org/Cases/CaseSubarticle.asp?ID=111 | website=Extraterrestrial Contact | title=UFO Case Article: Renato Nicolai; Trans en Provence, France}}
Nicolaï claimed the object took off almost immediately, rising above the treeline and departing to the northeast. It left burn marks on the ground where it had supposedly sat.
Nicolaï notified the local gendarmerie the following day.{{Cite web |url=http://www.ufoskeptic.org/trans.html |title=UFO Case 4: The Trans-en-Provence Case |access-date=23 March 2007 |archive-date=6 September 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140906044349/http://www.ufoskeptic.org/trans.html |url-status=dead| last=Haisch | first=Bernard | location=Palo Alto | publisher=ufoskeptic.org | website=UFO Skeptic}} They interviewed him, photographed the scene, and collected soil and plant samples from the field. The case was later sent to GEPAN ({{Lang|fr|Groupe d'Étude des Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non-identifiés}}) for review.
Analysis of evidence
GEPAN analysis noted that the ground had been compressed by a mechanical pressure of about 4 or 5 tons, and heated to between {{convert|300|and|600|C|F|0}}. Trace amounts of phosphate and zinc were found in the sample material, and analysis of resident alfalfa near the landing site showed chlorophyll levels between 30% and 50% lower than expected.
Impressions and explanations
Nicolaï had initially believed the object to be an experimental military device. The close proximity of the site to the Canjuers military base makes such a theory generally plausible. However, GEPAN's investigation focused on conventional explanations, such as atmospheric or terrain causes of a terrestrial nature. Despite a joint investigation by GEPAN and the gendarmerie, which lasted for two years, no plausible explanation was found.
Critique
Some French scientistsRossoni, D., Maillot, E., & Déguillaume, E. (2007). Les ovnis du CNES – 30 ans d'études officielles. www.book-e-book.com. [http://www.zetetique.fr/page/doc.php?publication=1&ecritId=37 (extracts from the book)] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081203040638/http://www.observatoire-zetetique.org/divers/LesOvniDuCnes/OvniDuCnes_chapitre13.pdf |date=3 December 2008 }}. Critical skeptical investigations of GEPAN's work. insist that the GEPAN investigation was flawed, especially the study of the physical traces.Figuet, M. (Ed.) (1995). L'affaire de Trans-en-Provence. Dompierre-les-Ormes, SERPAN.
The police report said that the traces, which appeared on an active road, looked like some made by the tyre of a car. This explanation was dismissed by GEPAN because of the sole witness said otherwise. The physical traces shown on the picture are not perfect circles, in fact there are two more-or-less semicircles crossing over each other. Also, a circular shape does not coincide with the description of the UFO made by Nicolaï. In an interview for French television, Nicolaï confirmed that there were vehicles passing by on the road at the time of the sighting.[https://web.archive.org/web/20081203040638/http://www.observatoire-zetetique.org/divers/LesOvniDuCnes/OvniDuCnes_chapitre13.pdf observatoire-zetetique.org] (webarchive)
See also
References
{{Reflist}}
External links
- [http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case110.htm Trans-en-Provence Case – UFO Evidence]
- [http://marcogee.free.fr/ovni/sepra/nt16.htm#1 Trans-en-Provence Case – Centre National D'etude Spatiales]
- {{in lang|fr}} [http://www.zetetique.ldh.org/tep.html Skeptical explanation of this case, by Éric Maillot]
{{UFOs}}
Category:20th century in Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur
Category:January 1981 in Europe