CORROBORATED
CF-GEI-20110602780 CORROBORATED

The Chozeau Lunar Eclipse Misidentification

CASE FILE — CF-GEI-20110602780 — CASEFILES CLASSIFIED ARCHIVE
Date Date when the incident was reported or occurred
2011-06-15
Location Reported location of the sighting or event
Chozeau, Isère, France
Duration Estimated duration of the observed phenomenon
Duration of video recording (several minutes)
Object Type Classification of the observed object based on witness descriptions
light
Source Origin database or archive this case was sourced from
geipan
Witnesses Number of known witnesses who reported the event
1
Country Country where the incident took place
FR
AI Confidence AI-generated credibility score based on source reliability, detail consistency, and corroboration
85%
On the night of June 15, 2011, a witness in Chozeau (Isère department, France) was filming a lunar eclipse when they noticed three luminous phenomena that appeared intriguing through their camcorder viewfinder. Upon reviewing the footage during post-production video editing, the witness discovered a fourth unexplained light. The witness submitted video and photographic evidence to GEIPAN for official investigation. GEIPAN's technical analysis revealed significant discrepancies between the witness testimony and the actual video/photo evidence. The first luminous phenomenon appeared at timestamp 3'48" during a zoom-out operation, making a light point visible that had not been present in the narrow field of view. Investigators observed the light point "descend" as the zoom factor increased again. At 4'02", another light point appeared below the Moon, clearly showing part of a lamppost base. Astronomical ephemeris data confirmed the Moon was at only 15° elevation above the horizon at the time, approximately two hours after moonrise, placing it very low in the sky. The photographic evidence showed two luminous "L" shapes, which GEIPAN determined to be a long-exposure photograph with camera shake, capturing the same two light sources that appeared in the video. The investigation concluded that the witness had only observed these phenomena indirectly through the camcorder viewfinder and during video editing, being misled by the zoom/de-zoom operations that altered the field of view and made terrestrial street lamps appear anomalous.
02 Timeline of Events
2011-06-15 evening
Lunar Eclipse Observation Begins
Witness begins filming the lunar eclipse in Chozeau. Moon positioned at low elevation (15°) approximately 2 hours after moonrise.
3'48"
First Light Appears During Zoom-Out
Witness performs de-zoom operation on camcorder. A luminous point appears in the expanded field of view that was not visible in narrow mode. Light 'descends' when zoom increases again.
4'02"
Second Light Identified as Lamppost
Another luminous point appears below the Moon. Video clearly shows part of a lamppost base, confirming terrestrial origin.
Post-recording
Additional Phenomena Noticed in Editing
During video editing and review, witness identifies a fourth light phenomenon. Long-exposure photo shows two 'L' shaped luminous patterns caused by camera shake.
Investigation period
GEIPAN Technical Analysis
GEIPAN analyzes video footage, photographs, and astronomical ephemeris data. Determines lights are street lamps captured due to low Moon elevation and zoom operations.
Case closure
Classification B Assigned
GEIPAN officially classifies case as 'B' - indirect observation via video and photo of ground-level street lamps. Case explained and closed.
03 Key Witnesses
Anonymous Witness 1
Amateur astronomer/videographer
medium
Local resident filming the lunar eclipse of June 15, 2011. Observed phenomena only through camcorder viewfinder and during post-production editing, not with naked eye.
"The witness noticed three luminous phenomena that intrigued them, and discovered a fourth phenomenon upon reviewing the video footage."
04 Analyst Notes -- AI Processed
This case represents a textbook example of observer error caused by technological mediation and lack of direct visual observation. The witness never observed the lights with the naked eye, relying entirely on the camcorder viewfinder and post-production review. GEIPAN's analysis is particularly credible given their methodical approach: they correlated video timestamps with specific camera operations (zoom changes), cross-referenced astronomical data to establish the Moon's low position (15° elevation), and identified visible structural elements (lamppost bases) in the footage. The classification as "B" (likely identified) by GEIPAN is well-justified. The investigation identified multiple confirmatory factors: the appearance/disappearance of lights correlated precisely with zoom operations, visible lamppost structures in the frame, astronomical conditions placing the Moon low on the horizon where terrestrial lights would intersect the field of view, and long-exposure photography artifacts explaining the "L" shaped patterns. The witness's honest reporting and submission of raw footage enabled a thorough analysis, though their interpretation was compromised by viewing conditions and technical unfamiliarity with how zoom operations affect apparent object positioning.
05 Theory Comparison
BELIEVER ANALYSIS
SKEPTIC ANALYSIS
Technological Artifact and Observer Inexperience
This case exemplifies how modern recording technology can create false anomalous reports when operators lack understanding of optical effects. The witness never made naked-eye observations, relying entirely on electronic viewfinder mediation. Zoom operations fundamentally alter field of view and apparent object relationships, creating the illusion of lights 'appearing' or 'moving' when in fact the camera frame simply shifted. Combined with low-horizon lunar positioning during eclipse observation, mundane street lighting entered the frame and appeared anomalous to an observer focused on the Moon. The long-exposure photographic artifacts further demonstrate technical unfamiliarity rather than genuine anomalous phenomena.
06 Verdict
ANALYST VERDICT
GEIPAN's conclusion is definitive: this case involves the indirect observation of ground-level street lamps, misidentified due to camera zoom operations during lunar eclipse filming. Confidence level: very high. The physical evidence directly contradicts any anomalous interpretation—lamppost bases are clearly visible in the video, and the lights' behavior corresponds exactly with camera operation changes rather than independent object movement. This case holds minimal significance for UAP research but serves educational value in demonstrating how optical effects, low viewing angles, and technological mediation can create false anomalous reports. It exemplifies the importance of direct visual observation versus camera-only sightings and highlights how GEIPAN's scientific methodology effectively resolves prosaic explanations.
AI CONFIDENCE SCORE:
85%
07 Community Discussion
VIEW ALL >
// AUTHENTICATION REQUIRED
Sign in to contribute analysis on this case.
LOGIN
// NO COMMENTS YET
Be the first field agent to contribute analysis on this case.
08 Live Chat 1 ROOM
ENTER LIVE CHAT
Real-time discussion with other field agents analyzing this case.
OPEN LIVE CHAT 1
// SECURITY CLEARANCE NOTICE

This system uses cookies to maintain your session and operational preferences. Optional analytics cookies help us improve the archive. Privacy Policy