ALSACAT ▶ Home ☰

Cette page en français

ALSACAT:

◀ Previous case Next case ▶

Case of Sainte-Marie-aux-Mines, on May 20, 1952:

Case number:

ALSACAT-1952-05-20-SAINTEMARIEAUXMINES-1

Summary:

In the ufology magazine Lumières Dans la Nuit #221-222 for November / December 1982, J. Journot reported on his investigation into a case à in Kaysersberg in 1982; on this occation ufologist Fernand Lagarde made his comments, and listed some other sightings around this town, including an observation in Sainte-Marie-aux-Mines on May 20, 1952.

The file summarizes an article on page 3 of the newspaper L'Alsace of May 22-23, 1954, in which it is reportedly said that on May 20, 1952, around 8:55 p.m., a woman from Sainte-Marie-aux-Mines reportedly saw in the sky, according to her telephone statement to this newspaper, a "ball of fire followed by a luminous trail" which remained perceptible "quite a long time" and was heading in a north-south direction.

It is said that the newspaper contacted the Strasbourg observatory "which could only record the fact without being able to provide an explanation for this phenomenon", ensuring that the various information which could reach them would be "cross-checked" and "confronted with the results of the study of the sky in the night from Tuesday to Wednesday."

Data:

Temporal data:

Geographical data:

Witnesses data:

Ufology data:

Classifications:

Sources:

[Ref. aldl:] MRS. GUEUDELOT, "LUMIERES DANS LA NUIT" ARCHIVE:

[Ref. ldl1:] UFOLOGY MAGAZINE "LUMIERES DANS LA NUIT":

Notes: In the years 1960-1980, ufologist Fernand Lagarde searched for "connections" between UFO observations places and, among other things, "geological faults". Without wishing to specify what such a link would demonstrate, he had often commented on reports of investigations by local investigators published in the ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit, intending to show that such geographic connections did exist.

In the case of Alsace, the task is easy: the whole of the plain of Alsace is a basin of collapse of the old Hercynian mountain range top, of which only the "edges" remain, the Vosges and the Black Forest on the other side of the Rhine River, in Germany. As a result, one should claim that all observations in Alsace are located on a geological fault! Is there anything to be concluded from this as to the nature of the observations? In my opinion, absolutely nothing.

As for "BAVIC", mentioned by Lagarde, it was about a line across France passing by the cities of BAyonne and VIChy, on which the pioneer ufologist Aimé Michel had thought in the years 1950, that on September 24, 1954, there were such a large number of "aligned" sightings on this line that mere chance could not account for it.

Michel, not having the resources to go check each observation report, argued that this alignment signified the reality and the remarkable nature of these observations since hallucinations, lies and misinterpretation could not be propagated on such a straight line.

In reality, the "statistically improbable" character of this alignment has been questioned, but above all, most if not all of the cases he cited for this day are not only explained by trivial causes (mistakes, hoaxes ...), not only were they badly dated and almost never occurred on September 24, 1954, but also, Aimé Michel had not at all been aware of all the cases of that day.

Aimé Michel, at the end of the 1960s, admitted that the "BAVIC line" had no reality; but many others like Fernand Lagarde continued to promote it as a "fact", "extending" the line geographically all around the world and extending it temporally to any observation on this line whatever the date, but without ever verifying that it there would really be a statistical anomaly in this.

Discussion:

Clearly, given [ald1], a meteor is the perfect culprit. There was no talk of "flying saucer" apparently.

It is surprising that the Strasbourg Observatory did not, at least, offer this explanation; we can also be surprised that only this lady from Sainte-Marie-aux-Mines came forward, apparently.

Unless of course the duration stupidly noted as "which remained perceptible for quite a long time" was something like half an hour...

I therefore rate the report as "probable meteor" rather than just "meteor".

In any case, this shows, once again, the lack of reliability of the study by François Lagarde on his alleged connection between UFOs and geological faults.

Evaluation:

Probable meteor.

Sources references:

* = Source is available to me.
? = Source I am told about but could not get so far. Help needed.

• [lae1] ? Article in the regional newspaper L'Alsace, France, May 22-23, 1952.
• [ald1] * Record in the archive by Mrs. Gueudelot, of the ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit, (LDLN), France, not dated, publishec circa 2020 by the ufology association SCEAU, France, at https://sceau-archives-ovni.org/fonds/fond_gueudelot/base_guy_jpr_fiches_gueudelot.html
• [ldl1] * In comments by Fernand Lagarde in "Phénomène à Kaysersberg (Ht-Rhin)", investigation report by J. Journot, in the ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit (LDLN), France, #221-222, page 32, November / December 1982.

File history:

Authoring:

Changes history:

Feedback  |  Top  |  Back  |  Forward  |  Map  |  List |  Home

This page was last updated on August 3, 2023.