French National Assembly to host UAP seminar with true believers

[RobertBillyBob]

Titled 'Research on Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena Beyond the Fantasies', the seminar is organized by the two deputies Arnaud Saint-Martin (LFI, left wing) and Pierre Henriet (Horizons, right wing).

Scheduled for June 29, 2026, it will consist of three round tables.
It's an informal discussion of the UAP topic, but the setting will give credibility to what is discussed. As far as I know, the seminar hasn't attracted a lot of media attention in the french mainstream news yet, but it could change after the seminar takes place. Like in the US, a small dedicated group of true believers may end up with significant political influence if the topic gets visibility in the media.

Round Table #1 : UAP research : history and contemporary stakes
Pierre Lagrange, anthropologist (EHESS)
Dominique Pinsolle, historian (Université de Bordeaux)
Luc Dini, engineer, SIGMA2 3AF president
Jérôme Lamy, sociologist (CNRS)

Round Table #2 : Official UAP studies by GEIPAN and French Air and Space Force
Frédéric Courtade, engineer, GEIPAN director
Mathieu Courtaban, CAPCODA TN director (Operation and Aerial Defense Command Center, French Air and Space Force)
Jérémy Moyal, French Air and Space Force
Gilles Munsch, expert (GEIPAN)
Michaël Vaillant, UAP Check

Round Table #3 : From GEIPAN to Pentagon : News and responses from public authorities
Philippe Ailleris, UAP Observations Reporting Scheme
Sylvain Maisonneuve, former ministerial advisor, author
Baptiste Friscourt, "The Debrief", Sentinel News correspondent

https://bsky.app/profile/arnaudsaint-martin.bsky.social%2Fpost%2F3mmynwcif2k27

A significant subset of the participants (5 out of 12) form a group of true believers that seems to know each other well.
- Dini
- Vaillant
- Ailleris
- Friscourt
- Maisonneuve

They participated together to several events :
- New Science of UAP papers (https://www.metabunk.org/threads/new-science-of-uap-paper.14041/)
- UAP Check : ufology organization
- Dossier Ovni : true believer UAP talk show, Dini and Friscourt are regular participants
- Paris défense and strategy forum 2025 UAP round table (PDSF25)

Dini (Sigma2 director) is also linked to the usual ufo groups :
- New Science of UAP co-author
- Sol Foundation conference speaker : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBvRlWhlTOg
- SCU cooperation agreement : https://www.3af.fr/global/gene/link.php?news_link=2023104228_1143533338_3af-sigma2-communique-on-3af-sig-ma2-cooperation-agreement-vf.pdf&fg=1
- Sigma2 seminar with Vallée, Mellon and Villaroel (Vaillant was also there) https://www.3af.fr/fr/news/reunion-sigma2-avec-christopher-mellon-colloque-echo-event-cnews-et-france-2-2389?id_details_groupe=43

Vaillant seems to be to one with the most exotic beliefs. He openly believes in paranormal, in consciousness explanation for UAPs, and in apparitions at Skinwalker ranch (french interview : https://youtu.be/ThDhAacwmcY?t=3496 ). He has written a research paper that could deserve a dedicated thread : "Spatial Point Pattern Analysis of the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena in France" (arxiv.org)

Most of them have given extensive interviews to the very non critical "ET PAN!" french UAP youtube channel ( https://www.youtube.com/@ET_PAN/videos ). Their beliefs are very in line with the usual claims. They believe Elizondo and Grush without reserve. They have no doubt about the existence of an anomalous phenomenon with unexplanable cases.

The 3rd round table will probably be an uncritical regurgitation of what Corbell, Elizondo and Grush have claimed so far.

A few words on the other participants :
- Lagrange : very knowledgeable in ufology history, seems skeptical even if the truth behind the individual cases is not what interest him.
- Courtade : GEIPAN director, skeptic. He is in contact with AARO but I don't know if he knows the high profile US cases well enough to debunk them live when they'll get brought up by the true believers.
- Gilles Munsch : crop circle expert, published a book about detecting signs that crop circles are man made
Not much is available concerning the remaining participants related to UAPs.

 

[Nourali]

I'm going to attend the seminar. But I really disagree with this characterization of Baptiste Friscourt. He is clearly more on the convinced / pro-anomalous side, sure, but he is not someone who treats every claim as established fact. From what I've seen, he usually makes a pretty clear distinction between what is proven, what is reasonably supported, and what remains an unproven allegation. He also follow discussions on Metabunk, so I don't think it's fair to portray him as someone who just repeats claims uncritically.

I don't see the usefulness of attacking people personally before they have even spoken...

 

[RobertBillyBob]

But I really disagree with this characterization of Baptiste Friscourt. He is clearly more on the convinced / pro-anomalous side, sure, but he is not someone who treats every claim as established fact.

That's not the impression I got from watching interviews, but he maybe more nuanced in his own content than interviews can lead to think.

I don't see the usefulness of attacking people personally before they have even spoken...

I'm not attacking anyone, if something feel like a personal attack please point it to me so I can reformulate. I was curious about who the participants were, I researched them, noticed they were linked and it made me think of what we've already noticed in the US. You're welcome to nuance what I said if you know them better than I do.
The usefulness of researching them before they spoke at the seminar was to know if I had to be ready to debunk a lot of things in french media after the seminar.

 

[FatPhil]

I don't see the usefulness of attacking people personally before they have even spoken...

Why is the medium of communication important? He's published: we've read what he's put his name to, and, to quote @Ann K '"science" is not being applied here.' (https://www.metabunk.org/threads/new-science-of-uap-paper.14041/post-338049 ), or, to quote me: "This "new science" paper had *no* science.".