Branchoria UFOs and UAP by Italian Region UFOs and UAP by Italian Region

Compare sightings, records, and explanations across Italian regions.

Within Basilicata UFOs

What Evidence Would Make a Basilicata UFO Case Convincing?

The region's reports show why radar data, trained observers, precise bearings and contemporaneous records matter more than memorable testimony alone.

122 sources 3 graphics

On this page

  • The limits of single witness testimony
  • Radar, aviation records and multiple observers
  • A practical standard for unresolved cases
Preview for What Evidence Would Make a Basilicata UFO Case Convincing?

Introduction

A convincing Basilicata UFO case would need more than an honest witness, a strange light and a memorable story. It would require independent records that fix the event in time and space: several observers reporting separately, precise bearings, original photographs or video with intact metadata, aviation and weather checks, and—ideally—radar or other instrument data recorded at the same moment. The evidence would then need to survive an open investigation that actively tested aircraft, satellites, meteors, balloons, drones and perceptual effects.

Overview image for Strong Evidence

That standard matters because Basilicata’s public UFO record is dominated by brief descriptions and later summaries. Regional catalogues preserve potentially interesting reports, including clusters from the 1978 Italian sighting wave, but the accessible files rarely contain the combination of technical measurements and independently documented testimony expected in a persuasive aviation investigation. The right verdict for many such cases is therefore not “explained” or “extraordinary”, but “insufficiently documented”.[La Gazzetta del Mezzogiorno]lagazzettadelmezzogiorno.itIl primo Ufo lucano del 2000 lo si vede in lontananza a Potenza il 13 maggio, poi in una sera di settembre del 1991, un oggetto viene vis…Published: January 23, 2011

The limits of a striking eyewitness account

Eyewitness testimony is valuable because it establishes that somebody experienced something they could not identify. It can supply the time, location, apparent shape, colour, direction and duration of an event. A prompt, detailed account is far more useful than a recollection written down years later.

Testimony alone, however, usually cannot establish an object’s actual size, distance or speed. A witness who sees a light against a dark sky may have no reliable reference point. A small nearby object and a large distant object can occupy the same apparent angle. Once distance is uncertain, claims that something moved at enormous speed or hovered at a particular altitude also become uncertain.

This is not a criticism of witness honesty. Aviation safety guidance recognises that even trained pilots can experience visual illusions. A stationary light in darkness may appear to move, an effect known as autokinesis, while sparse terrain lighting can distort judgements of distance and position. Clear night skies can make distant lights visible without providing the visual cues needed to judge how far away they are.[Skybrary]skybrary.aero* Black hole effect: When approaching an airport surrounded by dark terrain with few other lights in the area, pilots can get an illusion…

That problem is particularly relevant to reports from rural or mountainous parts of Basilicata. A witness may have an unobstructed view of the sky but few landmarks against which to measure an object. Statements such as “just above the hill”, “very low” or “moving faster than an aircraft” may accurately describe the impression received without fixing the object’s physical position.

A strong report would therefore separate observation from interpretation. “A white light crossed 30 degrees of sky in eight seconds” is useful evidence. “A huge craft accelerated silently” may be a reasonable description of the witness’s impression, but it contains assumptions about distance, size and propulsion that the observation itself may not prove.

Credibility also depends on how testimony is obtained. Witnesses should be interviewed separately before they compare accounts or see extensive media coverage. Investigators should record uncertainty rather than press for a neat shape or dramatic narrative. France’s official GEIPAN investigation service explicitly combines physical analysis with human factors and warns that the quality of questioning can affect whether a useful explanation is found.[GEIPAN]cnes-geipan.frry approach combining physical sciences and human…Read more…

Strong Evidence illustration 1

Radar, aviation records and multiple observers

The strongest conceivable Basilicata case would begin with independent observers in different locations. If witnesses in Matera, Pisticci and another town reported the same object at closely matching times, their viewing directions could be plotted. Intersecting lines of sight might establish an approximate location and altitude rather than leaving investigators with a single person’s visual estimate.

Independence is crucial. Ten people standing together may provide valuable confirmation that a light was visible, but they share the same viewing angle and can influence one another’s descriptions. Two or three observers kilometres apart, who report before communicating with each other, provide much stronger geometric and psychological independence.

A persuasive aviation-linked case would add records created for reasons unrelated to UFO reporting:

  • primary or secondary radar returns;
  • air-traffic-control radio recordings;
  • flight plans and aircraft tracks;
  • pilot reports made during the event;
  • airport operations logs;
  • military flying or exercise records;
  • meteorological observations;
  • satellite, rocket and astronomical data.

These records matter because they are time-stamped and normally exist whether or not anybody later labels the event a UFO. Aviation accident investigators routinely preserve radar, radio, flight-recorder, operational and witness evidence because any one source may be incomplete or misleading. The strength comes from comparing them.[gov.uk]GOV.UKHow we investigateHow we investigatePublished: June 7, 2018

What radar would—and would not—prove

A radar return matching a visual observation would substantially strengthen a Basilicata report. It could provide range, direction and movement that the human eye cannot reliably estimate. Two compatible radar systems, or radar combined with optical tracking, would be stronger still.

But the phrase “it appeared on radar” is not enough. Investigators would need the original data, the radar type, coverage, operating mode, filtering settings and an assessment by qualified technicians. Radar can register weather, birds, interference, anomalous propagation and other clutter. A processed screenshot or somebody’s later recollection of an unusual trace would be weaker than preserved raw or near-raw records with the relevant technical context.

Equally, no radar return does not automatically disprove a sighting. An object may be outside coverage, below the radar horizon, too small, constructed from poorly reflective material or removed by filtering. The proper conclusion would depend on whether the relevant radar could reasonably have detected the claimed object.

The key question is therefore not simply whether radar was involved, but whether its capabilities and limitations were documented well enough to compare the instrument record with the visual claim.

Strong Evidence illustration 2

Why trained observers help but do not settle the case

A report from a pilot, air-traffic controller, police officer or astronomer deserves careful attention because such witnesses may be accustomed to observing aircraft, judging directions or recording incidents. Their vocabulary and ability to give precise timings may improve the file.

Professional status is not a substitute for measurements, however. Multiple airline pilots have sometimes reported apparently unusual moving lights that were later reconstructed as sunlight reflecting from Starlink satellites. One published aviation case used flight-position data and satellite orbital information to reproduce what five pilots aboard two aircraft had seen. The example is important because the witnesses were experienced and mutually corroborating, yet the combined technical data made an ordinary explanation possible.[arXiv]arxiv.orgOpen source on arxiv.org.Published: March 13, 2024

For a Basilicata case, “seen by a pilot” should therefore raise the priority of investigation, not end it.

Photographs need context, not just clarity

A sharp image would improve a case only if investigators could establish what the camera recorded. The original file should be preserved, along with its creation time, exposure settings, focal length, sensor information and any sequence of frames before and after the object appeared.

A photograph without context may show shape but not scale. Dust, insects, birds, balloons and distant aircraft can all look unfamiliar when frozen in a single frame. Digital zoom can enlarge pixels without adding detail, while compression and image stabilisation can create misleading edges or apparent movement.

Video is usually more informative because it preserves motion and changes in brightness, but it still needs reference points. A clip should include the horizon, terrain, buildings, stars or another stable feature whenever possible. Investigators also need to know whether the camera was moving, whether optical or digital zoom was used and whether the displayed timestamp was accurate.

The most valuable visual evidence would be simultaneous imagery from separated positions. Two synchronised cameras can permit triangulation, allowing distance, altitude and speed to be estimated rather than guessed. Scientific proposals for studying unusual aerial phenomena emphasise precisely this kind of multimodal approach: wide- and narrow-field cameras, triangulation, radar-derived range, environmental sensors and properly characterised instruments.[arXiv]arxiv.orgOpen source on arxiv.org.Published: May 29, 2023

NASA’s independent UAP study reached a similar conclusion. It identified poor calibration, missing metadata, a lack of multiple measurements and an absence of baseline data as central obstacles to analysing unusual reports. It recommended systematic collection using multiple well-calibrated sensors rather than relying on isolated images.[NASA Science]science.nasa.govScience Independent Study Team ReportScience Independent Study Team ReportPublished: September 13, 2023

Strong Evidence illustration 3

A practical standard for unresolved cases

Italy already has a formal reporting route. The Italian Air Force has been responsible for collecting and checking UFO reports since the national wave of 1978. Its public procedure directs witnesses to complete a reporting form and submit it through the Carabinieri, after which possible links with human activity and natural phenomena can be examined. A report is classed as unidentified only when that inquiry does not find a technical or natural explanation.[Aeronautica Militare]aeronautica.difesa.itModulo Avvistamento OVNIAeronautica MilitareOVNI - Aeronautica MilitareA seguito dell’ondata di avvistamenti di Oggetti Volanti Non Identificati (OVNI) del 1978…

For Basilicata, that process could be strengthened by treating an unusual aerial report much like a minor aviation incident. The first hours matter most, because electronic records may be overwritten, witnesses may discuss the event, and memories begin to change.

A robust regional procedure would include five stages.

1. Preserve the first account. Record each witness’s description separately, in their own words, with an exact time, observing position, viewing direction, angle above the horizon and duration. Investigators should note how the time was established: a phone clock, a message, a photograph or an estimate.

2. Secure original material. Copy photographs and video without editing them, preserve metadata and document the chain of custody. Screenshots and social-media reposts should not replace original files.

3. Request independent records promptly. Relevant bodies should be asked to preserve air-traffic, radar, radio, airport, meteorological and military records before routine deletion. Aircraft and satellite tracks should be reconstructed for the witness’s actual position and viewing direction, not merely checked against the nearest town.

4. Test ordinary explanations quantitatively. It is not enough to list “aircraft”, “meteor” or “satellite” as possibilities. An explanation should match the time, direction, angular movement, brightness and duration. Conversely, investigators should not reject an ordinary candidate merely because it looked strange to the witness.

5. Publish a graded conclusion. The final assessment should distinguish clearly between:

  • identified with strong evidence;
  • probably identified;
  • not analysable because essential data are missing;
  • genuinely unresolved despite adequate information.

This final distinction is vital. GEIPAN, for example, separates cases that remain unidentified after investigation from cases that cannot be identified simply because the information is inadequate. A data-poor mystery is not equivalent to a well-documented anomaly.[GEIPAN]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.

What would change Basilicata’s UFO history

The publicly documented regional cases do not presently offer a clear example combining independent visual reports, original calibrated imagery, preserved radar data and a transparent technical investigation. Basilicata’s well-known catalogue entries—including reports associated with the December 1978 cluster—remain historically interesting, but the summaries available to the public generally provide locations and witness claims rather than complete evidential files.[La Gazzetta del Mezzogiorno]lagazzettadelmezzogiorno.itIl primo Ufo lucano del 2000 lo si vede in lontananza a Potenza il 13 maggio, poi in una sera di settembre del 1991, un oggetto viene vis…Published: January 23, 2011

One future case could change that assessment. It would not need to prove an extraterrestrial origin. It would need to establish, with unusually good evidence, that a real object or phenomenon was present and that familiar explanations had been tested fairly.

The strongest plausible Basilicata case would look something like this: pilots and ground witnesses report the same event independently; their bearings converge; air-traffic recordings confirm that the reports were made in real time; radar shows a corresponding track; original photographs from more than one location allow triangulation; weather and astronomical data rule out obvious alternatives; and independent specialists can inspect the records and reproduce the analysis.

Even then, “unresolved” would mean only that the available evidence had not identified the phenomenon. It would not by itself establish alien technology or any other extraordinary cause. That restraint is not a weakness. It is what would separate a genuinely strong Basilicata case from another memorable story whose mystery depends mainly on missing information.

Amazon book picks

Further Reading

Books and field guides related to What Evidence Would Make a Basilicata UFO Case Convincing?. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.

Browse more on Amazon:The UFO : A to Investigating, Evaluating, and Reporting UFO Sightings booksThe UFO Experience: A Scientific InquiryUFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Record

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

eBay marketplace picks

Marketplace Samples

Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.

UsingUSA

Selected fromUFO poster oneBay.co.uk.

Browse more oneBay.co.uk

Example items shown for inspiration; availability and pricing can change. Branchoria may earn a commission if you purchase through outbound eBay links.

Endnotes

1. Source: skybrary.aero
Link:https://skybrary.aero/index.php/articles/visual-illusions

Source snippet

* Black hole effect: When approaching an airport surrounded by dark terrain with few other lights in the area, pilots can get an illusion...

2. Source: skybrary.aero
Title: Night Visual Approaches | SKYbrary Aviation Safety * Darkness (light levels);
Link:https://skybrary.aero/index.php/articles/night-visual-approaches

Source snippet

A visual illusion known as "black hole effect" is another inherent risk of night visual approaches.... Perception scientists disagree as...

3. Source: skybrary.aero
Link:https://skybrary.aero/index.php/articles/vision-oghfa-bn

Source snippet

It is based only on the relative speed of flow through our visual field, which provides an indication of the distance and speed of object...

4. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/missions-methodes-et-resultats

Source snippet

ry approach combining physical sciences and human...Read more...

5. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58787

6. Source: GOV.UK
Title: How we investigate
Link:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/how-we-investigate/how-we-investigate
Published: June 7, 2018

7. Source: icao.int
Link:https://www.icao.int/SAM/Documents/2016-AIG-RECORDSPRO/Anx%2013_11th%20Ed_en.pdf

8. Source: icao.int
Link:https://www.icao.int/sam/edocuments/qa%20manual%201.0english.pdf

9. Source: arxiv.org
Link:https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.08155
Published: March 13, 2024

10. Source: arxiv.org
Link:https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.13091

11. Source: arxiv.org
Link:https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.18566
Published: May 29, 2023

12. Source: science.nasa.gov
Title: Science Independent Study Team Report
Link:https://science.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/uap-independent-study-team-final-report.pdf
Published: September 13, 2023

13. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/412

14. Source: regione.basilicata.it
Title: Matera, mongolfiere e dialogo nel Mediterraneo
Link:https://www.regione.basilicata.it/matera-mongolfiere-e-dialogo-nel-mediterraneo/
Published: July 13, 2026

15. Source: regione.basilicata.it
Title: La “pista Mattei” in cerca di un gestore
Link:https://www.regione.basilicata.it/la-pista-mattei-in-cerca-di-un-gestore/
Published: December 2, 2025

16. Source: icao.int
Title: AN C Technical Panels
Link:https://www.icao.int/anc-technical-panels
Published: May 8, 2025

17. Source: prefettura.interno.gov.it
Title: interno.gov.it Sorvoli con drone | Prefettura
Link:https://prefettura.interno.gov.it/it/prefetture/potenza/sorvoli-drone
Published: February 20, 2025

18. Source: regione.basilicata.it
Title: Wwf Potenza: no al radar su monte Li Foj
Link:https://www.regione.basilicata.it/wwf-potenza-no-al-radar-su-monte-li-foj/
Published: November 17, 2016

19. Source: regione.basilicata.it
Title: AEROPORT O PISTICCI: PRESENTATO POLO DIDATTICO AEREONAUTICO
Link:https://www.regione.basilicata.it/aeroporto-pisticci-presentato-polo-didattico-aereonautico/
Published: January 26, 2016

20. Source: skybrary.aero
Title: b738 kingston jamaica 2009
Link:https://skybrary.aero/index.php/accidents-and-incidents/b738-kingston-jamaica-2009
Published: December 22, 2009

21. Source: skybrary.aero
Link:https://skybrary.aero/index.php/articles/runway-visual-perspective

22. Source: skybrary.aero
Link:https://skybrary.aero/articles/transition-visual-flight-night-oghfa-se

23. Source: skybrary.aero
Link:https://skybrary.aero/index.php/articles/lessening-effects-visual-illusions

24. Source: skybrary.aero
Link:https://skybrary.aero/index.php/articles/general-aviation-night-flying-guidance

25. Source: skybrary.aero
Link:https://skybrary.aero/index.php/articles/laser-interference-aviation

26. Source: skybrary.aero
Link:https://skybrary.aero/articles/lessening-effects-visual-illusions

27. Source: skybrary.aero
Link:https://skybrary.aero/index.php/articles/pilot-perception

28. Source: skybrary.aero
Link:https://skybrary.aero/index.php/articles/vfr-flights-night

29. Source: store.icao.int
Title: manual on flight crew machine interface recordings doc 10101
Link:https://store.icao.int/en/manual-on-flight-crew-machine-interface-recordings-doc-10101

30. Source: icao.int
Link:https://www.icao.int/operational-safety/Understanding-GADSS

31. Source: store.icao.int
Title: flight recorder system maintenance frsm manual doc 10104
Link:https://store.icao.int/en/flight-recorder-system-maintenance-frsm-manual-doc-10104

32. Source: icao.int
Link:https://www.icao.int/accident-investigation-section-aig

33. Source: icao.int
Link:https://www.icao.int/safety/AIG/documents

34. Source: icao.int
Link:https://www.icao.int/safety/airnavigation/aig/pages/database.aspx

35. Source: store.icao.int
Title: int Manual of Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation
Link:https://store.icao.int/en/manual-of-aircraft-accident-and-incident-investigation-part-iii-investigation-doc-9756-part-3?pr_prod_strat=description&pr_rec_pid=4528935272536&pr_ref_pid=4158404132952&pr_seq=uniform

36. Source: icao.int
Link:https://www.icao.int/safety/regional-safety-cooperation/raios

37. Source: anwp.icao.int
Link:https://anwp.icao.int/lookahead/guidancematerial

38. Source: icao.int
Link:https://www.icao.int/operational-safety/contingency-Aircraft-Accident-and-Incident-Investigations

39. Source: icao.int
Link:https://www.icao.int/strategic-objectives/safety-policy-and-standardization

40. Source: nasa.gov
Title: update nasa shares uap independent study report names director
Link:https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/update-nasa-shares-uap-independent-study-report-names-director/

41. Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/en/node/414

42. Source: nationalarchives.gov.uk
Link:https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/ufos/

43. Source: lagazzettadelmezzogiorno.it
Link:https://www.lagazzettadelmezzogiorno.it/news/notizie-nascoste/249653/oggetti-volanti-in-basilicata-ecco-icasi-certificati-dagli-ufologi.html

Source snippet

Il primo Ufo lucano del 2000 lo si vede in lontananza a Potenza il 13 maggio, poi in una sera di settembre del 1991, un oggetto viene vis...

Published: January 23, 2011

44. Source: lagazzettadelmezzogiorno.it
Title: La Gazzetta del Mezzogiorno La Basilicata e gli Ufo una storia di 70 anni
Link:https://www.lagazzettadelmezzogiorno.it/news/home/998605/la-basilicata-e-gli-ufo-una-storia-di-70-anni.html

Source snippet

Impressionante l´avvistamento del 13 maggio del 2000, anch´esso puntualmente almanaccato dai coordinatori regionali del Centro ufologico...

45. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Title: Modulo Avvistamento OVNI
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/ovni/

Source snippet

Aeronautica MilitareOVNI - Aeronautica MilitareA seguito dell’ondata di avvistamenti di Oggetti Volanti Non Identificati (OVNI) del 1978...

46. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Title: Aeronautica Militare OVNI
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/en/ovni/

47. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/ModuloUFO.pdf

48. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/stats
Published: June 25, 2026

49. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/en/tender/id-2602604-fornitura-nr-300-deflettori-radarabili-occorrenti-al-centro-tecnico-per-la-metereologia-di-vigna-di-valle/
Published: May 25, 2026

50. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/tender/supporto-industriale-alla-capacita-di-space-situational-awareness-biennio-2025-2026-decisione-di-contrarre-con-la-leonardo-s-p-a/
Published: October 22, 2024

51. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Title: it OVN I
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/en/2023/01/12/ovni/
Published: January 12, 2023

52. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/436
Published: July 12, 2020

53. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Title: evolution classification des cas
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/actualites/evolution-classification-des-cas
Published: December 10, 2008

54. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/171
Published: December 10, 2008

55. Source: ovni.capital
Link:https://www.ovni.capital/

56. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Title: it Ufficio relazioni con il pubblico
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/ufficio-relazioni-con-il-pubblico/

57. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Title: it Pubblicazioni Aeronautiche
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/pubblicazioni-aeronautiche/

58. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Title: it Ufficio relazioni con il pubblico
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/en/ufficio-relazioni-con-il-pubblico/

59. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Title: it Ami Cert
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/amicert/

60. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Title: it Meccanismo di Feedback
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/meccanismo-di-feedback/

61. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Title: it OVN I Archives
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/category/ovni/

62. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Title: it OVN I Archives
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/en/category/ovni/

63. Source: aeronautica.difesa.it
Title: RIV 4 2020 FIN
Link:https://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/RIV_4_2020_FIN.pdf

64. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/what-did-i-see/step-1

65. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/faq-page

66. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/node/58787

67. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/mentions_legales

68. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58792

69. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/index.php/en/node/58788

70. Source: cnes.fr
Link:https://cnes.fr/en/projects/geipan

71. Source: ovni.engineering
Link:https://www.ovni.engineering/

Additional References

72. Source: archives.gov
Title: Do Records Show Proof of UFOs? | National Archives
Link:https://www.archives.gov/news/articles/do-records-show-proof-of-ufos
Published: February 9, 2018

73. Source: archives.gov
Title: Project BLUE BOOK
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/military/air-force/ufos
Published: June 25, 2024

74. Source: archives.gov
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/topics/uaps/faqs
Published: April 24, 2025

75. Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/foa_html/chap4_section_7.html

76. Source: forum.adiaastronomia.it
Title: it Avvistamenti Ufo in Basilicata
Link:https://forum.adiaastronomia.it/viewtopic.php?t=2165
Published: July 24, 2009

77. Source: secretsdeclassified.af.mil
Link:https://www.secretsdeclassified.af.mil/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/459832/project-blue-book/

78. Source: aliencouncil.com
Title: 00041 tic tac uss nimitz 2004
Link:https://aliencouncil.com/cases/00041-tic-tac-uss-nimitz-2004/
Published: July 9, 2026

79. Source: ansa.it
Title: dal 1972 ad oggi 445 i casi di ufo italiani ecf3e1b2 440f 4366 8f83 3cca910eeff2
Link:https://www.ansa.it/sito/notizie/cronaca/2014/03/29/dal-1972-ad-oggi-445-i-casi-di-ufo-italiani_ecf3e1b2-440f-4366-8f83-3cca910eeff2.html?TB_iframe=true&caption=RSS+di+++-+ANSA.it&height=650&keepThis=true&width=850
Published: March 29, 2014

80. Source: ansa.it
Title: Il cielo di Puglia e Basilicata illuminato da un bolide di 2,5 kg
Link:https://www.ansa.it/canale_scienza/notizie/spazio_astronomia/2023/02/15/il-cielo-di-puglia-e-basilicata-illuminato-da-un-bolide-di-25-kg_2f3592ce-4a99-4e43-8779-412110cf7662.html
Published: February 16, 2023

81. Source: ansa.it
Title: Ufo:445 casi’ufficiali’in Italia dal ‘72
Link:https://www.ansa.it/sito/notizie/topnews/2014/03/29/ufo445-casiufficialiin-italia-dal-72_0d650933-273f-4e5d-b127-859c733e9b10.html
Published: March 29, 2014