Who Actually Investigates Hamburg UFO Reports?

Introduction

Hamburg’s UFO case history is not held together by one grand official file. It is mostly a civilian record: witness submissions, local press reports, private investigator notes, searchable database entries, and later explanations by German UFO organisations. That matters because Hamburg is the kind of city where unusual lights are easy to notice and easy to misread: an airport, a harbour, public events, drones, aircraft, satellites and bright urban skies all create reports that can look strange before they are checked. The strongest reading of the Hamburg material is therefore modest but useful. Civilian investigators have preserved sightings that might otherwise have disappeared, but the same case files also show why many Hamburg reports weaken under scrutiny. A light show, a Starlink satellite train, a drone, a camera reflection or a bright planet may begin as a “UFO” in the ordinary witness sense: something unidentified to the observer. Investigation is the process that decides whether it stays that way.

Who Actually Investigates Hamburg UFO Reports?

There is no Hamburg equivalent of France’s GEIPAN: no state-run, publicly searchable official UFO office dedicated to local cases. In Germany, the practical work has long been done by civilian groups and individual investigators. The most important for case documentation is the Gesellschaft zur Erforschung des UFO-Phänomens, usually abbreviated as GEP, which says it has operated a German-language UFO reporting point since 1972 and accepts reports from private witnesses as well as institutions whose staff or contacts have encountered unusual aerial phenomena.[UFO Forschung]ufo-forschung.deOpen source on ufo-forschung.de.

The GEP model is case-led. A witness reports a sighting through an online form, email, phone or questionnaire; the group collects the basic details; and an investigator may follow up where clarification is needed. GEP’s own description says the online database form asks for the key information needed for an initial assessment, and that a member contacts the witness if further questions are necessary.[UFO Forschung]ufo-forschung.deOpen source on ufo-forschung.de. A 2023 paper by GEP authors describes the same process more fully: witnesses’ statements and materials are combined with secondary checks such as location, weather and astronomical conditions, after which investigators build a working hypothesis and discuss unclear cases with colleagues.[ResearchGate]researchgate.netOpen source on researchgate.net.

Hamburg also appears in this civilian network through named investigators rather than through a local government bureau. T. A. Günter, a GEP board member and project manager based in or near Hamburg, is identified by GEP as living and working in the Hamburg area, and a Journal of Anomalistics author note says he investigated regional UFO reports in Berlin-Brandenburg and Hamburg for CENAP and GEP.[UFO Forschung]ufo-forschung.deOpen source on ufo-forschung.de.[ResearchGate]researchgate.netResearch Gate Journal of Anomalistics Zeitschrift für AnomalistikResearch Gate Journal of Anomalistics Zeitschrift für Anomalistik That is a useful clue to how Hamburg cases often enter the record: through a national civilian organisation with regional investigators, not through a single municipal UFO archive.

CENAP, the Centrale Erforschungsnetz außergewöhnlicher Himmelsphänomene, is the other recurring civilian reference point in German media reports. It is more openly sceptical in reputation and is often contacted by people who want a scientific or astronomical explanation for what they saw. Recent reporting says CENAP received a record 1,348 sighting reports in 2025 from Germany, Austria, Switzerland and some other countries, with most explained by planets, stars, meteors, satellites, rocket stages, space debris or drones.[geo.de]geo.deufo meldestelle verzeichnete 2025 neuen rekord 37014016ufo meldestelle verzeichnete 2025 neuen rekord 37014016

For Hamburg readers, the practical result is clear: the first “investigator” is often not a government official but the witness, the local journalist, the police call-taker, or the civilian researcher who later checks the timing, direction, photos and likely conventional sources.

How Civilian Case Collection Works

A modern Hamburg UFO report usually starts with a simple problem: someone saw or filmed something they could not identify. A useful case file then tries to turn that moment into structured information. The investigator needs the date, time, location, direction of view, duration, apparent motion, colour, sound, number of objects, witness position, weather, nearby aircraft activity, possible public events, and any photos or video. Without those details, a spectacular story can remain almost useless as evidence.

GEP’s database and questionnaire approach is designed to reduce that problem. Its research paper says standardised structures have been developed since 2011 and are used both on the website and as the basis for the UFO database data model. The same paper notes that additional documentation may include witness quotations, arguments for the proposed explanation and case classifications.[ResearchGate]researchgate.netOpen source on researchgate.net. This is especially important for Hamburg because the city produces many “lights in the sky” cases, where small differences in timing and direction can separate a drone, aircraft landing light, satellite train, skybeam or astronomical object.

The public UFO database shows how granular this work can become. It allows searches by date, place, classification, evaluation, identification and investigation status, with categories that range from aircraft landing lights and lens reflections to meteors, balloons, drones, satellites, stars and planets.[UFO Database]ufo-db.comUFO Database That wide list is not a trivial detail. It shows that many civilian case files are not built around proving exotic claims, but around comparing a witness report with a long menu of ordinary and semi-ordinary causes.

A recent Hamburg example illustrates the point. The public UFO database lists a case from Hamburg-Eilbek on 12 May 2026 at 01:14, classified as a night-light sighting and assessed as an identified flying object: a quadcopter or multicopter drone.[UFO Database]ufo-db.comWfrm Sichtung Liste.aspxWfrm Sichtung Liste.aspx On its own, that entry is not a dramatic UFO story. Its value is different: it shows the modern civilian record at work, taking a local report and preserving not only the sighting but also the eventual judgement.

That judgement can be wrong, incomplete or provisional, but it is still more useful than a loose anecdote. It gives future readers something to test: Was the time recorded correctly? Was drone activity plausible? Were there photographs? Did the witness describe hovering, direction changes or sound? Could aircraft or reflections still be involved? A case file becomes valuable when it makes those questions possible.

What Local Press Adds and Misses

Local press is one of the main reasons Hamburg UFO stories survive. A police call may not produce a lasting public record, but a short newspaper item can preserve the time, place and witness language that later investigators need. The drawback is that journalism usually works under time pressure. A report can capture the excitement of “strange lights” before anyone has checked the mundane possibilities.

The 2011 Klitschko-Haye boxing night is the clearest Hamburg example. After the fight at the Imtech Arena, several callers reported circular light phenomena over Hamburg to a police station. The Hamburger Abendblatt linked the sightings to the arena’s light show, and GEP later archived the media item as an example of UFO reports caused by event lighting.[Hamburger Abendblatt]abendblatt.deBoxkampf Lichtshow sorgte fuer Ufo Meldungen in HamburgBoxkampf Lichtshow sorgte fuer Ufo Meldungen in Hamburg[UFO Forschung]ufo-forschung.deOpen source on ufo-forschung.de.

That small case shows the whole chain in miniature. The witnesses were not necessarily careless; they saw something unusual in the sky. The police were not “investigating UFOs” in a specialist sense; they were receiving public reports. The newspaper supplied the crucial context: the timing and location matched a large public light show. GEP then preserved the story as a solved media-linked case. The result is not a mystery solved by secret files, but an ordinary urban confusion resolved by context.

The 2020 Starlink reports show a newer version of the same pattern. Hamburger Morgenpost reported that Hamburg residents were startled by strange points of light “like a string” in the sky, and the article pointed readers to CENAP’s explanation that rows of evenly spaced moving lights were generally Starlink satellites.[Hamburger Morgenpost]mopo.deHamburger Morgenpost Hamburger staunen über seltsame Lichtpunkte am HimmelHamburger Morgenpost Hamburger staunen über seltsame Lichtpunkte am Himmel This kind of press item is useful because it preserves public reaction at the moment a new technology becomes visually unfamiliar. It is also limited because it often treats the reports collectively; individual witness files, exact viewing angles and case-by-case exclusions are usually absent.

The press therefore adds three things that case databases alone may miss:<div class="content-enhancement content-enhancement--insight-grid" markdown="1">

• Public mood: whether witnesses were confused, excited, alarmed or simply curious.
• Event context: concerts, sports events, fireworks, aviation incidents or satellite visibility windows.
• Report clustering: whether many people saw the same thing at roughly the same time.</div>

But it also misses three things investigators care about:<div class="content-enhancement content-enhancement--insight-grid" markdown="1">

• Precise geometry: direction, elevation, motion path and witness position.
• Raw evidence: original images, metadata and unedited video.
• Negative checks: what was ruled out, not just what seemed likely.</div>

For Hamburg, the best use of local press is not to treat every article as a finished investigation. It is to treat press snippets as leads: useful starting points that need to be matched against databases, astronomy tools, aircraft or drone context and witness follow-up.

Why Hamburg Case Files Are Patchy

Hamburg’s UFO record feels uneven because it is assembled from different kinds of evidence that were never designed to form one neat archive. A newspaper item from 2011, a database entry from 2026, a private investigator’s note, an old journal article and a witness email are not the same kind of source. They preserve different details and leave different gaps.

The biggest structural reason is that Germany has not maintained a single public official UFO archive comparable to some foreign programmes. A Bundestag research paper from 2009 records the federal government’s position that it had no knowledge of UFO or extraterrestrial sightings in Germany since 2000 and therefore no UFO sighting files available for publication. The same paper adds that Germany had no legal obligation to document or investigate reports of UFOs or extraterrestrial life and forward such findings to the United Nations.[Deutscher Bundestag]bundestag.deDeutscher Bundestag

That does not prove that no official ever handled an unusual aerial report. Police, aviation authorities, airports and military bodies may deal with lights, drones, safety incidents or security concerns under other labels. It does mean that a researcher looking for “Hamburg UFO files” should not expect one official drawer marked UFO. The more realistic trail is fragmented: police contacts, local press, aviation safety records, drone incident reports, transparency requests and civilian UFO databases.

Hamburg’s own transparency infrastructure can help with that wider trail, but it is not a UFO archive. The city’s Transparenzportal is described as the central register for information that Hamburg public bodies must publish, with full-text search across datasets.[Transparenzportal Hamburg]transparenz.hamburg.deOpen source on hamburg.de. It contains relevant adjacent material, such as geodata on drone no-fly zones attributed to Hamburg Police.[Transparenzportal Hamburg]suche.transparenz.hamburg.deTransparenzportal Hamburg Drohnenflugverbotszonen HamburgTransparenzportal Hamburg Drohnenflugverbotszonen Hamburg Such records are useful for understanding the local airspace and the modern drone environment, but they do not automatically explain older UFO reports.

Civilian records have their own limitations. GEP’s 2023 paper says that more than 5,000 investigated GEP cases are not all available in the UFO database, because structured data entry is time-consuming. It also warns that witness perception, memory and statements are significantly limited, and that even standardised single-case studies are not always directly comparable.[ResearchGate]researchgate.netOpen source on researchgate.net. That is an important caution for Hamburg: a database entry is stronger than a rumour, but it is still shaped by what the witness noticed, what the investigator asked, and what could be checked after the event.

The Hamburg Clues Worth Preserving

The most valuable Hamburg case files are not always the most sensational ones. They are the ones with enough detail to test. A weak but well-documented case can teach more than a dramatic story with no time, place or original source.

A good Hamburg case file normally has five qualities. First, it records the exact time and location. Second, it preserves the witness description before later theories reshape it. Third, it notes whether there were multiple independent witnesses. Fourth, it keeps original photos or video, ideally with metadata. Fifth, it includes the investigator’s reasoning, not just the final label.

The difference matters because many Hamburg reports involve lights rather than structured craft. A moving light near the airport may be an aircraft, helicopter, drone or satellite. A row of lights may be Starlink. A circular glow may be a skybeam. A still bright “object” may be Venus, Jupiter or Sirius. A strange mark in a photo may be an insect, dust, reflection or lens artefact. The UFO database’s identification categories reflect exactly this range of recurring explanations.[UFO Database]ufo-db.comUFO Database

Hamburg-Hummelsbüttel offers a reminder that older local cases can still matter even when they are not easy for the public to inspect. GEP’s shop listing for Journal für UFO-Forschung issue 257 includes an article by Hans-Werner Peiniger on a “rectangular flying body” over Hamburg-Hummelsbüttel in the summer of 1978 or 1979.[shop.ufo-forschung.de]shop.ufo-forschung.deproduct infoproduct info Without the full article and underlying file, a cautious reader should not overstate the case. Its significance is archival: it shows that Hamburg reports have entered specialist civilian literature, not only short newspaper snippets.

The same is true of GEP’s internal development work. A 2004 GEP leadership meeting near Hamburg discussed, among other things, an “electronic case file”, a starter kit for case investigators and refinements to identified-object classification.[UFO Forschung]ufo-forschung.deOpen source on ufo-forschung.de. That may sound administrative, but it goes to the heart of the Hamburg problem. Better forms, better categories and better investigator guidance are what turn fleeting reports into evidence that can be compared rather than merely retold.

What Makes a Hamburg Report Strong or Weak?

For readers trying to judge a Hamburg UFO claim, the key question is not “Does it sound strange?” Almost all UFO reports sound strange at first. The better question is “What survives after checking?”

A strong Hamburg report would usually include independent witnesses from different locations, precise timing, original media files, a clear direction of travel, weather and visibility information, and checks against aircraft, satellites, planets, drones and public events. A weak report might be sincere but vague: “a bright light over Hamburg last night” with no exact time, no direction, no duration and no image.

The 2011 boxing light-show case is useful because it shows how quickly a report can move from puzzling to ordinary once timing and setting are added. Circular lights over Hamburg sounded unusual; the nearby arena light show made them expected.[UFO Forschung]ufo-forschung.deOpen source on ufo-forschung.de. The 2020 Starlink reports show another pattern: many witnesses can independently report the same unusual-looking thing, but multiple witnesses do not by themselves make the object anomalous if a known satellite pass explains the cluster.[Hamburger Morgenpost]mopo.deHamburger Morgenpost Hamburger staunen über seltsame Lichtpunkte am HimmelHamburger Morgenpost Hamburger staunen über seltsame Lichtpunkte am Himmel

Modern CENAP statistics reinforce the same lesson at national scale. Reports have risen sharply, but recent record totals have been dominated by familiar causes such as Starlink satellites, bright planets, stars, meteors, drones, rocket stages and space debris rather than confirmed extraordinary craft.[geo.de]geo.deufo meldestelle verzeichnete 2025 neuen rekord 37014016ufo meldestelle verzeichnete 2025 neuen rekord 37014016 For Hamburg, this does not mean every case is solved in advance. It means that the burden on any unresolved case is higher: it must show why these common explanations do not fit.

A fair classification might look like this:<div class="content-enhancement content-enhancement--benefit" markdown="1">

• Resolved: a conventional cause fits the time, place, appearance and behaviour well, as with event lighting or a documented satellite train.
• Probably resolved: one explanation is strong but some details remain missing.
• Insufficient data: the report is too vague, late, edited or incomplete to judge.
• Unresolved: enough data exists to rule out the main ordinary causes, but no explanation has yet been established.
• Strongly anomalous: multiple reliable data streams support behaviour that remains unexplained after serious checking. Hamburg’s public civilian record does not currently rest on a well-known case of this strength.</div>

That last point is not a dismissal. It is the evidence-led position the Hamburg record seems to support. The city has interesting reports, useful investigator activity and a revealing civilian archive trail. It does not have a publicly documented landmark case strong enough to carry grand claims.

Why This Civilian Record Still Matters

The Hamburg case files matter precisely because they are imperfect. They show how UFO history is actually made: not through polished legends, but through phone calls, short articles, witness forms, database labels, investigator discussions and later corrections. In a city full of aircraft, harbour activity, drones, satellites and public lighting, that process is often more revealing than the mystery itself.

Civilian investigators preserve reports that official systems may ignore unless there is an immediate safety or security issue. They also provide a public-facing middle ground between ridicule and belief. A witness can say “I saw something I cannot explain” without having to claim alien technology, and an investigator can answer “Let us test the details” without treating the witness as foolish.

At the same time, Hamburg’s files show why caution is essential. The record is patchy, many cases depend on human memory, and not every old sighting can be reconstructed. GEP’s own research paper is unusually candid about these limitations, especially the problems of perception, memory, comparability and incomplete database coverage.[ResearchGate]researchgate.netOpen source on researchgate.net. Those limits should make Hamburg UFO history more careful, not less interesting.

The best way to read Hamburg’s civilian UFO record is therefore as a map of uncertainty. Some reports collapse quickly into light shows, drones or satellites. Some remain too thin to judge. A smaller number deserve preservation because they are detailed enough to revisit. The value of the case files is not that they prove extraordinary visitors over Hamburg. It is that they show, case by case, how an ordinary city decides what was seen in its sky.

Amazon book picks

Further Reading

Books and field guides related to Who Actually Investigates Hamburg UFO Reports?. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.

Book

The UFO Experience

By Joseph Allen Hynek

Explains structured civilian investigation methods.

See on Amazon

Book

UFOs

By Leslie Kean

Illustrates documentation standards for unusual reports.

See on Amazon

Book

The Demon-Haunted World

By Carl Sagan

Supports evidence-based investigation.

See on Amazon

Book

Bad Astronomy

By Philip C. Plait

Useful for eliminating common sky-based explanations.

See on Amazon

Browse more on Amazon:The UFO ExperienceUFOsThe Demon Haunted World

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.

Shop location

UsingUSAUSAUSAUKCanadaAustraliaIreland

Example eBay listing

Small UFO Flying Saucer Metal & Enamel Pin Badge with Secure Locking Back

SearcheBay.co.uk: UFO enamel pin

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

UFO SHADO Interceptor + Alien Craft Metal & Enamel Lapel Tie Tac Pin Badge Logo

SearcheBay.co.uk: UFO enamel pin

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

Alien Face Head Metal Enamel Pin Badge Area 51 UFO Silver and Black

SearcheBay.co.uk: UFO enamel pin

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

UFO UAP Flying Saucer Mountains Enamel Pin Brooch Button + Free Gift Bag

SearcheBay.co.uk: UFO enamel pin

Browse similar 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: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/ufo-sichtung-melden

2. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380530617_UAP_Research_in_Germany_Single_Case_Studies_Data_Management_Understanding_of_Strangeness

3. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/ufos-medien/hamburger-abendblatt-boxkampf-lichtshow-sorgte-fuer-ufo-meldungen-in-hamburg

4. Source: researchgate.net
Title: Research Gate Journal of Anomalistics Zeitschrift für Anomalistik
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381390939_Die_vergebliche_Suche_nach_dem_Bewusstsein_Ein_Bericht_von_der_Konferenz_The_Science_of_Consciousness_in_Taormina/fulltext/669446a1c1cf0d77ffd71dc5/Die-vergebliche-Suche-nach-dem-Bewusstsein-Ein-Bericht-von-der-Konferenz-The-Science-of-Consciousness-in-Taormina.pdf

5. Source: geo.de
Title: ufo meldestelle verzeichnete 2025 neuen rekord 37014016
Link:https://www.geo.de/wissen/weltall/ufo-meldestelle-verzeichnete-2025-neuen-rekord-37014016.html

6. Source: ufo-db.com
Title: UFO Database
Link:https://www.ufo-db.com/WfrmSuche.aspx

7. Source: abendblatt.de
Title: Boxkampf Lichtshow sorgte fuer Ufo Meldungen in Hamburg
Link:https://www.abendblatt.de/hamburg/article108041664/Boxkampf-Lichtshow-sorgte-fuer-Ufo-Meldungen-in-Hamburg.html

8. Source: bundestag.de
Title: Deutscher Bundestag
Link:https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/406336/741fdc9b7e96b9346e4e3414225b2835/wd-8-104-09-pdf-data.pdf

9. Source: transparenz.hamburg.de
Link:https://transparenz.hamburg.de/

10. Source: suche.transparenz.hamburg.de
Title: Transparenzportal Hamburg Drohnenflugverbotszonen Hamburg
Link:https://suche.transparenz.hamburg.de/dataset/drohnenflugverbotszonen-hamburg5

11. Source: shop.ufo-forschung.de
Title: product info
Link:https://shop.ufo-forschung.de/product_info.php?products_id=97

12. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/verein/gep-fuehrungsteam-trifft-sich-bei-hamburg

13. Source: suche.transparenz.hamburg.de
Link:https://suche.transparenz.hamburg.de/dataset/drohnenflugverbotszonen-hamburg1.rdf

14. Source: daten.transparenz.hamburg.de
Link:https://daten.transparenz.hamburg.de/Dataport.HmbTG.ZS.Webservice.GetRessource100/GetRessource100.svc/a4d863f6-b932-4fca-b4a2-284d0622e730/Akte_HmbTG_-_zu_veroeffentlichende_Dokumente.pdf

15. Source: daten.transparenz.hamburg.de
Title: Akte Hmb TG zu veroeffentlichende Dokumente
Link:https://daten.transparenz.hamburg.de/Dataport.HmbTG.ZS.Webservice.GetRessource100/GetRessource100.svc/3a3f222e-c9df-4923-8ab6-bab5bd53d1e4/Akte_HmbTG_-_zu_veroeffentlichende_Dokumente.pdf

16. Source: daten.transparenz.hamburg.de
Link:https://daten.transparenz.hamburg.de/Dataport.HmbTG.ZS.Webservice.GetRessource100/GetRessource100.svc/13142187-84ee-4781-9085-c50a478e15b1/Akte_UD832.07-51.pdf

17. Source: suche.transparenz.hamburg.de
Link:https://suche.transparenz.hamburg.de/

18. Source: bundestag.de
Title: wd 11 148 09 pdf data
Link:https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/408356/32b7d8a6d5868d7a585ba0b2488010c7/wd-11-148-09-pdf-data.pdf

19. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/category/verein

20. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/ufos-medien/suedkurier-ufo-ueber-dem-telekom-tower

21. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Title: 1972 2012 40 jahre gep
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/verein/1972-2012-40-jahre-gep

22. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/tag/hamburg

23. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/kurz-notiert/interview-mit-christian-czech

24. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/pressemitteilungen/pm-community/jahresbericht-2024-der-gesellschaft-zur-erforschung-des-ufo-phaenomens-gep-veroeffentlicht

25. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/kurz-notiert/mufon-ces-mit-neuer-webseite-und-thema-volksaufklaerung

26. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Title: JAnom23 2 302 Ammon etal
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/ta-guenter/pdf/JAnom23-2_302_Ammon_etal.pdf

27. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Title: 36 neue ufo meldungen im august 2022
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/ufo-meldungen/36-neue-ufo-meldungen-im-august-2022
Published: august 2022

28. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Title: Oeffentliche Erklaerung zu CENAP
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/wp-content/uploads/Oeffentliche_Erklaerung_zu_CENAP.pdf

29. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/author/gepweb

30. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Title: mitarbeiter fuer das webteam gesucht
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/kurz-notiert/mitarbeiter-fuer-das-webteam-gesucht

31. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Title: neue gep sonderpublikation ufo forschung und wissenschaft
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/forschung/neue-gep-sonderpublikation-ufo-forschung-und-wissenschaft

32. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Title: 50 jahre gep rueckblick auf die jubilaeumstagung 2022
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/verein/50-jahre-gep-rueckblick-auf-die-jubilaeumstagung-2022

33. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/kurz-notiert/journal-fuer-ufo-forschung-nr-276-erschienen

34. Source: ufo-forschung.de
Link:https://www.ufo-forschung.de/tag/t-a-guenter

35. Source: abendblatt.de
Link:https://www.abendblatt.de/sport/article108041706/Vitali-haette-Haye-gern-bewusstlos-gesehen.html

36. Source: geo.de
Title: dieser mann betreibt deutschlands beruehmte ufo meldestelle 35141896
Link:https://www.geo.de/wissen/weltall/dieser-mann-betreibt-deutschlands-beruehmte-ufo-meldestelle-35141896.html

37. Source: ufo-db.com
Title: Wfrm Sichtung Liste.aspx
Link:https://www.ufo-db.com/WfrmSichtungListe.aspx?uid_Menu=eb7461b8-035a-4226-b832-cec310caade2

38. Source: mopo.de
Title: Hamburger Morgenpost Hamburger staunen über seltsame Lichtpunkte am Himmel
Link:https://www.mopo.de/hamburg/wie-an-einer-schnur-aufgereiht-hamburger-staunen-ueber-seltsame-lichtpunkte-am-himmel/568963

39. Source: ufo-db.com
Link:https://www.ufo-db.com/

40. Source: ufo-db.com
Title: Wfrm Show Jahr.aspx
Link:https://www.ufo-db.com/WfrmShowJahr.aspx?strJahr=ohne

41. Source: orf.at
Link:https://orf.at/stories/3381375/

42. Source: explore.openaire.eu
Link:https://explore.openaire.eu/search/result?pid=10.5281%2Fzenodo.15882235

43. Source: mopo.de
Title: ufos am himmel so viele meldungen gab es noch nie
Link:https://www.mopo.de/news/panorama/ufos-am-himmel-so-viele-meldungen-gab-es-noch-nie/1766677

44. Source: hjkc.de
Title: UF O-Forschung
Link:https://www.hjkc.de/_blog/14938-ufo-forschung-ifo-universitt-starlink-satelliten-berflge-ber-deutschland-update-13/

45. Source: hjkc.de
Title: UF O-Forschung
Link:https://www.hjkc.de/_blog/17531-ufo-forschung-ifo-universitt-starlink-satelliten-berflge-ber-deutschland-update-21/

46. Source: zenodo.org
Link:https://zenodo.org/records/10547073

Additional References

47. Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecEY2xNFzPw

48. Source: youtube.com
Title: Fact or conspiracy: What are UFOs really? | ZDFinfo Documentary
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUF1ZzMj-Qg

49. Source: youtube.com
Title: Hundreds of Witnesses Come Forth | UFOs: Investigating The Unknown
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJbFeuTwbn4

50. Source: war.gov
Link:https://www.war.gov/ufo/

51. Source: academia.edu
Link:https://www.academia.edu/144343048/Auswertung_von_Sichtungsf%C3%A4llen_mit_GIS

52. Source: fragdenstaat.de
Link:https://fragdenstaat.de/anfragen/an/polizei-hamburg/?page=1&publicbody=polizei-hamburg

53. Source: telepolis.de
Link:https://www.telepolis.de/article/Bundestag-gibt-UFO-Akten-frei-10598428.html

54. Source: openpr.de
Link:https://www.openpr.de/news/875507/GEP-Mitglied-T-A-Guenter-CENAP-und-der-unerklaerte-Rest-der-UFO-Meldungen.html

55. Source: openpr.de
Link:https://www.openpr.de/news/872165/Deadline-der-ausserirdischen-UFOlogie-Das-CENAP-UFO-Manifest.html

56. Source: metaver.de
Link:https://metaver.de/trefferanzeige