"US DoD have confirmed the UFO phenomenon is real"

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
The above post got 4 stars in 1 minute? What is up with that! After I posted my post I went back right away to look at it, and the new post already had 4 stars! It took me about a minute to read the new post......is there some kind of post-starring bot program at the NSA?

Can't speak on what's happening here but I know for a fact that there is a bot program affiliated with disqus being abused on various websites.

a reply to: gortex

Alright first of all the settlement has been done in Jan. and there should have no uncertainty unless information has been distorted purposedly.

No matter who Pat Frascogna is, he is John Burroughs's legal agent in this particular case, which gives him the right as wel as full information to make official legal statement on behalf John Burroughs. He could be a crazy UFO believer but when he speaks about this particular case or endorse any annoncement, he is nobody but the attorney of this particular case who bears legal liability. Then the question is will he risk his career or Sen. John McCain's reputation?

I do not know the answer but I highly doubt that.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

There's fresh green grass growing in the burnt-out landing area. Though it's very hard to see the surveyor's three wooden guard stakes, with reference to the tripod landing marks.

I have one picture of one tripod landing mark --- but I never copied it on my computer.

Nevertheless --- It's all documented in MUFON's files --- with them reporting it to be a most significant case.

a reply to: Erno86

Thanks for the reply. I can see the three surveyors stakes. Did the shape of the outline in the grass match the reported shape of the object? Can you think of any reason why the grass in that area would be growing while the grass in the surrounding area is not, given the time of year?

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: Erno86

Thanks for the reply. I can see the three surveyors stakes. Did the shape of the outline in the grass match the reported shape of the object? Can you think of any reason why the grass in that area would be growing while the grass in the surrounding area is not, given the time of year?

The fresh green grass is fresh shoots popping out of the burnt out soil. The withered dry grass is from the winter with the green grass coming out below it.

You can see the power line next to the farm road that leads to a large farm house that faces the large grassy field where the foofighter landed. There is an apple orchard across the farm road. I went to the Fawn Grove hardware store to ask them about the whereabouts of the reported UFO landing. The one witness that saw the foofighter landing, was reported by MUFON to be a trusted member of the community, but --- IMHO --- seemed shy to come out to the press anymore about his UFO sighting.

Frankly...I don't know the exact size of the foofighter --- Yet you'll have to look at the MUFON report for the exact diameter of the burnt-out zone and the exact size/width/depth of the three tripod landing marks.

originally posted by: TrueMessiah

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
The above post got 4 stars in 1 minute? What is up with that! After I posted my post I went back right away to look at it, and the new post already had 4 stars! It took me about a minute to read the new post......is there some kind of post-starring bot program at the NSA?

Can't speak on what's happening here but I know for a fact that there is a bot program affiliated with disqus being abused on various websites.

The idea that there is a bot that would somehow add just four stars to just one post but not to any other posts that make the same or similar points seems ridiculous to me.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

In reference to the Gactchelleville/Fawn Grove Pa. incident:


MUFON Journal....page 8


Or go to UFO Casebook Forum....General UFO alien board...page 4....Karl12's....UFO/OVNI Shapes thread....reply#10 for a link to the MUFON report.

a reply to: jonnywhite

Hey cowboy, slllooooooowwwwwwww down. Have a look at this: www.ianridpath.com - Were the radiation readings significant?...

The investigations made by Colonel Halt and readings taken by Monroe Nevels on the 3rd night of the Rendlesham Forest incident have long been contested.

For posterity here is the 1990s TV debate over Rendlesham featuring discussion about the radiation readings made at the time.



Nick Pope also conducted a cold case review during his time at the MoD and the findings were actually confirmed in a document from the Defence Radiological Protection service confirming the radiation was significantly higher than background levels (although not dangerous).



Full document link

However the Condign report is inferring that the airmen were exposed to some form of radiation "....for longer than normal UAP sighting periods" (I assume they took measurements of average UAP sighting periods!).

My interpretation has always been that this was referring to a form of radiation (perhaps like that created by mobile cellular phone technology) that occurred in nature when certain atmospheric conditions prevailed. A number of the airmen out in the forest reported strange effects like highly charged static in the air that made their hair stand on end.

Does that cause physical harm? Well we don't really know about the long term effects of using mobile phones and perhaps there is a clue there as to why the VA settled the case up. Rather than open a very large can of worms they chose to keep the lid closed on it. Probably thinking that as Burroughs belongs to the crazy world of Ufology the mainstream media won't touch it. So far they haven't.



ETA : Also there was a UK scientist working on plasma physics project in the Rendlesham area in late 1980 which I consider to be of significance.....



Clipping taken from UFO Matrix Magazine Vol 1 Issue 3.

I just want to point something out regarding the radiation exposure. The press release states:

despite having been exposed to UAP radiation as postulated by the UK’s own intelligence report,

But the declassified statement from the intelligence report quoted in the press release reads:

The well-reported Rendlesham Forest/Bentwaters event is an example where it might be postulated that several observers were probably exposed to UAP [Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon] radiation for longer than normal UAP sighting periods.

Not the same thing as actually "postulating."

a reply to: Erno86

Erno - The particular document you referenced is here : MUFON journal Sep 1977 on page 8.

Here is the relevant snippet.



The description of a low level red light from these witness is similar to that of the witnesses on the 3rd night at Rendlesham. Although strange blue lights were also seen as well at Rendlesham. Can you expand any more on this information?

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: Pirvonen

a reply to: data5091

It is important to not confuse any of this statement with confirmation of an extra-terrestrial presence on earth. As far as the DoD are concerned I have not seen any statement by them. Burroughs is confirming that the DoD accept something happened to him whilst serving his country.

However the UAP could well be a 'natural phenomenon' that is is still not understood and affects human beings.

Yes. Agreed.

Vallee for example goes over Rendlesham in some detail in his book "Revelations"
where he makes a very good case that the entire things was a government-designed
hoax to presumably test human psychology or to generate "High Strangeness".

For example, supposedly the military ordered troops to standby for some hours
with video cameras/tv cameras in an exact spot where the UAP
(Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon) was spotted (on Schedule).

There is also a credible story from a fellow named Andrew Pike (a British Physicist)
who was researching UAP Phenomenon in the local area.

So in short, it is highly likely that there was no 'ET' or 'ETH' anything involved
here.

So nothing was 'proven' here in any way.

But do read "Revelations" by Vallee if you haven't.

Kev

Good to read that. More official documents on these matters are always good.

a reply to: mirageman

In terms of your physicist conducting plasma experiments, allegedly, the implication would be that the injuries could have been caused by those experiments, hence the cover up. I'm confused about the injuries though, the 'shredding', can plasmas be inhaled or ingested? Enter his blood stream? How did 'it' cause his anterior mitral valve to be 'badly shredded'?

I realise no one is going to have a definitive answer but I'd love to hears some ideas. Was there more damage to him physically that I am currently unaware of? Any help would be grand, thanks.

originally posted by: DelMarvel


The idea that there is a bot that would somehow add just four stars to just one post but not to any other posts that make the same or similar points seems ridiculous to me.

Except my post didn't imply that bots were being used on this site:

originally posted by: TrueMessiah
Can't speak on what's happening here

originally posted by: Anaana
a reply to: mirageman

In terms of your physicist conducting plasma experiments, allegedly, the implication would be that the injuries could have been caused by those experiments, hence the cover up. I'm confused about the injuries though, the 'shredding', can plasmas be inhaled or ingested? Enter his blood stream? How did 'it' cause his anterior mitral valve to be 'badly shredded'?

I realise no one is going to have a definitive answer but I'd love to hears some ideas. Was there more damage to him physically that I am currently unaware of? Any help would be grand, thanks.

Andrew Pike was the scientist involved but he was only 'observing' the phenomena not creating it as far as I understand.

He arrived in the area late on the 29th December 1980. This is after the first night of events on the 25th/26th December in which John Burroughs was involved (note also that no radiation readings were taken on this night). It was also almost 24 hours shortly after the final night (28th/29th Dec) when Colonel Halt took a team out into the forest to investigate further strange lights in the forest. John Burroughs arrived in the early hours of that morning and was technically off-duty when he reached the forest by the way.

Andrew Pike had nothing to do with causing the incident. However, if as John Burroughs claims, his heart condition was caused by his involvement in this incident then I would also like to understand how and am just as confused as you.

a reply to: mirageman

Thanks, that summary really helped me to frame the situation a lot better.

In terms of what actually happened to Burroughs do we know when in relation to exposure he received treatment? Was he left in a life threatening condition or did his condition become life threatening over time as a result of the exposure?

Sorry to be lazy, but I am struggling to find specifics and was hoping for pointers in the right direction. Cheers.

originally posted by: Pirvonen
a reply to: mirageman

An excellent find, and an important step.

However, the existence of unrecognized aerial phenomena still does not confirm either the breakaway hypothesis or the extraterrestrials. More poking is needed to get out the information on what the UFOs are.

The true believers will, of course, ignore that.

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: Bybyots

The issue seems to me is that there nothing there (from Condign) which intimates that the human heart could be damaged by UAP radiation. The big mystery is why Burroughs' medical records remain 'classified'.

Is there any verification that they are classified or is there merely a claim made by Burroughs?

a reply to: Tangerine

Is there any reason that anyone's medical records would be made public?

a reply to: Phage

I think the issue was that they were classified and inaccessible to Burrough's himself. I am wondering if part of his settlement included a none disclosure about the extent or nature of his injuries. Unless he says elsewhere more about it, I am not sure why he wouldn't, he doesn't seem overly shy about it in general.