'Skeptics' Ridiculous Explanations Of The Rendlesham Forest Events

a reply to: Ernestc

Been interested in the Rendlesham UFO for decades , I remember the excitement of downloading Lt Col Charles Halt's audio recording of the incident on a dial up connection , after years of research including ATS threads from knowledgeable members my conclusion is the Lighthouse mixed with the base Christmas festivities are most likely the explanation not Aliens.

Opinions may vary.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1


Hilarious. I seem to recall one of his videos did say that, then loads more sprouted up and now the latest in-between Burroughs is his stuff with Jack Sarfatti. You could join patreon and pay X amount per month for whatever treats he is offering. I'm keeping quiet, sometimes it's best to be like that wise old owl.😉

Before I leave. Here is Simon's latest.

youtu.be...

a reply to: gortex

Opinions may vary.

They do. But there is only so many horses to flog.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Ernestc

Been interested in the Rendlesham UFO for decades , I remember the excitement of downloading Lt Col Charles Halt's audio recording of the incident on a dial up connection , after years of research including ATS threads from knowledgeable members my conclusion is the Lighthouse mixed with the base Christmas festivities are most likely the explanation not Aliens.

Opinions may vary.

The reason I don't think it's the lighthouse and lights from the Christmas festivities it's because it happened only for a few days in 1980. If the lighthouse was so confusing and created different light effects then others prior and after the alleged events should have given us similar reports. I can't find anything allegedly happen before or after these events.

a reply to: Ernestc
I recall seeing a film of the actual lighthouse (For the life of me I cannot find it) and it perfectly shows any silly idea that it was the lighthouse as it had a light shield to stop the light going landward. But these debunkers like to omit that bit of information.

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: Ernestc
I recall seeing a film of the actual lighthouse (For the life of me I cannot find it) and it perfectly shows any silly idea that it was the lighthouse as it had a light shield to stop the light going landward. But these debunkers like to omit that bit of information.

I wouldn't bother so much for the lighthouse explanation because I think it's just ridiculous some adults in sensitive positions to confuse the lights from the lighthouse believing they are UFOs.

I’ve heard the lighthouse explanation several times. Seriously doesn’t hold water when you take the eyewitness accounts into consideration.

originally posted by: ARM19688
I’ve heard the lighthouse explanation several times. Seriously doesn’t hold water when you take the eyewitness accounts into consideration.

An attempt to explain away (not explain) the alleged sightings. The debunkers don't even consider other plausible explanations like the staff members lying and fabricating the entire story but they seem to be going for the least probable explanation. On the top of it other explanations have been thrown, mars, jupiter, mass hallucinations.

originally posted by: Ernestc
The reason I don't think it's the lighthouse and lights from the Christmas festivities it's because it happened only for a few days in 1980. If the lighthouse was so confusing and created different light effects then others prior and after the alleged events should have given us similar reports. I can't find anything allegedly happen before or after these events.

You apparently know next to nothing about the case and haven't read the detailed research in the threads here on ATS about it.

You should read the threads for details. But to summarize a very complex case, something unusual did happen. There were unusual lights in the sky. Those didn't happen every night, which is why they didn't ordinarily leave the base like they did during the RFI. What were the unusual lights? Explained here:

The 3am fireball-How it all started

British Astronomical Association Meteor Section Newsletter no. 4 dated 1981 February contains a brief report on the fireball that apparently sparked the Rendlesham Forest UFO incident. The BAA report notes that this fireball was seen at 02.50 UT (± 5 minutes) on Boxing Day 1980 by four witnesses, locations not given but seemingly in southern England, all of whom estimated its brightness as comparable to the gibbous (i.e. three-quarter) Moon and of 3 to 4 seconds duration. In that bare information lies the genesis of one of the most celebrated UFO cases of all time.

...the security guards thought that something had come down, so they went out into the forest expecting to find it.

So, they didn't normally go out to investigate fallen objects because such a bolide making them think there was a fallen object was rather unusual. That's also why they were unfamiliar with the lighthouse.

When you read the witness statements like John Burrough's statement, he basically said they went to investigate, saw an unusual light, didn't know what it was, kept walking toward it, and eventually saw a rotating beacon (the lighthouse). So only a complete idiot could read Burrough's witness statement explicitly saying he followed the light and ended up seeing the lighthouse would say the lighthouse had nothing to do with it. Not only that, but if you listen to Col Halt's recording, on another night, the light flashed at exactly the same 5 second interval as the lighthouse. Again, only a complete idiot would rule out the lighthouse with such compelling evidence as that recording showing the frequency of the flashing light exactly matched the lighthouse.

Now does the lighthouse explain everything? Of couse not, and only someone who hasn't researched the case would think that was supposed to be an encompassing explanation. It doesn't explain the bolide that started the whole thing and it doesn't mention other lights they saw that the lighthouse can't explain, such as the "star-like objects" that were probably just stars. I would say nobody has a perfect understanding of the case, because some of the lights they saw are not fully explained, but to claim the lighthouse wasn't involved to at least some degree is the epitome of ignorance or ignoring very strong evidence it was involved to at least some degree.

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: Ernestc
I recall seeing a film of the actual lighthouse (For the life of me I cannot find it) and it perfectly shows any silly idea that it was the lighthouse as it had a light shield to stop the light going landward. But these debunkers like to omit that bit of information.

UFO hunters had an episode making that bogus claim, which I'm sure is not the only place you could see it. Not only is the claim not ignored by skeptics, they go into great detail about the shield to show that it blocked the light from reaching the town. They also show the lighthouse light couldn't be seen from the east gate, which is why the security guards stationed there were unfamiliar with it. It wasn't until they left the base and started walking to where they thought the object had fallen, that they eventually saw the lighthouse light in a place where it was not blocked by the shield.

Here's a photo showing the shield blocking light going to the left, but the shield does not block light from this viewing angle which is why the airmen saw it:

Visibility of the Orfordness lighthouse

Above is a super-telephoto view of the top of the Orfordness lighthouse peeking through a notch between trees on the skyline, as seen from the eastern edge of Rendlesham Forest where the flashing UFO was sighted.... Shielding on the lighthouse windows blocked the light from the town of Orford (to the left in this picture), but as this picture shows there was an almost direct line of sight from the lamp towards the forest.

So yes there's a shield, but as you can see it blocked the light to the left, but not from the location where the airmen saw the lighthouse.

originally posted by: Ernestc

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: Ernestc
Mass Hallucinations

Hypnosis over a few patsies would be my first guess, coupled with evidence gathered after the event by those responsible for it to create the realistic scenario.

I feel sorry for those who still suffer the effects all these years later.

And "Professor Simon" is a bit of an attention seeker who loves his clickbait. He was on ATS but got banned for posting in a rediculous fashion I think. Shame, seems like a nice enough guy but has some very crazy concepts even for here.

When was that?
Didn't know this guy was an ATS member.

Realistically speaking all these explanations given by 'skeptics' are way too ridiculous and my opinion is the people at the base were not stupid or naive to confuse unexplained events with Mars, Jupiter, and the lighthouse.

I can't say what happened back then but there are two scenarios in my mind, either these events are true or fabricated.

You keep bitching about skeptics' explanations yet you don't provide any skeptics' criticizing comments and your opinion is not based on direct knowledge, it is based on your belief system.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Great post that really addresses the issue!

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: Ernestc
The reason I don't think it's the lighthouse and lights from the Christmas festivities it's because it happened only for a few days in 1980. If the lighthouse was so confusing and created different light effects then others prior and after the alleged events should have given us similar reports. I can't find anything allegedly happen before or after these events.

You apparently know next to nothing about the case and haven't read the detailed research in the threads here on ATS about it.

You should read the threads for details. But to summarize a very complex case, something unusual did happen. There were unusual lights in the sky. Those didn't happen every night, which is why they didn't ordinarily leave the base like they did during the RFI. What were the unusual lights? Explained here:

The 3am fireball-How it all started

British Astronomical Association Meteor Section Newsletter no. 4 dated 1981 February contains a brief report on the fireball that apparently sparked the Rendlesham Forest UFO incident. The BAA report notes that this fireball was seen at 02.50 UT (± 5 minutes) on Boxing Day 1980 by four witnesses, locations not given but seemingly in southern England, all of whom estimated its brightness as comparable to the gibbous (i.e. three-quarter) Moon and of 3 to 4 seconds duration. In that bare information lies the genesis of one of the most celebrated UFO cases of all time.

...the security guards thought that something had come down, so they went out into the forest expecting to find it.

So, they didn't normally go out to investigate fallen objects because such a bolide making them think there was a fallen object was rather unusual. That's also why they were unfamiliar with the lighthouse.

When you read the witness statements like John Burrough's statement, he basically said they went to investigate, saw an unusual light, didn't know what it was, kept walking toward it, and eventually saw a rotating beacon (the lighthouse). So only a complete idiot could read Burrough's witness statement explicitly saying he followed the light and ended up seeing the lighthouse would say the lighthouse had nothing to do with it. Not only that, but if you listen to Col Halt's recording, on another night, the light flashed at exactly the same 5 second interval as the lighthouse. Again, only a complete idiot would rule out the lighthouse with such compelling evidence as that recording showing the frequency of the flashing light exactly matched the lighthouse.

Now does the lighthouse explain everything? Of couse not, and only someone who hasn't researched the case would think that was supposed to be an encompassing explanation. It doesn't explain the bolide that started the whole thing and it doesn't mention other lights they saw that the lighthouse can't explain, such as the "star-like objects" that were probably just stars. I would say nobody has a perfect understanding of the case, because some of the lights they saw are not fully explained, but to claim the lighthouse wasn't involved to at least some degree is the epitome of ignorance or ignoring very strong evidence it was involved to at least some degree.

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: Ernestc
I recall seeing a film of the actual lighthouse (For the life of me I cannot find it) and it perfectly shows any silly idea that it was the lighthouse as it had a light shield to stop the light going landward. But these debunkers like to omit that bit of information.

UFO hunters had an episode making that bogus claim, which I'm sure is not the only place you could see it. Not only is the claim not ignored by skeptics, they go into great detail about the shield to show that it blocked the light from reaching the town. They also show the lighthouse light couldn't be seen from the east gate, which is why the security guards stationed there were unfamiliar with it. It wasn't until they left the base and started walking to where they thought the object had fallen, that they eventually saw the lighthouse light in a place where it was not blocked by the shield.

Here's a photo showing the shield blocking light going to the left, but the shield does not block light from this viewing angle which is why the airmen saw it:

Visibility of the Orfordness lighthouse

Above is a super-telephoto view of the top of the Orfordness lighthouse peeking through a notch between trees on the skyline, as seen from the eastern edge of Rendlesham Forest where the flashing UFO was sighted.... Shielding on the lighthouse windows blocked the light from the town of Orford (to the left in this picture), but as this picture shows there was an almost direct line of sight from the lamp towards the forest.

So yes there's a shield, but as you can see it blocked the light to the left, but not from the location where the airmen saw the lighthouse.

Are you trying to tell me the lighthouse was involved in the Rendlesham Forest incident or incidents?

You apparently know next to nothing about the case and haven't read the detailed research in the threads here on ATS about it or elsewhere online.

Lighthouses don't have magical and supernatural powers. Same can be said about swamp gas, planets Mars and Jupiter, and whatever other explanation was offered by the debunkers and 'skeptics'.

originally posted by: EduardoLopez

originally posted by: Ernestc

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: Ernestc
Mass Hallucinations

Hypnosis over a few patsies would be my first guess, coupled with evidence gathered after the event by those responsible for it to create the realistic scenario.

I feel sorry for those who still suffer the effects all these years later.

And "Professor Simon" is a bit of an attention seeker who loves his clickbait. He was on ATS but got banned for posting in a rediculous fashion I think. Shame, seems like a nice enough guy but has some very crazy concepts even for here.

When was that?
Didn't know this guy was an ATS member.

Realistically speaking all these explanations given by 'skeptics' are way too ridiculous and my opinion is the people at the base were not stupid or naive to confuse unexplained events with Mars, Jupiter, and the lighthouse.

I can't say what happened back then but there are two scenarios in my mind, either these events are true or fabricated.

You keep bitching about skeptics' explanations yet you don't provide any skeptics' criticizing comments and your opinion is not based on direct knowledge, it is based on your belief system.

It's the 'skeptics' who have come up with these ridiculous explanations. Any reasonable person will not even consider the lighthouse and swamp gas or weather balloons and planet Mars. It's just an insult to the intelligence of the people at the base and the readers here.

originally posted by: Ernestc

originally posted by: EduardoLopez

originally posted by: Ernestc

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: Ernestc
Mass Hallucinations

Hypnosis over a few patsies would be my first guess, coupled with evidence gathered after the event by those responsible for it to create the realistic scenario.

I feel sorry for those who still suffer the effects all these years later.

And "Professor Simon" is a bit of an attention seeker who loves his clickbait. He was on ATS but got banned for posting in a rediculous fashion I think. Shame, seems like a nice enough guy but has some very crazy concepts even for here.

When was that?
Didn't know this guy was an ATS member.

Realistically speaking all these explanations given by 'skeptics' are way too ridiculous and my opinion is the people at the base were not stupid or naive to confuse unexplained events with Mars, Jupiter, and the lighthouse.

I can't say what happened back then but there are two scenarios in my mind, either these events are true or fabricated.

You keep bitching about skeptics' explanations yet you don't provide any skeptics' criticizing comments and your opinion is not based on direct knowledge, it is based on your belief system.

It's the 'skeptics' who have come up with these ridiculous explanations. Any reasonable person will not even consider the lighthouse and swamp gas or weather balloons and planet Mars. It's just an insult to the intelligence of the people at the base and the readers here.

I haven't heard of swamp gas, weather balloons or the planet Mars mentioned in this thread or regarding Rendlesham. That's all coming from you.

Arbitrageur addressed some points and the lighthouse but somehow you don't like that. It is reasonable to consider the lighthouse as the source, in fact it probably is.

a reply to: midicon


This thread is ridiculous. I'm surprised Arbi even commented.

Have fun.😎

originally posted by: baablacksheep1
a reply to: midicon


This thread is ridiculous. I'm surprised Arbi even commented.

Have fun.😎

I'm glad he did and you are right, it's a nonsense thread.

originally posted by: midicon

originally posted by: Ernestc

originally posted by: EduardoLopez

originally posted by: Ernestc

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: Ernestc
Mass Hallucinations

Hypnosis over a few patsies would be my first guess, coupled with evidence gathered after the event by those responsible for it to create the realistic scenario.

I feel sorry for those who still suffer the effects all these years later.

And "Professor Simon" is a bit of an attention seeker who loves his clickbait. He was on ATS but got banned for posting in a rediculous fashion I think. Shame, seems like a nice enough guy but has some very crazy concepts even for here.

When was that?
Didn't know this guy was an ATS member.

Realistically speaking all these explanations given by 'skeptics' are way too ridiculous and my opinion is the people at the base were not stupid or naive to confuse unexplained events with Mars, Jupiter, and the lighthouse.

I can't say what happened back then but there are two scenarios in my mind, either these events are true or fabricated.

You keep bitching about skeptics' explanations yet you don't provide any skeptics' criticizing comments and your opinion is not based on direct knowledge, it is based on your belief system.

It's the 'skeptics' who have come up with these ridiculous explanations. Any reasonable person will not even consider the lighthouse and swamp gas or weather balloons and planet Mars. It's just an insult to the intelligence of the people at the base and the readers here.

I haven't heard of swamp gas, weather balloons or the planet Mars mentioned in this thread or regarding Rendlesham. That's all coming from you.

Arbitrageur addressed some points and the lighthouse but somehow you don't like that. It is reasonable to consider the lighthouse as the source, in fact it probably is.

I ve seen the comments but I don't agree it has anything to do with the lighthouse.

Mass hallucinations was proposed as a way to explain the alleged events and it's somehow connected to UFO sightings in the past.

stock.adobe.com...

originally posted by: midicon

originally posted by: baablacksheep1
a reply to: midicon


This thread is ridiculous. I'm surprised Arbi even commented.

Have fun.😎

I'm glad he did and you are right, it's a nonsense thread.

Why is the thread ridiculous?
Do you want to censor it?!

I ve explained my views and I find the explanations of the alleged events to be ridiculous.

It's ok to disagree.

originally posted by: midicon

originally posted by: Ernestc

originally posted by: EduardoLopez

originally posted by: Ernestc

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: Ernestc
Mass Hallucinations

Hypnosis over a few patsies would be my first guess, coupled with evidence gathered after the event by those responsible for it to create the realistic scenario.

I feel sorry for those who still suffer the effects all these years later.

And "Professor Simon" is a bit of an attention seeker who loves his clickbait. He was on ATS but got banned for posting in a rediculous fashion I think. Shame, seems like a nice enough guy but has some very crazy concepts even for here.

When was that?
Didn't know this guy was an ATS member.

Realistically speaking all these explanations given by 'skeptics' are way too ridiculous and my opinion is the people at the base were not stupid or naive to confuse unexplained events with Mars, Jupiter, and the lighthouse.

I can't say what happened back then but there are two scenarios in my mind, either these events are true or fabricated.

You keep bitching about skeptics' explanations yet you don't provide any skeptics' criticizing comments and your opinion is not based on direct knowledge, it is based on your belief system.

It's the 'skeptics' who have come up with these ridiculous explanations. Any reasonable person will not even consider the lighthouse and swamp gas or weather balloons and planet Mars. It's just an insult to the intelligence of the people at the base and the readers here.

I haven't heard of swamp gas, weather balloons or the planet Mars mentioned in this thread or regarding Rendlesham. That's all coming from you.

Arbitrageur addressed some points and the lighthouse but somehow you don't like that. It is reasonable to consider the lighthouse as the source, in fact it probably is.

I ve mentioned all these 'potential' explanations from what I ve read over the years on the topic. Don't tell me you haven't come across any of them and it's only the lighthouse explanation you ve heard of. There could be even more from the ones I ve mentioned.

originally posted by: Ernestc

originally posted by: midicon

originally posted by: Ernestc

originally posted by: EduardoLopez

originally posted by: Ernestc

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: Ernestc
Mass Hallucinations

Hypnosis over a few patsies would be my first guess, coupled with evidence gathered after the event by those responsible for it to create the realistic scenario.

I feel sorry for those who still suffer the effects all these years later.

And "Professor Simon" is a bit of an attention seeker who loves his clickbait. He was on ATS but got banned for posting in a rediculous fashion I think. Shame, seems like a nice enough guy but has some very crazy concepts even for here.

When was that?
Didn't know this guy was an ATS member.

Realistically speaking all these explanations given by 'skeptics' are way too ridiculous and my opinion is the people at the base were not stupid or naive to confuse unexplained events with Mars, Jupiter, and the lighthouse.

I can't say what happened back then but there are two scenarios in my mind, either these events are true or fabricated.

You keep bitching about skeptics' explanations yet you don't provide any skeptics' criticizing comments and your opinion is not based on direct knowledge, it is based on your belief system.

It's the 'skeptics' who have come up with these ridiculous explanations. Any reasonable person will not even consider the lighthouse and swamp gas or weather balloons and planet Mars. It's just an insult to the intelligence of the people at the base and the readers here.

I haven't heard of swamp gas, weather balloons or the planet Mars mentioned in this thread or regarding Rendlesham. That's all coming from you.

Arbitrageur addressed some points and the lighthouse but somehow you don't like that. It is reasonable to consider the lighthouse as the source, in fact it probably is.

I ve mentioned all these 'potential' explanations from what I ve read over the years on the topic. Don't tell me you haven't come across any of them and it's only the lighthouse explanation you ve heard of. There could be even more from the ones I ve mentioned.

There are many ridiculous claims made regarding UFOs. I don't think your list applies to the Rendlesham affair. There is nothing ridiculous about the 'lighthouse' explanation, for some of what went down. It's ridiculous to ignore it.

I have no idea why you would think I'd want to censor a thread.

Anyway I'll leave you to it.