The "Welsh Triangle" documentary

Been trying to track this particular series of videos down since they were aired on Channel 5 TV in Britain, judging by the number of views and assuming they don;t appear titled differently, I think these might be new to people on here.








This is the documentary that, i think, pretty well explains the Welsh Silver Suited Spaceman as a prank, in all bar one case, the Combes family, which the prankster denies was down to him. Sadly, you also have to sit through Ridpath trotting out the same old factually incorrect bovine waste about Rendlesham as well.

I've added, from the same series "The Berwyn Mountain" incident as well.

Its a real shame all the kids drew things that didnt really fit the description given at the start.

Some have drawn saucers shapes , some cigar and the description was a triangle. Some of the designs had windows while otheres didnt. Plus they added things like space people , legs on the ships and flashing lights. Even the colors were different from picture to picture.

I didnt see any realy similar details other than they were all drawing what they thought looked like a space ship.

Im not saying they didnt see anything but their witness testimony seems a little unreliable and very much tainted by popular scifi.

reply to post by PhoenixOD


At those kids' ages most of them would be hard pushed to draw you a decent circle or a square even with it right in front of them to copy from let alone a car. So I'm not quite sure of the point you are trying to make save, it would have been nice for some budding Leonardo to have been in that particular class.

It would be nice to know exactly how long it was before the "Head" had them all sit down, under exam conditions and draw what they thought they saw in order to ascertain how long the group mentality had to set in. Outside of that, I don;t see any real problems with their pictures. They were kids, they claim they thought they saw a spaceship so each drew partly on their own expectations as to what one should look like, which is what kids do when asked to draw anything even when there is something to copy from.

reply to post by FireMoon


ok they can draw a man in a space suit or a flying saucers quite nicely but you are trying to say they would have difficulty darwing a simple shape like a circle , square or even a triangle? There drawings were not at a preschool level, they could all color inside the lines etc, the kids were 9 years old!

I think you are just being defensive where its not needed.

Quite simply nothing in any of the drawings were simular to each other or matched the verbal description. this kind of is quite odd. These are simple points that should be made when evaluating witness testimony. So there is no 'point' i was making other than going though the motions of trying to weigh up the strength of the evidence they gave.

Did anyone notice that the guy said the the object came up from the ground but the news reader said it came down from the sky? that sort of inconsitancy makes me wonder if all the boys had the same story. But as only one is telling the story to the camera its hard to know for sure at this stage.

Nice docu, FireMoon. You Brits usually do a better job of answering the questions that will form in a viewers mind.

I'm with you on the kid's drawings for a couple of reasons. One being that--as the reporter pointed out--there was a general consistency in the drawings and the other being the possibility of some sort of "electromagnetic" source that slightly skewed the event in the children's minds.

I believe they probably witnessed something strange and possibly something meant just for them, whether anomalous or government testing...or a strange mixture of both.

The main reason I tend to believe the children is that surely, if nothing strange happened, some of the children would have taken the opportunity to call out the others as being crazy or liars. Kids seem to more consistent that way.

Hard to say though, I admit, but I did enjoy the docu and some of the other events too. What were those sounds in Warminster??

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
reply to post by FireMoon

 

ok they can draw a man in a space suit or a flying saucers quite nicely but you are trying to say they would have difficulty darwing a simple shape like a circle , square or even a triangle? There drawings were not at a preschool level, they could all color inside the lines etc, the kids were 9 years old!

I think you are just being defensive where its not needed.

Quite simply nothing in any of the drawings were simular to each other or matched the verbal description. this kind of is quite odd. These are simple points that should be made when evaluating witness testimony. So there is no 'point' i was making other than going though the motions of trying to weigh up the strength of the evidence they gave.

Did anyone notice that the guy said the the object came up from the ground but the news reader said it came down from the sky? that sort of inconsitancy makes me wonder if all the boys had the same story. But as only one is telling the story to the camera its hard to know for sure at this stage.

edit on 25-7-2012 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

You completely ignoring how kid's minds work. Kids seek approval and will give testimony bent towards that they expect their elders to want to hear, be it verbally or via drawing. If there's a spaceship a kid logically thinks, there must be spacemen so i better include them even if i didn't see them simply because that is what you'd expect. .Plus, kids have far more open "one-upmanship", that is, I saw more detail then they did ...I saw spacemen you didn't" ..... It would have been far far weirder and a hell of alot more suspect had they all drawn exactly the same as that would indeed suggest "peer pressure" exerted before they were asked to draw what they saw.

There's nothing defensive about simply pointing out what is, in my opinion, wrong headed logic, based on adult expectations, not those you'd expect of children.

reply to post by FireMoon


So your saying because the story's don't match the pictures and the pictures don't match each other they must have seen what the maker of the documentary would have us believe is a flying saucer? You see that logic just does not add up. Other wise there would be no point in presenting any of the evidence in the first place.

First you were defending them because you said they couldn't get the pics the same because they were to young to draw a circle if it was in front of them and then you say that they can draw better than what they had seen and thats what you would expect in the first place.

Your defense of the story is all over the place and contradictory.

reply to post by PhoenixOD


With the greatest of respect you really haven't a clue what I'm saying do you? Most kids cannot draw with any great natural aptitude at all, even when they copy something they are likely to add things that aren't there and miss things that actually are because children's minds are driven primarily by their own ideas, not controlled and secondly, in this particular case, in order to be seen as being "right" in the eyes of their teacher. This of course sets up a certain paradox whereby kid's interpretations of any given incident, after the fact, are tainted by their own "open mind" and the need to be "accepted" by their elders, in this case their head teacher. In other words, the pictures are perfectly commensurate with normal kids behaviour. .I'm sorry if you can't fathom that one, it doesn't make it any less true.

If, on the other hand, the kids had all drawn virtually the same, given children's psychology then that would reek of the kids being in on a hoax, as kids aren't sophisticated enough to know that when everyone gives exactly the same testimony it's liable to be false or if not false, "coached".

reply to post by FireMoon


I understand perfectly what you are trying to say its just i don't agree with you at all. Also this is the second line of reasoning you have given which totally contradicts the first you gave out. So you obviously really want the story to be true.

At 9 me and my friends could draw pretty decent Death Stars (we all loved starwars) and Xwing and tie fighters. We would never be professional artists but all the pics looked like eachothers.

These are 9 year olds trying to prove what they claimed they saw, there is no incentive to put in extra stuff other than what they described. especially space aliens. Some of the drawings were of the craft on the ground while the story was they saw it briefly in the air behind trees.

Personally i think that because the pics didn't fit the story and the pics didn't even come close to each other then its more likely they are not telling the truth. Story's or presented evidence have to be the same if they are to be taken seriously , its called corroborating evidence or witness testimony. Trying to put forward the idea that the story is correct because the evidence does not match just makes no logical sense no matter how you look at it.

Originally posted by FireMoon

This is the documentary that, i think, pretty well explains the Welsh Silver Suited Spaceman as a prank, in all bar one case, the Combes family, which the prankster denies was down to him.

Firemoon, excellent stuff mate -the documentary has finally been tracked down.

Originally posted by The GUT

What were those sounds in Warminster??

The GUT, have no idea mate but there's some very strange UFO testimony as well.


Old BBC Documentary on the Warminster UFO Flap


Cheers.

reply to post by PhoenixOD


No it doesn't at all, try it this way as you obviously have trouble with the concept.

Teacher... Did you see any lights on the craft?

Pupil No

Teacher then why did you draw them then?

Pupil Well how would it be able to see where it's going in the dark or space?

Teacher Did you see any "aliens"

Pupil No

The why did you draw them then?

Pupil..Well, who else would be flying a spaceship like that?

That's how kid's logic works.

How hard is that to understand and how hard it is to understand that if you look at those pictures they drew, from memory, only one of them has any sort of perspective in it? The one with two trees either side of the ship> Do you know any trees that actually look like the ones the kid drew? No you don't however as there are two brown elongated shapes, with a big green circle on top one assumes they are trees doesn't one? Ergo they are one of the very few pupils who had any idea of perspective and tried to convey the drawing as an actual record of the event in any sort of logical context. The other kids saw what they thought was a spaceship so attempted to draw a spaceship roughly akin to that they remember seeing the rest, as kids will do, they filled in from their own conceptions of what they thought a spaceship should be and what the teacher would expect them to draw.

You , on the other hand, are judging their drawings as if they were adults. giving evidence in some court. it's that sort of crazy thinking that saw several kids taken off their parents in the 1980s in England for "satanic abuse" when the truth was, they'd seen a dodgy copy of "The Evil Dead" round one kid's house when his folks thought they were in the kid's room watching Disney films and then repeated the stories of "this evil hut in the woods" at school.

reply to post by FireMoon


uh you either are making up how you would draw things or you have no clue about how a 9 year-old thinks.
i would expect maybe a 4-5 year-old to do this, but only maybe those who are overly literal minded.
a 9 year-old would draw what they saw, they have developed that part of the brain enough and are old enough to understand the concepts of drawing real world things.
i don't know where you get the idea that 9 year-olds think like that, they are more aware by far than that.

you seem to be judging them on some cartoon view of how children think, the only time that scenario would happen is if they are drawing something imaginary.
which makes sense why they drew what they did, it was imaginary.

reply to post by demongoat


This was the late 1970s, outside of a few tiny ghettos in London and a couple of other big cities it was still the world of Postman Pat and Bagpuss, kids were kids not proto adults whining about the "wrong trainers being sad". It's amazing how the loudest debunkers always seem to understand absolutely chuff all about people.

That not one of the kids could even manage to draw anything like a proper tree outside of a cypher, tells you how "advanced" their grasp of conceptual thinking was.


TextSit down before fact like a little child, and be prepared to give up every preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever and to whatever abyss Nature leads, or you shall learn nothing ~ T. H. Huxley.

reply to post by FireMoon


lol , so now you are trying to say that they were coerced into drawing pictures that dont match the story by the evil headmaster? Even though theres no evidence to suggest this other than what you are making up in your mind. So this is excuse number 3 you have come up with.

But now you are trying 1970 children were retarded in some way and only were interested in things that were marketed to 5yr olds? Now this is your excuse? This makes it the 4rd line of reasoning you have tried to come up with which totally contradicts the first two you have tried to put forward in the defense of this bad evidence. As well of trying to imply that anyone who disagrees with you doesnt have the mental abilities to understand what you are saying or are just evil 'debunkers'

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
Its a real shame all the kids drew things that didnt really fit the description given at the start.

Some have drawn saucers shapes , some cigar and the description was a triangle. Some of the designs had windows while otheres didnt. Plus they added things like space people , legs on the ships and flashing lights. Even the colors were different from picture to picture.

I didnt see any realy similar details other than they were all drawing what they thought looked like a space ship.

Im not saying they didnt see anything but their witness testimony seems a little unreliable and very much tainted by popular scifi.

edit on 25-7-2012 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

Something to think about here, there have been numerous reports of UFOs being able to "morph" into different shapes, an example below which I believe to be genuine:



There's also this, which I'm not sure about as being genuine a UFO (however, it is a weird plane), but for the point in question, "morphing" UFOs are very real imo:



Additionally, anyone interested in Welsh UFOs, might wan't to check out this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by FireMoon
reply to post by PhoenixOD

 

To be perfectly honest, I'm quite happy to leave it that, anyone with a half functioning brain above the level of an amoeba, has worked out who fell out of the idiot tree and hit every branch on the way down, having read this thread.

Yeah after reading your 'headteacher must have told them into drawing things they didnt' see idea which you pulled out of thin air we can certainly agree on that..

reply to post by PhoenixOD


Just what are you blathering on about? Can you actually read English, do you actually understand it? You quite obviously don't have a clue about the case , yet are happy to spout off about it, ie several of the kids said they saw figures, several said they didn't" something you singularly failed to notice.

Have you ever actually interviewed any UFO witnesses, face to face in order to try and work out what happened? I have, quite a few down through the years and to that extent, my speciality was dealing with "the psychology of group sightings". To that extent I often consulted "experts in order to try and understand what was going on and what might lie beneath the surface.

I try to impart that knowledge, I have gathered over 3 decades on here, it is not my problem some people are just totally unable to grasp concepts and flail around making asinine remarks again and again in order to try and climb out of the hole they have dug for themselves with their childish level of understanding about a certain subject.

reply to post by FireMoon


lol your one to "talk about a hole you have dug yourself" after 4 completely contradictory excuses for defending bad evidence. Talk about trying to blindly defend something. If that's all you can come up with after gathering 3 decades of knowledge than feel very sorry for you.

Yeah after reading your 'headteacher must have told them into drawing things they didnt' see idea which you pulled out of thin air we can certainly agree on that..

Show me where I made any such claim or just quit polluting this thread with your totally unfounded remarks, uneducated and totally uninformed analysis of the psychology of hoaxes.

The intellectual paucity of your whole stance is only surpassed by your blinding ego that thinks, you assessing your own ability to draw and extrapolating that to all children, without presenting any evidence you could even hold pencil properly at 9 years old, let alone draw a likeness of anything, actually constitutes a coherent hypothesis.

If you want a stark example of how young people wish to please those in positions of authority, you need look no further than the first case DNA was ever used in in Leicestershire, just down the road from where I live.

2 girls were murdered, the hallmarks of both killings leading the police to suspect the culprit was the same person in both cases. In the second case, they arrested and questioned a young guy who was the last person to claimed to seen the second victim. Within a fairly short time span they had a full confession from the guy that he had murdered the second victim. Convinced that he had killed both they sent his DNA to be the first ever checked by the scientists who developed the technique and guess what? The scientists said 100% impossible he killed either girl. As you might imagine the police really didn't want to believe the scientists however, the scientists persisted. See, that's what you have when an older person in a position of authority interrogates/questions a naive younger person. The younger person often is desperate to be seen to be giving the "right" answers to the extent, in that case, they confessed to murder they knew they hadn't committed. That case was one of those that led to the wholesale change in the way police interviews were conducted

That you think there is any connection between you copying pictures of an object, that were literally 10s of thousands of images of all, over the world for years to the point, probably 70% of the world's current population under 60 could draw it, with a one off incident that lasted a relatively short time shows just you haven't even thought through the most basic of methodology.

So lets consider what you might expect if it was a hoax.

Well these were kids, if it was a hoax you'd expect their drawing to provide convergent evidence in order to support each other's story, not as they did in this case, slightly divergent evidence. If the case was genuine that is exactly what you'd expect, different kids seeing slightly different things and more importantly, remembering it, at a later date differently, which is totally contrary to what you have claimed, which suggests you simply don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Some 30 years later, it would seem only 1 of the kids is willing to go on camera to speak about the incident, and not one, so far, has broken ranks and said. "We faked it" even though, you can bet your bottom dollar the makers of that documentary were looking for exactly that.

That doesn't mean they saw a spaceship and some even saw aliens, what it means is, some 30+ years later it would seem, to a person, they still think they did and that is all.