Oh no, not another Rendlesham Thread.

reply to post by DrunkYogi

So one night it was a Meteor and another night it was the Lighthouse and i will take a guess here i bet the third night was drum rollllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllCrash....................Swamp Gas.......Yeah...........

Think about what you are saying mate!

I thought about and people do tend to tie unrelated events together. That's what people do. That's how really good movies are made, you know, really good editing.

Wow! did anyone tell Gary Heseltine that he wasn't making the movie there and then!

Heseltine's presentation is probably longer than the movie itself!

There are certainly fascinating nuggets of new information being presented, such as the lady officer's experience with the light entering her car...........but Heseltine's presentation is so dry, it loses the attention when you get about halfway though.

I use to be a bit like that, i.e made serious presentations....... whilst I thought I was doing a fine job of presenting the topic at hand..........I am forever grateful to my former boss, who suggested I inject some humour into my speeches........... and I am glad I did.........my presentations got much better and a whole lot easier too.

Sadly my father died earlier this year, so I made a speech at the funeral, lots of people later came up to me and remarked how good my speech was, especially as I made sure to add some humor to it.

So Heseltine..........If your reading this........I will give you the same advise as my boss gave me all those years ago........."Inject some humour into your presentations!"

Originally posted by aardhaggis
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

Thanks for the response but you haven't really answered my questions.

Why if the incident or at least part of it was the lighthouse can it not be replicated on video? Should be really easy to do.

Why weren't the base personnel out every clear night being fooled by the lighthouse? It doesn't add up unless it wasn't the lighthouse.

What is it that can't be replicated on video? You can only replicate an existing video of the event. If you are saying that someone's memory of their perceptions can't be replicated on video, you are right.

The only person that could be fooled by the lighthouse twice would be George Bush... You know, fool me once shame on... You. Fool me twice... I won't get fooled again.

reply to post by jonnywhite


"Obviously, saying it was a lighthouse is not near as fun as saying it was aliens"

Eh!!! What a comment, this was a nuclear base for god sake. Do you think these guy's would have made that up to save face or for a laugh! .............jeeeeeeeeeeeeeez.


Admiral Peter Hill-Norton commented, "Either large numbers of people were hallucinating, and for an American Air Force nuclear base this is extremely dangerous, or what they say happened did happen, and in either of those circumstances there can only be one answer, and that is that it was of extreme defence interest."

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by ZetaRediculian


What he is saying is that the light house had been there for a long period of time prior to the event. Why is it that only on THOSE three nights that the lighthouse was mistaken for a possible crash in the woods? Logic would say that any group of airmen standing watch around that base would have at some time seen the lighthouse off in the woods and asked "whats that?" at which point an old salt non-com would have told him "Just a light house kid, we see it all the time". What was special about this particular time frame that transformed the lighthouse into something so unfamiliar to these men that they mistook it for a moving object in the woods?

While searching for some information on my "White Whale", the Cash-Landrum case, I found that Major Ed Dames had already solved it and Rendlesham!

The carbon dioxide that is present in Mars today is due to microbes– the only current life form on the planet, he said, aside from what he called “sentient machines or robots” that stayed behind after the loss of the Martian civilization. According to remote viewers, the Russian Phobos II spacecraft was destroyed by one of these robots, which took on the form of a spacecraft. The sentient machines control via an underground command center– “they are the ones who create the crop circles on Earth…they are the ones responsible for the Rendlesham Forest Incident, for the Cash-Landrum radiation incident,” Dames announced.

Remote Viewer Major Ed Dames solves the UFO mystery
I just realized linking to the source site may be verboten, but still, whoa!

Originally posted by Dragoon01

What he is saying is that the light house had been there for a long period of time prior to the event. Why is it that only on THOSE three nights that the lighthouse was mistaken for a possible crash in the woods? Logic would say that any group of airmen standing watch around that base would have at some time seen the lighthouse off in the woods and asked "whats that?" at which point an old salt non-com would have told him "Just a light house kid, we see it all the time". What was special about this particular time frame that transformed the lighthouse into something so unfamiliar to these men that they mistook it for a moving object in the woods?

Whilst the point is a valid one, the light house light cannot be seen at all vantage points, and it is only certain areas in the wood that it can be seen on.

Now Burrows and Pennington themselves said they originally pursued the mystery light........only to find that it was the lighthouse.........so to a certain extent the lighthouse can indeed confuse even those stationed at the base.

Whilst I am not saying the lighthouse was the definite cause of all the lights, it certainly had the capacity to confuse those pursuing the lights..........even Colonel Halt later admitted that he had got the location of the lighthouse wrong when he was in the woods, now Colonel Halt is not saying that the "UFO" was the lighthouse.......but he is saying that the light that he originally assumed was the lighthouse was not, and it was more likely to have been a boat light off the coast.

Thanks for this Firemoon I will have to watch this when I have a couple of hours spare. Heseltine is fairly credible in my opinion although a movie of the events at Rendlesham may simply muddy the waters even more. Artistic licence is often taken.

I have to admit it's one case I have continually looked for updates on since I saw the "UFO lands in Suffolk and that's official" headline delivering the newspapers one crisp autumn morning in 1983. I have over the years found a number of common mis-conceptions and also many contradictions in the story.

Here's my basic understanding of the case now (although I may too be mistaken and have to revise it?).

Night and early morning of Dec 25th-26th 1980 - After lights seen descending into nearby Rendlesham forest 3 USAF personnel go off base and into UK sovereign territory fearing an air crash. John Burroughs, Jim Penniston and Ed Cabansag witnessed lights in the woods surrounding the Bentwaters/Woodbridge bases. All mention seeing BLUE lights in their statements. Burroughs reports realising they were eventually chasing the lighthouse at Orford Ness. Without saying this was the intial reason for the sightings.

Penniston (spanned out over the last 20 years) claims to have made notes, seen a dark, glasslike covered craft with glyph markings and received a "binary" download after touching it. He also claims to have taken photos that came out blurred after a 45 min investigation. Burroughs remembers nothing of this but agrees that lights were seen in the forest, animals were disturbed and eventually they hit the ground as the lights shot away from them.

Cabansag's statement says they first discovered the lights were a farmhouse and they then thought the lights were beyond the forest. Although the statement also includes a comment about it being "...a cleaned up statement".

There is also hard proof that on the same night/morning that the Russian Cosmos rocket descended over the English Channel and burned up around 21:08pm followed by 3 shooting stars. At 2:45am on Boxing Day morning a bright comet/shooting star also lit up the night sky over Southern England. For years radar confirmation was often quoted but never proven until Nigel Kerr confirmed he saw three blips over Rendlesham whilst on duty on Christmas night. The reading then disappeared.

The following morning - 26th Dec 1980, Jim Penniston made plaster casts of three round indentations at the landing site whilst off duty. British police also visited the site after originally being diverted from a call in the early hours due to a break in. Although they were somewhat unimpressed by the site they were taken to. On the evening of Boxing Day 26th Dec 1980 a female shift commander was sent out into Rendlesham Forest after more lights were seen and a blue light "flew" through her vehicle as it stalled. She was sent home in a state of shock. Later in the night more lights were seen dropping into the forest and what appeared to be a fire. Again a patrol and lightalls were sent off base (again into Sovereign UK territory). Col. Halt was alerted and began a search himself. His team found (often contested) radiation readings and broken tree branches at a possible landing site. Then they followed a glowing object manoeuvring through the forest, at times appearing to drip something like molten metal and then split into glowing balls of light into the sky.

Halt also witnessed a beam of light shining down onto the weapon storage area and other places on the base. At around 3:00am John Burroughs (although off duty) arrives and also witnesses the lights and strange blue lights passing by the lightalls and vehicles.



Eventually though by 4:00am without ever once calling for air cover or an alert of any sort Halt calls the search off and returns to base. I am unsure of the protocols involved about friendly US troops operating off base in UK territory and the permissions required. But it seems even before the situation was reported to Halt the USAF had decided to open the gates once again and go wandering around the forest.

Oh and Larry Warren saw aliens !

I no longer know what to make of it all. I think there is a story to Rendlesham but it may not be the one that was first reported in 1983 in the News of the World.

reply to post by Dragoon01


I understand your point but its all speculation. What they should have seen and what they shouldn't have seen. The short answer would be that they expected to "see" something. That's how perception works I didn't make that up.

Anyone if they study the facts about this case knows these UFOs cannot be government technology and some kind of ET thing is real but who knows what to think about an ET phenomenon.The idea that they are not threatening in any way seems way to early to say that.They may have purposes of spying on nuclear bombs for other reasons to just check up on things.Might be some kind of good and evil spiritual forces of some kind.Whenever these UFO shows present these ETs or whatever they are as some kind of alien race warning us to stop wars and warning us about the planet I get a creepy feeling about the people who turn them into some kind of savoir or something to the planet.Like feels like they are turning a possible ET phenomenon into some kind of giant cult like following that they have come to help mankind.

Originally posted by FireMoon
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

Heseltine has personally interviewed everyone who will talk to him from the case, meanwhile you rely on something posted on-line. Typical double standards, then again, you're happy to believe that mirages can manoeuvre round a jet flying at 350 MPH so I guess you'll believe any old tosh.

I don't necessarily agree with Heseltine's conclusions on the origin of the objects, as the honourable member for Down the Warren, The Gut has alluded to, I have my own take on events. Be that as it may, Heseltine is so far, the only person to have collected everything together and presented it as whole and who, has first hand knowledge of operational procedures on a base containing nuclear ammunition.

Where I am in total accordance with Heseltine is over his issue with every documentary that seeks to use illustrations that are often wholly unlike those described by witnesses It is not just the Rendlesham case, this is done with rather, any number of pro or anti UFO documentaries. .

Yep, I see what you are saying here, FireMoon. I also applaud your continued slam-dunk to totally debunk the alleged lighthouse debunking.

I also happen to know that you have, and have had for many years, by nature of the entertainment industry and your interest in ufology and related subjects, longtime friends and acquaintances all over the British ufological field. Anyone who carelessly disregards your assertions and research do so at the peril to their own knowledge.

One thing seems to be without doubt: Something WEIRD happened out there in them there woods.

reply to post by CardDown


Ha! Ed Dames cracks me up. Ancient robots that live underground on Mars fly all the way to Earth to make fancy designs in corn fields and leak toxic junk on people.

That quote comes from an episode of Coast to Coast AM.

www.coasttocoastam.com...

www.youtube.com...

It's about 54:30 in the YouTube link.

Finally finished watching it.
Thanks again

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

And how do you figure the eyewitness statements say they followed the lights and ended up finally identifying lights coming from the lighthouse when they got close enough to make a positive id on the source?

edit on 16-7-2013 by Arbitrageur because: clarification

The way I read it in the witness statements.

They followed red and blue lights that appeared to be moving.

Then they saw another light that they positively identified as the lighthouse.

Different lights.

What was seen by others at the time and on other nights, through night vision scopes and the like, is unclear (although the light referred to on the Halt audio tape does appear to be the lighthouse) but it does seem pretty clear cut that on at least one occasion unusual lights were seen that were definitely not the lighthouse.

Originally posted by chunder

The way I read it in the witness statements.

They followed red and blue lights that appeared to be moving.

Then they saw another light that they positively identified as the lighthouse.

Different lights.

What was seen by others at the time and on other nights, through night vision scopes and the like, is unclear (although the light referred to on the Halt audio tape does appear to be the lighthouse) but it does seem pretty clear cut that on at least one occasion unusual lights were seen that were definitely not the lighthouse.

I watched an interview with Burrows who said that they did follow one light for a while..........and that light did turn out to be the lighthouse............so for a while at least they DID misidentify the lighthouse as one of the mysterious lights.

I myself think many seemed to have overlooked, what today is fairly common place..........Chinese Lanterns.
Now sure Chinese lanterns don't explain all the claimed descriptions of the lights but I have often thought that the time of year Christmas might be a clue.

Now some will argue that Chinese Lanterns are only a recent phenomena, now whilst I agree the amount of Chinese Lanterns being released into the night sky has exploded in the last 5 years or so......... there was still a size able Chinese community in 80's Britain.
So it follows that Celebratory Chinese lanterns could well have been released between the Christmas and New Year and those lanterns could have appeared over Rendlesham.

Colonel Halt describes the lights as having "dripping molten metal"...........and that could well be accounted for by dripping wax off a lantern...........indeed the recent "Fact or Faked" program managed to show that a Chinese Lantern's dripping candle wax can appear as if it was dripping molten metal.

Whilst I am not claiming that Chinese Lanterns explain everything that happened at Rendlesham.......I certainly think a good case can be made that they may have played their part into some of the sightings at Rendlesham at Christmas time.

The Rendlesham forest incident is painfully known - at least the public information about it, so this does bring something else. I can check this video later.

However, I am somehow when it comes to getting some binary code that even says 'exploration humanity' - has this case been stretched a little bit and decorated with such fancy stories?

Originally posted by Logical one

Originally posted by chunder

The way I read it in the witness statements.

They followed red and blue lights that appeared to be moving.

Then they saw another light that they positively identified as the lighthouse.

Different lights.

What was seen by others at the time and on other nights, through night vision scopes and the like, is unclear (although the light referred to on the Halt audio tape does appear to be the lighthouse) but it does seem pretty clear cut that on at least one occasion unusual lights were seen that were definitely not the lighthouse.

I watched an interview with Burrows who said that they did follow one light for a while..........and that light did turn out to be the lighthouse............so for a while at least they DID misidentify the lighthouse as one of the mysterious lights.

I myself think many seemed to have overlooked, what today is fairly common place..........Chinese Lanterns.
Now sure Chinese lanterns don't explain all the claimed descriptions of the lights but I have often thought that the time of year Christmas might be a clue.

Now some will argue that Chinese Lanterns are only a recent phenomena, now whilst I agree the amount of Chinese Lanterns being released into the night sky has exploded in the last 5 years or so......... there was still a size able Chinese community in 80's Britain.
So it follows that Celebratory Chinese lanterns could well have been released between the Christmas and New Year and those lanterns could have appeared over Rendlesham.

Colonel Halt describes the lights as having "dripping molten metal"...........and that could well be accounted for by dripping wax off a lantern...........indeed the recent "Fact or Faked" program managed to show that a Chinese Lantern's dripping candle wax can appear as if it was dripping molten metal.

Whilst I am not claiming that Chinese Lanterns explain everything that happened at Rendlesham.......I certainly think a good case can be made that they may have played their part into some of the sightings at Rendlesham at Christmas time.

edit on 17-7-2013 by Logical one because: (no reason given)

lol...................You must be joking.

Originally posted by Logical one


I myself think many seemed to have overlooked, what today is fairly common place..........Chinese Lanterns.
Now sure Chinese lanterns don't explain all the claimed descriptions of the lights but I have often thought that the time of year Christmas might be a clue.

Now some will argue that Chinese Lanterns are only a recent phenomena, now whilst I agree the amount of Chinese Lanterns being released into the night sky has exploded in the last 5 years or so......... there was still a size able Chinese community in 80's Britain.

This is better than Ridpath's explanation. The Chinese community would of course have been celebrating Christmas. Especially with blue chinese lanterns that explain how all of the witnesses saw blue lights. Don't forget as well that Boxing Day in Britain is also a celebration of the crushing of the Boxer rebellion in the early 1900s. Celebrated by the many of the Chinese community as well. So a special lantern could well have been used equipped with a high powered beam the following night and explains Halt's sighting.

The thing you failed to mention as well is that East Anglia is well known for it's plethora of marsh vapour. Which could be the final part that nails Rendlesham as a solved case.

Yep your explanation was definitely tugging at me just above my ankle.

I wasn't able to watch the video due to work constraints, but could you fill me in on the gist of the new info. Thanks.

Yes I agree! Some sneaky party goer's broke into RAF Rendlesham and set aloft a dozen party lights with extra strong candles inside, and then the officers investigating became so hyped up they hallucinated the craft landing, the shape and texture of it and so did all the other officers there. Thanks for solving this man, case closed!

Originally posted by mirageman

Originally posted by Logical one


I myself think many seemed to have overlooked, what today is fairly common place..........Chinese Lanterns.
Now sure Chinese lanterns don't explain all the claimed descriptions of the lights but I have often thought that the time of year Christmas might be a clue.

Now some will argue that Chinese Lanterns are only a recent phenomena, now whilst I agree the amount of Chinese Lanterns being released into the night sky has exploded in the last 5 years or so......... there was still a size able Chinese community in 80's Britain.

This is better than Ridpath's explanation. The Chinese community would of course have been celebrating Christmas. Especially with blue chinese lanterns that explain how all of the witnesses saw blue lights. Don't forget as well that Boxing Day in Britain is also a celebration of the crushing of the Boxer rebellion in the early 1900s. Celebrated by the many of the Chinese community as well. So a special lantern could well have been used equipped with a high powered beam the following night and explains Halt's sighting.

The thing you failed to mention as well is that East Anglia is well known for it's plethora of marsh vapour. Which could be the final part that nails Rendlesham as a solved case.

Yep your explanation was definitely tugging at me just above my ankle.

edit on 17/7/13 by mirageman because: woops