It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
ZetaRediculian
So the correct scientific methodology would be to mix up all the "testimony" over the course of a series of events, treat it as one and call it "data" on a ufo?
The correct scientific methodology to validate a claim that these witnesses all saw the lighthouse would be to collect their testimony and check if against this claim. If you do that the only valid conclusion is that the claim is falsified by the testimony of each individual witness.
The GUT
If I recall correctly: Hasn't La Plume suspected--and proffered--that heads have been tinkered with? I like Steve and his apparent honesty. Is anyone familiar with his connection to Frank Camper's cointelpro "merc school?"
It raises some interesting questions for those that investigate rather than pontificate. Jus' sayin'.
The problem I see with both hardcore believers and hardcore skeptics is that they ignore the totality of information and, as such, discredit themselves as thinkers of note. Just my opinion...but one that is certainly more inclusive of ALL of the extant information.
Prior to 1914, coloured sectors were shown from the lantern room using coloured shades in front of the light and this meant that the shaded areas would have shared the same characteristic of the main light. Since then, a red light - visible for 14 nautical miles - has shone north to mark the Sizewell Bank. A red and green light shine south, the green light shines over hollesley bay, for 14 nautical miles and the red shines over whiting hook and whiting bank visible for 15 nautical miles.
Ectoplasm8
reply to post by Guest101
It's comparing facts with a hypothesis. The fact being the Orford lighthouse exists. The fact that it exists within view of the "landing" site. The fact that the frequency of the flash is at 5 second intervals as proven by the specs sheet and by videos.
All of these are absolutes and verifiable facts that are directly involved with this incident by way of location of the lighthouse.
LT COLONEL HALT: 3.05: We see strange err, strobe like flashes to the err ... almost sporadic, but there's definitely something there, some kind of phenomena. 3.05: At about err... 10 degrees horizon err directly north, we got two strange objects, err ...half moon shape, dancing about with colored lights on them. but err. it has to be about 5-10 miles out, maybe less. The half moons have now turned into full circles as though there was an eclipse or something there for a minute or two.
(Break in tape)
LT COLONEL HALT: 3.15: Now we've got an object about ten degrees directly south...
SGT NEVILLES: There's one to the left.
LT COLONEL HALT: 10 degrees off the horizon, and the ones to the north are moving, one's moving away from us.
SGT NEVILLES: It's moving out fast.
LT COLONEL HALT: They're moving out fast.
MASTER SGT BALL: There's one on the right heading away too.
LT COLONEL HALT: Yeah, they're both heading north. Hey, here he comes from the south; he's coming in toward us now.
MASTER SERGEANT BALL: #.
LT COLONEL HALT: Now were observing what appears to be a beam coming down to the ground.
[Excited shouting in the background]
MASTER SGT BALL: Look at the colors... #
LT COLONEL HALT: This is unreal.
Break in tape
LT COLONEL HALT: 3.30: And the objects are still in the sky, although the one to the south looks like it's loosing a little bit of altitude. We're turning around and heading back toward the base. The object to the sou... the object to the south is still beaming down lights to the ground.
Guest101
reply to post by Ectoplasm8
I will not waste my time on silly theories about lighthouses and stars.
As I said before, I was on the fence before reading this thread
ZetaRediculian
reply to post by draknoir2
As I said before, I was on the fence before reading this thread
same. I actually thought the lighthouse explanation was a huge stretch when I first read about a couple of years ago. But now that facts have been laid out, its a no brainer. I also would be inclined to believe what Gut proposes but I just don't see this as anything more than an embellished story. That and I won't waste time with anyone that doesn't agree with me.
any others you are on the fence about?
but this is an EIGHT second interval during which the flash of the lighthouse should have been visible once. Why doen't anyone mention it?
JAL1628, Cash Landrum
draknoir2
But you'll waste time on even sillier theories about aliens and UFO's.
I think this one line best illustrates your "open mindedness".
The lighthouse and stars were, are, and will be there for anyone to verify for themselves. The Aliens and UFO's... not so much.
As I said before, I was on the fence before reading this thread, but I can't imagine how this incident could be more thoroughly debunked at this point.
Guest101
It’s not about ‘data on a UFO’.
In this case it’s about ‘data on a lighthouse’. We’re investigating the claim that these men ALL saw the lighthouse, remember? ‘UFO’ is not a part of this claim.
The correct scientific methodology to validate a claim that these witnesses all saw the lighthouse would be to collect their testimony and check if against this claim. If you do that the only valid conclusion is that the claim is falsified by the testimony of each individual witness.
Note that falsifying the lighthouse claim does not automatically mean that the ET claim is supported. It also does not mean that none of these men ever saw the lighthouse, but this was not the claim.
Skeptics often mix up the validation of their own “I know what you saw” claim and a claim about extraterrestrial visitation. These are two different things entirely.
However, both need to be treated with the same (scientific) methodology.
Instead of using the data to investigate a claim of extraterrestrial visitation, skeptics often use an unsubstantiated counterclaim. They do that because the data is inconclusive and hence does not exclude the extraterrestrial hypothesis entirely. This is very unsatisfying to a skeptic so a counterclaim is invented and the data is made to fit this counterclaim in an attempt to falsify the extraterrestrial hypothesis entirely.
In a sense skeptics and believers are alike. They both use the same pseudo-scientific methodology and are mainly driven by a desire to prove they are right. That is why a discussion with them is pointless.
It all seems to me that something odd was going on at the Twin Bases and the military knew about it.
draknoir2JAL1628, Cash Landrum.
As I said earlier, Ectoplasm8, I will not waste my time on silly theories about lighthouses and stars.
2. Is a shaky argument, since it rests on the assumption that the light was NOT visible between the utterances “there it is again“, and “watch, straight ahead off my flashlight there sir, there it is “. Nothing on the tape suggests this.
There IS a clear suggestion on the tape that the light was not visible between the utterances “you just saw a light?” and “there it is AGAIN”, but this is an EIGHT second interval during which the flash of the lighthouse should have been visible once. Why doen't anyone mention it?
So the match in timing is shaky at best. But it gets even shakier when we consider the reported color of the light: RED. Yes, it is yellow later on the tape, but that was during an episode where it was closer and became brighter. What happens if you brighten a red light? Right, it gets a yellowish orange color.
12:52-12:58
12:59
12:59
13:04
mirageman
I think the probability of this being aliens is fairly close to zero.
mirageman
I also think the lighthouse played a part (along with the other celestial events going on) in deceiving the men to some extent. But could it really be the main reason why so many military men were searching Rendlesham forest for hours on end?
mirageman
However I have never heard a good all encompassing theory to actually what DID happen on the bases over the whole of that period.
mirageman
What did Gerry Harris see plunge into the forest and rise out of it?
There is no way that Adrian Bustinza and Larry Warren saw a lighthouse sitting in a field 10 yards in front of them.
The blue lights seen on both nights are not really satisfactorily explained.
What were airmen doing with lightalls off-base during Boxing Day evening before Halt went out?
Why does it seem there was partial evacuation at Woodbridge?
What did Steve La Plume witness gliding silently over his head in early Jan 1981?
mirageman
It all seems to me that something odd was going on at the Twin Bases and the military knew about it.
mirageman
Perhaps it was actually an experiment?
I cannot imagine myself in any way that the US top military brass would conduct whatever kind of experiments on a base and especially in a foreign country which had as it seems a huge storage of nuclear ordnance.
ZetaRediculian
reply to post by spacevisitor
I cannot imagine myself in any way that the US top military brass would conduct whatever kind of experiments on a base and especially in a foreign country which had as it seems a huge storage of nuclear ordnance.
Maybe, maybe not. Vets feel abandoned after secret drug experiments