Rendlesham Forest…, A Christmas Story from 1980 - Can We ‘Let it Be’?

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I agree with this 100%.

a reply to: ctj83

Oh I agree.

But an esteemed ATS member likes bringing up the possibility (seems to infer its nearly "proven") so I was addressing the topic in general.

For the record, I do not yearn for the "supernatural" or have a need to prove it. (SOME interest in kicking the tires..but not a need).

As I've stated before, if RFI WAS due to a lighthouse, or satellite or meteorite showers, that would be fine with me.

But the NEED some debunkers/skeptics have to only put forward "swamp gas explanations" is just as unfortunate to me, as the those who are other varieties of rabid believer.

That said..I'd prefer to err on the side of science than completely wild takes with zero to back them up.

Frankly hysteria seems a good bit of RFI (conversion disorder), but most likely not all of it IMHO.

Then add disinfo and repurposing of the event over the years and you get the current big mess.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Reminds me of a bad tooth that you can't stop poking with your tongue.
Its been wobbling for a while and it hurts when you poke it.
Its gonna have to come out eventually but for now let's just give it another prod... Ow!

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

You sound like you are getting rather bored with it all Kev.

Unfortunately this specific case will go round and round and round. The blue balls of light were mentioned on page 1 of the thread. Andrew Pike's work seems to provide possible solutions. But the picture is incomplete and so old ideas get regurgitated over and over again. All we can do is go over it all again and chip away at the bits that don't stick properly or sit and wait for something new to crop up.

Anyway tonight England expects (and so does Wales) so I shall have to catch up with everything later.

a reply to: mirageman

At a minimum I'm bored with RFI and to a lesser degree bored with "UFOs".

There never has been a "real" UFO, but the societal control system endlessly feeds us deception on that subject and so many people are how waiting for "alien Jesus" to come save us all, so nobody has to take personal responsibility for their actions or think. It will one day be even worse than the original fake Jesus and fake religion rhat the grand Roman empire psy-opped into the world the first time around.

So we barely need government programming anymore...we are doing it to ourselves now.

Of course there is a "spooky" phenomenon involved too...but it's conned most people to either worship it, fear it, or ignore it.

It badly needs to be researched.

But it won't be. Not seriously.

Kev

originally posted by: ctj83
a reply to: mirageman

I've heard audio recording of Halt talk about Tamplin crying down the walkie talkie to him.

I don't suppose you remember which audio recording that was?

a reply to: mirageman

Assuming I'm not imagining it was audio when it was written, it must have been an interview or event video. I'll have a dig through my internet history.

a reply to: Marylongstockings

Andrew kindly sent me a copy of his material (A CD version) to Ireland for me to read. But I do know there has been problems for him in ufo land, so he is a quiet one. UFO land and mediums such as these are not the kindest of places . So, I do not blame him for been a tad aloof...........

From what I can gather Andrew was working on a study of earth lights (and similar meteorological phenomena). He was alerted to something going on in Rendlesham forest around the same time the 'UFO' incident was occurring. Although at the time he was unaware what was going on. He turned up in Suffolk just after the shenanigans of the 'Halt' night had finished.

Unfortunately a lot of confusion about his connection to the RFI has grown in the last few years. Resulting in people thinking he was working for the MoD and even conducting Tesla like experiments in the area. All of which are completely false. But sadly resulting in unwanted attention for Andrew.

Andrew's research work, coupled with the details released in the Condign report, may point to a completely terrestrial explanation to the whole affair. But one that the UK/US/NATO military were also trying to weaponize. This is a theory that cannot be ignored. But then we have to work out what weapons could be gleaned from such a study. It is probably not be the the type of weapons most people would think of.

a reply to: mirageman

Burrough's has been talking about a plasma shield designed to protect the base from attack. It's an interesting theory but a non-starter.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Of course there is a "spooky" phenomenon involved too...but it's conned most people to either worship it, fear it, or ignore it.

Sounds like it's almost defeated you now Kev. Maybe you should take a break and get involved in the Political mudslinging thread instead?

Maybe we are researching the wrong UFO cases?

Or maybe we are just incapable of recording the right information to solve it all?

a reply to: mirageman

The interesting takeaway here is that there is a digital version of the book.

a reply to: ctj83

Sounds like something good ole' Ronnie Reagan would have thought up for his Star Wars 'defense program'. Only all the action seemed to be happening off base.

Oh and Carter was still President at the time.

I am taking it slow but will try to unearth a few more details about Halt's testimony over the coming week.

a reply to: mirageman

I would not in the least be surprised if something like the x-37b or some hardware up there was involved with these microwave induced plasma delusions that people confuse with "UFOs" and "spiritual channeling".

Or possibly BTUFO-like drones.

I know how tin foil hat that sounds.

But one must consider multiple possibilities when trying to crack ridiculously layered deceptions.

Kev

a reply to: mirageman

I've been researching "this" in one form or another, nearly full time for at least 42 years.

A fellow gets tuckered eventually.

I'd rather have rabies than to fight over politics, when in fact there is only one major political party in the U.S.

But I'm not completely down and out yet, just a bit tuckered.

Kev

a reply to: mirageman

I should have some rather nice additions tomorrow...

a reply to: mirageman

Andrew's research work, coupled with the details released in the Condign report, may point to a completely terrestrial explanation to the whole affair. But one that the UK/US/NATO military were also trying to weaponize. This is a theory that cannot be ignored. But then we have to work out what weapons could be gleaned from such a study. It is probably not be the the type of weapons most people would think of.

I am not sure about this,its a yes and no. For me I would have to ask how would all of that sit with present times with the men and things which have been taking place with them over the years (Jim and John) Were would all of this fit into it.
The Condign stuff according to Andrew is an intelligence memo and not a science report. Also John recently said the
full Condign material is not fully released???. Then we have Jim and that side who claim the Condign report is a fools errand. They don't explain exactly why this is, other than they don't seem to buy into it and claim Johns injuries were not caused by events in 1980. Whatever the case is, for or against, like you say a theory which cannot be ignored.

I have corresponded with Andrew a few times and he has been more than willing to discuss things which have asked
him about at the time. Of course Andrew had zip all to do with the MOD and just recently Pope also confirmed this fact.

a reply to: Marylongstockings

Condign is officially entitled a "Scientific & Technical Memorandum" but with a stated objective to

"......determine the value, if any, of UAP sigthing reports to Defence Intelligence..."

Illustrated by some of the mentions of using the findings in 'novel weapon technology'.






Some parts of the report were redacted to protect sensitive information regarding military and radar installations and also members of the public. Perhaps there is still more to come then?

And despite the confusingly worded claim that John Burroughs hinted has helped settle his injury claim :

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.

Many parts of the report are similarly dubiously worded.

Condign says it used a sample of UAP reports between 1987 and 1997 for statistical analysis in a database. But it is not clear whether reports prior to 1987 were 'examined manually'. Apparently the contractor employed to carry out the study was given access to files dating back to the 1970s.



However if Condign really only centred around reports from 1987-97 then the relevance of the report to Rendlesham becomes more tenuous.

a reply to: mirageman


Am no expert on this MM, but see Andrew Pikes comment.
I was asking him some things and that was his response.
Then we have Burroughs now claiming there is more?

And then of course we have Jims side of things were he has
said its a fools errand and does not accept John was injured by
anything relating to what occurred in 1980. So am not sure
what to make of it all.

Interesting bits you have pulled out there though.

a reply to: Marylongstockings

If you want to read something with scientific substance, skip Condign and read these books instead:

McCambell link
'http://www.nicap.org/ufology/cover.htm

Paul R Hill link
'http://pdfsr.com/pdf/unconventional-flying-objects

I think Andrew Pike would agree ...

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: Guest101

The story, according to Halt, is that female shift commander Lt. Bonnie Tamplin was out in the woods and whatever happened she threw her gun down and ran. She left the base a few days later and supposedly had a nervous breakdown. But Halt claims he was never told about this. Really?

The story from other personnel (John Burroughs, John Trementozzi and Lori Buoen)is that Tamplin saw a blue light fly through windscreen of her patrol vehicle, she screamed for her supervisor MSgt. Bob Ball and went into complete panic. She then had to be relieved of duty.

I find this incredible that Halt would not be aware of such an incident. All senior officers have a duty of care towards their staff

‘Care towards his staff’ may have been the reason why Halt never mentioned this in public, to protect Bonnie from too much public attention.

The most important Halt discrepancies, in my view, are:

Why did Halt get the dates wrong?
Halt’s answer: He made a mistake.

Why did Halt describe a craft with size estimates in his memo while such craft is not mentioned in the witness statements?
Halt’s answer: "A few of the men moved to within 20 or 30 feet. Each said the same thing independently -- a triangular-shaped metallic object, about nine feet across the base, six feet high, appeared to be sitting on a tripod. They split up, walked around the craft. One of the men apparently tried to get on the craft, but, they said, it levitated up. All three of the guys hit the ground as the craft moved quickly in a zigzagging manner through the woods toward the field, hitting some trees on the way. They got up and approached again, but the object rose up, and then it disappeared at great speed.”

Why didn’t Halt mention in his memo and lectures what happened on the second night?
Halt’s answer: He only heard about these events in 2008.
Timeline: These events were the reason Conrad called in Penniston to hear his story and ordered an in-depth investigation by Nevels.

Why does the Halt tape start at 01:00 AM if he was interrupted at a dinner party?
Halt’s answer: ?
Timeline: The incident involving Battram was the reason Halt was called out after midnight. The interruption at the dinner party was earlier, when Nevels returned from his investigation with Englund.

Why was Halt investigating the initial landing site two days later in a pitch dark forest?
Halt’s answer: "I took half a dozen of the men and headed into the woods on foot to a clearing where the initial incident had supposedly taken place. We found three distinct indentations in the ground equidistant apart and pressed well into the sandy soil. They were supposedly caused by the object seen two nights before, but I didn't see anything sitting there that night. Neither did anybody else there.”
Timeline: They were actually investigating the site where Battram saw the object.

Why does the Halt tape suddenly jump to the second farmer’s field as soon as a strange object is hovering a few 100 yards from them?
Halt’s answer: “Suddenly, it exploded -- not a loud bang, just booompf -- and broke into five white objects that scattered in the sky. We went to the end of the farmer's property to get a different perspective.”

Why did Halt return at 04:00 and left the objects in the sky if he believed they were extra-terrestrial?
Halt’s answer: “I called the command post, asked them to call Eastern Radar, responsible for air defence of that sector. Twice they reported that they didn't see anything. The objects in the north were still dancing in the sky. After an hour or so, I finally made the call to go in. We left those things out there.”

Why is the incident with a beam shining down on John Burroughs not on the Halt tape and not in his memo?
Halt’s answer: ?