"US DoD have confirmed the UFO phenomenon is real"

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed


The military doesn't Hire "Insane people" that might think a lighthouse is a flying alien triangle do they?

I'm sure the military tries not to employ "insane people" but they are obviously not always successful.

(I'm not making a comment on the lighthouse theory one way or another here.)

a reply to: mirageman


Apparently...the 1977 Gatchellville, Pa. incident did not have equilateral [72"x54"x52"] tripod landing marks as compared to the Rendlesham incident which had equilateral 9.8" tripod marks spread apart on the level pine forest floor.

The Gatchellville case tripod landing marks can possibly be explained that the foofighter landed on a slope and not on level ground as it appeared to happen at the Rendlesham incident.

I can therefore speculate that the tripod legs are adjustable with varying widths in order to accommodate different vertical ground elevations at a landing zone.

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
Trying to get acknowledgement that someone was injured by a "UFO" phenomenon is not the same thing as acknowledging ET's are here. It looks to me that they are simply trying to get this injury "covered". From what I can see regarding this story, there is nothing to indicate that the incident wasn't homegrown. Highly advanced government technology that is still apparently "Above Top Secret".

This is the truth I think, IMO:

What happened?

- Military Object or weapon unintentionally damaged the man, yes there was an object of some kind

What didn't happen and was turned into a bogus case to hide the unplanned damage it may have caused:

- The symbols on the object
- The binary code 'Exploration Humanity'
- Anything that implies it may be outwordly

originally posted by: Bybyots
Burroughs and his attorney believe that Project Condign's suggestion that Burroughs and others present for the Rendlesham/Bentwaters event may have been exposed to the types of radiations discussed in its report for "longer than normal UAP sighting periods" explains Burroughs' heart problems and has caused the DoD to confirm the existence of the UFO phenomenon.

They also believe, as stated by Burroughs, that this is “Top Secret confirmation that humanity is dealing with an intelligence capable of engineering interstellar travel.” In other words, he believes, like some of you, that it's aliens.

Yet Project Condign does not.

How do you rectify this?

Never mind me, I am 7/8ths of my way through a Netflix House marathon and riding high on a raging crush on the 'bad' doctor, it may very well be messin' with me head.

Anywho, within the context of scrambled brains, the VA could, theoretically, I suppose, have paid out on the basis that whatever happened at Rendlesham led to Burroughs believing that his heart disease was a direct consequence of that event, accepting responsibility that that 'belief' was created during active service, without accepting responsibility for the heart problem...perhaps? The only thing that they are therefore admitting to, is that Burroughs believes something happened, and they believe that he believes that.

Much clearer

a reply to: Anaana

The only thing that they are therefore admitting to, is that Burroughs believes something happened, and they believe that he believes that.

Much clearer

Yup, that's about the sum of it. It really makes me wonder if Burroughs and Co. realize what a silly mess they've set up for themselves here.

I want to say, though, that I am glad Burroughs got the coverage that he needed, whatever all the rest may mean. I'm sure that makes a big diff for he and his family.

What he's done is he's claiming that PC is a cover for the U.S. and the UK being involved with aliens. So that's how he gets around the whole "heart-shredding" radiation thing. It's looney: as I mentioned, that citation that Burroughs and his attorney pulled out of context comes from "Part 13, Annexx F" of the UAPoUKADR report. Burroughs claims that he was affected by "ionizing radiation" from "exotic technologies".

Yet "Annex F" is entitled, "NON-IONISING EM EFFECTS ON HUMANS".

Sheesh, right?

Never mind me, I am 7/8ths of my way through a Netflix House marathon and riding high on a raging crush on the 'bad' doctor

I completely understand. I have been watching Sword Art Online and I think I'm Kirito.

a reply to: Bybyots

I hope I didn't come across as critical of Burroughs, that wasn't my intention, I was thinking that in some contexts though, that the DoD/VA could easily explain the settlement away as a pat on his head given his 'mental' health issues, it gives them an open-ended play dependent on how tides turn.

Non-ionizing radiation supports the burnt eyes suffered by the other guys, not heart disease.

I am even more confused, and now, having explored wikipedias view on various forms of radiation my mind has been blown away by whatever the hell Black-body radiation might be...there are lots and lots of words about it but none of them are telling me what it is...I think it is probably interesting though.

a reply to: Anaana

Oh no, not at all, I just wanted to get that out of the way before I called he and his attorney looney.

Non-ionizing radiation supports the burnt eyes suffered by the other guys, not heart disease.

I did not know that, I'm going to go and find out why, thanks for that (!).

I was thinking that in some contexts though, that the DoD/VA could easily explain the settlement away as a pat on his head given his 'mental' health issues, it gives them an open-ended play dependent on how tides turn.

Well, you know? It sure does. I had a rather long post regarding this, but the short of it is that the punchline at the end of Project Condigns report is that it discusses how difficult it is to convince someone that has experienced a "Condignesque" UAP that what they have seen is not from another world.

Anyhow, it's a messy old mess. I had higher hopes for the legs on this one but they are very tiny.

originally posted by: Bybyots
Anyhow, it's a messy old mess. I had higher hopes for the legs on this one but they are very tiny.

The legs are wobbly for sure, but give them chance.

I don't know about you but I loved the whole blue dress, white dress fiasco, we're becoming increasingly aware, collectively of the subjectivity of reality. We cannot believe our eyes.

a reply to: Anaana

I don't know about you but I loved the whole blue dress, white dress fiasco

I don't know if I did or not. The dress is white and gold, although my first guess was lavender.

We cannot believe our eyes.

Yup, me incuded. That was my initial problem with that Venus thread. I thought it must be a drone, I believe that I should be forgiven, as I apparently live in "drone alley", but it took me a while to straighten myself out. Had to get out a ladder and other things til I realized that Tom Hall had gone upstairs as he continued to film; anyway, stuff like that.

That's been on my mind a lot lately; James-Lange theory.

originally posted by: DarthFazer
And to think if we had flying saucers at least since the 1950's that tech would be privy to the public and the antigrav in our possession. We would be living like the jetsons right now. But we are still using jet propulsion today. Why would our military use obsolete technology for over 60 years in light of this. It all points to non terrestrial presence.

Why do billions of people still take the bus to work, and some even walk and ride camels, when we have nuclear powered submarines?

The advanced technology could be, in fact, exceptionally expensive and dangerous, and more limited in applicability when it turns out to be just plain technology and not magic.

a reply to: Anaana

I am even more confused, and now, having explored wikipedias view on various forms of radiation my mind has been blown away by whatever the hell Black-body radiation might be...there are lots and lots of words about it but none of them are telling me what it is...

it's normal electromagnetic radiation caused by the movement of the charged particles in matter

from back on page 1

a watered down acceptance that there are things in the sky that we cannot explain that MAY be et in nature

..my thoughts exactly (more or less)

there's that rockerfeller funded disclosure project (greer etc)
there's the vatican shifting over to 'space brothers'
there's seth rogan telling people the info has been seeded into culture for decades incase we accidently meet

..i don't see how it's going to happen any other way

the full "revelation" no doubt, will be broadcast live from a McDonalds restaurant in dubai, with cheeseburger coupons for all

oh, & miley will be there to twerk them with full honors while will.i.am sings 'calling all occupants' in the background

a reply to: mbkennel
Not to mention the public believing in aliens would provide a nice cover for illegal spying, military abductions and experiments, mind control programs...

originally posted by: aynock
it's normal electromagnetic radiation caused by the movement of the charged particles in matter

That explains the what, the hows and the whys...not so much, but thanks, I realised it wasn't relevant here, other than as a demonstration of how easily distracted I am. It did, initially, make me think of one of the reports at Hessdalen of a black 'hole' by the lead researcher, and in terms of Lake Michigan with it gravitational anomalies, however, I would estimate that I am a good decade away from understanding those intricacies of theoretical and applied physics. At the very least.

Cheers

originally posted by: Bybyots
a reply to: Anaana

I don't know about you but I loved the whole blue dress, white dress fiasco

I don't know if I did or not. The dress is white and gold, although my first guess was lavender.

For me, jet black and a deep indigo.

Colour perception is highly subjective and in humans varies remarkably with some being able to perceive differences in shades and tones that range into the 100,000s where as the majority may only differentiate within the 1000s. In the most basic terms, in regard to that 'experiment', we can can understand that it is not just a matter of the material of the dress absorbing all other colours of the light spectrum but that that blue is what the rods and cones of my retina interpret as blue. For others, the blue is not seen because the rods and cones are less or unresponsive to blue shades in the spectrum or rather they are more sensitive to other forms of light.

This is important to understand when considering phenomenon that is perceived as light (energy) emitting.

You might see a white light body, where as I could just be looking at a patch of sky that seems a little different in hue to the rest, if I can see anything at all, simply because our cones and rods are responding differently. That's before we even get into how our central nervous system responds to the signals generated and any infilling of details that the various neurological processes feel the need to add in order to establish the appropriate course of action in response to that visual stimulus (if any, bearing in mind that my perceptual development has already rendered such information as invisible, could lead to an assumption of that seeing it is more harmful than not seeing it...not a safe assumption, but 'it'/'they' hasn't/haven't sneaked up and killed me yet, so I am playing with that idea for the time being ).

Without dragging the bollocks off my point, the seeing blue instead of white, or white instead of blue, should be an enormous flag to UAP enthusiasts, and one that can be presently and retrospectively explored.

originally posted by: Bybyots
Yup, me incuded. That was my initial problem with that Venus thread. I thought it must be a drone, I believe that I should be forgiven, as I apparently live in "drone alley", but it took me a while to straighten myself out. Had to get out a ladder and other things til I realized that Tom Hall had gone upstairs as he continued to film; anyway, stuff like that.

That's been on my mind a lot lately; James-Lange theory.

I wasn't aware of James-Lange, thanks for pointing that out, describing and contextualising emotions is significant aspect of an assignment I am working on at the moment, so that is really useful and I'd like to get back to you about that.

I experience a lot of peripheral infill, I always have but I have been actively observing it for the past couple of months. Rather than reacting by turning my direct gaze to whatever stimulated my peripheral vision, I have passively allowed infilling to take place with delightful results. As I am sure you know, the Macula of the retina contains the greatest concentration of photo receptive cones, and it is what provides us with high acuity vision. Much more infilling is required in periphery vision but we are programmed to respond to peripheral stimulus by turning our macula regions towards the source of stimulus or, as importantly away from it (in the case of bright light) to protect our macula region.

In terms of blue or white perception, the important aspect of the macula is the lutea, or Yellow Spot.

Lutein was found to be concentrated in the macula, a small area of the retina responsible for central vision. The hypothesis for the natural concentration is that lutein helps keep the eyes safe from oxidative stress and the high-energy photons of blue light. Various research studies have shown that a direct relationship exists between lutein intake and pigmentation in the eye.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9]

Lutein may play a role in Haidinger's brush, an entoptic phenomenon that allows humans to detect polarized light.

en.wikipedia.org...

Inhibition or increases of lutein production changes the way we visually perceive, both in terms of colour and increased oxidation and photon exposure. Higher levels of lutein allow us to distinguish colour particularly within the blue-green-yellow band, hence Haidinger's brush. The really interesting thing though is that the yellow filtering, that enables us to distinguish between green tones is totally derived from diet. If it is not obtained through diet it is not present (the Corpus Luteum which is key to the regulation and stimulation of fertility, is derived in the same way also.). To produce lutein you need to ingest sufficient Xanthophylls.

Like other carotenoids, xanthophylls are found in highest quantity in the leaves of most green plants, where they act to modulate light energy and perhaps serve as a non-photochemical quenching agent to deal with triplet chlorophyll (an excited form of chlorophyll)[citation needed], which is overproduced at high light levels in photosynthesis. The xanthophylls found in the bodies of animals, and in dietary animal products, are ultimately derived from plant sources in the diet. For example, the yellow color of chicken egg yolks, fat, and skin comes from ingested xanthophylls (primarily lutein, which is often added to chicken feed for this purpose).

The yellow color of the human macula lutea (literally, yellow spot) in the retina of the eye comes from the lutein and zeaxanthin it contains, both xanthophylls again requiring a source in the human diet to be present in the eye. These function in eye protection from ionizing blue light, which they absorb. These two specific xanthophylls do not function in the mechanism of sight, since they cannot be converted to retinal (also called retinaldehyde or vitamin A aldehyde).

en.wikipedia.org...

Two people, simply by differentiation of diet, will perceive 'reality' in different ways. I have no difficulty in understanding that others can see things that I can't, and vice versa, I have direct experience of that. As do a lot more people now even if they are still struggling with 'believing'. In context with Burroughs et al, this allows us a point of commonality with which to explore explanations for the more complex disparities of perceptual difference. Emotions too, as you rightly point out, is key to what 'we run with' and 'get behind', but I haven't fully got my head around the mechanic yet.

originally posted by: Erno86
a reply to: mirageman


Apparently...the 1977 Gatchellville, Pa. incident did not have equilateral [72"x54"x52"] tripod landing marks as compared to the Rendlesham incident which had equilateral 9.8" tripod marks spread apart on the level pine forest floor.

The Gatchellville case tripod landing marks can possibly be explained that the foofighter landed on a slope and not on level ground as it appeared to happen at the Rendlesham incident.

I can therefore speculate that the tripod legs are adjustable with varying widths in order to accommodate different vertical ground elevations at a landing zone.

The information on the Gatchellville case seems fairly sparse so it's difficult to see any direct correlation to Rendlesham. However there was another case two weeks later across the English Channel in France which also seems similar.

While Rendlesham is widely understood to be Britain's most important UFO case, another major case took place in France less than two weeks later. It involved a close encounter by a reliable witness, phvsical trace evidence, and extensive investigation by qualified scientists. Although less dramatic than Rendlesham, the physical evidence it left behind makes it the most important case in French ufology.

At his home near Nice during the afternoon of January 8, 1981, 55 year-old Renato Niccolai heard a whistling sound outside and went to investigate. On the edge of his property, just above the trees about 250 feet away, he saw an object that looked like two saucers, one upside down against the other. it was dull grey and about four or five feet high. The object landed in his field of wild alfalfa, but stayed on the ground only ' briefly. He soon heard the whistling sound again, louder this time.

The object rose to treetop height and shot off to the north-east. Before it left, he noticed additional details, including landing feet and trap doors. Niccolai told his wife and the police, who arrived within 24 hours - They in turn notified France’s official UFO investigative body, GEPAN, part of the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales [CNES]. They found a circle on the ground about seven feet in diameter; nearby plants looked diseased or damaged. Several laboratories studied plant and soil samples, showing consistent and bizarre results. The leaves in the affected area had lost 30-50% of their chlorophyll pigment. Scientists could not duplicate this effect, even with radiation. Speculation centred on “some type of electric energy field” causing the damage. Niccolai was interviewed many times, with no indications of mental issues, dishonesty, or even exaggeration. Forty'davs after the event, traces of the craft’s impact were still perceptible.

Source : Richard Dolan : UFOS and the National Security State 'The Cover-Up Exposed, 1973-1991'

Now the interesting thing that ties this in with Rendlesham is that Colonel Halt's team supposedly collected samples of the damaged foliage from the supposed landing site. To my knowledge any subsequent testing on these samples has never been revealed. They may have been taken away, as General Gabriel (then Head of USAFE) reportedly flew in and removed certain items on a visit shortly after the Christmas holidays.

Jim Penniston allegedly made plaster casts of the three holes in the ground the following morning (Dec 26th 1980) during daylight. (Although I also have a problem with how he managed to do this so inconspicuously in between interrogations, driving 20 miles home, obtaining the plaster from a friend. mixing it and driving back to base and then the forest)

But here is at least something more than anecdotal evidence in the case.


I don't know much about either the case in Gatchelville a few years before Rendlesham, or the French case in early 1981. Nor has it ever been established for definite that something actually landed on Rendlesham Forest. In between the Cash-Landrum UFO Case also happened in late December 1980.

Perhaps there is nothing that ties any of these cases together. But someone out there may have a bit more knowledge and add to thread.

a reply to: Anaana

Anywho, within the context of scrambled brains, the VA could, theoretically, I suppose, have paid out on the basis that whatever happened at Rendlesham led to Burroughs believing that his heart disease was a direct consequence of that event, accepting responsibility that that 'belief' was created during active service, without accepting responsibility for the heart problem...perhaps? The only thing that they are therefore admitting to, is that Burroughs believes something happened, and they believe that he believes that. Much clearer

Unless John Burroughs wishes to reveal all the documentation and correspondence involved in his communications with the VA then I think this is a reasonable guess as any.

I' d also add the point I made somewhere earlier. Burroughs was stationed at a base containing tactical nuclear warheads. This was actually in violation of a treaty with the UK. Neither government (nor Burroughs or most of his fellow witnesses) will confirm that fact. Despite it now being almost common knowledge.

If any of the heart trouble Burroughs suffered could have been due to contact with something 'nuclear' whilst he was stationed on the base then this could explain why his records remain classified and also why the VA decided that it was better to pay out and keep quiet about everything.

However perhaps most importantly of all at least John Burroughs is still with us and his claim has now been settled.

originally posted by: mirageman
Unless John Burroughs wishes to reveal all the documentation and correspondence involved in his communications with the VA then I think this is a reasonable guess as any.

Have the VA/DoD released his formerly (allegedly) classified records to Burroughs? As far as I could tell they didn't but I haven't been through everything yet.

originally posted by: mirageman
I' d also add the point I made somewhere earlier. Burroughs was stationed at a base containing tactical nuclear warheads. This was actually in violation of a treaty with the UK. Neither government (nor Burroughs or most of his fellow witnesses) will confirm that fact. Despite it now being almost common knowledge.

If the US had tactical nukes then the UK knew about it and therefore colluded in any conspiracy to pervert the facts. I would have thought though that it would have been an open secret if really a secret at all, more just an avoidance of publically releasing that info for fear of all those wonderful women in comfortable shoes that spent years camped outside the more publically acknowledged nuclear arms facilities.

originally posted by: mirageman
If any of the heart trouble Burroughs suffered could have been due to contact with something 'nuclear' whilst he was stationed on the base then this could explain why his records remain classified and also why the VA decided that it was better to pay out and keep quiet about everything.

If it was nuclear though that would not fit with the non-ionising radiation rationale. Also, given the other people exposed, by admitting that Burroughs injuries were caused by that event, they are opening themselves up to other similar suits and opening a whole flood gate. Besides, if you read the transcript from the second night, they took geiger counters with them, which did detect some radiation but not to the extent that would indicate a nuclear incident. Additionally, from that transcript, the trees that were damaged uniformly and exhibited a heat signature when viewed through the starlight scope, the damage is notable but far to minor to suggest a 'nuclear' incident.

I am wondering about the claims that they were given sodium pentothal, which have been denied. Although known as a 'truth serum' it is also effective in treating mania. Burroughs could have got himself worked up, hysterical and they used the drug to bring him down, get some sense out of him. If he was ranting and raving about aliens or invaders, it may have been a bad call but hysteria is contagious, and would have needed to be nipped in the bud. The DoD may not want to have to explain why they had 'truth serum' lying around, could be as innocuous as that.

However, we're also back to the contradiction of non-ionizing verus ionizing radiation. Does non-ionising radiation register on a geiger counter?

originally posted by: mirageman
However perhaps most importantly of all at least John Burroughs is still with us and his claim has now been settled.

Indeed, I wish him peace of mind.

a reply to: mirageman

The Condign report proposes plasma’s as the answer to the ‘true unknowns’.
The report even attributes magical abilities to these plasma’s:
- They can make people ‘see things’, such as solid craft.
- A mysterious ‘field’ can form in between them that absorbs all light and gives the impression of a dark object.
- They can pace aircraft in full flight, because of the local electromagnetic field distribution around the aircraft.

These theories have already been investigated and rejected a long time ago.

In 1968, Dr James McDonald showed by computation that an airplane is not able to drag a plasma sphere along at any speed above 9 mph.
The reason is that the air drag on a plasma sphere is much higher than the electric force caused by the plane’s electric field, see physics.princeton.edu... page 21.

The Condon committee also considered the plasma hypothesis and even organized a ‘plasma UFO conference’ in 1967 with 10 experts.
During the conference, “unusual UFO reports were presented for discussion. These included a taped report by a B-47 pilot whose plane was paced for a considerable time by a glowing object. Ground radar reported a pacing blip which appeared to be 16 km from the aircraft. After review the unanimous conclusion was that the object was not a plasma or an electrical luminosity produced by the atmosphere.”
See files.ncas.org...

If the UK MOD analysts had properly considered these earlier examinations of plasmas there would have not been much left to sustain the report.

And, like I stated in an earlier post, there is not much in the Condign report to relate the heart problems of John Burroughs to these hypothetical plasma spheres either.

It takes x-rays to damage heart valves, and there is ample evidence that x-rays were an integral part of the Rendlesham mystery.

originally posted by: Guest101
It takes x-rays to damage heart valves, and there is ample evidence that x-rays were an integral part of the Rendlesham mystery.

I don't buy the plasma explanation either, generally or specifically, but it does add to the mix. I am though interested in the x-rays. Where do I find out more about that, please?