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.

 

"US DoD have confirmed the UFO phenomenon is real"

page: 4
129
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 05:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Ridhya

Yeah, the VA has been haunted by scandals for decades. They often seem to have political and economic agendas that outweigh the needs of individual veterans. Bureaucrats and bean counters are a soulless bunch...

Nevertheless it's difficult to accept that one man's claim of being injured by a controversial, alleged UFO incident would be enough to gain access to funding for an operation. Aside from the late Dr Leir or Greer, what medical practitioner would feel qualified to say that a mitral valve condition was 'caused' by a UFO encounter decades ago? There's no database for comparison, no historical cases or research evidence.




posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 06:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

Thanks MM for that info, I will look through that thread.

Is it possible he was told not to talk about the case soon after it happened, or if forced to talk told not to reveal too much, and as he got older cared less about the possible security breach ramifications and just told more and more of the whole story?

Plus, none of the others have said anything about possible inconsistencies, wouldn't they call him out if he was fabricating details?


Penniston is either one seriously mixed up individual, a disinformation agent or simply enjoys the small modicum of fame and attention this story has brought to him with a tendency to heavily 'exaggerate'.

If you haven't followed this case closely the four most vocal Rendlesham witnesses are forever changing loyalties and it's more like a soap opera these days. Whenever one tries to take things forward the squabbling starts again. And as for Penniston's binary code story that's now stretched into a list of mystical co-ordinates for places some New Age traveller might have on their places to visit list.

In fairness to John Burroughs his story hasn't really changed since day one although loyalties to his fellow witnesses have changed a number of times. So dragging it back to this particular development in the story. It all comes down to whether you believe Burroughs statement is correct. I think he has left a lot open to interpretation.
edit on 28/2/15 by mirageman because: typo



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 06:09 AM
link   
So we can finally drop the lighthouse debunking. I've seen several long posts from skeptics about the lighthouse story here and elsewhere for years. Good to see it being refuted.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 06:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: NiZZiM
a reply to: mirageman

Radiation from a ufo....that's pretty darn apparent. And if a top secret base can't identify a craft with properties far more advanced then anything in existence, I'm sure to say that it was not of this planet. From the testimony and subsequent coverup it's only logical to assume something incredible happened and to ignore that is ignant lol


Bentwaters and Woodbridge were not top secret bases (although it is now known they held nuclear warheads). Only Jim Penniston claimed to have seen a solid craft and his original statement says he never got within more than about 50yds of it. The Condign report is not necessarily referring to a 'craft' but to Unidentified Aerial Phenomena and could simply mean a form of ball lightning for example.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 06:58 AM
link   
a reply to: mirageman

Easily explained using Occam s Razor, this clearly was some super secret experiment, you have the RAF and USAF, always secretly working together, hmm... I vote there was no ET and that was some sort of joint project and the testing thereof.... no ET OK, but to theirs (governments) full advantage to keep people thinking this nonsense and keep you guessing when they use it scare masses of individuals at the appointed time.

The little green men are the most elusive and so are their crafts.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

Thanks for adding some more background to this. Unfortunately the mass of information on Rendlesham that is now out there in the media and on the web has become more of a hindrance to resolving the case. Some of it is just plain wrong and a lot of it is merely opinion.

Linda Moulton Howe, to me, is far from a reliable source of information. "Gullible" is the kindest way I can find of describing her work in the field. And of course the VA have not confirmed anything in this case. Nor do I expect them to as patient confidentiality surely applies. So we have to trust Burroughs word on whether his records were removed, classified, and ultimately if his illness was caused by what happened in Suffolk in 1980. Although the fact that he had to get a Senator involved suggests that there were serious problems to overcome.

But I always try to let the statements of others and facts stand for themselves in any opening post. That way people can decide for themselves. You can see from the responses how widely different opinions can be!



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: mirageman

Yep, I agree with your assessment there. I avoided getting personal in my initial post to avoid the ad-homs.

In reality, I'm not really interested in much that comes off Earthfiles or from the 'Hearings' guys either. They rarely vet their stories and appear too involved with each other to do anything but praise and support colleagues and associates. When Burroughs sat beside Penniston during the summer of 'binary codes,' he joined the circus and being associated with LMH doesn't help matters.

None of it matters really, does it? It's just more carnival barking from the same people it always is.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 07:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: mirageman

Aren't they really only admitting that the DoD knew about a vehicle that was active near the base in 1980, and not at all admitting that it was a UFO?

Hypothetically, they could have been testing a small UAV, with exotic power and propulsion systems in that area which malfunctioned and had to land in the forest.

They seem to be acknowledging that this particular UAV emitted a radiation that was harmful to life...a nuclear based power system would also emit a harmful radiation.

Could the Rendlesham forest incident be a secret, and according to treaties and governmental rulings at the time, also a highly illegal test of military drone technology, powered by nuclear means?

This would explain the cover up and why the forest where this took place was immediately cut down to get rid of the residual radioactive evidence that would be on the trees where this UAV came down temporarily.



The DoD and the VA have made no statement on this issue. It all comes from John Burroughs. He is basically declaring the VA have settled and agreed his disability claims and by implication are admitting he was injured in Rendlesham Forest by radiation from a "UAP". We have no way of knowing if this is actually the full truth as the VA, I assume, are forbidden from commenting on cases of this nature.

As to whether a nuclear craft was present on any of the nights from 25th - 27th Dec 1980 or there was some kind of secret tesst is difficult to say. Jim Penniston and Ed Cabansag were with Burroughs and neither of them seem to have suffered any ill effects from any radiation. Well in Penniston's case at least not phyically!

The trees were already planned to be cut down by the Forestry Commission before the incident happened and the great storms the country suffered in 1987 also meant even more trees had to be removed.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 07:35 AM
link   
Wow, I thought this thread wouldn't be forum slid so quickly given its significance.

Here is the deputy base Commander at the time, Colonel Charles I. Halt, in a press release of June 25, 2009:


"the unidentified lights and beams I saw in Rendlesham Forest, were extraterrestrial in origin and that the security services of both the United States and England were and have been complicit in trying to subvert the significance of what occurred at Rendlesham by use of well-practiced methods of disinformation."


Source

Although some people take issue with LMH, there is no question that Halt said the above.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 07:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: phinubian
a reply to: mirageman

Easily explained using Occam s Razor, this clearly was some super secret experiment, you have the RAF and USAF, always secretly working together, hmm... I vote there was no ET and that was some sort of joint project and the testing thereof.... no ET OK, but to theirs (governments) full advantage to keep people thinking this nonsense and keep you guessing when they use it scare masses of individuals at the appointed time.

The little green men are the most elusive and so are their crafts.


The secret experiment is one theory and there is even a US document discussing esoteric technology (for the time) and how it could be tested on an airbase. But it is only a theory.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 07:52 AM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

It's important not to get side-tracked by all the BS that's stuck to this case. Colonel Halt saying what he said doesn't mean what Penniston (binary codes) says is also true. Likewise, if Burroughs and attorney say the VA accepts claims of injury resulting from ET crafts, it ain't necessarily so.

Check out Jerry Cohen's perspective for an interesting read.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 07:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
...
Here is the deputy base Commander at the time, Colonel Charles I. Halt, in a press release of June 25, 2009:


"the unidentified lights and beams I saw in Rendlesham Forest, were extraterrestrial in origin and that the security services of both the United States and England were and have been complicit in trying to subvert the significance of what occurred at Rendlesham by use of well-practiced methods of disinformation."


Source

Although some people take issue with LMH, there is no question that Halt said the above.


Yes Halt definitely made that statement in 2009

Jim Penniston said in Leslie Kean's book




On one side of the craft were symbols that measured about three inches high and two and a half feet across. These symbols were pictorial in design; the largest symbol was a triangle, which was centred in the middle of the others. They were etched into the surface of the craft. I put my hand on the craft, and it was warm to the touch. The surface was smooth, like glass, but it had the quality of metal, and I felt a constant low voltage running through my hand and moving to my mid-forearm……………. At that moment, I knew that this craft's technology was far, far above what we could ever engineer. When it took off, I felt alone, knowing now what John and I knew. Suddenly, there was no doubt. I realized that it was 100 percent certain that we are part of a larger community beyond the confines of our planet.


Source : www.tinyurl.com...


"Life Jim but not as we know it". Penniston then later remembered or at least re-remembered binary codes and decided it was time travel.

Larry Warren said :




Bustinza asked under his breath. “Can you see them?' l saw their eyes and knew then that they definitely were not kids. All personnel seemed in a trance and just watched them. The glow had faded a bit so their features were easier to see. The one light then broke into three separate glowing cylinders, each containing what appeared to be a living creature. They were small, about three to four feet tall and somewhat ghostlike in appearance. They had large heads with cat like black eyes. I could not see other facial features. They were not human at all, but I was not frightened. Each was very bright almost silvery clothing. I could not see any life-support devices attached to the entities.”


Larry Warren – Left at East Gate (1997)
Source : www.tinyurl.com...



Colonel Halt has long contested Larry Warren's story but actually seems to have drawn the same conclusion as him.


Steve La Plume, who was not a witness to the events over Xmas 1980 but was on the base also witnessed something odd in January 1981 a few weeks later. He also appeared on ATS for a while to give his take.




“….Airman Palmer and I stood there and talked about the light house in the background and thought it ridiculous that they would have mistaken that for a UFO over their heads. Later that evening when we had our sighting I will say this if it is a light house I saw then it uplifted off its base and flew over my head, directly over my head and then flew off to the south and went into the stars never to be seen again………”

“Again I can not speak for what those guys saw that night but the night I saw this craft it was perfectly over my head causing me to look up and craning my neck backwards...NOT a light house! I saw a structured craft of some sort with multiple colored lights.”

Source : www.abovetopsecret.com...



Make of it all what you will.

John Burroughs has always said he doesn't know what they encountered in the forest by the way.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 08:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

I don't pay a lot of attention to Earthfiles myself and paid little attention to the hearings. Across the pond it seems that there are a lot more people in the field geared to money making rather than actually extracting the truth.

I still find the ongoing Rendlesham 'soap opera' entertaining. But it's become mighty frustrating to actually work out what it was all about.


ETA : I haven't listened to it as yet but Linda Moutlon Howe Spoke About Burroughs case on C2C AM on Thursday.

Full details and archives of the show (for C2C insiders) are available here : www.coasttocoastam.com...

edit on 28/2/15 by mirageman because: Added radio details



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 08:15 AM
link   
I think we should focus more on what people saw that can be corroborated with others, as opposed to those same people interpreting they saw.

For example, Penniston sounds credible up to the point of describing the craft and what it felt like, maybe describing some of the details, but loses credibility with the binary code descriptions and time travel explanations. I don't think he would have had time or been in a state of mind to take in "binary codes", basic symbols maybe. As I mentioned before, if his story has changed, forgetting about the binary codes and time travel part, it seems like it has only been additive, not contradictory, which would make sense from the standpoint of all of them probably being threatened after it happened not to talk about it, to gradually after decades wanting to get the story out and damn the consequences.

Of course I agree Colonel Halt calling it Extraterrestrial doesn't make it so, but it is an interesting opinion from a credible individual, also one who happened to be the deputy commander of one of the largest air bases in the world who was presumably familiar with a multitude of flying craft and their performance, he wasn't some cab driver on a country road, not that it is impossible for cab drivers to have a high level of knowledge in this area, they just would be less credible.


edit on 28-2-2015 by PlanetXisHERE because: addition

edit on 28-2-2015 by PlanetXisHERE because: grammar, syntax and context



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: mirageman

Damn! Cheers, you've just reminded me that Vallee was on there a few nights ago so I've just snatched a copy.


The LMH show is 'out there' too and can stay where it is.

Part of me is laissez faire about the bullsh!tters in the field. They see a way to make a living or supplement an income and go for it. They owe nothing to any mysterious phenomena and even less to the general public. They might be a part of the larger phenomena too? Another part resents the noise they bring to the study of the subject.

It doesn't harm us if people want to believe LMH's operatic perspective or claims. It doesn't really matter in the scheme of things if Penniston's notebook has more unpublished things in there (schematics of spaceships anyone?) or if the next MUFON conference has the usual old frauds. It's just same old, same old.

And yeah, it can be frustrating to suss things out when 4-5 'experts' are all stridently making assertions with equal authority.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky




The statement is from an attorney and should be expected to accurate. Is it though? Frascogna is an associate of LMH and the 'citizen hearings on disclosure group.' This suggests, to me, that the statement itself is an interpretation by Frascogna that isn't at all the thinking of the VA. Without a release from the VA, we'll have to take his word for it.

I think that pretty much sums up the problem with the story mate , all we have is a statement from interested parties with no official confirmation , if we had a copy of the decision to read then we could draw our own conclusions.
I did a bit of searching last night but could only find links back to Earthfiles , the essence of the story may be true but as you say it's all in the interpretation which may well have been skewed to suit the beliefs of the Renlesham proponents.

The fact no one else involved has reported any health problems resulting from the events of that night suggest to me John Burroughs problems are not related to whatever they experienced in or around the forest , it does however breath a bit of new life into the story.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
I think we should focus more on what people saw that can be corroborated with others, as opposed to those same people interpreting they saw.

For example, Penniston sounds credible up to the point of describing the craft and what it felt like, maybe describing some of the details, but loses credibility with the binary code descriptions and time travel explanations............



Yes that's where the problems begin. From the very earliest moments of the incident.

Here is Penniston's (undated) statement after the initial encounter that finished on the morning of 26th December 1980.



He clearly states that Burroughs was close to him and at no point mentions his touching a craft or even being closer than 50m. Burroughs statement is more difficult to read but both his and Ed Cabansag's mention only patterns of lights in the distance.






.....Left vehicle, proceeded on foot. Burroughs and I were approx. 15-20 meters apart and proceeding on a true east direction from logging road. The area in front of us was lighting up a 30 meter area. When we got within a 50 meter distance, the object was producing red and blue light. The blue light was steady and projecting under the object. It was up the area directly extending a meter or two out. At this point of positive identification I relayed to CSC, SSgt Coffey. A positing sighting of the object…1….Color of lights and that it was definitely mechanical in nature. This is the closest point that I was near the object at any point.


So why did his story slowly become more and more bloated? Only Jim Penniston can answer that question and I wouldn't trust his answer even if he did answer it.

I agree that there a number of other people (if they were prepared to speak) that could help in clarifying what was going on but the focus is always on John, Jim, Chuck and (perhaps less so) Larry.


My take on Burroughs press statement (which no major, or even minor, media agency seems to have picked up on) is that he chose his words carefully to try and gain maximum attention. So far it has gained very little attention at all.

I also think he's done a job of joining the dots. Basically he's tied in his own witness accounts with his legal battle over his heart trouble and the statement from Project Condign. Perhaps more information may come out. But at the moment it isn't really earth changing news.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Absolutely. These people are all part of the media wing of popular ufology and appear to place ambition above truth.

Burrough's heart condition may have resulted from a physical training exercise in 1996 for all we know. Even he might not know how it started.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:14 AM
link   
What is the real information in it? I would like to try to summarize the following:

1. The official acknowledgement of existence of UFO/UAP in the Rendlesham Forest back to 1980. The witnesses did NOT lie. Case closed.

2. The official acknowledgement of the radioactivity of UFO/UAP.

3. The official acknowledgement of relationship between UFO/UAP radiation and John Burroughs’s health issue.

What a pity the acknowledgement is achieved at the cost of a man’s health.

Then what was that UFO/UAP? It remained UNIDENTIFIED and it could be something natural, terrestrial made or even extraterrestrial made.

Then is this whole thing a result of compromise or something political or something else? Frankly I don’t even care. If you want to debunk VA, try your very best, which would also release the very tiny shadow in my mind.

Then did the U.S. government have any TESTABLE EVIDENCE supporting their acknowledgment? You may try to ask for it and do not forget to get some senators for endorsement. I strongly suggest SKEPTICS do this coz you always ask for TESTABLE EVIDENCE and it is your chance to show your gut.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Paperjacket




If you want to debunk VA, try your very best, which would also release the very tiny shadow in my mind.

Neither you nor I know what the VA have said as we don't have their report , all we have is a statement from people involved in one way or another in the case , people who we could argue have a vested interest in portraying this in certain light.



new topics

top topics



 
129
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join