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.

 

Rendlesham Forest 1980 Pt II - Will There Be An Answer?

page: 60
39
<< 57  58  59    61  62  63 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 06:07 AM
link   
a reply to: AdamE

It was more tongue in cheek (sarcasm) but thanks for the link all the same


Was a big fan of Tom mahood back in the day..




posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 06:08 AM
link   
Mirageman.

The Karen Tapes would fit the Soviet technology side of things, would it not?

Potential Soviet Anti Sat technology the West wanted their hands on?



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 07:30 AM
link   
Sorry if I am late to the party on this one guys, but could we say that the satellites that Russia was flying over "places of interest" was in a sense a Soviet version of the US's "Defense Threat Reduction Agency" but back in the 1980's...a way to spy, monitor and detect nuclear weapons that posed a threat to Soviet Russia?

Considering that, albeit not confirmed but assumed to be one of the worst kept secrets, that there were nuclear armaments at the twin bases.

Were the events of that day, simply an anti soviet satellite systems in the form of laser based weaponry gone awry that zapped people it shouldn't have... could this weapon have instigated or brought forth the phenomenon that was encountered over the remaining nights that reared its head back in the 50's?

Interesting Sidenote;
how the US has been looking at detecting Nukes by the gravitational differences that nukes have on their surroundings, considering that the radiation they give off can be shielded.. #EveryDaysASchoolDay
www.sec.gov...



posted on Dec, 11 2018 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: AdamE

I think the jury is still out on the satellite theory and the Karen tapes. As usual there is probably a tiny amount of truth and a lot of obfuscation involved. What we do know is that 1980 really was a very tense time period.

Š Christmas time 1979 the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.

Š In the late 1970s a guy called Mstislav Keldysh convinced the then Soviet Premier, Leonid Brezhnev, that the Space Shuttle was actually an attack spacecraft and was going to be used in a pre-emptive strike to 'nuke' Moscow. The Space Shuttle was rolled out onto the tarmac on Dec 29th 1980.

Š In Dec of 1980 US diplomats were still being held hostage in Iran.

Š In Poland the Solidarity movement was threatening to destabilize the government there

Š Ronald Reagan about to enter office full of anti-Soviet rhetoric

Š Western Europe had agreed to accept Pershing & Cruise nuclear missiles on home soil

Š A lot of secret things were going on behind the scenes back then too.

We've also discussed how the Kosmos 1227 satellite was in orbit at the time and unusually appears to have had its mission completed after 12 days (not 14 like other previous missions of Zenit-6 satellites). That satellite returned to the Soviet Union on Dec. 28th 1980 at 7:12 UK time. Around 3 hours after Colonel Halt returned to base after his ramble in the forest.



So NATO acquiring technology for destabilizing a Soviet satellite. What do you think?

Proving it is something else.



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 01:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: AdamE

I think the jury is still out on the satellite theory and the Karen tapes. As usual there is probably a tiny amount of truth and a lot of obfuscation involved. What we do know is that 1980 really was a very tense time period.

Š Christmas time 1979 the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.

Š In the late 1970s a guy called Mstislav Keldysh convinced the then Soviet Premier, Leonid Brezhnev, that the Space Shuttle was actually an attack spacecraft and was going to be used in a pre-emptive strike to 'nuke' Moscow. The Space Shuttle was rolled out onto the tarmac on Dec 29th 1980.

Š In Dec of 1980 US diplomats were still being held hostage in Iran.

Š In Poland the Solidarity movement was threatening to destabilize the government there

Š Ronald Reagan about to enter office full of anti-Soviet rhetoric

Š Western Europe had agreed to accept Pershing & Cruise nuclear missiles on home soil

Š A lot of secret things were going on behind the scenes back then too.

We've also discussed how the Kosmos 1227 satellite was in orbit at the time and unusually appears to have had its mission completed after 12 days (not 14 like other previous missions of Zenit-6 satellites). That satellite returned to the Soviet Union on Dec. 28th 1980 at 7:12 UK time. Around 3 hours after Colonel Halt returned to base after his ramble in the forest.



So NATO acquiring technology for destabilizing a Soviet satellite. What do you think?

Proving it is something else.


From my understanding, the West version of anti-missile technology was based on laser and laser targeting and infrared homing and adaptive optics. The other goal was to utilise the space shuttle for some of the missions. Ground based then progress to space based platforms.

www.aip.org...

The Soviets were using particle beam technology which one would think would require an energy source of some kind which the West may have been interested in? So the Soviets had ground based and space based beam weaponry, apparently.

Also to note, the West were trying to replicate Soviet advances with or without the help of the Soviets.

fas.org...

So to summarize, at best, the Soviets were using Beam technology that we replicated by 1989 with the 'BEAR' project also utilising a Soviet based idea for a plasma generating device.


For the Army, Sipapu was a neutral beam, space-based weapon, ranked second in priority to Chair Heritage and is receiving in excess of $10 million in 1980. This Army program, being conducted at the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory in New Mexico, is based on advanced Soviet technology demonstrated in a Russian-designed plasma generating device. The US version was tested to determine compatibility with a Meson Physics Accelerator, located at Los Alamos. The two devices were coupled to form a test apparatus for follow-on experiments on beam propagation and lethality

www.globalsecurity.org...

This is also an interesting article, historically speaking, from 1993
books.google.co.uk... 9foQdCop4-cawbTcJaP2i4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjt5rrQppLfAhWDonEKHVduDS4Q6AEwFXoECAwQAQ&fbclid=IwAR2B6FzzYRFWPA1THIl2RD-9ncP-szEn-4FYYKsj4K8Xj_fO-PZ_DTP zlAE#v=onepage&q=Russian-designed%20plasma%20generating%20device&f=false

Yes. Proving this is going to be difficult, but I still think we need to get things in order as to who had what during this timeframe, with as much historical evidence and documentation to back this up. I hope some of the information I am providing will help in this endeavour.

edit on 12-12-2018 by AdamE because: tidy up



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 03:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: ctj83
a reply to: KilgoreTrout

Typing that into Google will give you the Chapter. Unpublished means it's not in the published book.

Hanging Rock - Secret Ending


I finally got around to reading your link at the weekend - which blew me away! That is quite the twist at the end, I had no idea. It of course reminded me of the Cabeiri again and these posts pages back.


originally posted by: KilgoreTrout

originally posted by: mirageman
Linda Moulten Howe was talking about a known hoaxed MoD memo taken from the MoD reports DEFE 24-1948-1 and talks about aliens.





"According to OSI, entities with claw-like hands with three digits and an opposable thumb."





And then, last night, I was reading up on re-entry events and while reading about Kosmos 954 (which came down on 24th January 1978) I saw this...


The January 28, 1978, episode of Saturday Night Live featured a running gag about the radioactive debris from the crashed satellite having created giant, mutant lobsters heading for the US east coast, concluding with them invading the studio at the show's end.[14]


en.wikipedia.org...

Curiouser and curiouser.

Or...






posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 03:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: mirageman
A number of witnesses have said that Heathrow Tower reported something to them that was tracked over the base. That story seems to have never been followed up and remains anecdotal.


In the March 1981 edition of the Flying Saucer Review when Jenny Randles first "broke" the RFI story, it was claimed that an object had been tracked on the base radar, the eastboard civil radar, West Drayton civil aviation radar and "at least one other radar station". It was also claimed that in addition to witnesses on the ground that a civil airliner "witnessed" the object.

Later in The Unexplained from either 1982 or 1983, (according to Issac's chronology) Randles writes that Paul Begg was approached in his local pub near Rendlesham by someone he vaguely knew who told him that an object had been recorded at the radar station that he worked at. He claimed that while he hadn't been on duty, his friend had. According to the source this took place on the 30th December 1980. The confusing part is that Randles goes on to write that she asked Peter Warrington "a specialist investigator of radar cases" to check out the story. According to Randles he "talked to the radar operators and got the same details from them."

With the 20/20 that can come with hindsight, what is to be made of that, do you suppose?


originally posted by: mirageman
The witness statements confirm Burroughs reporting strange lights in the woods around 3am. WIth the exceptions of Penniston's testimony where he seems to believe things started just after midnight. Halt has it all starting the following day at 03:00 in his memo. So 02:44 could well be correct.


I think I was mixing up nights. I had seen the time 02:44 on the Halt transcript and conflated. So, happy to go with Penniston's just after midnight if that's the consensus for the "first night". Either way, I don't feel that a bright object that appeared for a few seconds really explains much at all, other than it was one of a number of identified and unidentified light sources.



originally posted by: mirageman
The real problem is the following nights. There were no booster rocket burn-ups or unusual celestial displays in the sky. Nor are any witness statements publicly available from those nights. Even Burroughs, who was present on both nights, only talks about the first night in his statement. Why did he not mention the later night's events? All we have is Halt's tape and his memo (which is seemingly inaccurate with its dates).


And yet, somehow, Peter Charrington and Jenny Randles were able to confirm with "radar operators" that something had been recorded on numerous radar systems on the 30th December. I am currently working on the assumption that this (error?) is explained by Randles or Charrington in some later publication.


edit on 12-12-2018 by KilgoreTrout because: so many civils



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 03:35 AM
link   
a reply to: AdamE

From Bob Lazar's trip around LANL.




posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 03:36 AM
link   
a reply to: KilgoreTrout

I'm not sure if you are aware but according to Jenny, she writes in one book that Dr Alan Bond (HOTOL / Reaction Engines) told her the orbit was wrong.



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 03:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: AdamE


I have traced the book, but the pages that this picture comes from are inaccessible. The book is from 1981.



I am just kind of throwing this out for general dissection and consideration but I have noted a couple of inconsistencies with regard to reporting of the Kosmos 749 launcher re-entry event on Christmas night. When it was initially confirmed as being a launch vehicle it was reported in the Evening Argus (29th December) that, "experts from the British Astronomical Association have now established that it was a third stage rocket used to launch Russian satellite Cosmos 749." Seems fair enough except when I went to look at what the "third stage rocket" looked like, which given that 10-40% of mass usually survives re-entry could be significant chunks, I found that the Kosmos 11K65M that launched 749, doesn't have a third stage. Does that mean that the satellite itself is the third stage?

Assuming it isn't the satellite itself and is just part of the final shedding (use of words denotes my ignorance of the technicalities, in case you're wondering), do you think it is possible that by tracing the re-entry of the "third stage", they were able to target the satellite itself and perform a "controlled" re-entry? I'm holding up my ignorance here, it may be that 749 is present and accounted for, but the thought crossed my mind and I thought I'd share it. It seems like it would have been a useful satellite to recover, just in case some of the data on "enemy radar" could be retrieved...again, not sure if that would be even remotely possible.

Cheers



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 03:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: ctj83
a reply to: KilgoreTrout

I'm not sure if you are aware but according to Jenny, she writes in one book that Dr Alan Bond (HOTOL / Reaction Engines) told her the orbit was wrong.


You're going to have to expand a little. I have a cold and am super dense today. Context?

Sorry



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 08:11 AM
link   
a reply to: KilgoreTrout

The only hard record of anything tracked on radar is this memo in response to a now 30 year old request from Nick Redfern. Col. Halt called for a radar confirmation at 03:25 on the early morning of the 28th Dec 1980. The RAF Watton (Eastern Radar) log book does confirm a report from Bentwaters of a UFO at that time. Although the response is that all other records were disposed of.






I think I was mixing up nights. I had seen the time 02:44 on the Halt transcript and conflated. So, happy to go with Penniston's just after midnight if that's the consensus for the "first night".


The consensus of the first night from witness statements Chandler, Buran and Burroughs is that the events began around 3am on Boxing Day morning. Penniston believes it to have been close to midnight.



Peter Charrington and Jenny Randles were able to confirm with "radar operators" that something had been recorded on numerous radar systems on the 30th December. I am currently working on the assumption that this (error?) is explained by Randles or Charrington in some later publication.


Sorry I've run out of time at present.
Please check your personal messages. I have sent you some links that might provide helpful.



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: mirageman
The consensus of the first night from witness statements Chandler, Buran and Burroughs is that the events began around 3am on Boxing Day morning. Penniston believes it to have been close to midnight.


3 am it is then - which makes better sense given that Chris Arnold on the Law Enforcement Desk notified the Suffolk Police at 4am that they were going off-base to investigate.


originally posted by: mirageman
Sorry I've run out of time at present.
Please check your personal messages. I have sent you some links that might provide helpful.


Thanks.
edit on 12-12-2018 by KilgoreTrout because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: mirageman
Halt called for a radar confirmation at 03:25 on the early morning of the 28th Dec 1980. The RAF Watton (Eastern Radar) log book does confirm a report from Bentwaters of a UFO at that time. Although the response is that all other records were disposed of.



Calling in a UFO at 03:25 before seemingly 'calling it a day' on the tape recording and heading back to base is a bizarre element of the entire saga. 35 minutes later, Halt's last taped remark confirms beams are still coming down and... what? Obviously they did not call it a day.

As the only top guy insisting this was ET, Halt has been coy about post 4am events, initially 'forgetting' he gave JB permission to go into the field despite an ongoing active duty of care, so why is there no official record of JB's seemingly dramatic experience? Can somebody gently pin Halt up against a wall and get a straight answer at last? And perhaps a comment about statements taken that night. The RAF Watton call at least demands one official statement, surely, however brief - if Watton bothered to produce one, why not the base?

Simple unprofessionalism, or something more sinister?


edit on 12-12-2018 by ConfusedBrit because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   
I've just been having a wee read of Burroughs' facebook page and there is a little flurry of activity discussing dates and the such like with Randles, Butler and Street jumping in which generated a quite interesting conversation. It's not particularly clarifying, a little confusing to be honest but from what I can gather Butler first heard of the RFI at a New Years party and told Street in February, Street contradicts that in a number of ways but there is a lot of referring to notes disagreeing with her and pointing out that she is confused. I don't know, but she makes the following comment.


A few days later my local butcher told me he was told by col Williams


www.facebook.com...

Seems the world and his wife was jibber-jabbering about the incident in the areas around the base, the towns and villages beyond. Hardly screams "cover up". If there was a decision made to cover anything up it was presumably taken retrospectively, after the horse had bolted. Or at least you'd think, but then that would imply that they didn't realise that it was something that needed to be covered up or kept secret initially. And then that would imply that that realisation, or instruction/order, came later. Maybe?

Still quite the jumble, still curiouser and curiouser



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: ConfusedBrit



It appears that the Suffolk Police responded to a call at 4:11 AM on the first night (early hours of 26th Dec 1980) with a negative result after searching the area. This suggests to me that the 3:00 AM start of events on the Twin Bases is accurate.

So given that we do have some factual documentation from the first night...




Calling in a UFO at 03:25 before seemingly 'calling it a day' on the tape recording and heading back to base is a bizarre element of the entire saga. 35 minutes later, Halt's last taped remark confirms beams are still coming down and... what? Obviously they did not call it a day.


That seems to be the case. There is a strange disconnect there.

The USAF either felt it unnecessary to inform UK authorities about their ongoing military presence on UK sovereign territory in the forest beyond their initial recce missions on 26th December 1980. Or the UK authorities ignored it and are complicit in covering up the real reason why USAF personnel were involved beyond that date.

Along with the complete dearth of details from the second night, the third night is also shrouded in much mystery. Why are there no witness statements or documents confirming communication and co-operation with the British authorities that night? The Americans were out in the woods again. Outside of their jurisdiction.

What were they up to?



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 06:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: mirageman

Along with the complete dearth of details from the second night, the third night is also shrouded in much mystery. Why are there no witness statements or documents confirming communication and co-operation with the British authorities that night? The Americans were out in the woods again. Outside of their jurisdiction.

What were they up to?


And the mystery will feed this thread until its belly is full enough to start a third thread.


"What were they up to?" is a perfect, accurate question that tantalises the senses.

The post-4am saga on 28th Dec may hold all the answers. The off-duty Burroughs probably knows more than he can tell us; indeed he admits there is info he must keep to his chest, and not just the ongoing refusal to admit the nuclear stockpile 'secret'. Considering JB's refusal to accept an ET hypothesis, why does Halt still insist the opposite (unless simply plugging his bulbous 'Perspectives')?

There are strange loose ends galore that cry out for elaboration - eg, the mysterious arrival of air-transport a few days later (or the next day?) that necessitated further USAF activity on UK soil after 28th Dec, including helicopters. Were they collecting something? What? Do we assume no statements exist for THAT? Does it tie in with Bustinza's bizarre remark about the 'craft' he witnessed in the field actually remaining there for a few days? Does the seemingly ridiculous rumour of the USAF "repairing" a UFO relate to something far more Earthly that crashed in a field and needed assistance, hence the transport?

One more little detail regarding the first night, which I think was mentioned in Pope's 'Encounter At Rendlesham'. I can't source it right now, but Penniston was not the only one making plaster-casts of the alleged landing 'holes' the next day (26th Dec) to secretly 'preserve the experience' - can someone else elaborate on this? It wasn't JB or Cabansag...Hmmm...


edit on 12-12-2018 by ConfusedBrit because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: KilgoreTrout

Argh yes Doty. I did see all the jabber.

She is the one who was not surprised re the binary of Jim's . Woodbridge 2010

But that is another story.




posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 10:58 PM
link   
A little friend by the name of Wednesday Addams says they were there on the third night only, not the first, not the second. So maybe not throw out the "other" involvement.

"We were working with them, the Americans, not the British."

I'll go away now.



posted on Dec, 13 2018 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

The other guy who supposedly made plaster casts was Master Sgt. Ray Gulyas.

Here are photos of the markings in the ground at the alleged 'landing site' taken around 10:30 am on Boxing Day 1980.





Here is one of the supposed plaster casts given to Colonel Halt (it's lighter than his book but as big as his head).



I think you can see why the police were unimpressed. I also wonder whether the plaster cast was taken from the same place.







 
39
<< 57  58  59    61  62  63 >>

log in

join