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.

 

Col Charles Halt says “extra-terrestrials” caused the close encounter at Rendlesham Forest air

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by JennyJen
JC ~ I think I would faint before I got near enough to check the outfit for a 'Made in China' label.



After so many years of interest in "The UFO Phenomenon"...I'd likely head in the opposite direction like a bat outta hell!




posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by tarifa37
“I believe the objects that I saw at close quarters were extra-terrestrial in origin.”

Take note, please, that all this quote reveals is that he saw a device and he did not recognise it as built-here That's not the same as knowing it was extraterrestrial in origin.


That's right. The two key words in his statement are "I believe." He can believe it was made by leprechauns, too, but that don't make it true.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nohup

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by tarifa37
“I believe the objects that I saw at close quarters were extra-terrestrial in origin.”

Take note, please, that all this quote reveals is that he saw a device and he did not recognise it as built-here That's not the same as knowing it was extraterrestrial in origin.


That's right. The two key words in his statement are "I believe." He can believe it was made by leprechauns, too, but that don't make it true.


no..but its a very educated guess by a man who can be trusted..was there...and has authority.

he said it was manufactured and intelligently controlled...what possibilities does that leave us with?

man made craft..meaning we are being lied to regarding energy technologies
alien...meaning we are being lied to regarding...ermm...aliens..

either one gets my interest



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by alienesque he said it was manufactured and intelligently controlled...what possibilities does that leave us with?
man made craft..meaning we are being lied to regarding energy technologies
alien...meaning we are being lied to regarding...ermm...aliens..
either one gets my interest


I agree most wholeheartedly! Just making the point that his observation presents more than one possibility.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Do not forget the Phoenix Lights. MSM was covering it LIVE and not just for a few minutes. Thats the night I knew for sure there are ufos whether alien or american. But sadly it faded away didnt it? No one at my job talked about it or knew about it. An alien invasion could occur, they could destroy buildings and towns and monuments, and still the majority would either be unaware or simply not care. There will never be satisfactory proof. The movies and tv shows that penetrate our thick skulls this year and next will desensitize us to the point if you went into your bathroom and ET was taking a dump you would say Excuse Me and wait your turn. Far-fetched? PHOENIX LIGHTS PEOPLE! It happened on LIVE tv! And there are still skeptics walking around. Make sure you have toilet paper in your bathrooms please.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
I guess this is the first time he said the word ET but I believe Col Halt has always emphatically insisted the UFO he saw was something fantastic and unexplainable, not some balloon or secret govt spy plane. There is simply too much evidence that something extraordinary occurred. The visitation of a nuclear weapons base in England is connected with the ICBM UFO incidents in the United States.

WTF is penetrating these high security areas other than aliens ?
I've seen a strategic weapons storage facility up close, and you'd be in a world of pain for simply flying over one in an ultra light or paraglider. It woud take a small army to get close to where the weapons are stored. They shoot first and ask questions later.

Regarding Rendlesham Forest, there is likely a lot more to the story we will probably never know. I don't think the higher up UK or US generals have given any details, unlike events such as Roswell. I think the Air Force camera footage from Col Halt's experience in Rendlesham Forest disappeared into a black vault. Halt spoke about all the outside visitors AFOSI etc, in the period after the UFO events.


[edit on 9-7-2009 by Schaden]



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   
What I love about the most famous cases, is that the farther and farther we get from the date they happened, the more and more "amazing" things we learn from the.......ah....er....creative buffoons that were involved in them and/or their investigation.

I have looked into the whole Rendlsham thing more than I think most here have. Much more than a casual internet search, including phone calls with several of the names I see on these very boards and other means. When it came to light, I was fascinated, and wanted to know more. Unfortunately, the more and more I learned about the actual incident, including the recordings from it, the more and more I had to shrug the whole ting off and then giggle at those that know nothing more about it than the internet ramblings of "experts" and the stories (which seem to be ever evolving) of the principals involved...which has also changed over time and also several who were there that tell different stories.

Radiation on site.......PLEASE. If you believe that then you didn't understand that the unit they were using didn't have the resolution to display what is claimed.

Blinking lights in the woods and all the "airmen" knowing for sure it wasn't a lighthouse (because they all "thought" they were facing the other direction even though a close look indicates they were "not sure" of their actual orientation) Funny, how the recording matches EXACTLY the cycle rate of the lighthouse in the distance. Guess the UFO was just matching that to blend in huh?

I would love to do a write up of everything I have collected on this SHAM of a case (that is a good example of how the internet has ruined the ability to present evidence to the contrary of people's desire to belief the least probable conclusion). But, lucky for me, another guy has pretty much summed up my findings in a nifty 10 minute of so podcast.

Click and Save the Listen, lol

Seriously, spend 10 minutes of you life and listen to this before reading the rest of my tripe.

I can imagine that most will not let the light of common sense, reason and logic shine on one of the "commandments" of the religion of Ufology. But if you can disconnect your belief system, and step back from the ever "evolving" accounts of "those that were there", we might be able to move past idiotic cases like this, and show those that are involved and purposely push things like this on the public that yes we do have a brain, and we are no longer going to blindly discuss such none-sense unless they present the FACTS that some of us went out of our way to discover.

Noticeably missing from cases like this, presented by those that do so, are the majority of the things that seem to discredit or leave doubt in the observer's or readers mind. Wonder why that is?

Ufology is dead. Cases like Roswell and Redelsham along with the loudest voice of Ufology on the internet have "baptized" an entire generation of those interested in this subject and it prevents them from questioning openly one of their sacred cows.

Hate me for saying this, call me an ignorant skeptic, but then continue along the path your on and lets talk in the next 20 years to see if this subject has made any movement based off of the worship of cases like this and others.

Folks, it is far past time to hook our brains back up and take this to the next level.

[edit on 9-7-2009 by IgnoreTheFacts]



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts Folks, it is far past time to hook our brains back up and take this to the next level.


Ok. I'm listening. So what's the next level, in your opinion?



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   
The next level is a place we can't get to from here due to the "generational sin" that Ufology has been passing down to the young ones.

The next level is where logic, reason and common sense speaks for this subject, so when a real good case comes up worth mainstream investigation there is no giggle factor to contend with. That will never happen in our lifetime.

[edit on 9-7-2009 by IgnoreTheFacts]



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Meh.. you can dismiss it all if you like, but I am also tired of people treating other humans as ignorant morons who cant' tell the difference between something flying over their heads, and a lighthouse some 20 miles away or whatever it was.

Trained military men working in a secure location are so clueless as to be utterly unable to tell the difference between UFOs, stars, and a lighthouse? Even though I'd guess, that lighthouse was well known to them. The thing was right in front of them.

Of course, as usual, I'm sure they are all lying as well as idiots, because of all the fame and fortune it's gotten them. wait...



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Originally posted by fleabit

Meh.. you can dismiss it all if you like......


Hey, I didn't dismiss this case without REALLY looking into it and using my brain. That puts me far and above the group I think you are trying to lump me into.


....but I am also tired of people treating other humans as ignorant morons who cant' tell the difference between something flying over their heads, and a lighthouse some 20 miles away or whatever it was.


First and foremost, if I came across calling them ignorant morons, I should have made a better point to just call them ignorant (which doesn't mean stupid, moron of buffoon, just that they have a lack of knowledge). However, taking the word of some very young service men recounting something years and years later (while often disagreeing with each others accounts) on faith that you want to believe alone is doing a discredit to this subject, and I know you better than that, that's why your one of my trusted friends. Lighthouse?

Let's listen to the recording of the guys seeing the light, then superimpose a beep representing every time the lighthouse would shine in their direction. WOW, it is DEAD ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! To ignore that evidence in light of taking the word of some exited guys years later is, in my opinion, ignorant.


Even though I'd guess, that lighthouse was well known to them. The thing was right in front of them.


Their accounts has them mixed up on their direction at first, not knowing where they were facing at first. Ever happen to you in the woods..sure it has. And to make believe that THESE KIDS were HIGHLY trained SUPER SOLDIERS who are far and above fault is not really understanding the average 3rd shift military guard mentality at a base where there were very few incidents that EVER required their attention. So when something even remotely "fun" happens they are more than happy to over act, misidentify and misconstrue what was happening in the name of "something to do".


Of course, as usual, I'm sure they are all lying as well as idiots, because of all the fame and fortune it's gotten them. wait...


You have not looked at the facts of this case by yourself, without the internet filter of conspiracy guiding your way, so it does not surprise me that you take this position, but as I pointed out above that is the problem with this subject.

Are they idiots? Maybe, maybe not. But are they ignorant. YES. The "radiation" they reported was using a meter that couldn't give them crap for answers because it was not the right scale to determine the levels were the least bit unusual. In fact, the readings should be thrown out because the were inaccurate, caused by the users being too ignorant to understand what they were trying to measure. Simple as that.

There are TONS of things that are as "simple as that" about this case. Viewed independently they pretty much tear this thing up, viewed as a group they make this case a joke. Simple as that.

Go ahead, look into this for yourself and if you don't come to the same conclusions as I have I'll eat my hat.

And SERIOUSLY, if you are that subscribed to things like this, give the audio link I posted 10 minutes of your life. Especially the part about the lighthouse. It is almost sad when you hear it, as it will dispel the majority of the utter tripe you read about this case on the internet.


[edit on 9-7-2009 by IgnoreTheFacts]



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   
If it was only the lighthouse they saw, why wouldn't that be obvious on subsequent nights in the woods ?

What got their attention on the night of the first incident ? What did Penniston and Burroughs see ?



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
Originally posted by fleabit

Meh.. you can dismiss it all if you like......


Hey, I didn't dismiss this case without REALLY looking into it and using my brain. That puts me far and above the group I think you are trying to lump me into.


....but I am also tired of people treating other humans as ignorant morons who cant' tell the difference between something flying over their heads, and a lighthouse some 20 miles away or whatever it was.


First and foremost, if I came across calling them ignorant morons, I should have made a better point to just call them ignorant (which doesn't mean stupid, moron of buffoon, just that they have a lack of knowledge). However, taking the word of some very young service men recounting something years and years later (while often disagreeing with each others accounts) on faith that you want to believe alone is doing a discredit to this subject, and I know you better than that, that's why your one of my trusted friends. Lighthouse?

Let's listen to the recording of the guys seeing the light, then superimpose a beep representing every time the lighthouse would shine in their direction. WOW, it is DEAD ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! To ignore that evidence in light of taking the word of some exited guys years later is, in my opinion, ignorant.


Even though I'd guess, that lighthouse was well known to them. The thing was right in front of them.


Their accounts has them mixed up on their direction at first, now knowing where they were facing at first. Ever happen to you in the woods..sure it has. And to make believe that THESE KIDS were HIGHLY trained SUPER SOLDIERS who are far and above fault is not really understanding the average 3rd shift military guard mentality at a base where there were very few incidents that EVER required their attention. So when something even remotely "fun" happens they are more than happy to over act, misidentify and misconstrue what was happening in the name of "something to do".


Of course, as usual, I'm sure they are all lying as well as idiots, because of all the fame and fortune it's gotten them. wait...


You have not looked at the facts of this case by yourself, without the internet filter of conspiracy guiding your way, so it does not surprise me that you take this position, but as I pointed out above that is the problem with this subject.

Are they idiots? Maybe, maybe not. But are they ignorant. YES. The "radiation" they reported was using a meter that couldn't give them crap for answers because it was not the right scale to determine the levels were the least bit unusual. In fact, the readings should be thrown out because the were inaccurate, caused by the users being too ignorant to understand what they were trying to measure. Simple as that.

There are TONS of things that are as "simple as that" about this case. Viewed independently they pretty much tear this thing up, viewed as a group they make this case a joke. Simple as that.

Go ahead, look into this for yourself and if you don't come to the same conclusions as I have I'll eat my hat.

And SERIOUSLY, if you are that subscribed to things like this, give the audio link I posted 10 minutes of your life. Especially the part about the lighthouse. It is almost sad when you hear it, as it will dispel the majority of the utter tripe you read about this case on the internet.


Only you cant see the lighthouse at all from where they were walking through the woods. Obviously haven;t actually done half as much work as you claimed you have... Plus there was the corroborative evidence from a civilian witness, living next to the forest, who saw lights descending into the forest and the flash lites in the forest of the, what one would assume, was the military personnel. Then there were the two independent witnesses who made a UFO report on the same night after their drive home in the vicinity..

It sounds like you have made the classic mistake of getting your time lines totally mixed up and are mixing facts from one nights activity, during which the troops on the ground double checked it wasn't the lighthouse they were seeing and another night...

Halt took the very guy who originated the Lighthouse theory to the place he claims the incident happened and the guy himself, on film, admitted that, his explanation of the lighthouse no longer held water, so I'd suggest you keep up with what has been going on yourself..



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Last summer Halt was on a Larry King episode talking about this same thing.

His story has been out for some time.

This line is the 3rd line.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
I can imagine that most will not let the light of common sense, reason and logic shine on one of the "commandments" of the religion of Ufology. But if you can disconnect your belief system, and step back from the ever "evolving" accounts of "those that were there", we might be able to move past idiotic cases like this, and show those that are involved and purposely push things like this on the public that yes we do have a brain, and we are no longer going to blindly discuss such none-sense unless they present the FACTS that some of us went out of our way to discover.

Noticeably missing from cases like this, presented by those that do so, are the majority of the things that seem to discredit or leave doubt in the observer's or readers mind. Wonder why that is?

Ufology is dead. Cases like Roswell and Redelsham along with the loudest voice of Ufology on the internet have "baptized" an entire generation of those interested in this subject and it prevents them from questioning openly one of their sacred cows.

Hate me for saying this, call me an ignorant skeptic, but then continue along the path your on and lets talk in the next 20 years to see if this subject has made any movement based off of the worship of cases like this and others.

Folks, it is far past time to hook our brains back up and take this to the next level.



Wow, what a fantastic post. Exactly what I have seen and concluded, but better articulated that I could hope for.

I was in England when Rendlesham happened. I remember later some soldier confessed to driving a jeep through the forest with lights flashing as a hoax and then retracted it. Whether it was pressure, embarrassment, fear of recrimination he backed off, who knows. But someone actually confesses and the UFO community, doesn't want to speak to this guy because it might reveal the truth of the non-event.

I've been interested in UFOs for decades, but so far not a sliver of an extaterrestrial craft or convincing photo of an alien has come to light.

A million stories, fuzzy videos and pics. A lot of con men, delusionals and deranged people along the way.

It's not a scientific quest any more. It's a cult-like religion with all the classic characteristics. Faith, dogmas, belief in the absence of substantiation.

Sadly if there is some evidence of a visitation form out there, it will get lost among the thousands of amateur videos, contact stories, myth creations, etc.

Thanks for your input.


Mike



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by jdm2104
I hope we hear more information about this from other sources. It bothers me that the story comes from the Daily Star!


Just noticed he was part of "out of the blue":





[edit on 9-7-2009 by jdm2104]

[edit on 9-7-2009 by jdm2104]



Maybe " they" only allow these stories to come out through sources that are deemed " maybe not trustworthy" as a diversion tactic......

That way they let us do the " hush hushing" to our selves....



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by fls13
reply to post by tarifa37
 


Hasn't this been his position for years? Sure it has. Just like Edgar Mitchell's spring appearance at the Nat'l Press Club. He didn't say anything there he hasn't been saying for years. I certainly don't blame Halt or Mitchell, they've been consistent. The media spins this as if it's a new revelation. Bad media!



If they fired all the media and let people like us ( normal people who "get it" ) cover all the stories the truth about everything in the past 50 years would be out to the public within the end of 2009...............

We humans are not dumb......just young and easily manipulated...



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by tarifa37
Former Deputy Base Commander Col Charles Halt said “extra-terrestrials” caused the close encounter in Suffolk.... “The UFOs I saw were structured machines moving under intelligent control and operating beyond the realm of anything I have ever seen before or since.

“I believe the objects that I saw at close quarters were extra-terrestrial in origin.”

Take note, please, that all this quote reveals is that he saw a device and he did not recognise it as built-here

That's not the same as knowing it was extraterrestrial in origin.


Ok but at the very least it means somebody is covering something up.

And that doesn't bother you at all ?

Sheep



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 07:04 PM
link   
I served in the military for many years. Young soldier doesn't equate to ignorant. Inexperienced in some areas, sure. But soldiers are imo, more alert and less inclined to panic in situations than say, your average joe citizen.

There is this, too. In their excitement, they may have also seen the lighthouse, and reported it as well. I can believe that. But seeing the lighthouse does not eliminate the entire sighting. Don't you think that they had perhaps seen that lighthouse probably many times in their time serving there? Why were these sightings not happening on a regular basis, if it was something as simple as that? No... there is imo, more to it than a lighthouse. And even moreso, I find it hard to believe that all reporting it ALL mistook it. But if they had sighted something very anomalous, I could believe that in their heightened stress and excitement, they mistook those flashes as further crafts.

I've not personally called people involved, so I guess you got me there. But I've read up on it many times, and seen at least three shows that featured this sighting. I think it is quite a bit more substantial than a lighthouse that probably was on every single night.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Schaden
If it was only the lighthouse they saw, why wouldn't that be obvious on subsequent nights in the woods ?


Simple answer. It was.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join