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

page: 30
89
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2014 @ 03:44 PM
link   
I am about 80% through this fine read by Mr. Pope. There is not a question in my mind what so ever, that Pope knows, as to all the others on base involved in the Bentwaters incident that an extraterrestrial craft landed and there was quite a bit of interaction with many distinguished members of the US Air Force, and in particular two members of the Air Force are still suffering both mental and physical consequences of their interaction with this craft. Pope also knows that no matter what both governments claim about their policy towards ufo's, that BOTH governments still are very much involved with ufo investigations. Its all about the technology.
edit on 07pm31pm5091 by data5091 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 7 2014 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Guest101

Thanks for all that information Guest101 your posts in this thread have been very informative.

This is very similar to the information Andrew Pike wrote about (which I summarised briefly in the thread here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...)

Plasma may well be the key to this case and that million dollar question certainly is what it a natural phenomenon or something artificial out in that forest?

Reading between the lines I think Nick Pope is suggesting the latter in the new book. Although that is far from being a definitive conclusion.



posted on May, 7 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: data5091

I can see how you arrived at your interpretation of Nick Pope's book. Some of his arguments are convincing, with others he points us in a certain direction and leaves us to join the dots. But sometimes he fails to question the dubious evidence or even leaves out information to make the case seem more mysterious.

For instance Penniston is quoted as reporting that no landing gear was visible on the craft in the early hours of the 26th of Dec. 1980. His head still full of binary codes he then returns in daylight, having picked up some plaster from a friend in Ipswich and spends an hour at the landing site making plaster casts, without anyone else noticing!! Even though we know the police visited the site at around 10:30am and other USAF Personnel therefore must have visited the site earlier in the morning. With daylight not arriving until after 8am, Penniston getting back home from his debriefings, contacting his friend, picking up the plaster, driving back to the forest and then preparing plaster casts it all seems a bit of a tight timeline.

This and a number of other major problems with Penniston's story are explained away as a result of interrogations and the trauma from the whole experience. So it's a case of whatever he remembers that fits is fine, when he doesn't make sense it's all down to those nasty interrogations he went through.

I think Nick Pope is a good writer and has done a very good job of putting all the information together in a style that makes it an easy and informative read. His experience at the MoD puts him in a good position to talk about the inner working of government and he does know a lot about this case. But by agreeing to write up Jim Penniston and John Burroughs's stories means he has compromised and therefore ignored some of the more difficult aspects of the witness testimony.

This is not to say that something strange didn't happen, just that the book doesn't completely convince me that it was ET.



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 07:37 AM
link   
I find it difficult to explain away the evidence of this incident including the increased radiation readings in the area the craft landed, as well as mentions of tree damage to a point where some type of sap was oozing out of the branches, as mentioned the plaster casts made of the landing site, the drawings Penniston made of the hyroglyphics on the craft, the sensations of electrostatic feelings felt by both Penniston and Burroughs and others, as they were close to the craft and on and on..and then I mentioned both Penniston and Burroughs have had sometimes severe health consequences related to this incident and are trying to obtain their medical records but to date, they are not getting any reply. Why? What are they trying to hide?
I think Pope buttressed his case in a chapter of the book called "Beyond Rendlesham" where he mentioned many, high profile ufo incidents around the world that today are not explained, including the Phoenix Lights, the Cash/Landrum encounter in Texas, and a pilot out of Melbourne Australia who encountered a ufo while in the air, and whos last words were that the ufo was above him. He was never found or heard from again. This particular story was aired in the Science Channels excellent "Unexplained Files". Pope was somewhat of a self admitted skeptic before he left his MOD position, but has since come to terms with his change of opinion regarding the subject of ufo's.
edit on 08am31am5091 by data5091 because: (no reason given)

edit on 08am31am5091 by data5091 because: (no reason given)

edit on 08am31am5091 by data5091 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: data5091
I find it difficult to explain away the evidence of this incident including the increased radiation readings in the area the craft landed.
I don't think Nick Pope's source agrees that there were increased radiation readings, as Nick Pope claimed:

Were the radiation readings significant?

Cowling also confirmed to me by telephone in 1998 August that Nick Pope had not re-checked the facts with him. This was over a year after Professor Close’s TV demonstration that there was nothing significant about the radiation levels at Rendlesham – an opinion with which Cowling, Pope’s own source, now agrees. (See also 2009 Update, below.)



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: data5091

I find it difficult to explain away the evidence of this incident including the increased radiation readings in the area the craft landed, as well as mentions of tree damage to a point where some type of sap was oozing out of the branches, as mentioned the plaster casts made of the landing site, the drawings Penniston made of the hyroglyphics on the craft, the sensations of electrostatic feelings felt by both Penniston and Burroughs and others, as they were close to the craft and on and on..and then I mentioned both Penniston and Burroughs have had sometimes severe health consequences related to this incident and are trying to obtain their medical records but to date, they are not getting any reply. Why? What are they trying to hide?

I think Pope buttressed his case in a chapter of the book called "Beyond Rendlesham" where he mentioned many, high profile ufo incidents around the world that today are not explained, including the Phoenix Lights, the Cash/Landrum encounter in Texas, and a pilot out of Melbourne Australia who encountered a ufo while in the air, and whos last words were that the ufo was above him. He was never found or heard from again. This particular story was aired in the Science Channels excellent "Unexplained Files". Pope was somewhat of a self admitted skeptic before he left his MOD position, but has since come to terms with his change of opinion regarding the subject of ufo's.


Having studied a lot of information on this case myself from both sides of the argument I will say that the case has not been explained satisfactorily. Taking your points one by one here are the main issues. I'm sure some of them have been covered earlier in thread as well.

i) A landed craft is thrown into doubt because the initial statements of all the witnesses make no mention of a landed craft other than Penniston's who stated :




When we got within a 50 metre 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 metre or two out. At this point of positive identification I relayed to CSC, SSgt Coffey. A positing sighting of the object…1….Colour of lights and that it was definitely mechanical in nature. This is the closest point that I was near the object at any point.



ii) The tree damage is also contested as it was supposedly markings made at an earlier date by the forestry commission to indicate trees for felling. However the samples Colonel Halt took have never materialized.

iii) The plaster casts I have covered a few posts earlier. But the fact remains that Penniston stated even in later interviews that he could not see any landing gear. Why then during daylight did he suddenly decide he needed some plaster to make casts of something he didn't know existed. The British police thought the markings left at the alleged landing sight were nothing more than tracks left by animals. Some of the USAF Personnel beg to differ.

iv) The glyphs are an odd one. Penniston says he took his camera with him and took two rolls of photos of the craft during a 45 minute recce of a craft he never got within 50m of originally. Before or after that in the dimly lit forest he also managed to take out his notebook and start sketching the glyphs he'd just photographed or later decides to photograph. These same glyphs confused him as he didn't know what they meant. However they were made public a couple of decades ago. The binary codes, which supposedly ended up in the same notebook and were also something that confused Penniston, not knowing what they meant were not revealed until 2010. Penniston even claims to be oblivious to what binary code was until the History Channel research team glimpsed his now infamous notebook. Even though in his own 1990s hypnosis sessions he actually mentions binary codes but never pursued their definition for another 20 years.

v) The electrostatic effects have never been adequately explained and is a most interesting part of the story.

vi) Burroughs and Penniston's fight to obtain their own medical records is another part of the case that also makes you stop and wonder what all the secrecy is really for? What is the US government trying to hide.

vii) As for the Phoenix Lights, the Cash/Landrum case and the Fredrick Valentich case from Australia you will find similar conflicting 'facts' in these cases. Just check out a few of the 'vintage' threads on them here on ATS.

These are conundrums (amongst many others) that exist in this case. However I also think everyone is entitled to make their own mind up based on their own evaluations of the evidence they have seen.

Just so you can check it out as well, John Burroughs was also on ATS , 8 years ago and presented a slightly different point of view from his rather minor role in the book.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

It all remains a mystery to me.











edit on 8/5/14 by mirageman because: spelling



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: mirageman
If Burroughs is credible, Penniston kept no such notebook:

The Rendlesham UFO witness statements

In more recent television interviews Penniston has exhibited a notebook in which he claims he made real-time notes and sketches of a landed craft for about 45 minutes (see picture below). However, there are serious problems with this claim. For one thing, the date in the notebook is December 27 and the starting time is noted as 12:20 (presumably meaning 00:20). This, as we know, does not accord with the established date and time. Burroughs, who was within a few yards of him throughout the incident and saw no craft, told me in an email on 2006 March 22: “Penniston was not keeping a notebook as it went down”. In a further email dated 2008 January 17 Burroughs emphasized: “Penniston did not have time to make any sketches in a note book while this was going on and did not walk around it for 45 min.” Penniston now claims the date and time refer to a stream of binary digits he received telepathically and wrote down while at home the following day, but unfortunately that is not what the notebook shows.
I would add that it seems odd Penniston never produced this notebook earlier if it was real, so such absence also makes it seem like a later fabrication. I tend to believe Burroughs when he said Penniston didn't keep such a notebook, and didn't walk around any craft for 45 minutes, especially since Burrough's claim is consistent with Penniston's original witness statement, that he never got any closer than 50 meters.
edit on 8-5-2014 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on May, 10 2014 @ 06:05 AM
link   
Yes, John Burroughs’ memories are very different from those of Jim Penniston.
John used to post a lot on the old Rendlesham forum. Here are some interesting quotes from these posts:


We came upon whatever it was and only were close to it briefly.



It did not just stay on the ground. If we would have come up on something we would have reported it and secured it.



Whatever we encountered was able to lift off and fly away on its own power at a high rate of speed.



There was some kind of object flying around in the sky and it was beaming down some kind of energy to the ground.



It did seem to slow down and it was only for a couple of min. before it went into the trees and disappeared.



Jim and I were standing right next to each other and what we remember happening is totally different.



Jim said right away as we were walking back that he felt it was some kind of object or craft. He was about 5-10 feet closer than I was. His statement also stated how close we got to it.



I was farther away from it and did not feel it was a craft for sure. The lights around it were very bright and if you look at my statement I drew what the lights looked like.



As far as him touching something he was the closest but I did not see him touch anything. We did split up for a brief period of time but not for 45 min. I do not believe he had a different encounter than the one the 3 of us did.



Jim never brought it up after it happened and as a young airman I really did not know what to say. UFO back then were something you did not talk about.
I did ask Jim in later years why he did not talk about it and his answer was it was an ongoing investigation because he kept getting called into OSI about it. He also stated he thought I was being called in and he never would talk about things that were in an ongoing investigation.



His story has changed and I am not sure why. He has told me since he went under hypnosis his memory of the event has changed.



posted on May, 10 2014 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: Guest101

Thanks for all that information Guest101 your posts in this thread have been very informative.

This is very similar to the information Andrew Pike wrote about (which I summarised briefly in the thread here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...)

Plasma may well be the key to this case and that million dollar question certainly is what it a natural phenomenon or something artificial out in that forest?

Reading between the lines I think Nick Pope is suggesting the latter in the new book. Although that is far from being a definitive conclusion.





Andrew Pike calls it the chicken and egg answer in his book. Although his book was written a year before Condign was released he talks of a plasma MoD report leaked to him which looks like it was Condign! He was not impressed and calls it MoD disinformation.

If it is the report in question I agree based on the black ops he covers. He does not see eye to eye with Pope. I have to say I am less than impressed with Pope's book. Can we trust a MoD man bound by the official secrets act?

I did hear two copies of Andrew's book were requested by journalists in the US which had to be got direct from him. And for those interested a CD version with additional material is being released.



posted on May, 10 2014 @ 05:55 PM
link   
The differences in testimony between Burroughs and Penniston are not adequately explained in the book. It is left as a mysterious mix of Burroughs possibly being lost "in the light" as he hits the ground and a missing 45 minutes when both men (Cabansag's position is unexplained) could not be contacted on radio.

By the way I stand slightly corrected on the story (as described in the book) of the plaster casts.

Apparently Captain Verrano and Major Drury had questioned the pair after they returned from the incident. They then ordered Burroughs and Penniston to rendezvous with them at the landing site. The pair retraced their route and found the markings at the landing site that they'd seen in the dark forest (!!). Verrano, Drury and Ray Gulyas (to take photos) arrived shortly after. Why the men travelled separately is not explained unless the officers followed directly behind them in a separate vehicle. It's still a bit peculiar.


Penniston then rushed home to Ipswich, contacted a decorator friend. Drives to his home to obtain some plaster and then returns to the 'landing' site. He then fills the indentations with plaster, waits around whilst they set and then just as he's packed the last cast away bumps into the British police accompanied by Drury, Verrano and Gulyas.He makes his excuses and leaves.

I still find this an incredibly tight time line. Boxing day in the UK is one of the darkest days of the year. Sun up is around 8:15 am assuming no gloomy cloud cover as is usual for the time of year. According to the police a report was made about 10:30am. So Penniston had 2:15hrs to not only show the officers the site but also get home, get to his friends, return and make plaster casts.

Of course the other factor in all of this is that if Penniston is blaming his drugged interrogations for fogging his memories then how does he explain making notes, drawing the glyphs and writing down the binary codes into his notebook. Supposedly they were all made immediately after the incident and before he was interrogated by secret agents from the US and Britain.

So does that mean that his notebook is actual a result of mind-bending drugged interrogations and cannot be trusted as evidence?





It seems Penniston has never asked that question to himself.
edit on 10/5/14 by mirageman because: addition



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 10:33 AM
link   
Just finished the book this morning. The complexity of this case really, is just staggering. I too believe this incident as a whole is larger than even Roswell. This WAS the U.K's. Roswell and then some. Its abundantly clear that for whatever reason, Pennistons and Burrows medical records are considered classified, and they may never be able to see them, which is sad, because both men are ill, with many health issues ongoing, but esp. so Mr. Penniston, who said he nearly dies in July 2012 because of a heart condition. They also suffer from PTSD not surprisingly, and I am of the mind that what they experienced was not clouded by this condition.

The way I took it Mr. Pope still clearly thinks that there was a ufo, dozens of people on the bases saw it, and its also been pointed out that the Chief Commander of the base who also experienced interaction with the ufo took evidence WITHOUT the knowledge of the Ministry of Defense. Why? What are they trying to hide? I do expect to hear more from this case at some point down the road. This was such an interesting read, one that I could easily read again, there was so much new information I was unaware of.....



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: data5091

It may have been military gig, the part with the binary code just doesn't cut it. I will suppose Penniston is not part of the cover-up but the code that he had a vision of, makes this case a complete mess. You don't know who to believe, is he playing a victim and at the same time disinfo-ing with the binary code? Hard to say a person with health issues would pretend that.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: data5091

Thanks for posting up your thoughts on the book. By the way I thought John Burroughs had to have open heart surgery not Penniston???? But the fact that both personnel have had their medical records from their time at Bentwaters 'classified' is a most strange development after all this time.

What are the USAF trying to hide?

I think Nick Pope is hinting that this was something 'under intelligent control'. Yes a UFO, but not automatically the commonly held perception that it was of alien origin. I definitely agree with you on that point. When I have some free time I will scrutinize the Condign report to see if the clue Pope gave us leads to anything. Although he also suggests it won't be obvious.

As for the MoD not being privy to evidence taken by the USAF well I think in some respects they are content to leave it that way. Both the US DoD and the UK MoD wanted to push responsibility for handling the case on each other.

Even if you don't think this was aliens, or time travellers then it is still a baffling mystery.

edit on 12/5/14 by mirageman because: clarification



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: ImctR

I am not sure about Penniston's role in all this. He's either completely messed up and doesn't know the real truth or a disinfo agent in my opinion. I tend to believe the former.



posted on May, 13 2014 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: mirageman

Charles Halt has some interesting comments about Penniston’s changing story.

At:
59:25
1:03:45
1:23:30
1:46:30


He seems to agree with you, and adds that Jim and John have become completely obsessed with this case.

I think Jim knew perfectly well what he wanted to achieve with those binary codes.
Well, another UFO case goes down the drain …



posted on May, 13 2014 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Guest101

Thanks for that, another one for my 'Rendlesham Collection', and I'll give it a listen in full at the weekend.

If anyone is catching up with this thread then there is a list of other free resources I compiled on Page 19:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 13 2014 @ 10:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Guest101
a reply to: mirageman

Charles Halt has some interesting comments about Penniston’s changing story.

At:
59:25
1:03:45
1:23:30
1:46:30
Thanks for the link. I didn't realize there was bad blood between Halt and Penniston/Burroughs. Halt said he tried to be nice to them and wrote a letter trying to help them get their medical records, and the next thing he knew, they were threatening to sue him. Wow.

So it seems of four different witnesses, Halt, Penniston, Burroughs, and Warren, we have 4 different stories and they don't really match up all that well. I think Halt was trying to be a little diplomatic when he said he didn't know why Penniston added the code part of his story which he never mentioned when Halt debriefed him, but Halt did put diplomacy aside long enough to say he thought Penniston and Burroughs were obsessed with the case.

There were also a few interesting tidbits from Leslie Kean like she apparently accepts that one of the UFO photos she devoted so much of her book to was hoaxed (The Belgian UFO triangle), though that's a different UFO case but I thought it was interesting that she doesn't deny the hoaxer's claim like some others seem to do. So her 5 good UFO photos is at least 20% lower plus the Paracast guys sent her info about the Costa Rica photo she thought was good (which it never was good since the lighting never matched and everything about it was wrong). Then one of the three left experts who reviewed it came to totally different conclusions, so she's down to two I guess, but given her track record of picking lousy photos as good ones, I don't hold out much hope for the other two. She still insisted there are some good UFO photos but then she's hardly unbiased since she's selling books with UFO photos. The Paracast guys come across as a little more unbiased to me.

Kean also seemed to naively accept that Penniston's photo of the Rendlesham craft didn't turn out due to radiation, but I don't think a critical analysis supports the claim of anomalous radiation in this case. As for what happened to any photos Penniston may have taken, I have no idea but I don't find the claim that radiation ruined them to be credible, and I also think Nick Pope needs to come clean and admit that his source talking about radiation now admits he doesn't think the radiation levels were anomalous either.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I’m not even sure Jim used his camera.

But Nevels did (it’s on Halt’s tape) and stated in his Earthfiles interview he developed the film himself and it was fogged.

The residual radiation on the landing site does not say anything about the amount of radiation emitted by the phenomenon itself. The phenomenon could have radiated massive amounts of X-rays and hardly leave any residual radiation.
That’s because residual radiation is either caused by leakage of radioactive material or it is caused by particles (photons) that each individually have enough energy to affect the nucleus of the atoms in the soil (turning these atoms into isotopes). “Soft” X-ray photons simply do not have enough energy for that and will not leave any residual radiation.

In the afternoon of December 27, Nevels went into the woods with Englund and was close enough to the phenomenon to make his hair stand up due to the static in the air. Maybe he was also close enough to receive sufficient radiation to fog the film(s) he had in his camera and in his pocket. This means the film was already fogged when he took the photographs later that night.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Here’s an interesting case that is very similar to the RFI.

A red object was seen. It beamed down streams of light. Landing marks in a triangular pattern were found. The soil at the landing site was investigated and showed levels of radiation that were significantly higher than background but not harmful.

www.ufoevidence.org...



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 03:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: HUMBLEONE
Penniston reports that during the download of information from the vehicle, he was told that "they" are "us" from the future. I observed a UFO during the 90's, during which in my mind I asked the question, "who are you"? ...the answer which popped into my head was "we are anthropologist 's". For years , that never made sense to me, Pennistons statement was for me a long awaited epiphany.


agreed



new topics

top topics



 
89
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join