It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 56
<< 53  54  55    57  58  59 >>

log in


posted on May, 4 2016 @ 03:55 PM
a reply to: ctj83

J.D. Ingall's.

Are you sure there's an apostrophe in there. That sounds like the name of a corner shop

Well, the crying airman was Lori Rehfeldt. She spoke to Halt after the blue light came through her vehicle.

I'm pretty sure that Lori Rehfledt's case occurred back in Feb of 1980.

I think you may be getting confused with Lt. Bonnie Tamplin.

She suppposedly was out in the forest on the 'inbetween' night of 26th/27th Dec 1980 and a blue sphere or light flew through the windscreen of her patrol vehicle as it stalled. Apparently she had to be relieved from duty and had some kind of breakdown. I would hasten to add that this part of the story is the least known about.

Don't worry about getting confused though. It happens to us all!

posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:07 PM
a reply to: mirageman

Ingalls owns a used part store for UFOs, didn't you know? His name is JD Ingalls - no apostrophe.

You're right about Bonnie Tamplin, just me getting confused! Apparently she was calling for Master Sergeant Ball (I can't call him Bobby Ball) and Halt heard this.

At least this explains what Halt told the Dot Street and Brenda Butler!

One thing I'm very surprised no on has mentioned is in the video that you posted of Larry and Garry talking about the letter at the event.

At one point a photograph of the phenomena is shown. Warren points out trees and airmen. This photo was one of the slides. Has anyone got a copy of the slides or the photo?

edit on 4-5-2016 by ctj83 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:31 PM
a reply to: ctj83

Ingalls owns a used part store for UFOs, didn't you know?

You deserve more than a solitary star for that comeback my friend.

I have heard Larry Warren talking about Bonnie Tamplin losing the plot back in the office and refusing to go back on duty. But I can't remember where from.

As for Larry's photo. I suspect it is this one.

Correct me if you think it's wrong. I've circled what is supposed to be the UFO. Little else is visible. It just looks like a bunch of smudges to me.

ETA : There is also a photo of an A10 Larry took which shows a tiny speck that may be a UFO.

Enlarged the speck looks like this

edit on 4/5/16 by mirageman because: ETA

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 04:44 AM
a reply to: mirageman

The Bonnie Tamplin 'crying' comment comes from an interview Halt gave to Dot Street And Brenda Butler. It can be found in Haunted Skies Volume 5.

Actually, I'm talking about 48:55 in the presentation (RFI Convention 2014, after those photos are shown.

Warren says (if I hear correctly) - that this is a photo of the phenomena, and that trees and personnel can be made out.

Why have I never heard of this before, or have seen this? I've done a quick perspective correct on the projection... I'd love to see the original or Garry's slides.

edit on 5-5-2016 by ctj83 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 09:12 AM
a reply to: ctj83

Are you saying that's supposed to be a picture of the "blue orb"?


posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:12 AM
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Dunno what to make of that myself.
Somewhere in there is a sort of black triangle if you really want to see one but it could be anything. Dazzle, reflection, flare...very unclear.
Getting to be par for the course here.

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 01:40 PM
a reply to: ctj83

If I was a gambling man (and I'll give you odds of 4/5 that I am) then I'd say someone has coloured and manipulated the black and white picture posted earlier with software. Probably blown up the size of it as well.

The originals can be seen here :

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 01:56 PM
a reply to: mirageman

Rendlesham has more layers of deception than Roswell.

Something quite interesting or embarassing must be at the core of it.

Doesn't seem we will ever find that "smoking gun" however.


posted on May, 5 2016 @ 02:53 PM
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Indeed. A year ago we had that fiasco the "Roswell Slides"

Now we've got the "Rendlesham Powerpoint Presentation".

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 03:40 PM
a reply to: mirageman

Its feeling as though one of those layers has been prepared specially.
If the memo was "sanitized" or played down, I now strongly suspect the tape was too.
Don't ask me what or why but it definitely could be the edited version for public consumption.
Looking back through some transcripts gives me the impression that Halt was quite comfortable using tape as his method of record.
He mentions the personal version which was made shortly after the event for his own use, further copies (plural) and/or additional information which are in a safe place for his insurance, "four or five hours" which will never see the light of day....and copies which went up the chain of command from the original event.
It seems we won't ever get to the bottom if we try and follow that trail anymore.
Hitting the pause button on that line.

Not really sure what to make of the photos. I can't see anything really.

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 04:34 PM
a reply to: mirageman

I feel rather bad saying this, but I think if you are right, it means that Warren and Heseltine knowingly lied (and possibly fabricated) the photo as Warren is pointing out trees and airmen. I think that is a far greater game changer for the RFI.

Larry talks about a photo expert saying that the photo having all sorts of odd things going on. Doesn't sound like a fabrication does it?

Why have we not seen this image before?

Where can we get a clearer version?

Have I made a huge mistake and not heard Garry or Larry say that this is a mockup? If not then they need to stand by this, as it's a huge addition to the case.

So what is it to be:
- A mockup that I misinterpreted? Someone else please watch that section - Larry does talk about airmen, photo experts etc
- A genuine photo that show the phenomena?

Larry, or Garry if you see this, you thought the photo important enough to share at RFI Con' 14. Surely it's worth sharing as it adds so much the case?

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 04:44 PM
a reply to: Tulpa

Personally I doubt I'll ever know what really happened at Rendlesham. It's pretty obvious that, sadly, the main witnesses are unwilling to work together. But I still find the whole thing fascinating. It's more like a soap opera than UFO story now. I guess that's part of the attraction!

This forum is actually in need of a really good *NEW* UFO thread to get it's teeth into. Sadly there don't seem to be many new topics out there though.

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 05:22 PM
a reply to: Tulpa

If the photo is genuine, then I think I know of photos of something very similar.

If the photo is faked, then Warren is essentially as compromised as Penniston.

Compromised by money or compromised by an outside force who needs to misdirect?

Here is an offbeat theory:
- The second night is the night the real stuff happened
- halt recorded two tapes - one second one third night
- his occasional confusions such as John not being present are due to the two tapes
- the tape we have is edited or reconstructed to hide details
- it's essentially a sacrifice to protect the second night which we know far less about.

I think Halt knows what happened. The problem is, as I understand it - Halt is writing one book. Who knows what it will reveal? There is also another book that will expose a lot of the contradictions made by people like Halt.

There is a possibility that these books will seek to undermine each other.

Will either talk about the truth behind the tapes and that second night? Will either back up or destroy the "phenomena photo"?

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 05:35 PM
a reply to: ctj83

I used to hold Gary Heseltine in quite high regard with his background as a military police officer and a regular British cop. However now he's retired from the force and entered the "UFO conference circuit" on a sort of semi-professional basis my opinion has changed.

I honestly believe that once you become a paid "UFOtainer" then you eventually stop chasing the truth and trade it in for whatever will bring in the £, € and $. It's hard to stay neutral to each and every case when you really want to find something of substance. I try to do this in my posts even though I don't get things right all the time. However, without listing names, once you start writing books, speaking publicly, and becoming a paranormal radio regular guest, things change. Cash is involved. The audience for these shows tend not to want to hear the truth they want the 'fantasy'.

So once 'researchers' start getting paid to "entertain" folks with UFO stories then (most) eventually compromise themselves. Because there is that brick wall everyone in the field hits where nothing sticks any more and they realise that UFOs might seem real but there is nothing to prove they are controlled by ET, time travellers or any other supernatural least so far anyway. Like Hynek said

"We don't have UFOs only UFO reports".

So "UFOtainers" end up missing out vital information to leave mystery where there isn't any. They also start adding in the stories of the rich and famous (because people are impressed by people they've seen on TV speaking about stuff). The Roswell slides is a good example of this. A photo of a mummy taken in a museum was made out to be an alien body taken by a friend of the Eisenhowers. Hmmm!

I don''t particularly want to stop people from following this story. I have a feeling it will run and run like Roswell. All I am saying is that you should never lose your objectivity.

edit on 5/5/16 by mirageman because: corrections

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 05:42 PM
a reply to: mirageman

We need a post like this pinned up to the top of the Aliens and UFOs forum.


posted on May, 5 2016 @ 05:44 PM
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

It wouldn't stick Kev

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 05:56 PM
a reply to: mirageman

I doubt we'll find out too much more from the forthcoming books.
At some point I think it was confused enough to cease being a cover up and become an experiment on UFOlogy in general.
Its been a suspicion of mine that it was a good time to move weapons around while the nosy folk were all looking at Woodbridge.
You know, Britain's ONLY nuclear storage depot...honest...just that one, no more anywhere...etc.

Halt seemed adamant that Warren had mixed up parts of different nights.
Did he do the same with the tape?
New books are all well and good but all the main players are well aware of the state of play regarding researchers and if its a game then they know what's going to be looked at with suspicion and what some people will leap on as the next big clue.

Halt is probably unable to reveal anything of a secret nature so could be leading us away from the truth while maintaining a plausible position about what is already public.

I think you're right about a new case.
I'll finish Night Siege later on then have a day off UFOs.

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 08:48 PM
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I agree with that in the sense that our thread is the only mechanism holding any of the participant's-in-this-mess' toes to the fire.

We're it.

All six of us.

edit on 5-5-2016 by Bybyots because: Sorry, lostgirl, 6

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 09:28 PM
a reply to: Bybyots


posted on May, 6 2016 @ 01:45 AM
More lurkers around than you might think

Still following this thread with a lot of interest. Good stuff!

<< 53  54  55    57  58  59 >>

log in