It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
There's also the question of time. If Halt says they were out for four hours, there's a good chance it was getting to be daylight? Maybe someone was posted to stand by the marks until they could be examined properly. I don't know really.
This same colonel who again was very high level in NATO's nuclear weapons security apparatus told me in approximately 1994 that after the UFO hovered over that facility and sent down laser-like beams of light … that two bombs were selected from one of the bunkers and flown aboard a C-58 aircraft to Kirtland AFB and the Nuclear Weapons Analysis Laboratory they have there.
He claims to have seen the files relating to the transfer of the weapons. He couldn't tell me why these two particular bombs were selected. Maybe they had visible damage to them from the beam? He didn't know one way or the other. When I asked him what the results were of the analysis of the lab, he said he was not privy to that information.
They tracked a bona fide UFO on the night that Col. Halt was in the woods. It crossed their radar scope, which had a 120 mile diameter. It crossed it in less than two sweeps which would have been approximately 8 seconds. It then hovered outside their window of the air traffic control tower, they could see it hovering some distance away above a water tower on the base.
Ike Barker said it was like a basketball, it was an orange sphere, it had windows around its equator, its centre that seemed to be portholes which a yellowish orange light emanating from the portholes. And after this object hovered for a few seconds it then reversed its course and on the way out of the area, made a sharp angle 90 degree turn.
And Jim Carey talks on camera about ... "That can't be one of ours."
Something pointed them to that spot...
I think the way certain expressions, figures of speech and other bits of linguistic vagueness get analysed too much. Not everything should be taken literally.
I can't say what started it but at some point I think that a separate project was started in which we (as in the general public but specifically UFO type folk) became the subjects of an information gathering experiment. How do we react to the information we have been given? What effect does this all have on the public consciousness? How has it changed our beliefs in relation to mysterious subjects? Someone is definitely watching us watching them.
I've always just wondered what the hell UFOs are. No real idea or hypothesis has got me completely on-side. There could be a number of different explanations for a number of associated phenomena.
I know nothing about football............
Yes, thanks for that. There's no way the ground was frozen enough to prevent a heavy craft from making bigger impressions than what's shown in the photos. I think the frozen ground claim is made up to try to preserve the idea there was a landing site when the photographic evidence and audio evidence on Halt's tape doesn't suggest any landing site of any heavy object.
originally posted by: mirageman
According to this site en.tutiempo.net... the Christmas Day temperature was as high as 10°C and fell to 4°C overnight at Woodbridge. On the morning of Boxing Day When Ray Gulays took the photos, the temperature was a crisp but not frozen 2 to 5°C. By the 29th December the temperature did not drop below 7°C.
So all we have is something less than definitive and probably does not strengthen the case for a UFO or other object sitting on the forest floor.
If someone finds Penniston to be a credible source, perhaps. But even the very open-minded Paratopia guys are now very disillusioned with the credibility of Penniston after his answers imploded on the Angela Joiner show, and they're usually willing to give people the benefit of the doubt. With so much coming from Penniston being of an obviously dubious nature, it's hard to attach any special significance to his casts. Also it's not like we don't have other evidence from the photographs and Halts tape. Given Penniston's credibility record, I'd have to go with the photographs and Halts tape as being more credible to the extent there's any conflict between them and Penniston's casts.
It also makes it difficult to explain the Penniston plaster casts
Yes Lord Hill Norton says he has no doubt something landed. He might have been a fine admiral so I can't judge his skills as a commander, but I must say his skills as an investigator are woefully lacking if he makes such a statement based on the dismal evidence for a so-called "landing" that's been made public. What's really ironic is that video focuses on a so-called landing site in the middle of the field and that's nowhere near the supposed landing site that's documented in the forest with trees nearby, so right in the video the evidence is contradictory, but even if one ignores Warren and sticks to the documented "landing site" in the photos, none of that evidence suggests any landing to me. The police apparently looked at the site when they were called, and they didn't see any evidence of a landing, nor did Thurkettle when he looked at the site a while later, and even Halt's tape suggests he didn't see anything significant at the so called "landing site". All of this adds up to Lord Hill Norton's statement he has no doubt something landed as having absolutely no known credible evidence to back that up.
originally posted by: mirageman
Gerry Harris provides an interesting perspective as a civilian and Lord Hill Norton suggests that the MoD and DoD are covering something up.