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

a reply to: Guest101

Whoo-boy. No woo there.

a reply to: mirageman

In my view, this binary code talk is null, void, without content or merit.
If I was a coyote in a "binary code trap" I'd chew off all 4 limbs to get
away from it. IMHO the RFI "binary code" is a "4 coyote".

But I suppose when I get on my high horse about my theories,
people probably feel the same.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

The first line of your post I agree with. But don't assume anything. Remember, "assumption is the mother of all f***ups," and many of us tend to assume too much and will prematurely base our conclusions on it. I find that gets in the way when discussing these things with people in general. Just wait until the results are published.

a reply to: Gaos0

When I interacted with this black triangle "UFO":



It certainly seemed that I was in "telepathic contact with it".

And yes, indeed, just like with the RFI mythology in 2010,
at a later time it seemed that "downloaded information"
was now streaming into my mind.

I ignored that information. I've never really discussed it
with anyone.

Then maybe a month later, another bunch of "data"
played in my mind.

I ignored it.

I am not certain if this "conflation effect" is a purely psychological
thing.. where one's mind keeps trying to figure something out,
and as a result of not being able to generates all this
"binary code horse feces".

Or whether the "source" is up to the usual deception and keeps
trying to reel someone in, who refuses to get sucked down
the rabbit hole with deception.

I don't know. Nearly everyone I've ever heard of gets suck down
into the deception.

Fortunately I have been trained to resist deception as part of my
old 'spiritual past'.

Now in the case of RFI, where the whole thing stinks of simple
human deception, I can't say that this same dynamic happened.

But it was one of the following:

1) Simple deception from the military/alphabet complex
2) Simple deception from Jim for whatever reason.
3) The same effect I experienced, only the "Phenomenon" threw him under the bus.
4) Who knows what happen with Jim (or cares), but you got a "contact high"
from whatever happened, and now you are working away on your version of
"bible code".

So any way you look at it, it's a 4 coyote.

IMHO.

Kev

originally posted by: Gaos0

The first line of your post I agree with. But don't assume anything. Remember, "assumption is the mother of all f***ups," and many of us tend to assume too much and will prematurely base our conclusions on it. I find that gets in the way when discussing these things with people in general. Just wait until the results are published.

There are indeed certain energies around what we are somewhat fondly goofing on and calling "woo." That is my own opinion from my own experience as a seeker. So though I tease, I'm not a woo-denier. I haven't, however, found those energies to be trustworthy or generally psychologically healthy for the folk playing with them. Or defined. Supranormal or Collective Unconscious I care not to debate. However, I do like to keep a feel on the pulse of certain long-standing "cultures."

Gary: Does any of this tie into The Nine?

a reply to: mirageman

For any budding "UFO Prophets" or anyone else who wants to jump down the bunny hole with UFO's and try to crack the mystery, I'd recommend keeping three things in mind:

1) Government and human deception are RIFE as we all know. Just when you think you've found some 'truth' you are still probably bumping up against this.

2) Self-deception is RIFE. We all deceive ourselves, even the most hardened skeptic.

3) if you managed to doge deceptions 1) and 2) and you actually DID come into contact with "the phenomenon" then you have to deal with even worse deception---"phenomenon deception".

The "phenomenon" ALWAYS LIES / DISTORTS - 100.0000000000000000000000000% of the time. Period.
You may think that you can trust your 'source' but you can't.

This book should be required reading for all budding "UFO Prophets" and "hardcore investigators":

Messengers of Deception

Now I've found if one is very careful.. almost like trying to observe a quantum effect without disturbing it.. and keeps oneself in a very tight grip.. it's possible to observe some trends.. but any voices or visions or the like must be 100% discarded. They are pure BS.

This post comes as as result of about 50 years fighting this fight, both in the "spiritual" and the "UFO" realms, as it's all just "spiritual" (laws of physics apply though).

IMHO.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Hi Kev,
You would perhaps be surprised that I have personally gone through the same trains of thought about the phenomenon and it has led me into some dark places. But, if it it is all a deception as you say, then why is it that I personally found what I have discovered to be useful? What I mean is, these discoveries have provided answers - and in a mathematical way - to the very thing I was already researching.
And if it is a deception, then does that mean I should not present these discoveries?
Right, I shall keep it all to myself then . . . and actually, I have often thought about doing just that.

a reply to: Gaos0

Confirmation bias.

If you start with the answer you want and then "back engineer it", you can prove anything to yourself.

I've gone through the same thing.

If you *really* want to pursue this, then you will have to take endless mocking..and you have to
be able to prove it, starting from scratch, with "non-inspired sources", using just science.

"Divine math" no matter how many "correspondances" you think you have found are a dead end.
It's almost as bad as quantum mechanics.. only quantum mechanics let us fly to the moon.
"Divine math" has never let someone blow their nose.

It's OK to take the "inspiration" and then poke around with real research.. real world research..
and then see if there is anything to it.

But if you are intending to make some sort of "grand proclamation" using only "soft thoughts"
then you are probably hurting and deceiving yourself IMHO.

The very reason that I dither on writing a book.. I have lots of theories--many involving
a lot of science (people call it pseudoscience, and rightly so, as I have not used the
scientific method to falsify)---so while there certainly may be quite useful insights
that would inspire better researches than I---some grand opus of truth it wouldn't
be---just my research notes and observations---which is OK.. if I don't take it too
far.

That's my input.

Kev

a reply to: The GUT

"Does any of this tie into The Nine?"

Again, if you believe it does, then you will find evidence that supports that belief. I suspend belief on that, but I did find some connections, yes.

First of all, I met Filip Coppens at the QuestCon05 - a conference organised by another friend of mine Andrew Collins and at which we were all speakers that day. Filip became a good friend (we often hung out together) and he told me he was going to assist me on the binary code around June 2012, and after he had completed a project he was working on. However, Filip died suddenly from a rare form of cancer in November 2012. It was in 2012, that I too had contracted cancer - a malignant growth on my left kidney - although I was lucky, in that I could have it removed, and I had the operation a month before Filip sadly passed away.

In any case, at the time we first met, Philip became interested in my associations with physicist Jack Sarfatti from 1999. This may have something to do with the fact that Filip wasn’t at all happy with the various ‘loose ends’ that had been left unexplained in 'The Stargate Conspiracy' - of which he was one of the main researchers, along with Simon Cox.
At the time, Filip was researching and writing a follow-up of his own to this book.
At first, he planned to write a book himself, but then settled on doing a three-part article which he later placed on his website, titled 'The Stargate Conundrum' – in which I am also mentioned in the last section 'Reactions.'

After this first meeting, and over the course of several months, Filip and I would meet in the Museum Inn over the road from the British Museum in London, where we would chat over a few drinks and then as was our habit we would visit the nearby pizza restaurant afterwards. Our conversations were mostly about our mutual interests in the ancient mysteries and also the nature of reality and consciousness. Again, we also discussed my association with physicist Jack Sarfatti and the other people on Sarfatti’s exclusive email list – some of whom were later introduced into Filip's 'Stargate Conundrum' article that he was writing at the time.

The Museum Inn was the same pub where Filip also used to meet with Nick Pope and Georgina Bruni in the late ’90s – although I did not know this when I was meeting with Filip, and he didn’t know that I had already met Nick Pope - and by chance I might add - perhaps before or around the same time he was meeting Nick and Georgina.

In April 1997, Nick just happened to walk into my local pub one evening. The pub was the William Morris at Merton Abbey Mills in Surrey. Apparently Nick had just moved into an apartment just around the corner. Anyway, I thought it was unusual that I had been reading about Nick in a magazine that very same week. And so because of the experiences my brother and I had in the late 80's and early 90s, I thought this a strange synchronicity and had to introduce myself to Nick to perhaps discuss these experiences. I was doing research into these experiences and saw that there might be a link between these experiences and the UFO phenomenon. The short of it is, Nick gave me his phone number and said we could meet in the same pub for a chat, which we did several times. Because Nick wasn't familiar with the experience I had in 93 (which I later learned was associated with Kundalini), we went our separate ways. I then became an author in 2005 when my book 'The Serpent Grail' was published and then 'The Shining Ones' in 2006. These books contain insights I had as a result of my experience in 93.
The strange thing about all this is that when he first contacted me at the end of 2010, Jim Penniston says he had no knowledge of my prior meetings with Nick some 13 years earlier. Also, I later discovered that Nick had never mentioned me to Jim and did not know Jim had contacted me "out of the blue" in 2010.

I was later told that the late Georgina Bruni, who was interviewing Jim Penniston at the time I was meeting Nick Pope, was interested in ‘the Nine’ communications, having known Sir John Whitmore. Apparently, Georgina saw a connection between the so-called ‘Nine’ and the Rendlesham Incident . . . and this brings us back to Filip Coppens and the research he did about "The Nine" that went into 'The Stargate Conspiracy,' which as you know is about the goings-on at Giza - especially the Sphinx and the Great Pyramid. Interesting, because Giza and the Great Pyramid turn up in the coordinates from the binary code presented to Jim, as claimed on Boxing Day morning, 1980.

John Burroughs claimed to have met two of the nine.

We also had interesting interactions with another who claimed to
be part of a small group. He did mention the nine.

Maybe John should expand some time. Its interesting.

a reply to: Gaos0

For what it's worth it's always fun to discuss woo.

But I doubt that anyone, myself included, has "100% truthy answers"

But observations, specific theories that could possibly be tested and good gossip are always fun.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

"If you *really* want to pursue this, then you will have to take endless mocking..and you have to
be able to prove it, starting from scratch, with "non-inspired sources", using just science."

Yes, I know. The findings speak for themselves and I am certainly not worried about the skeptics - or rather, the pseudoskeptics.

a reply to: Gaos0

Interesting and thank you. I have much respect for the late Mr. Coppens, especially as regards the IC, UFOS, and cult - building investigation/research. Busy at the moment but look forward into digging into your reply and commenting.

a reply to: Gaos0

Such research tends to take over ones life, even if there is zero basis in provable fact and there probably never will be.

I see this repeatedly on ATS. People dig in, unwilling to abandon their failed religion or philosophy..as their sense of self is too entwined in it.

I personally don't care what life choices you make about Rendlesham. You are the person most interested in your research. You may find others who like your theories..or you may not.

But I guess for me at least, RFI has become so tedious and devoid of research value that its time to investigate something which is not a web of lies, deception and childish bickering and posturing.

Kev

I'm also getting tired of Rendlesham. There are so many contrary accounts and opinions that the whole thing is too muddled at this point

a reply to: vlawde

. . . except what is contained in the code - especially the seven coordinates and what they are pointing to. If it turns out to be correct (as this will have to be confirmed) then it will perhaps be the most important thing to come out of the RFI, and this also includes discovering who devised it.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Consider them a mental virus (strange loops) that is both contagious and disruptive to those that might dig too deeply.

originally posted by: Gaos0

it will perhaps be the most important thing to come out of the RFI, and this also includes discovering who devised it.

To me, the binary codes already have been the most important thing to have come out of the RFI.
It solved a big controversy in the timeline: How did Jim investigate a landed craft for 45 minutes?
I now know for sure he didn’t and his account can be discounted. This makes it very easy to construct a consistent timeline for the first night.

I also made me realize that the impression someone makes as a person can be very misleading.
This encouraged me to just look at the facts, and whether they add up or not, instead of the impression someone makes.

Larry’s letter to his mum does not add up. Nor does his account of a landed craft, which does not jibe with Halt’s reaction when strange lights were seen again mid-January.
Instead of putting the base on alert, Halt jumped in his Triumph and took Gordon Williams & family with him in the forest to watch the phenomenon. Steve Laplume’s account corroborates this.
Would Halt have reacted like this if he had to secure a landed craft in the forest two weeks earlier? Of course not!
So no matter how convincing Larry may come across, his story does not add up.

This solves a lot of the controversy in the timeline of the third night. Suddenly all statements become pretty consistent.
Bustinza, Burroughs, and even Larry may have seen strange lights and light beams, but a landed craft? I don’t think so.

Fact and fiction have been sufficiently separated for me to close the book on this case.
Could it have been something extraterrestrial? This surely cannot be ruled out.

I feel sorry for the ones who fall for the fiction of the binary codes. They will eventually discover they have wasted their time.
I can only guess what Jim’s motives are. Maybe it is just a coping mechanism for him, or maybe he got addicted to all the attention. I don’t think anything more nefarious is behind it – the errors in the binary are typically the errors a lay person would make.