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: 99
87
<< 96  97  98    100  101  102 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 05:22 AM
link   


I said before that this alleged debriefing with drugs and hypnosis is my number one suspect for any of the oddness Jim has experienced subsequent to the original events.


Yes, I don't disagree Tulpa.




Add to that, the complexity of the whole set up as well as the time scale and I think whoever is responsible for this has an awful lot of resources at their disposal.


Yes.




posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 08:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: FireMoon
The type of discrepancy one might expect in such a story would be for Penniston to say he walked around the craft for 20 minutes and for Burroughs to say it was only 10 minutes. Then you might presume that perhaps Penniston's estimate was a little high and Burroughs might be a little low so maybe he really walked around the craft for some time in-between, maybe 15 minutes or something like that.

But when Penniston says he walked around the craft for 45 minutes and Burroughs says that didn't happen, this can't be attributed to normal witness variability, it's an irreconcilable contradiction. Since Penniston was radioing progress reports to yet a third witness whose account is more consistent with Burrough's accounts and with Penniston's original written account (but not his later changed accounts), a pattern emerges. The pattern is that there is consistent testimony from at least 4 different witnesses, but at a later time Penniston's recollections of events such as his 45 minute walk-around diverged significantly from the relatively consistent account of events which had normal witness variability.


Sorry, wrong again and you are really going to have to actually do some proper work on this field if you are going to be taken seriously on here. My friend spent what he thought was about an hour "talking to an alien" to find out he and his partner, who saw the UFO however had zero interaction with anything even a wandering squirrel, had lost about 15-20 minutes when they finally reached their home. They were standing next to each other and had totally different experiences and she could easily say. "it never happened" because she had no contact. This is typical, in my experience, of genuine cases where something truly weird has occurred close up and personal to more than one person.

One of the problems for science in trying to deal with this whole subject is that, how can you have a control or a baseline when the data you receive from differing people who have close up sightings as group is usually, totally random? Idiots such as Clarke, Roberts and Ridpath choose to jump on this either through utter stupidity or pure malice, in order to try and pick holes in cases, when in fact, it's actually. it's at the very core of what we are trying to study. Furthermore, it doesn't mean it's "aliens" per se, though that is an option, it just means when these incidents occur the human brain is messed with big time, by what and why, is what we are trying to work out.



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 08:31 AM
link   
a reply to: FireMoon
It's well-known that human perception is flawed and that different people can perceive the same event somewhat differently.

However the entire field of science is based on the idea that there is a macroscopic reality independent of the human perception problems. If for example a video recorder had been running during the event it presumably could record the actual time Penniston walked around the craft, independent of the recollections of any of the witnesses which may disagree. By the way witnesses will typically have discrepancies even without drugs or hypnosis.

But it's because of these known flaws in human perception that witness statements alone are unlikely to ever be considered scientifically valuable proof.

Now if what you're trying to suggest is that there's not a macroscopic reality such as the length of time Penniston walked around the craft that could be recorded by a video camera, you are of course entitled to that belief, but that's hard to take seriously. But I have no argument with the idea that multiple witnesses recollections probably won't agree with exactly what the camera records if that's all you're trying to suggest, as far as I know that's been proven, even with no drugs or hypnosis.



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I can't speak for Firemoon, but this is the phenomenon in question, not mere witness perceptual problems:



www.ufoevidence.org...: There is a phenomenon. We don't know where it comes from. It's characterized by its physical [traces]. Eighty percent of all the cases have trivial explanations. But I'm talking about the core phenomena. It seems to involve a lot of energy in a small space; it seems to involve pulsed microwaves, among other things. There isn't much that is known about the effect of pulsed microwaves on the brain, so it's quite possible that some of the stories that you get from people are essentially induced hallucinations in sincere witnesses--the witnesses are not lying. They really have been exposed to something genuine but there is no way to go back to what that thing was, based on their description, because their brain has been affected by proximity to that energy.


If you go through the ~ > 1000 investigations Dr. Valle has done, you will read many cases, where two witnesses stand in proximity to each other; one see's a "UFO" while another sees nothing.. or a bus pulling away from the curb.. or any combination of strange perceptions.

Now.. RFI is so corrupted, barely worth investigating.. due to all the disinformation, contamination, hypnosis, drugs and what not.. that I'm not invoking the "phenomenon" necessarily at all.. but yes, it might have been present at some low level..

And if you don't go for "the phenomenon" in the larger sense, even though it is quite rational and justified, just going with an EM anomaly or EM "Test", which might have affected witnesses brains would suffice in the case of RFI...

Now if you do not find the EM explanation of some cases credible.. that's up to you..

Kev
edit on 27-6-2016 by KellyPrettyBear because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: FireMoon
It's well-known that human perception is flawed and that different people can perceive the same event somewhat differently.

However the entire field of science is based on the idea that there is a macroscopic reality independent of the human perception problems. If for example a video recorder had been running during the event it presumably could record the actual time Penniston walked around the craft, independent of the recollections of any of the witnesses which may disagree. By the way witnesses will typically have discrepancies even without drugs or hypnosis.

But it's because of these known flaws in human perception that witness statements alone are unlikely to ever be considered scientifically valuable proof.

Now if what you're trying to suggest is that there's not a macroscopic reality such as the length of time Penniston walked around the craft that could be recorded by a video camera, you are of course entitled to that belief, but that's hard to take seriously. But I have no argument with the idea that multiple witnesses recollections probably won't agree with exactly what the camera records if that's all you're trying to suggest, as far as I know that's been proven, even with no drugs or hypnosis.


And it's well known "effect" that, the sceptic perception will accept any old tosh as an explanation if it suits their agenda and outright lies are fine as well. There are a legion of cases where , from a distance, people see a clearly delineated craft of some sort, it's when we get up close with them that it all goes weird. My friend and his partner both described the exact same "UFO" right up until they had some sort of close interaction with whatever it was. Clarke and his ilk are just billy BS artists. A classic case for example is Clarke banging on about mass hysteria and UFO sightings. NO, if a load of people see a UFO other people have a habit of looking at the sky that bit more for a short while and maybe, just happen to notice stuff they would never have under normal circumstances.

Ergo, stand off sightings, often people agree on details, shape, size, colour etc, close up sightings people do not agree on much at all therefore one can abduct from that that, whatever the phenomenon is affects our perception in a different manner once we are in close proximity to them.

Then again Arby, you're happy to believe that mirages can manoeuvre around jets so I would respectfully suggest you might need to do some work on your own perception of reality.



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear
If you're being exposed to microwaves, there are basically two things that can happen. You can get warmer, not unlike something you put in a microwave oven. The other thing we know can happen is you can get cataracts, since apparently the cornea of the eye is like the "canary in the coal mine" of exposure to microwave radiation, it's the most sensitive to microwaves and most easily affected.

The ideas that pulsed microwaves can or other phenomena can affect mind control are not scientifically well founded, unless one is referring to the general ability of someone who is overheated for any reason, such as high fever, to have perceptual distortions as a result of the high temperature. However the internet is full of unsupported mind control claims, and there are even some patents along those lines, which don't really have any credibility. But yes I've heard stories of people with high fevers hallucinating, and microwaves could cause such high temperatures without separate illness, but if exposed to such you'd have an increased risk of cataracts.


Now.. RFI is so corrupted, barely worth investigating.. due to all the disinformation, contamination, hypnosis, drugs and what not
I certainly agree with the contamination of the Rendlesham Forest case, although the drugs claims seem rather dubious to me.



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: FireMoon

This is not about differences in memories. It’s about exact copies of coordinates taken from the internet and sold as binary codes downloaded from a craft from the future. If such obvious cases are taken seriously by the UFO community then it deserves to stay where it is now: in the fringes.



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I'm referring to the research of one of the fathers of UFOligy, who spent 40 years jetting around the world on his own dime, doing in-person interviews with eye-witnesses and testing incident sites.

I'm not referring to hokum from the Internet.

I do not disagree with the majority of your generic comments mind you.

But like anything, there are more nuanced views available.

Kev



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Guest101

Yup. Any reasonable person would likely view the Binary code and related hokum as pure fraud.

I personally regard it as having nothing to do with the RFI incident itself.

Once that misinformation is jettisoned, then we can look at the actual incident, which comes across as much less hysterical (and noteworthy).

At THAT point my post on scrambled perceptions applies.

Kev



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 12:17 PM
link   


It’s about exact copies of coordinates taken from the internet and sold as binary codes downloaded from a craft from the future.
a reply to: Guest101

I consider that to be extremely serious 101 and Gary and Jim should now seriously address things.

When you put it in this context then this cannot be dismissed. It also troubles me in respect to my
own experiences and what I witnessed when with Jim, so from my perspective I consider this to
be pretty alarming indeed.



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Marylongstockings

Yes.
Ignore the UFO download idea.
Who might want to package together a little mystery puzzle to be cracked?(complete with mistakes).
Why get JP to be the delivery man?

Something about those mistakes really gets me irked.
The ordinance survey, when making their maps, have little deliberate imperfections in the detail.
It may be something tiny and innocuous like a kink in a stream that shouldn't really be there.
This is only noticeable to someone who knows exactly what they are looking for, and is done as a way to prevent copyright fraud.

Obviously, we're not talking about that kind of fraud but whoever packaged the puzzle might've made this mistake as a clue of some sort.



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Guest101
a reply to: FireMoon

This is not about differences in memories. It’s about exact copies of coordinates taken from the internet and sold as binary codes downloaded from a craft from the future. If such obvious cases are taken seriously by the UFO community then it deserves to stay where it is now: in the fringes.



Or, Penniston had his mind played with and he subconsciously did all that and then assumed he'd been given them during the incident? It's a huge field to open up and worthy of a whole thread to itself however, there does seem to be common ground between "close encounters" and "abuse". I'm not talking about the hokum of "recovered memories" rather real incidents. Some times people do block the "mad things" out for weeks, months, years, decades and then, in a moment, they are back there experiencing the whole thing again.

What is different to abuse is that, with Close Encounters the "trauma" is not always a bad thing at all. Jimi Hendrix changed the face of music as a result of his encounter, hence the opening to his first album, my mate changed his musical style and found almost instant success after years of banging his head against a brick wall. Penniston et al, were troops on guard duty and the day after it happened they were back on guard duty. It was a wholly different "experience" for them.



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Tulpa below is taken from the "First Responders Page". I could not fit it in the box, so am quoting it below, you
may or may not find it of interest?




Quote.
Now we are aware of the strangeness of these UFO Entertainers and Opportunists to jump on the preverbal band wagon. Let me share this with you Jameson and the other readers too.

Just like when I get people saying they received binary from the same source I did? As you most likely know, one of our RFRT member said in 2012 (that the code has a sequence code imprinted in it, so we can see if it is related to RFI, a signature he called it). So to date i have received eight people saying they received code as well or from so called UFO/UAP investigators who say they are researching a particular claim. So I tell them about the sequence signature and if they can send it to me, then I can send it off to (the RFRT) and find out if it has the embedded signature. LOL so far after I said that, I have received zero messages from anyone and they no longer contact me. LOL The world is full of hoaxers Jamison, I find it fascinating why they do that? So I would question everyone my friend. I also look forward to your comments and assessment after the book is completed. end quote.

edit on 6-28-2016 by Springer because: external content tags - again...



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear

If you go through the ~ > 1000 investigations Dr. Valle has done, you will read many cases, where two witnesses stand in proximity to each other; one see's a "UFO" while another sees nothing.. or a bus pulling away from the curb.. or any combination of strange perceptions.



Now this is something I find an interesting side effect that makes me wonder about a couple of things. For easy reference, let's call it the 'randomness' of the phenomena/trickster.
- Is the randomness completely in the perception of the witness? Is this done on purpose or does our brain fill in the gaps we don't understand yet? Is it mimicking the witness' thoughts?
- Is the phenomena in itself random? How could this be achieved? Different options in some sort of maintenance list (high unlikely, hard to manage) or more like procedurelly generated?

For some reason, assuming there really is a highly intelligent trickester at work, this makes me believe we'll never solve the mystery. Such a ' trickster system' would be made in such a way humans are practically incapable of maintaining an overview on all the puzzle pieces, even without in dept knowledge of the cases. Our "limited" brain capacity simply wouldn't allow us to. Probably that's why Vallee made a data model...

Just some answerless questions, but these things make everything the more intriguing for me.

RFI seems more like another kind of deception, I agree. What we know/read might as well be a deception of the deceived ... or just some 80/20 disinfo mingled with science fiction expanded universe by the different parties.
edit on 27-6-2016 by zeroPointOneQ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: FireMoon

Or, Penniston had his mind played with and he subconsciously did all that and then assumed he'd been given them during the incident?


If what you say is true and Jim is unconsciously manipulated, Jim should know it by now. Gary, his co-author, was on this forum and has been given the source of the coordinates.

What kind of reaction would you expect from someone who just found out he was manipulated?

A logical reaction in that case would be to call off the publication of the book, and hold a press conference in which he states that his memory has been manipulated and he has been given false information.

Instead I only see complacent and naive reactions from both Gary and Jim.

If Jim consciously knows he is being manipulated, why all these weird stories about dreams and such ..? Why claim to have sent a letter about copyright violation to OKM? Why claim to be in the possession of some ‘magical key’ that can identify ‘true’ from ‘false’ binary codes?

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck ….
I don’t like it either, but sticking your head in the sand won’t get you any further in this case.

The abused people in this case are the ones who have been studying these binary codes for years, thinking they might be on to something of ‘biblical proportions’.

Other victims are the witnesses to the RFI who are telling the truth. Like Buran stated:


I still feel that chasing lights in the forest has gotten way out of hand, to the point that good people's reputations may be harmed because the story as presented is not believed.


edit on 27-6-2016 by Guest101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: zeroPointOneQ

In my experience the whole trickster thing is far less mysterious than one might suppose.

There are myriad "factions" in "trickster space" and myriad different minds of people who from time to time let themselves be used by one faction or another.

It's all one massive food fight for access to human nervous systems, and the creme deal crem, which is to get a human to build a personality which gives one of the factions full brain access.

The same thing happens with Christianity and other pretend religions, spirituality and even political extremism.

Consider it like various strains of somewhat sentient meme families which are like cells in Boltzmann Brains.

If that helps frame it.

So yes...letter agencies and occultists and the like are also being played for fools too..


Kev



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Guest101

Surely this is no surprise?

Its the same with religious and spiritual people, especially if they are in a cult.

Once in a while these folks "by some miracle" get reprogrammed...or is often the case get NEARLY reprogrammed.

If you talk to such a person, on the cusp of sanity, they will often say that their entire life has been about "X", that "true or not" its all they know...AND the clincher is when they say that they can't face having "wasted their lives" "for nothing".

The longer one is held captive by insane memes, the less likely one is to break away.

It comes to the point where the brain itself has become molded through long term potentiation and neural plasticity --- even when they realize they are dead wrong --- they are addicted to the twaddle and can't give it up.

I went through this myself 3 separate times of about 10 years each.

The human capacity for self-delusion is nearly infinite-- even when fully conscious of it.

Kev



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Marylongstockings

I do, indeed, find that interesting.
Very interesting.
Thank you.
It could be that this signature he's talking about is like the little errors in the OS maps.

edit on 27-6-2016 by Tulpa because: Damn! Thought I'd get top of page hundred. Ha!



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 03:43 PM
link   
La reply to: FireMoon

On the radio program last night , John mentioned the 45 min of lost time



posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Sedonabird

So how do we listen to this show of yours then?



new topics

top topics



 
87
<< 96  97  98    100  101  102 >>

log in

join