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.


The BBC's Evan Davis Goes to Rendlesham Forest , and Finds...

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:20 AM
Well nothing really , unsurprisingly .
In the company of astronomy writer Ian Ridpath and UFO author Mark Pilkington ,Davis comes to the conclusion that the Rendlesham event was nothing more than a miss-identification of both the Orford Ness lighthouse and bright stars .

He took me to the place where the airmen reported seeing flashing lights in the sky. There, we were greeted by the sight of the Orford Ness lighthouse a few miles away. Mr Ridpath was certain that this was what the witnesses to the mysterious lights in the forest were looking at. It is still there now - its light rotating every five seconds. "It's too good a story to allow to die. It's a combination of events which, when put together, sound inexplicable," he told me. "But when you look at them individually, the bright light flashing away across the field was the Orford Ness lighthouse; the bright lights that hovered in the sky for several hours were in fact bright stars." Mystery explained. It was an easy mistake for young Americans a long way from home to make.

So I guess in the absence of any tangible evidence to the contrary , I to have over the last few years come to the conclusion that the " British Roswell " case is nothing more than a misinterpretation , fueled by adrenalin and maybe even a little Christmas spirit .

Of course you may disagree , but ask yourself .... how reliable is your memory in reality , you may think you can remember something from 10 , 15 or 20 years ago with perfect clarity but if you were physically taken back to that time how different would the actual event be ?

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:30 AM
Just a tad desperate this. Ridpath has made himself look a right plonker over this one. They started off from the premise it was nothing and simply ignored everything that precluded that conclusion. This lot make Greer look sensible.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:39 AM
reply to post by FireMoon

Indeedy, what did they expect to find, a small triangular craft making dents in the ground just waiting for them? Did they expect to find the indentations still there? How can this possibly be considered a serious piece of investigation?

Oh,. wait, it's from the beeb, say no more 'arry

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:55 AM
Its amazing that this Ian Ridpath can continue to IGNORE the people that where there on those nights that witnessed these events.The lighthouse lights explanation is nonsense, even the light house keeper did not think that this was valid either.The below facebook group started by John Burroughs is the place Ian Ridpath and co should be concentrating on.Sorry but i tend to be on the side of these military witnesses that were there that night, unlike Ridpath, to me they encountered something that showed and contained very high strangeness.

A new Facebook group started by John Burroughs demands justice for all those involved in the Rendlesham forest incident. As well as raising peoples’ awareness of the case, it is hoped that the group will encourage new witnesses to come forward.

The group’s description is as follows: “In late December 1980 the fine men and women of the USAF 81st security were exposed to something unexplained in Rendlesham Forest. Their Command chain left them high and dry. We demand Justice for the 81st and we demand an explanation from the US government as to what they were exposed to. We demand the USAF release their classified files on the incident.”

The group’s page can be found here:

[edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 11:56 AM
The people involved - an A-Z;

A list of all the people involved in the Rendlesham forest incident. Many ranks and details about their involvement are listed. Click here to read the page.

An overview of the initial incident involving A1C John Burroughs, Amn Cabansag and Tsgt James Penniston. Many photos and maps included


Continuing on from the page above, this page examines the statements taken from the witnesses shortly after the incident. All statements included and typed out.


"The UFOs back Sir": 27/28 December 1980 A night later the unusual lights were spotted again, the deputy base commander (Lt. Col. Halt) was alerted this time and decided to end the UFO 'nonsense'. He and others went out in search of the UFO, what they saw shocked them all


The lighthouse theory examined Could the Rendlesham incident be explained, by a lighthouse which sits on the coast, five miles away? Includes my footage of the lighthouse flashing


The last link on the" lighthouse theory examined" is for me the nail in the coffin for this explanation offered and repetitively enforced by a one Mr Ian Ridpath.The above conclusions after the investigations supplied by the links above carry much more than what Ridpath and co have to offer as explanations i feel. The late and much respected British Admiral Lord Peter Hill-Norton summed it up for me we he said;


Surely, to any sensible person, either of those explanations cannot fail to be of defense interest. That the Colonel of an American Air Force Base in Suffolk and his military men are hallucinating when there are nuclear-armed aircraft on the base — this must be of defense interest.


source link for investigation links;

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 12:07 PM
Can't really dispute or support the close encounter accounts, but regarding the "Lighthouse theory", I'm pretty sure I saw the lighthouse caretaker in an interview explain [and show] how the light cannot shine in the direction of the forest due to a reflector behind the lamp.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 12:42 PM

Originally posted by draknoir2
Can't really dispute or support the close encounter accounts, but regarding the "Lighthouse theory", I'm pretty sure I saw the lighthouse caretaker in an interview explain [and show] how the light cannot shine in the direction of the forest due to a reflector behind the lamp.

You are correct sir and you are not the only one who remembers this interview with this lighthouse keeper.The link i provided in my last post on the "lighthouse explanation theory" is more of an insight to the rather desperate attempt of explaining this incident as just mere lighthouse lights.As if trained and experienced military personnel were not used to these lighthouse lights anyway is another nail in the lighthouse coffin.Also something was picked up on radar that night.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 12:46 PM
what about the tapes?
i dont think they have been released but transcripts have
didnt they touch the object?
tracked it threw the forest all night as i recall
this lighthouse explanation is as bad as saying the pilot Mansell that chased a UFO and passed out then crashed and died was actually chasing Venus!

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 01:16 PM
They also neglect to add that Forestry comission flattened the area soon after the event and cleared a lot of the forest away !

Pointless visiting the area these days really.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by Did you see them]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 01:48 PM
reply to post by gortex
Yeah, I read this earlier today and posted a comment on the site. In England, Ridpath is comparable to a male chicken...a cock. If a guy who admits he refuses to read about UFOs (Davis) goes to Rendlesham with a guy who doesn't believe there's any such it any surprise the article dismisses the account?

As a journalist, Davis has essentially accepted hearsay as proof. He hasn't read anything about the incident (he admits this) and draws a conclusion based on one man's word.

It's not a cut and dried case.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:01 PM
Ridpath...what can you say....

He is selling a story that basically calls the people on the base - those who went into the forest that night and on the previous night as well - idiots.

He suggests that military personnel guarding nuclear weapons are incapable of telling the difference between a lighthouse and an object they describe as being directly infront of them.

Evan Davis's article on the BBC site is simply a hit piece. He did no investigation, he wrote it in a mocking tone and he continually refers to "martians" - in other words he is either incredibly naive on the subject, or it was written in cohoots with Ridpath, as a promotion for his book.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:49 PM
reply to post by Kandinsky

Yeah I know what you mean about the tone of the piece , but the problem is the Rendlesham incident is now so wrapped up in claim and counter claim that the truth of what really happened is lost in the mythology .
So many different accounts by people who claim ever increasingly incredible occurrences over the three night period , or was it two nights , who to believe ?

I used to believe that Rendlesham was the real deal due to the quality of the witnesses , I mean Lieutenant Colonel Halt , United States Air Force colonel chasing UFOs through the Forrest and recording the experience on audio tape , what could be better .
But over the years a streak of skepticism has set in due to conflicting claims by the multiple players in the story , who was there and who wasn't there on this or that night ,the Jim Penniston and John Burroughs contradictions .
Maybe one day when they finally land we can ask them and get the truth....but until then we are all just scrabbling about in the dark

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:09 PM
reply to post by gortex
Same here. It's an interesting case, but too much conflicting information.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:12 PM
I agree with you i feel the same way, but because of those inconsistencies in the storey

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:19 PM
After seeing the principals involved argue with themselves, change and embellish their stories over the years I gave this case up.

Way too many things I would have to overlook in order to come to the least possible conclusion that the believers have already arrived at.

You have the lighthouse, perfectly......and I mean PERFECTLY timed with the recording, you have the geiger counter readings....made with a model that doesn't give the resolution necessary to get ANY reasonable readings that can be have the....never mind. Those that want to believe in this case will overlook whatever they have to.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:45 PM
Oh I was listening to R4 yesterday when this was broadcast. I love Eban on Dragons Den etc but he really played the BBC/Government/MOD line in this radio recording, it began with him saying he was in the forest in the dark and how it was understandable how the witnesses eyes could have played tricks on them. He said it in a tone that made you believe him and made the USAF staff appear deluded - typical BBC report and they use this tactic every time in that condescending way

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:57 PM
As far back as this goes, I'm surprised anything will be found at all. Which it in fact does not leave anything to be found.

The only thing that remains is the witness accounts and, well, the story. We're left to believe it or leave it alone. It's a personal choice. For some it's an interesting story, for others it's an interesting piece of delusion.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 04:34 PM
Remember this?

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:40 PM
reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts

Pretty much my thoughts exactly.

This site does a great job of putting together all the known evidence.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:09 PM
Rendlesham is one of the best cases IMO. You had military personnel who actually went and investigated the craft up close and one even sketched the designs that were on it. You also have the part of the story where one of the witnesses, I forget which one claims a craft flew over the spot where they were housing nukes and shined a beam a light down to it.

I think the witnesses are credible and I don't see any reason why they would waste military time and resources to create this hoax when you consider what the consequences would have been had they been found out.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in