• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
None of that stuff in Kecksburg really happened. But that is a matter for another thread.

As far as Rendlesham is concerned, the objects that Halt described cannot have moved overhead, because he almost immediately afterwards describes them (on the tape) as only moving slightly. The movements he appears to remember do not seem to have happened in the way he remembers them. We have a wide range of potential reasons for this; the magnification and distortion caused by the starlight scope is most important, but autokinesis is also a factor.

----------------
You should not confuse the ability to 'affect' someone's mind with the ability to 'control' them. Lots of technologies exist which allow an experimenter to affect a subject's mind; drugs, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, stress; none of these have precisely predictable effects, so we can't honestly call this mind control. A more accurate description would be irresponsible tampering with a subject's mental state with unpredictable results.

And telepathy is a myth, I'm sorry to say.
 
None of that stuff in Kecksburg really happened. But that is a matter for another thread.

As far as Rendlesham is concerned, the objects that Halt described cannot have moved overhead, because he almost immediately afterwards describes them (on the tape) as only moving slightly. The movements he appears to remember do not seem to have happened in the way he remembers them. We have a wide range of potential reasons for this; the magnification and distortion caused by the starlight scope is most important, but autokinesis is also a factor.

----------------
You should not confuse the ability to 'affect' someone's mind with the ability to 'control' them. Lots of technologies exist which allow an experimenter to affect a subject's mind; drugs, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, stress; none of these have precisely predictable effects, so we can't honestly call this mind control. A more accurate description would be irresponsible tampering with a subject's mental state with unpredictable results.

And telepathy is a myth, I'm sorry to say.
I can see that since you take fixed and prejudiced views about every topic there is little point in responding. "Kecksburg never really happened." OK. Halt couldn't distinguish between an object slightly moving and one travelling through a 90degree arc. OK. Mind control is irresponsible tampering with someone's mental state but results can't be predicted. OK. The attack on the twin towers never happened -- you haven't got that far yet but I'm sure you're working on it! Telepathy is a myth that has been confirmed in the laboratory, by the way.
 
I am prepared to discuss each of these topics, and show that there are alternative (and generally more realistic) ways of interpreting the data.

Consider this; Halt maintains that the object which emitted the 'beams' was flying at an altitude of at least three thousand feet. If it really were moving through a 90 degree arc at that height, the observers in the Bentwaters and Woodbridge bases should have seen it - as well as the British police who turned up in a car at one point, and other observers not in Halt's small posse. Instead all they saw were the stars.

------------
Telepathy hasn't been proved - it has been demonstrated on some occasions, but so were N-Rays. Proving takes a lot more work.
 
I am prepared to discuss each of these topics, and show that there are alternative (and generally more realistic) ways of interpreting the data.

Consider this; Halt maintains that the object which emitted the 'beams' was flying at an altitude of at least three thousand feet. If it really were moving through a 90 degree arc at that height, the observers in the Bentwaters and Woodbridge bases should have seen it - as well as the British police who turned up in a car at one point, and other observers not in Halt's small posse. Instead all they saw were the stars.

------------
Telepathy hasn't been proved - it has been demonstrated on some occasions, but so were N-Rays. Proving takes a lot more work.
Proof is not a scientific concept. Telepathy has been demonstrated to a very high level of statistical significance. It fulfils all the requirements albeit not a very strong effect. I'm sure there are always different ways of interpreting data, but one can choose whether to take an open-minded position or a narrow negative stance. I think we are at opposite ends of this continuum so our discussion would be endless and futile!
 
Telepathy has been demonstrated to a very high level of statistical significance.
But only by certain researchers. Other researchers have failed to replicate these results, which shows that something else is going on. In any case, there is no evidence that telepathy was involved in Rendlesham.
 
But only by certain researchers. Other researchers have failed to replicate these results, which shows that something else is going on. In any case, there is no evidence that telepathy was involved in Rendlesham.
Of course there wasn't. I only mentioned telepathy because you did, not because it is relevant at Rendlesham.

It is not uncommon in parapsychology or in psychology for results to be replicated by one group and not by another. Human subjects are sensitive to experimenter expectation. But telepathy has been detected by many different researchers over a long period. One of the first systematic studies of an unusually gifted telepath was Upton Sinclair's experiments with his wife, documented in his book Mental Radio, using mostly line drawings as targets. This approach makes more sense than using experiments with subjects of varying abilities and attitudes. See the SPR's website for summaries of major work in this area.
 
It is not uncommon in parapsychology or in psychology for results to be replicated by one group and not by another. ...

(Ahem ... )
Neither is it uncommon for posts wandering off-topic to vanish without comment or residual traces. :reyes:
 
Of course there wasn't. I only mentioned telepathy because you did, not because it is relevant at Rendlesham.

It is not uncommon in parapsychology or in psychology for results to be replicated by one group and not by another. Human subjects are sensitive to experimenter expectation. But telepathy has been detected by many different researchers over a long period. One of the first systematic studies of an unusually gifted telepath was Upton Sinclair's experiments with his wife, documented in his book Mental Radio, using mostly line drawings as targets. This approach makes more sense than using experiments with subjects of varying abilities and attitudes. See the SPR's website for summaries of major work in this area.
Speaking in general terns, an experiment is only deemed to be a success if it can be repeated on multiple occasions by different experimentors.
 
Last edited:
Upton Sinclair can be compared to Arthur Conan Doyle; brilliant writers, led astray into esoteric subjects that did nothing for their reputation.

And I was talking about mind control, not telepathy. In due course we will probably be capable of interacting in detail with other people's brains (although I expect we'll try it out on flatworms, and dogs, and a sizeable of fraction the rest of the animal kingdom, first). This interaction will rely on physical data channels, not paranormal ones. Indeed, the paranormal ones, even if they exist, are unreliable and have low-bandwidth.

Technologically-mediated telepathy may have extremely controversial ethical consequences, so hopefully it will be carefully regulated, but this may be a vain hope.
 
Neither is it uncommon for posts wandering off-topic to vanish without comment or residual traces.
Before we eliminate this side track, I would like to re-iterate my points:
1/ black projects in 1980 were crude and limited in scope, and couldn't have produced a disappearing aircraft landing site in a location that was swarming with US and UK security and police forces,
2/ and the mind control technology of that time was even less capable.
 
I'm watching the second Halt video, and It is hard to believe they saw a beam from a lighthouse, and mistook it for the described.
 
... black projects in 1980 were crude and limited in scope, and couldn't have produced a disappearing aircraft landing site in a location that was swarming with US and UK security and police forces ...

Experiments with UAVs - including joint US / UK projects - date back farther than 1980. The night shift at a relatively under-utilized military airfield would provide both a convenient timeframe and location for testing.
 
Interesting idea. I'm not seeing quite how it fits with Rendlesham, however; drones in those days were quite large, and would need a truck or a helicopter to recover them. The sightings and accompanying hoo-haa would have attracted more attention, making a secret recovery difficult.

And this doesn't explain any of the lights seen by the Halt gang, either. Human technology couldn't produce effects like that in 1980, assuming we take their accounts at face value. And if we accept that their accounts are unreliable, we are back to square one, trying to uncover the stimuli that produced these sightings. Which means we don't need the UAV recovery theory.
 
If it was UFOs, it would fit in perfectly with the rest of the past sightings. So folks at the weapons storage area said they saw the objects shine beams down on the area, and Halt was listening in real time. They were captured on radar moving waaay too fast and making right-angle turns. It sounds like other encounters documented by Hastings and can also be seen in the NICAP sighting files:
http://www.nicap.org/chronos/
The objects there at Warren look like mine...
 
Last edited:
The two radar operators, who only reported their experience in 2013, said they observed anomalous tracks at some time over the Christmas period in 1980, and that they normally only worked till midnight, so they are unlikely to have seen any traces associated with Penniston's or Halt's accounts - which occurred in the middle of the night, when these gentlemen would be in bed..

As I've indicated before, Hasting's researches are intriguing, but generally unconvincing. He brings together a lot of half-remembered tales and second-hand accounts, short on dates and coherence.
 
This kind of phenomenon definitely falls into the plasma category. When these things "explode" there are no fragments left even though in some cases there is damage to surrounding objects.
A central enigma in Halt's later recollections is the unidentified, small right light - only 2-3 feet in size - observed, apparently via a starlight scope, to seemingly being in the farmers field, in front of the farmhouse, suddenly exploding into five even smaller white lights.

The evidence from Halt's recording contradicts this entirely.

In fact, having gone over this carefully again, I would even go so far as to say it can be proven to be a myth.

Firstly, there's strictly no reference within the recording to it exploding, only what are perceived to be pieces falling off, or shooting off the small light source.

Secondly, as opposed to it doing so, Halt actually reports seeing the same light again, after passing through the farmer's field.

The initial sighting - farmer's field:

"There we go... about approximately four foot off the ground, at a compass heading of 110 degrees".

The later sighting, with my emphasis:

"We're at the far side of the second farmer's field and made sighting again about 110 degrees. This looks like it's clear off to the coast. It's right on the horizon. Moves about a bit and flashes from time to time. Still steady or red in color".

Furthermore, as just recently highlighted, the five white lights are a completely separate and later sighting - nothing whatever to do with the light in our farmer's field having 'exploded':

"We've passed the farmer's house and are crossing the next field and now we have multiple sightings of up to five lights with a similar shape and all but they seem to be steady now rather than a pulsating or glow with a red flash".

So, where does that leave our red light enigma then?
 
From Halt's recording;

HALT: 03:15. Now we've got an object about 10 degrees directly south, 10 degrees off the horizon. And the ones to the north are moving. One's moving away from us.

VOICE: Moving out fast.

VOICE: This one on the right's heading away, too.

HALT: They're both heading north. Hey, here he comes from the south, he's coming toward us now.

HALT: Now we're observing what appears to be a beam coming down to the ground.

SHOUT IN BACKGROUND: [Unclear] Could be 'colours'?
(End)

Mentioned before that I wasn't so sure, 'colours' made any sense and I wondered if it could be, 'choppers'.

Now that would make some sense of it all, however, we would expect them to have heard helicopters and no evidence of any being present that night.

Or is there...

I've come across one related reference.

It's from an email circulated in June, 1998 by Georgina Bruni and of which I received a copy:

Sgt Adrian Bustinza was stationed at Bentwaters/Woodbridge and attached to the 81st Security Police Squadron during the 1980 incidents. He was in the service for six years. On the night of his encounter he was with Lieutenant Bruce Englund.

The two took a jeep out to the East Gate to relieve SP Larry Warren of his duty there and take him with them to the motor pool. After filling the light-alls they then drove [back to the field] and discovered that the light-alls now didn't work - although they had worked perfectly well at the motor pool. From there on they picked up a jeep and drove to the Bentwaters gate were they met up with other vehicles.

They then left the Bentwaters gate and headed towards Woodbridge, were on the road they passed Military Police with flares blocking the traffic. [remember this is on British soil] The jeep then turned into the wooded area were they were met by other vehicles.

The personnel had to hand over their M16 weapons because they were on British soil - but Bustinza's side arm was not taken. At this stage the animals were going frantic, Lieutenant Englund had already cautioned him to drive carefully on the way over because the animals were all over the road. About this time Major Zickler stepped out of a jeep and fell into mud up to his waist, which caused a lot of laughter.

After organising themselves, they began to break up into four man teams and proceeded to enter the forest in some kind of a line. Amongst the personnel with the aforementioned were John Burroughs, Sgt Medina, Captain Verrano, MSSgt Bob Ball, Mark Thompson, Sgt Combs, Palmer.

Bustinza says that a pararescue squadron from the Woodbridge base was activated [67 ARRS outfit] Major Zickler had requested the scramble, and helicopters were now overhead.
(End)

However... and massively so, Halt told Salley Rayl there were no helicopters involved.

Needs more clarification, obviously.

Might also explain the grid search pattern which MSSgt Ball described...
 
And this doesn't explain any of the lights seen by the Halt gang, either. Human technology couldn't produce effects like that in 1980, assuming we take their accounts at face value.

This, I believe, is where the substances come into play. You don't need technology.

1/ black projects in 1980 were crude and limited in scope, and couldn't have produced a disappearing aircraft landing site in a location that was swarming with US and UK security and police forces,
2/ and the mind control technology of that time was even less capable.

As an example, MK ULTRA was at its peak between 1953 and 1964. I would only assume it was even more refined by 1980.

And, personally, I don't think what happened at Rendlesham went to plan. I feel it was a cock-up. And I think it was limited. And I don't think there was any need to engineer any disappearing aircrafts. And I don't think any evidence suggests the location was swarming with US and UK security and police forces.

Just my opinion.
 
It starts with him getting the date wrong, then builds from there. We all do it; nobody is immune from misremembering.
 
It starts with him getting the date wrong, then builds from there. We all do it; nobody is immune from misremembering.

Totally agree...

However.

I tend to sway between thinking of Halt as a bit dim and somone who likes the limelight as well as someone who has made a career out of keeping the "story" alive...and then thinking of him as an active disseminator of misinformation.
 
Last edited:
(Ahem ... )
Neither is it uncommon for posts wandering off-topic to vanish without comment or residual traces. :reyes:
Sorry I was suckered in to this irrelevant thread. I can't help reacting to outrageous overgeneralisations! Delete the whole thing if you like.
 
And I don't think any evidence suggests the location was swarming with US and UK security and police forces.
There were (supposedly) at least four US teams wandering about in the forest at night; Englund, Ball, Burroughs, Zickler, Nevers , Combs, Warren, Bustinza, Halt, Fail and god-knows who else. And a UK police car turned up as well, quite prepared to identify the 'landing marks' as rabbit burrows. The Plod are on the tape at one point.

God only knows why they couldn't have attempted this in the daytime.
 
Englund, Ball, Burroughs, Zickler, Nevers , Combs, Warren, Bustinza, Halt, Fail and god-knows who else. And a UK police car turned up as well...

Ok. We might have slightly differing definitions of "swarming" then mate!
 
... God only knows why they couldn't have attempted this in the daytime.

I've wondered the same thing. With the exception of reports being submitted / forwarded by (presumably) the day shift personnel the whole affair seems to have been a matter engaged by the night shift alone.
 
Back
Top