- Joined
- Oct 19, 2001
- Messages
- 1,921
I think it was about 7 or 8 years ago.
Does anyone know which issue it was?
Thanks
Does anyone know which issue it was?
Thanks
WhistlingJack said:FT 152?
WhistlingJack said:FT 152?
A most propitious punological conjunction, if ever there was one. Even now, the editorial staff at FT will be trying (and not succeeding) to resist the temptation to over-milk this ontological overlap.fortieth anniversary
They’ve recently demolished the lighthouse that some claim was the cause of the lights that were seen, so one less thing to experience when you’re there.A most propitious punological conjunction, if ever there was one. Even now, the editorial staff at FT will be trying (and not succeeding) to resist the temptation to over-milk this ontological overlap.
The Rendalsham Incident has always puzzled me: I feel it surely must either have the potential to be fully-explained, or not. This is because of its relatively-recent occuence, the nature of the witnesses/ quality of documentation and the re-surveyable context.
I'll re-read these legacy cited links, thanks @EnolaGaia (and hope the topic is indeed re-examined by Fortean Times soon)
And meantime, may the Fort go with you... :-/
I read Nick Pope's book just before chirstmas off the back of listening to radio dram based up The Whisper in Darkness (its on BBC sounds worth checking out) I'm not a ufologist just someone with an interest in all things weird and wonderful.