Hi,
I don't know if members of this Forum have not been following the debate about the British Ministry of Defence's "Condign Report" released on its website on Monday of this week.
Just in case, I thought it might be helpful if I highlighted the brief discussion of Rendlesham in that report.
The relevant comment (in full) from the Condign Report is
as follows:
"The well-reported Rendlesham Forest/Bentwaters event
is an example where it might be postulated that several
observers were probably exposed to UAP radiation for longer than
normal UAP sighting periods. There may be other cases which
remain unreported. It is clear that the recipients of these
effects are not aware that their behaviour/perception of what
they are observing is being modified" (Volume 2, Working Paper
1, Annex F, page F-4, para 13)."
The Condign Report is online at:
http://tinyurl.com/kqll2
My comments on it are at:
http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/upd ... -012.shtml
All the best,
Isaac Koi
[Condign-MoD] Rendlesham resolved by Ministry of Defence?
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
[Condign-MoD] Rendlesham resolved by Ministry of Defence?
by Isaac Koi » Wed May 17, 2006 1:21 pm
- Isaac Koi
Condign report
by Observer » Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:32 pm
Hi
My own take on the Condign report is that they are just clutching at straws. The MOD have chosen to ingore or disbelieve those first hand witnesses out in the forest who saw a nuts and bolts thing.
They have also chosen to ignore or perhaps refuse to aknowledge that Jim Penniston touched this object and his description of what he saw and felt. Yes Jim did say that every thing seemed to slow down like slow motion even time seemed to slow down and the air in the vicinity felt electrified like static.
So, i have been under power lines on a misty damp day and the area felt very much like static. I've seen balls of light dancing above power lines on damp days, but none of this altered my perceptions or slowed time down.
There are other sections of the Rendlesham incident that they have glossed over by saying it was all down to ball plasma and then have the nerve to say it can alter people's perception and mind set. I won't argue with this statement as i am not a scientist, but i would like to see the scientific evidence to back up the MOD's theory?
As admin stated, there are lots of things that happened over the 3 nights that in no way can be put down to Ball plasma. I would also suggest that the weather conditions on those 3 nights was in no way conducive for the appearence of plasma phenomenon.
It was below freezing and a clear sky. From what i have read you need a certain amount of dampness in the air along with a humid atmosphere and some cumulus clouds that are ready to discharge electricity (lightning). The air also needs to be highly ionised which just does not happen in mid winter below zero with clear skies. This is a simplified explanation. So MOD, the weather alone kills your theory.
Observer
My own take on the Condign report is that they are just clutching at straws. The MOD have chosen to ingore or disbelieve those first hand witnesses out in the forest who saw a nuts and bolts thing.
They have also chosen to ignore or perhaps refuse to aknowledge that Jim Penniston touched this object and his description of what he saw and felt. Yes Jim did say that every thing seemed to slow down like slow motion even time seemed to slow down and the air in the vicinity felt electrified like static.
So, i have been under power lines on a misty damp day and the area felt very much like static. I've seen balls of light dancing above power lines on damp days, but none of this altered my perceptions or slowed time down.
There are other sections of the Rendlesham incident that they have glossed over by saying it was all down to ball plasma and then have the nerve to say it can alter people's perception and mind set. I won't argue with this statement as i am not a scientist, but i would like to see the scientific evidence to back up the MOD's theory?
As admin stated, there are lots of things that happened over the 3 nights that in no way can be put down to Ball plasma. I would also suggest that the weather conditions on those 3 nights was in no way conducive for the appearence of plasma phenomenon.
It was below freezing and a clear sky. From what i have read you need a certain amount of dampness in the air along with a humid atmosphere and some cumulus clouds that are ready to discharge electricity (lightning). The air also needs to be highly ionised which just does not happen in mid winter below zero with clear skies. This is a simplified explanation. So MOD, the weather alone kills your theory.
Observer
- Observer
- Posts: 1284
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:31 pm
- Location: Woodbridge Suffolk, now London.
by Guest » Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:59 pm
Different guest, Schooner, but I can say something regarding the Rendlesham File. I was just looking around sites and saw your post.
It is out of print. I don't know whether you heard of the bust up between astronomers and ufologists over it. In case not, in a nutshell, there was a lot of bad words and personal attacks on the author (Andrew Pike) from certain ufologists before the report was even released, maybe because it was being compiled by astronomers and the ufologists were in fear that it might not be supportive to their cause.
Anyway, it WAS actually supportive to ufologists and indeed actually put astronomers in a bad light, it also contains a lot of new stuff, if only those ufologists had waited for the report to actually appear before going on the attack.
Needless to say the astronomers involved (Andrew Pike included) now have nothing to do with ufology (although Andrew is still helping out the new UFO Data magazine in a strictly astronomical way for Russ Callaghan for now - he was astronomy correspondent on UFO Magazine for ten years run by Russ's father-in-law, Graham Birdsall). He has also withdrawn from Russ's conference in October where he was due to speak about the research and expand on any points people had however.
Anyway, what was to be a report kept in print for as long as possible has now been pulled by the astronomers in protest, apparently along with three further UFO reports due for release over the next year or so, one on plasma UFOs (similar to Project Condign but done properly!), one on Flying Triangle research and I can't remember the other one!
There are copies of the Rendlesham File out there, but no new ones available from the publisher. It will have to be a second hand one Schooner if you are lucky!!
It is out of print. I don't know whether you heard of the bust up between astronomers and ufologists over it. In case not, in a nutshell, there was a lot of bad words and personal attacks on the author (Andrew Pike) from certain ufologists before the report was even released, maybe because it was being compiled by astronomers and the ufologists were in fear that it might not be supportive to their cause.
Anyway, it WAS actually supportive to ufologists and indeed actually put astronomers in a bad light, it also contains a lot of new stuff, if only those ufologists had waited for the report to actually appear before going on the attack.
Needless to say the astronomers involved (Andrew Pike included) now have nothing to do with ufology (although Andrew is still helping out the new UFO Data magazine in a strictly astronomical way for Russ Callaghan for now - he was astronomy correspondent on UFO Magazine for ten years run by Russ's father-in-law, Graham Birdsall). He has also withdrawn from Russ's conference in October where he was due to speak about the research and expand on any points people had however.
Anyway, what was to be a report kept in print for as long as possible has now been pulled by the astronomers in protest, apparently along with three further UFO reports due for release over the next year or so, one on plasma UFOs (similar to Project Condign but done properly!), one on Flying Triangle research and I can't remember the other one!
There are copies of the Rendlesham File out there, but no new ones available from the publisher. It will have to be a second hand one Schooner if you are lucky!!
- Guest
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Return to The Rendlesham forest incident
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests