[Part 1] Rendlesham explained? [Visitor Submitted Article]

[Observer]

Hi Admin

I listened to the Nick Pope interview last night and i thought it quite good. He was up front and informative. When the ARRS question came up, he hadn't much to say about it and very quickly he was on to another subject. Was he being evasive?

The MOD files that Nick said would be released soon on new cases should be interesting.

Observer

[Deep Purple]

Should be interesting to see what gets released, I do wonder whether we are getting close with the ARRS theory and a disinformation campaign is starting

[Observer]

Hi all

Admin may be right concerning the vast amount of evidence that exists on this incident so to use the hoax theory is counter productive. Let me explain. There are a lot of people who have and still do make money out of this intriguing incident.

There is the lecture circuit, the interview circuit and the written word circuit, I.E. books, news paper/magazine article circuit.
If the ARRS hoax theory was to be proved right, these lucrative mediums would be dead in the water, so i guess to a point this mystery is being kept alive by certain individuals for monetary gain. This senario is as old as the hills and has been used for decades by unscrupulous gournalists.

I'm prepared to give these people the benefit of the doubt about Rendlesham but none so far have been able or willing to put forward an alternative senario as convincing as the ARRS theory.
Only Jenny Randles has now said she feels nothing of significance happened in Rendlesham forest. I would love her to quantify this by giving her reasons for this dramatic change in her once held belief.

Observer

[Deep Purple]

Observer, you have said what I am thinking.
Having said that I think as admin has said we should all keep minds open.
But as we are already doing, recognise the disinformation and commercial pressure on these events.
Its interseting that Nick Pope thinks more "stuff" is going to be released soon---- I thought every thing they had had been released?. Is this just some stuff about to be released just freshly manufactured to keep us away from beleiving the ARRS incident is the truth and re- inventing the UFO story too spin it for a bit longer?
If Nick Pope doesnt think its a hoax what doe she really think it is?

[Observer]

Hi deeppurple

I think if you listen to Nick Pope's interview again, he said that the MOD were going to release more UFO files rather than more files on the Rendlesham incident. I may be wrong but this is how i read it. If there is new RFI MOD info great.

As for conspiricy theories concerning the RFI [Rendlesham Forest Incident], we have to be fairly subjective in our analysis of the available evidence. Its knowing how far to take a conspiricy theory before it becomes ludicrous! Every body will have a judgement threshold where fact finally meets fiction and a line has to be drawn. We will all be different and i for one have yet to reach this line in my investigations. My ARRS theory is one possible senario but to be honest i have yet to fully convince myself, mainly due to lack of hard evidence.
For those who insist it was a UFO from outer space [i for one would love it to be that] are not helping because they are flapping around with the same old evidence and are just presenting it in new ways to make it look like its new evidence.

Observer

[Deep Purple]

Hi Observer
I must be honest and say I didnt listen to Nick Popes broadcast, cause I was on holiday far away from my computer.
I like you think that it would be great if the incident turned out to have an Alien Dimension, but like yourself ( I think) suspect this is most unlikely and a more down to earth explanation will be found ( perhaps).
Its interseting that Georgina Bruni, having written such an excellent book on the case and having gone to so much trouble seems to have gone "cold" on the incident.
This to me suggests a down to earth explanation, if she could keep an ALien dimension going I would have thought she would have as this would sell more books or an updated version of her book.

[Pluton]

It's funny how many people who investigated Rendlesham then went cold on the idea. Georgina Bruni, as mentioned. I also read that Dot Street no longer regards it as part of her life, Jenny Randles, as mentioned, now thinks its much ado about nothing and also Astrophysicist Andrew Pike, who was on of seven scientists who actually went down there in 1980 and spent 25 years on the case, refuses to even talk about it anymore following the release of his book. All these have spent years on the investigation and then drop it for some reason. Strange but true!!

[Observer]

Hi Pluton

I agree, there are probably many reasons these people no longer take an interest. I suspect for those who make a living out of writing about it have found there is no more mileage left in the subject and have moved on to more lucrative projects. I know this sounds cynical but it how journalists work.

It would be interesting to see what take people like Bruni and others have on the subject now that this forum has been running along with all the published ideas and theories.
Georgina Bruni did have some arguments post publication of her book with Larry Warren and a couple of other people and i'm glad i was not part of that.
So far we are met by a stony silence, only Ian Ridpath, bless him, has made some comment on this forum which i and i'm sure Admin welcomed.

Has some of the theories on this forum got close to the truth which may explain a reluctance by these writers to get re involved in the Rendlesham forest incident?

Observer

[Pluton]

To be honest I only logged on for the first time in ages last night and saw there was a lot of new bits and argument, I've not had a chance to log on for months.

It's certainly true Georgina Bruni did as much as she could regarding the military interviews. Her re-interviewing and new details are first class work in my opinion. Of course a lot of military could not have come forward as yet if it is to be believed hundreds were out there in the forest, so there is one area lacking, probably plenty more untold there, although whether it will come out is unlikely now.

Bruni does little in the way of science, that is picked up by Andrew Pike who, like Bruni, took it a long, long way, it's amazing what the science suggests. And certainly much of that is not seen on any website I have looked at, so a lot missed there also I think. I have to say this site is lacking on that part too! Sorry to be critical. Quite why the science is ignorred is unclear to me because it seems to be so important if anybody is serious about finding new details on this case. You have to undrstand, I believe, most people think if any science was there Ian Ridpath, as an astronomer would have mentioned it, but he is actiually not qualified, he is an amateur astronomer, and if he is aware of the science, it is, in itself, strange he has not mentioned any of it.

By the way Andrew does deal with the Apollo bit in two area, including a bit about the IRA, coastal smuggling and Special Branch work. But I won't spoil the plot here! Anyway as I say for anybody not familiar with that work, there is still a lot to discover, many similar cases world wide are covered and many scientific clues also. I'm surprised it wasn't a best seller like Georgina's book.

So although a lot is out there and maybe it is true that it has been done to death by these investigators, I still see much ignored on many websites. Also if a magazine does a special it aways seems to be the same as that which went before, the same old bits, same old names, same old debunkers, yawn, yawn. Nothing original or new more often than not.

[Observer]

Hi pluton

I agree totally with your comments re the science that may be associated with the Rendlesham forest incident. If you feel up to it, perhaps you could remind us of some science that we could all explore. Is it man made science or something more wierd.
Some of the posts and threads have contained some science a good example is radiation and the readings taken. There is a debate concerning the significance of the readings taken at the landing sites.
Georgina Bruni's book to my my mind is the best account even though it contained a few inaccuracies and a couple of poorly researched items.

My problem is that most debunkers on this subject offer no alternative senarios.

Observer

[Pluton]

I'll have to get back on the science bits, there was so much and I'm not really a scientist, just interested when it's explained simply. Plus I am just on a flying visit to the site today! I can recall some of the radiation bits off the top of my head seeing as you mention them..

Georgina Bruni did a good job with the radiation, however, as far as I am concerned, the best details on the readiation is in Andrew Pike's work. He explains the errors in the memo using the scientists cleaned up Halt tape transcript, they had a second generation copy (actually they sort out the date errors in the memo also!) They also had state of the art equipment, plus his father was a sound engineer, so they were able to show the readings in the tape were different to the memo and they were steady readings, debunkers claim they were not steady readings, and therefore not significant. Halt confirms to Nevilles they are steady readings on the tape! They also did their own readings and cross referenced them with the MoD cliams and got a range of values up to (if I recall correctly) about 80 times background (a bit more than the MoD's claims). Anyway there are pages in the book on the radiation investigation they did. Very interesting. I'll have a re-read to see if there was anything more, I think there was.

Anyway, when I have more time, I'll post a better reponse.

[Wolf]

The area around Rendlesham forest etc is affected by a slighter higher than normal levels of RADON gas. I have never seen this mentioned in any research.

See - http://www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/radon/r ... /index.htm and http://www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/radon/index.htm for details & map

V/R

Wolf

[Observer]

Hi all

Firstly, the radiac survey meters [they were not gieger counters] used by the incident team in the USAF were designed to measure nuclear fall out and or fission materiel debris from nuclear weapons. Like the meters we had in the RAF, they were probably calibrated to read whole units of Roentgens from around zero to 300 as RPH [ROENTGENS PER HOUR]

The quoted readings from the landing sites were in milli Roentgens which is only part of a whole unit. These meters were at best very inaccurate below a whole unit and were not designed for milli readings. Thus i take the quoted readings as unusable evidence.

Radon gas is associated mostly with lanscapes that are high in granite bed rock such as Cornwall. There may be some granite under Rendlesham forrest but it needs a local geolologist to confirm this.

Observer

[schooner]

Hi all,

Lets not forget that no matter how inaccurate the readings Nevilles and his companions were satisfied that there were significant changes in the readings. Nevilles was the skilled operative of this machine and he noticed changes. No matter what we all think what did Nevilles think after having time to evaluate the readings?

Anyone know what Nevilles view was/is?

Regards

Schooner

[Observer]

Hi Schooner

Excepting that the RAD readings were [although inaccurate] noticably above normal back ground readings, what does this tell us? Was the object emitting radiation and why. What was its source. Were any of the airmen checked such as Penniston who alledgedly touched the object for contamination. If he was contaminated it was of low dosage as he seems to be in good health today.

When i was an active member of the ROC we were trained to take radiation readings. One such exercise was at Sizewell 'A' Atomic power station which was the old Magnox system.

We found the local back ground readings higher than what was being emitted from the station!!

Regards

Observer

[schooner]

Hi, Observer,

Seems that the Sizewell Team does its job well thank goodness!

The readings from the trees/depressions that Nevilles recorded were slightly higher than those in the surrounding area. Halt must have thought this significant to report and record the fact.

Can we say that if we took one of these sensors into the woods today would we be able to replicate the same.

I take it that these machines would have been calibrated and a record made of this at the time?

What puzzles me is why Halt decide to take radiation sensing equipment in the first place given that most military craft/vehicles at the time ran on mineral fuels, why not gas detecting equipment for instance? Was it anticipation or expectation?

Regards

Schooner

[Observer]

Hi Schooner

The radiac survey meter [Geiger counter] was part of the standard equipment used by the 'distaster' team. It was part of their field kit. We had the same in the RAF/ROC.

The main reasons for having this was that some aircraft had radio active isotopes in some of their instrumentation/electronic systems and this could be released in the event of a crash.

Secondly, it was also used to measure any radiation from a crashed aircraft that was carrying a nuclear weapon. [Remember, the US Air Force to date have either dropped by accident or have crashed an aircraft carrying a N weapon 68 times]. A frightnening record.

I think Halts first thought was a crashed aircraft which then is no surprise if he asked for the meter to be taken out.

I see your point about Halt knowing more about the rad hazard. He either knew that there was going to be some radiation which suggests he knew what it was or on the other hand as i have explained, it was just a standard procedure.

Regards

Observer

[schooner]

Hi Observer,

So it could be that Halt was looking for debris or something ejected from an aircraft. Seems he got a bit of a surprise then.

I assumed having read a couple of books on the incident that Halt decided to put these sightings to bed - prove that USAF personnel were pranking about. Seems a bit of an over kill to be looking for radiation if this was the case, pretty dangerous as well.

You state this type of instrument was used to pick up radio isotopes and to find radiation from nuclear weapons, so would the radiation from these be far more intense than those discovered by Nevilles?

If an item/package(radioactive) had been dropped from one of these USAF aircraft and say it had struck the trees and ground is it possible that it left traces that could have been picked up on Nevilles instrument?

Regards

Schooner

[Observer]

Hi Schooner

The primary role of the geiger counter issued to the USAF & RAF was to measure fall out that might be contaminating the airfield from a nuclear burst some miles away. This would then either depending on the dose rate render the base operational or non operational.

The symthetic exercises we did during the cold war were based on the war time emergency dose of 60rph. In other words you would receive 60 R if you stayed out side for 1 hour. Any thing longer than that and you would be rendered a hospital case. Even a 1 hour dose could give you long term problems.

The readings in the forest were in milli rads which were in no way hazardous.
A broken peice of electronics that contained an isotope would at worst contain radio active material that probably gave similar readings. On a par with your smoke alarm. These meters were not very accurate below a whole unit [bearing in mind their primary role] of 1 Runtgeon.

As for Halt's motive's, [if he ever had any] i haven't a clue. Did Halt think there was some thing in the forest that was goint to give high readings, if so what did he think it was?

Observer

[puddlepirate]

Many thanks for the entirely feasible and possibly highly probable story involving the 67th ARRS in a practical joke that backfired.

Just a couple of observations - these are not criticisms of any kind, just observations and a hypothesis:

1. Whatever it was that came down in the forest, it created a huge flap amongst the Americans. One thing is for sure, senior officers do not leave black tie engagements to go cavorting about in the woods in search of strange lights unless there is a very,very good reason for doing so.
2. A senior officer (irrespective of service or nationality) making written a report about such an incident then submitting that report to a foreign power instead of to their own command is more likely to be locked up than promoted - unless they have been specifically ordered to instigate immediate diversionary tactics, including making such a report. On successful completion - and let's face it, as a diversionary tactic Rendlesham was brilliantly executed -of such an action, a promotion would almost certainly be a given.
3. It is known there was a Russian bear - a Cosmos - re-entering the atmosphere at about the same time as the Rendlesham incident
4. If not many personnel knew about the Apollo capsule being on site then it must have been highly classified and even at Christmas would probably have been under secure guard in a restricted area. From the little I know about such areas, they are always guarded 24/7 with access to authorised personnel only - and helo pilots requesting to take the device on a walkabout, even if they did have access to the area, would almost certainly be denied and possibly even reported.
5. What if....and only what if.....instead of an Apollo capsule, it was a Russian space capsule that came down? That would most certainly have been sufficient reason for senior officers to leave what they were doing and go rushing into the forest with security staff, the 67th ARRS, umpteen helo's, diversionary tactics and gawd knows what else following hard on their heels...and of course it would be of 'no defence significance' simply because those who needed to know already knew exactly what it was. Perhaps it was known the craft was off track and local RAF radar stations had already been alerted to track its descent. Then what might have happened was that once they knew it was going to come down in the forest, the RAF notified Bentwaters and because Woodbridge was nearer the projected landing site, Bentwaters call Woodbridge. On receipt of the alert, Woodbridge security staff immediately rush into the forest to secure the area in readiness for the recovery.
6. A resident of Sudbourne stated he saw something akin to an upside down mushroom hovering over his house.....and a Soyuz capsule suspended under a parachute(s) could look very much like an upside mushroom (go to: Here)
7. Soyuz was designed to land back on the ground, not in the sea.

Of course, much of the above could apply equally well to an Apollo hoax - but the weakness with the Apollo hoax is the difficulty in gaining access to the capsule, bringing it out onto the airfield, hooking it up then flying off with it. I've no idea what happens when US helo's take to the air but from the RN helo's I've seen taking off from onboard ship, the fight deck crew are usually in attendance to give the pilot an assurance that all strops etc have been cleared. If you are about to fly off with a highly classified piece of kit for a bit of a lark, the last thing you need is a dozen others watching you go....(never mind the control tower staff - even the most inattentive skeleton duty watch might have noticed a helo dangling an Apollo capsule taking to the air)

As I stated previously, this is not a criticism of the Apollo hoax suggestion and I have absolutely no idea if the above is any more valid but one thing is for sure, if it was a highly classified Soyuz mission that ended with the capsule landing in the UK instead of in the USSR because of some technical problem, then boy, what a flap that would cause - and if the craft bore markings in the Russian alphabet, then they could look like odd hieroglyphics....

Admin edit: I shortened the link you posted, as it was stretching the page. Cheers.