Charles Halt, Press release.

[John Burroughs]

Ian
The lights were moving around in the sky! They were beaming lights down to the ground. One of the lights flew past us went through a truck and shot back up into the sky! Larry Warren is the one who had eye problems right after the incident. The thing about this incident is as you look at it you can come up with many Ideas on what happened to us. The key is somthing happen to us besides the lighthouse or stars in the skys. I have spoken to the tower operator and there is no way it was stars it was a ball of engery that was hanging over the forrest. As far as the WSA goes it was the blue lights that were flying around not hovering that shot the blue lights down to the ground! halt has opened the door by sayying it was a ET now its time to show how he knows that. For years he said Larry Warren was crazey for saying it was ET now this. He also now says its a cover up when before it was not. You can't make those kind of statements and then run for cover. It may be time for all of them to raise there right hand and swear to tell the truth in front of god and country. Time is running out for them before they are going to be forced to do that!

[IanR]

The lights were moving around in the sky! They were beaming lights down to the ground.

I think the question is whether they actually were doing that or whether they were *appearing* to do that, which is a different thing.

You may not be aware but there are various well-known reasons why stationary objects can appear to move. These effects are to do with the human eye and also the movement of other objects around them, such as clouds. Because of these effects astronomical objects such as bright stars and planets are often described as moving, sometimes in a zig-zag fashion (hence the 'grid search' phrase) even though we know the movement is illusory. Dimming and brightening due to intervening cloud can also be interpreted as movement away and towards the observer.

I am regularly astonished at how many supposed UFO 'experts' know virtually nothing about the ways in which celestial objects are misperceived by witnesses, but I suppose that is why they are UFO believers and I am not.

Bright celestial objects also appear to twinkle different colours and flash out rays of light due to atmospheric effects. These effects are most pronounced low down on the horizon, which brings me back to my previous point that these hovering lights seen at Rendlesham were low down over the forest. Recall also that the beam of light coming down to Halt's feet was a detail he 'remembered' many years later, like the supposed silent explosion of the flashing light. The descriptions of these supposed events on his real-time tape are nowhere near as dramatic or inexplicable as his later pronouncements for the media.

Let me say that I am not denying that you saw something or went through an experience that has genuinely troubled you ever since. Same goes for Larry W. I discussed this with Halt over dinner when we met earlier in the year, and I know he accepts this point.

Halt gave me the impression at the time that the case was not a major preoccupation of his. He said he "left it on the shelf" and only took it down when the media came calling.

Ian

[Sacha Christie]

Just one small point to note seeing as it is late now and I've had to read through quite a few replies: If the windows caused a distortion looking at the lights making them look like triangles.... wouldn't they have always done that? If that is the case then all of the operators in the tower would have known about this illusion.

Andrew, at no point did I read into anything you said as intimating i had twisted anything. I will make further comments later as there has been a lot said that i need to digest.

[Andrew Pike]

The lights were moving around in the sky! They were beaming lights down to the ground. One of the lights flew past us went through a truck and shot back up into the sky! Larry Warren is the one who had eye problems right after the incident. The thing about this incident is as you look at it you can come up with many Ideas on what happened to us. The key is somthing happen to us besides the lighthouse or stars in the skys.

John, can I just reassure you, and others in this case, that there are astronomers out here who do not agree with Ian and his theories, I am one. What happened at Rendlesham was certainly more that stars, meteors, crashing satellites and a lighthouse.

Members of the USAF who do not recognize stars? Well, if it wasn't for the fact that it's so laughable it would be an insult in my opinion. There are many effects like movement to stars, colour changes, effects with clouds, but these are nowhere as great enough to account for what you and others saw. It is a very small part of the answer in my opinion.

There are too few astronomers on this case, but I can tell you we are not all from the crashing satellite and lighthouse brigade. I have seen the flying triangle myself in my part of the UK, along with other astronomers. On one encounter it flew over an observatory, I grab two elastic bands off a document wallet, made a catapult and fired a stone at it, it rang out like a tin bath. Now if that is not a solid bit of evidence I don't know what is!!! I know it was Jim Penniston rather than you who saw a solid triangular craft, but as you were together that night I thought you might like to hear the story.

I have a great respect for what you all went through and I only hope the answer will come one day, it certainly isn't shooting stars and lighthouses.

Best wishes

Andrew

[puddlepirate]

Hi P88.. not sure where I've misrepresented the facts. I've only quoted - copied and pasted as it happens... parts of Halt's memo. Perhaps you can clarify?

Maybe I've misunderstood. I thought the whole purpose of this forum was to discover what it was that M/Sgt Penniston and A1C Burroughs and Cabansag saw when they went into the forest to investigate the sighting from the guard post at the back gate of RAF Woodbridge. In my simple view I thought whatever it was they saw might be the cause of other activity in the sky above the forest.. notwithstanding the fact that Ian R and others have explained that stars and other stuff might have played a part in what was seen from various other locations, including the guard towers. Incidentally, I've climbed and taken phots from the tower within the secure area of the Bentwaters WSA (many thanks to Graham H for leading a party of visitors around that area) and the also from other tower over the WSA (after getting 'lost' during a motor sport event)..The cabins at the top of each tower have glass windows that angle inwards at the base to enable a good view of the WSAs but both towers also have a walkway around the outside of the cabin so anyone inside could easily go outside to get a better view of any aerial phenomena. In fact, from memory I think the guard towers only have glass to the front and the sides, not at the back, Therefore it would almost certainly have been necessary to go outside to get a good 360 deg all-round look. The towers, especially the one in the less secure area, are in a state of disrepair.. lots of birds nesting inside and a door hanging off its hinges..and move quite alarmingly in the wind. Unsettling at first but OK when you get used to it.

I am NOT suggesting that nothing else happened.. beams coming down and so forth, only that sometimes it's better to start at one end and work to the other than steam off in all directions at once...

But that's just my view... perhaps it really was ET looking for a phonebox so he could phone home and wish his mum Merry Christmas....

[IanR]

I have seen the flying triangle myself in my part of the UK, along with other astronomers. On one encounter it flew over an observatory

Andrew, would you like to tell us the identities of these 'other astronomers' so we can get their recollections of this event?
Thanks,
Ian

[John Burroughs]

Ian
Having one fly right over the top of me was a eye opening experiance and seeing beams of light going down to the ground also. Plus what i got close to twice. The funney thing is that you can't seem to deal with what a ufo could be. Some people have said it was a ET I have not! Jim and I both are not sure with what we were dealing with. We explain what we saw and then sit back and listen to all of the arm chair quaterbacks who were not there tell us what we saw. Halt has said alot of things but its funney everytime the media comes knocking he steps up to the plate! He now wants to do a movie and go on record saying it was ET that hardly a guy who puts it on the back shelf! All he has to do is say no. As far as i go there are several of us who have had health problems over the years some who are now getting worse. I for one will need a heart valve replacement soon! I'm also having vision problems which are getting worse! This all started right after the incident within days so unless the light house and stars can reach out and touch me with radition I think it was somthing else. Over the years the USAF and people in my chain of command has openly said somthing happened to us! I enjoy both sides the people who are sure it was ET and the ones who would go to there grave saying it could never be! The one I enjoy the most have a open mind are willing to listen and even do some investigation work themselves. Look at Zickler back ground even some of the other officers! Look at the first reporter who looked into it and what he does now and it paints a different picture! Look at what was being worked on over the years in the area. And now look at the fact slowly but surely the real truth on the dates and what went on are comming out! Somthing happened to us and somthing big and it has been covered up!

[Deep Purple]

I have to say I dont beleive the security people on duty were fooled by the stars or lighthouse, wandering around at night you get very used to these, sure you see some unusual things such as "shooting stars".
The story of flying triangles has been around for a while, and I dont think everyone who reports one can be a crank etc.
The first US MArine Corp troops back in the 70s to see the prototype of the F117a the " Have Blue" plane were shocked, it was flown pass them to see if they could track it on thier anti aircraft missles--- their radar didnt see it.
But for years the stories of triangular aircraft with amazing flight charateristic are easliy found. What are these aircraft--- the Black Manta TR3? who knows?
During the 80s the Belgium authorities had a big flap with a triangular aircraft penertrating their airspace with amazing characteristic--- this is well documented.
Now bearing in mind the close proximity of the Belgium coast to Rendlesham--- miuntes in a quick aircraft, was the RFI a first test of this technology?

[IanR]

During the 80s the Belgium authorities had a big flap with a triangular aircraft penertrating their airspace with amazing characteristic--- this is well documented.

Belgium is of course another solved case, but the solution has been covered up by the UFO believers. Remember that cover-ups can work both ways!

[IanR]

there are several of us who have had health problems over the years some who are now getting worse. I for one will need a heart valve replacement soon! I'm also having vision problems which are getting worse! This all started right after the incident within days so unless the light house and stars can reach out and touch me with radition I think it was somthing else.

Again, let me emphasize that I am not denying that you and others had a real experience that you found disturbing, nor that you have had real health problems. (I hadn't known about the impending heart valve replacement and I wish you successful surgery, a speedy recovery and a long life.) Where we differ is on interpretations and causes. My interpretation is based on 30-plus years of UFO cases going back to the Hynek days. The believers have been promising me they will find "the truth" about UFOs (whatever that may be) for all those years. I keep telling them the truth is that there is nothing to find. In my view the only explanation for UFO reports that holds any water is called the psychosocial hypothesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosocial_hypothesis).

I wish you luck in your search and I will be as interested as anyone in any new information about the Rendlesham incident that comes to light.

Ian

[pupil88]

While reports of triangular craft were being witnessed above tree level, Lt. Col. Halt was witnessing circular or elliptical craft in the sky..

Excerpt from Halt's interview with journalist A.J.S. Rayl .

[After leaving the woods, our search team] crossed the farmer's field past his house and across the road, stumbled through a small stream, and went out into a large plowed field. Somebody noticed several objects in the sky to the north—three objects clearly visible with multiple-colored lights on them. The objects appeared elliptical and then they turned full round, which I thought was quite interesting. All three doing that. They were stationary for awhile and then they started to move at high speed in sharp angular patterns as though they were doing a grid search. About that same time, somebody noticed a similar object [in the southern sky]. It was round—did not change shape—and at one point it appeared to come toward us at a very high speed. It stopped overhead and sent down a small pencil-like beam, sort of like a laser beam. It was an interesting beam in that it stayed—it was the same size all the way down the beam. It illuminated the ground about ten feet from us and we just stood there in awe wondering whether it was a signal, a warning, or what it was. We really didn't know. It clicked-off as though someone threw a switch, and the object receded, back up into the sky.

[slipX]

"Belgium is of course another solved case"

eh?

[puddlepirate]

Re the A J S Rayl interview: The description of the lights, the objects themselves and the way they manoeuvered ... sharp turns, hovering, grid search pattern and so on....suggests helicopters using night-sun searchlights to locate something on the ground. If the aircraft were high enough and some distance off (plus Doppler effect, wind direction etc etc) there might not have been much sound from them or at least not enough to be immediately audible to those on the ground. Also, when viewed from the front some types of helo's have a roughly circular shape.

Halt's account of what he saw could fit with a flight of small British Army / RAF helo's (Gazelles perhap? I'm not good at aircraft types) doing a search but don't ask me what they were looking for, maybe they were hunting an escaped prisoner from a high security jail. If so, then perhaps the alleged prison evac alert was not an evac alert but an escape alert resulting in a muster of inmates? But I digress....

If the objects were helo's conducting a grid search for something or somone, then this part of the interview:

About that same time, somebody noticed a similar object [in the southern sky]. It was round—did not change shape—and at one point it appeared to come toward us at a very high speed. It stopped overhead and sent down a small pencil-like beam, sort of like a laser beam. It was an interesting beam in that it stayed—it was the same size all the way down the beam. It illuminated the ground about ten feet from us and we just stood there in awe wondering whether it was a signal, a warning, or what it was.

might be describing an action taken by the pilot after he or his co-pilot spotted Halt's squad. They see the US airmen, decide to take a closer look, illuminate the ground with the night-sun, contact flyco and are told there are US airmen on the ground in and around the forest. so with Halt and his men positvely identfied, abort and resume the search elsewhere.

Of coure, the issue of what they were looking for still remains.

[John Burroughs]

Ian
There is new news to report! The fact the Col Halt said it was ET in nature is a big deal! The fact that no one has steped up and said it was not true is even bigger! I beleive and he has said he has been holding back certain things including a tape that was recorded that night is what he will use to back up what he has now said. The fact that you can't and won't even admit it could have been somthing the Government was working on puzzle's me. Jim and I were both out there and we know that 1 it was not the lighthouse and 2 it was not stars or planets we were looking at! The fact both goverments have not come out and gave any kind of explanation which they always do is also puzzleing other than to say we support Halts memo and it was not a defense threat. The other big news is alot of us will be getting together soon which has never happened before. The truth is out there and will come out. John

[time4truth]

John i Really hope the truth is told soon for you and the other US airman who witnessed this srange event in1980. It is somethig you are entitled to know as You experienced it all first hand.. we can only imagine and search our minds for Reason. any health problems you and others contracted IS VERY SERIOUS, and no one should take it lightly! YOU WERE THERE- we were not..! i wish you good health and happiness for the future T4T

[Sacha Christie]

I think it's hilarious to suggest that a Col and his men couldn't recognize a helicopter with a search light on right over them. ON AN AIR BASE???!! Gimme a break. Also the suggestion that any kind of glass would cause anyone to believe that stars looked like triangular craft is ridiculous. What about the winking eye? Any explanation for that? Perhaps there was a solar eclipse that night?

It would be nice to have a concise explanation in chronological order of what happened over that weekend from Ian's point of view. If every part of the event can be explained as a covert human occurence then I'd like to hear it. I've read through you site Ian and you just seem to pick out the thinks you can think of an alternative theory but you don't explain every single event.

Autokenesis is a slight involuntary flick of the eyeball to keep everything in focus.. it certainly doesn't stand up as a reasonable argument for stars to seem like "objects" moving through the trees changing colour or winking like an eye!

John you need answers either way. If it wasn't a ufo then it was military and if it was military then somebody is accountable.

[Andrew Pike]

I'd just like to add my best wishes John regarding your health problems (and to others involved suffering health problems). I for one believe you have been let down in a big way by both your own government and the UK's.

**********

Sacha I don't think you'll get the response you want from Ian. I too have read his site, etc, and he'll only answer what he can debunk away with ease. Anything which doesn't fit won't get addressed. They all do it, Chris French, Susan Blackmore, David Clarke, et al. John Burroughs asked him a few posts ago about the blue lights he saw pass through his truck, I think the response addresssed zig-zagging stars the effect of stars and clouds, one of the standard one-fits-all answers trotted out all the time. That's why I said many posts ago it's not worth even talking to these types of astronomers, what some of us call the 'Patrick Moore clan', or as Stanton Friedman would put it "Don't bother me with the facts, I've already made up my mind." Worth a try maybe. But I bet he picks up on some unrelated point in your post that has nothing to do with anything and twist away from an answer. Lets see.

[puddlepirate]

No more hilarious than everything has to be alien, no matter what. To see aliens in everything is to ignore the fact the the UK has a robust air defence system.

There was no flying (at least no scheduled flying) from any of the US bases in the area - not just the twin bases but also Lakenheath (I've asked them). So if no US aircraft were up, then observers on the ground were probably not expecting to see any aircraft. If any non US aircraft that might have been up were some distance away and downwind then they could well have been very quiet indeed. If the alien believers bothered to read my post in its entirety instead of selectively they would see it says 'suggests' 'could be' 'if' etc not that it was...

That's the problem with believers in aliens. Aliens have to be everywhere, no matter what and anything, anything at all that suggests there could be a logical explanation must be immediately dismissed as nonsense. SETI have been looking for aliens for years and have found nothing. So given their expertise and the time and money that has been thrown at the project, I go with SETI.

Ian R's lighthouse theory that proposed Orfordness lighhouse as the primary cause for Penniston's, Burrough's and Cabansag's excursion into the forest has been proven to be incorrect because it is not possible to see the lighthouse from east gate. Plus the light is what is known as a sector light, showing white, green and red. The red light is low down, much lower than the white. Therefore, the red light eminating from the Orfordness light could not have been what Halt saw. Whilst it has been suggested that the white light can be seen from the edge of the farmer's field if an observer stands in a particular place, I have my doubts because even when standing on Orford jetty the light is only a few degrees off the horizon. Even from there it is very small and quite faint so from approx 6 miles further inland, behind a hill and a line of trees, the light would be fainter and smaller still. Further to that, the back of the light is shielded to prevent the light from shining inland.

Therefore, if it cannot be proved that no helicopters were flying or hovering over the field - and to simply say I think it's hilarious to suggest that a Col and his men couldn't recognize a helicopter with a search light on right over them. ON AN AIR BASE???!! Gimme a break. is NOT proof, then it cannot be discounted. Ditto the glass... have any of the believers in aliens every properly tested the optical effects of observing stars through the glass windows of the control tower or any of the observation towers? If not, then I suggest they do and until they have done, they abstain from ridiculing the suggestion.

There are contributors to this forum who are acknowledged experts in their respective fields. To dismiss their suggestions or theories without any supporting evidence for that dismissal is ludicrous and smacks of amateurism and intransigent beliefs.

I don't expect anyone to accept what I say, even if it is only a suggestion but I do expect them to provide hard evidence to contradict it.

[Sacha Christie]

"That's the problem with believers in aliens. Aliens have to be everywhere, no matter what and anything, anything at all that suggests there could be a logical explanation must be immediately dismissed as nonsense. SETI have been looking for aliens for years and have found nothing. So given their expertise and the time and money that has been thrown at the project, I go with SETI."

Thats an outrageous generalized sweeping statement. And yes I do think it is hilarious to suggest they can't recognize a helicopter. Also I did read all of your post including the "if's" etc.... You shouldn't just jump to conclusions about a persons personal beliefs, research or intellignece... you're basing all your evidence for my beliefs on a false premise and bordering on an ad hominim attack. I'm not some stupid white lighter channelling anus from the pleideas nor to do I believe in any of that. Believe it or not I'm a nuts and bolts researcher not "one of those alien believers" although I obviously entertain the idea that someone/something is flying these craft seeing as they are very obviously under some kind of intelligent control. Also the fact that people have mentioned seeing ETI at the time of the events allows me to consider it as a possibility.

I've been to the forest many times, I've looked at the lighthouse, stood in the spot where the picnic table is now and there's no way in the world it could have been that so if these 'experts' who are not to be ridiculed by us "alien believers" and we only have witness testimony which can't be believed seeing as they can't possibly be credible or reliable witnessesbecause a) it was Christmas and they'd been drinking and b) they can't tell a helicopter from a hot air balloon then where do we go from there? Instead of just telling us we're all deluded cranks why doesn't someone say what they think happened? Fair enough, cold war theory... but6 what's the theory? If it was an ejector pod then where's the rest of the craft said pod came from? Where did it land or did it float to the ground changing shape and emitting pretty colours breaking a few twigs in the process?

What is the alternative theory.. no one can convince anyone without saying what they actually think.

Oh and there were no helicopters flying that night... an FOI request sorted that issue out.

What I always find incredible is the voracity of the attacks from non believers on believers.... why so instantly hot under the collar? The only reason I believe ufos are in our airspace is because I saw two on the same night at the same time in very close proximity with a group of friends. I'm not an idiot and I research thoroughly and am extremely discriminating but as yet, as far as this event is concerned everyones holding their alternative theories very close to their chest so how can I be convinced otherwise... please go ahead. If there is an earthly explanation that explains all the facts of the matter I might be put in two minds about it at the very least.

"There are contributors to this forum who are acknowledged experts in their respective fields. To dismiss their suggestions or theories without any supporting evidence for that dismissal is ludicrous and smacks of amateurism and intransigent beliefs."
Right back at ya.... heard nothing and have seen no proof to suggest it was anything than what eyewitnesses have said they saw.

Andrew I expect as much myself but I though it was worth asking. I'm not on this forum to fall out with anyone, I just want reasonable answers to reasonable questions. If it wasn't an ET event, what was it? What were all the different events that have so many people confused, deluded, mistaken etc?

Remember... Being open minded means accepting all prospects as possibilities. However it does not imply that one necessarily believes in all prospectives. One can choose their own beliefs while still maintaining an open mind, as long as one is willing to accept that others beliefs are equally legitimate.

As I have said right from the start I haven't made up my mind on what happened there yet, ET or otherwise, I'm still looking into the possible human angle (I have not found ANY evidence so far of what human angle it could have been...) but I am open to any evidence and or explanation with an OPEN mind.

[Deep Purple]

I think the obvious thing to say about lighthouse, stars, fixed glass etc, is none of the players who were there says it was these. The lighthouse would have been there every night , shining away, so you would normally be able to see any effects from it on a number of nights.
YOu can bet the optical quality of glass in an aircraft control tower would be good and clean--so I would be so suprised if this was causing the starnge effects. Control tower staff would be looking through this glass , day and night, and see stars etc--- they would spot any strange features I am sure.
Something happened at Rendlesham and is being covered up. Whether it is an ET event or not I am not sure.
It will be certainly interesting if Col Halt tells us more about what he saw and why he beleives it was an ET event.
The think Andrew Pikes comments on some of the professional skeptics hit the nail on the head