I can imagine that it is hard to tell from a distance whether the beams came down exactly in the WSA or not. Apparently there
was something in the air about half a mile from the WSA and someone even saw a "large craft".
Steve's report of a large cigar-shaped object as large as a football field that came directly overhead a few nights later is also interesting. (Such a shape clearly matches a lighthouse, so now we now lighthouses
do fly - sorry Mr Halt ..
But seriously, in such complex cases you can expect that the witness statements do not match exactly. The question is, what do you conclude from that?
1. The "it just can't be true approach": Each mismatch indicates that they exaggerate, suffer from hallucinations or even lie.
2. The "Sherlock Holmes approach": The witnesses do not have photographic memories but somehow there is a scenario that matches their statements to a large extend.
I would try 2 first before jumping to 1. Would a sceptic like Halt write a memo to the MOD stating a triangular craft was seen it all they saw was some space debris burning up in the atmosphere, a light house and some stars? Surely Halt - a well-educated man determined to debunk the whole affair - would have been able to determine that it was just the lighthouse after an investigation of several hours in the woods.
Nevertheless, before concluding anything you must get the facts right (or a right as they can be in such a case). I highly respect Ian's critical attitude in trying to obtain the truth; like so many others he has contributed a lot to this case.