Lighthouse beam video

[AdrianF]

Evenin all,

As a few of the long standing forum members may know, I have been involved in putting together a documentary on the RFI. During the last few years I've pieced together a fairly decent amount of material, much of which won't make it into the final documentary ( because of time constraints ). Some of this is probably of interest to followers of the story, so I am going to try, when possible, to put some of this online.

This short video is one of these, which covers the lighthouse beam and how it's rear guard works to block light falling on the town of Orford. It's been stated on numerous occasions, that the beam can't be seen from the forest, because of the rear guard. Obviously, this isn't the case and hopefully, this little clip goes some way to explain why.

Not very exciting..no scary music, no clips of the Halt tape to go with it and just my boring boring voice and some ropey graphics, but hopefully it will be of benefit to those who aren't familiar with the area.



Cheers

[AdrianF]

Rick was so late 80's

[simple]

The more i read about the plausibility of a light house producing a phosphorous phenomenon of releasing a bright glowing ball of light that moves toward the eyewitness in the woods then the glowing ball of light blast a beam of light within striking distance of the eyewitness.Man we should be stockpiling lighthouses in our military weapons.This is the same lighthouse the night before that created a illusion of a spacecraft landing... illuminating long enough to scribble details right? Maybe you ought to go back in the history books and credit this light propagation theory to the Rendlesham ufo chase in 1956...case 2 of project bluebook..or do the lighthouse buffs rather leave this under the radar...lol

[Deep Purple]

I watched your short clip, and well done for compliing it.
Basically form the alledged landing site you could have seen the lighthouse, but the lighthouse would always look like the lighthouse, and I 've never seen any strange beam effects at night from lighthouses. I think if the lighthouse did cause the incident why didnt the troops in subsequent nights spot it and say " Hey arseholes you just got spooked by a lighthouse dude". This is a fairly obvious question and needs an answer. The thing could have got put to bed . But it didnt happen that way.
As said before many of the troops had been out plenty of times at night on the arifield and would be familar with it and local night light sources ( perhaps JB you could confirm this point?)
Sometimes I think we go too techinical on this forum and blind ourselves to the obvious. Having said that this is not a critiscm of AdrianF's efforts--- he is just trying I belive to get to the bottom of this part of the puzzle in a logical way

[IanR]

I think if the lighthouse did cause the incident why didnt the troops in subsequent nights spot it and say " Hey arseholes you just got spooked by a lighthouse dude". This is a fairly obvious question and needs an answer. The thing could have got put to bed.

The local police told them that on the night in question, of course, and colleagues of theirs have since told them but it seems that no one wants to know those opinions.

As said before many of the troops had been out plenty of times at night on the arifield and would be familar with it and local night light sources

And as JB has quite openly told us on many occasions, that wasn't the case. See his posting only two days ago, on May 13: "I have never said I new where the lighthouse was before that night."

Recall also the quote from JB's buddy Chris Armold: "Contrary to what some people assert, at the time almost none of us knew there was a lighthouse at Orford Ness... That's one reason the lights appeared interesting or out of the ordinary to some people.”
For more, see Point 9 on this page
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham2b.htm

Sometimes I think we go too techinical on this forum and blind ourselves to the obvious.

Agreed entirely!

Ian

[John Burroughs]

Deep Purple
Thanks for asking! I spent many nights on the gate and you could not see the lighthouse from there. When we entered the forrest you could not see it until you crossed the field and passed the farmers house in my statement I say that. We came up on whatever it was it moved away then we went out into the field and passed the farmers house saw a becon and followed it. Ian like to say the power of the light has changed which makes a difference but he never filmed it before it was changed.But he did shoot film standing by the east gate when all the trees were gone saying look you can see the lighthouse from here now.Also you can see how the house looks like its on fire to the right of the house but again you can't see the lighthouse.

[Deep Purple]

Thing is Ian, none of them are now saying, yes ok we made a mistake and it was the lighthouse.
Many of the the witnesses would have gone down in the forest at night after the incident and none have said -- hey i made an honest mistake and it was the lighthouse!
After the Halt memo appeared, why didnt any of the witnesses say "Yup we've been down in the woods and we got spooked by a lighthouse"--- end of story.
I note some are saying that they werent aware there was even a lighthouse about, but at that distance it wouldnt have been very bright anyway.
If you were a witness and made a mistake whats the problem in saying " Yup I got spooked by the lighthouse", none do however.
Can you answer these questions?

[Deep Purple]

JB
Thanks for replying.
The original report of the incident has security personel very concerned about lights outside the perimeter, so much so they even thought it was a crashed aircraft
Doesnt sound like Lighthouse that couldnt be seen from their position anyway does it?

[John Burroughs]

Think of it another way Deep Purple they would have never done the memo would they if they thought it was the lighthouse. Why the investigation by the Mod dia why the missing documents. They could have easily told the USAF thats what it was. And of cource Ridpath and Clarke say those documents mean nothing. Just like Ridpath wants you to beleive those beams of light that Halt had come down at his feet was coming from a planet.

[AdrianF]

Sometimes I think we go too techinical on this forum and blind ourselves to the obvious. Having said that this is not a critiscm of AdrianF's efforts--- he is just trying I belive to get to the bottom of this part of the puzzle in a logical way

Thanks Dp and I agree that getting too technical can end up in the realms of pseudo-science. For me, this part of the puzzle became obvious a while back and is one of the reasons I posted this clip. It's probably not wise to spend too much time on this one tiny aspect, but as the guard on the back on the lighthouse has been used as a reason that the lighthouse can't be seen from the forest ( cough..UFO Hunters ) I thought it might be a useful exercise.

[IanR]

Can you answer these questions?

I could speculate, but I think you should try coming up with your own answers.

[Ignis Fatuus]

Charles Halt: The individuals reported seeing a strange glowing object in the forest.

Edward Cabansag: The beacon light turned out to be the yellow light. We would see a glowing near the beacon light, but as we got closer we found It to be a lit up farm house.

How many glowing objects were out in the forest?

[Ignis Fatuus]

[simple]

Where did u guys get this lighthouse theory ? From staring into a lava lamp ? I met Halt a couple of months ago..Theres no half truth to that man at all..You got the recording...what he saw is what he saw..I don't think no lighthouse would arouse the animals around there eh? That dude would have been the first to debunk the whole incident if he had the chance.Just call it a life changing moment.

[Deep Purple]

JB,
Thanks for reply and your comments are along the line of my thinking--- if it was the light house why did the memo get written?-- as you point out it would have done.
I think its important for forum members to understand that from the witness testimony the lighthouse could not be seen from the gate so what ever caused the guards initial alarm was not the lighthouse.
The guards saw starnge lights in those woods that caused them to become alarmed and report it--- this was the start of RFI.

IanR, I would like you to speculate on my earlier question--- this is not a court of law and we can allow speculation on the forum , also do you agree with the above or if not whats your angle on it?

[John Burroughs]

He will say we saw a fireball coming down one that lasted for well over a hour..

Skeptics do not present a point to explain a sighting, they present a point to dismiss it. Once they can enter a plausible idea, even if it's foolish, then they can move on and cause others to move on who accept the point outright with no evidence. Most people do not want to 'think' about anything, they want to be told what it is so they don't have to think. Posted on Face Book..

[IanR]

I think its important for forum members to understand that from the witness testimony the lighthouse could not be seen from the gate so what ever caused the guards initial alarm was not the lighthouse.
The guards saw starnge lights in those woods that caused them to become alarmed and report it--- this was the start of RFI.

They were drawn out by the 3 am fireball – that's what sparked off the whole event
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham1d.htm

But this is old news and here we go round that revolving door again...

Ian

[John Burroughs]

I think its important for forum members to understand that from the witness testimony the lighthouse could not be seen from the gate so what ever caused the guards initial alarm was not the lighthouse.
The guards saw starnge lights in those woods that caused them to become alarmed and report it--- this was the start of RFI.

They were drawn out by the 3 am fireball – that's what sparked off the whole event
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham1d.htm

But this is old news and here we go round that revolving door again...

Ian

Yes one that lasted for over a hour..

Skeptics do not present a point to explain a sighting, they present a point to dismiss it. Once they can enter a plausible idea, even if it's foolish, then they can move on and cause others to move on who accept the point outright with no evidence. Most people do not want to 'think' about anything, they want to be told what it is so they don't have to think.