A challenge to the skeptics

General discussion about the Rendlesham forest incident

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby stephan » Tue Sep 07, 2010 9:43 pm

John Burroughs wrote:The next question is if they could put something into your mind from a distance with different effects would it explain what happened to us?

John, are you serious ? I mean, if that was the case this technology would certainly be made use of widely (warfare, mass manipulation etc). Why should it be limited to that event in 1980. As far as I know the only mean to achieve that would be a combination of drugs + visual/ audio indoctrination (e.g. when you are put in front of a screen with headphones on while being on drugs) which may in fact have happened to some of you (especially Larry and Jim as they've mentioned something like that themselves).
send me a signal
User avatar
stephan
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:10 pm
Location: Germany

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby John Burroughs » Tue Sep 07, 2010 9:55 pm

Are you aware of what the US England have been using in both gulf wars and other operations they have carried out? Did you know the Russians carried out EM on the US in Moscow? There were also reports of those kind of effects used on British Citizens when they were protesting US nukes in the UK! Jim and I can't explain what happened to us and we were about 5 feet away from each other why? Could something not have caused this effect and could it not have been EM?
John Burroughs
 
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby Zodian » Tue Sep 07, 2010 10:00 pm

This is such an opportunity for those sceptics who believe that the 'Rendlesham Incident' was something other than a downed stealth-fighter to have their say. But where is the their evidence?

Scepticism is healthy and promotes discussion. but all the pointers indicate a military origin to the enigma, despite the sceptical attempt to have us believe otherwise. The 'challenge' invites all kinds of wild and whacko theories regarding the downed stealth aircraft partially observed in the woods that night, and those sceptics seem to want to go to untold lengths to have us believe that what they claim to have perceived in the woods, was something 'not of this world'.

Come on sceptics, give us something tangiable to argue about. Give us some good reason to believe that what happened in Rendlesham Woods was not directly explainable to human error. 8)
Zodian
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 3:49 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby puddlepirate » Tue Sep 07, 2010 10:08 pm

Thanks Dan92 :D

They did pick something up on radar the first night we went into the woods! CSC called eastern radar through are tower and they confirmed something was seen on radar and disappeared over Woodbridge! LT Buren has verified this because he was the one who made the call!


This maps to something I was told by a very reliable source about two months ago but as that was 'mate of a mate' stuff it's invalid as evidence. The fact that easterm radar confirmed a contact was lost over Woodbridge is interesting - especially as verification was requested by Lt Buren.

On a different point - the whole purpose of stealth was for it to be invisible to radar. Given the aircraft remained secret for so long, it can be assumed that its stealth capability worked therefore there would have been no radar signature or if there was then it was more likely to look like noise rather than a firm contact.

I remember BTDTs comment about him working on an aircraft at Woodbridge that had to be up on the flightline by 0630. At approx 0200 his flight was mustered then told to leave because the base was being evacuated. Because his car's fuel tank was virtually empty and the base petrol station was closed, he asked if he could leave by the east gate in order to shorten his journey. With permission granted he headed off down the east gate service road, turned left at the bottom, went past the end of Woodbridge runway at which point he saw floodlights to his right, preventing anyone from looking into the forest. His posts must still be on the forum somewhere but I think that's pretty much what he said. Taking his statement at face value, then if Woodbridge was being evacuated (and perhaps also HMP Hollesley Bay) then the situation must have been very serious indeed. However, there has been no confirmation of that evacuation - not at Woodbridge nor the alert at HMP Hollesley Bay.

There appear to be a number of elements that suggest someone, somewhere knew full well what was in the forest... e.g. the need to take floodlights, the fact that Halt and co should take a geiger counter but did not need NBCD suits, Conrad's apparent lack of concern over what was going on, the increase in flash-override voice traffic on the Autovon system (apparently a precedence reserved for calls to the US President or the UK PM or similar high ranking persons - that alone would surely have been enough to get any commanding officer reaching for his cap to find out what the f**k was happening...), the lack of response from the RAF, an apparent lack of concern that a radar contact had been lost right over Woodbridge.....fairly insignificant on their own but quite telling when put together.
You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time (Winston Churchill)...causa latet, vis est notissima
puddlepirate
 
Posts: 637
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:47 am
Location: UK

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby John Burroughs » Tue Sep 07, 2010 10:13 pm

About 2 weeks or so ago someone posted a couple of quotes from General Williams he did for Bruni book! I don't remember what thread it was in can you direct me to it or repost it!
John Burroughs
 
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby AgentAppleseed » Tue Sep 07, 2010 10:15 pm

Did you feel like whoever was talking to you knew what you were thinking?
At no time did I observe anything from the time I arrived at RAF Woodbridge.
AgentAppleseed
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 7:04 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby John Burroughs » Tue Sep 07, 2010 10:23 pm

Puddle
Why send out more men to draw more attention to whats going on. A special ops team could secure the area and await retrieval with out drawing that kind of attention could they not! Conrad and Williams didn't know what was going on outside the wire if they did we would have not been out there! And why would the NSA and DIA be involved if what your suggesting was true the CIA would be running the operation! Plus Conrad and Williams were on there radios the whole time Halt was out there!
John Burroughs
 
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby John Burroughs » Tue Sep 07, 2010 10:30 pm

I never said anything about talking to someone or that they knew what I was thinking!
John Burroughs
 
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby AgentAppleseed » Tue Sep 07, 2010 10:39 pm

I apologise, I must have gotten mixed up with the EM thing, apparently its capable of some really strange effects
At no time did I observe anything from the time I arrived at RAF Woodbridge.
AgentAppleseed
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 7:04 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby stephan » Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:05 pm

John Burroughs wrote:Are you aware of what the US England have been using in both gulf wars and other operations they have carried out? Did you know the Russians carried out EM on the US in Moscow? There were also reports of those kind of effects used on British Citizens when they were protesting US nukes in the UK! Jim and I can't explain what happened to us and we were about 5 feet away from each other why? Could something not have caused this effect and could it not have been EM?

to be honest, I'm not aware of that which doesn't mean anything of course :mrgreen: I'm aware though of allegations of so-called christian fundamentalism used in the military to influence soldiers. Recently I saw this documentary on RT:



if the devices you suggest would exist (perhaps they do, I don't know) wouldn't it be easier to use them rather than to undertake such huge efforts to influence the army in the way as shown in the documentary ?

I could very well imagine that what happened to you and Jim was indeed extraterrestrial in nature as I've had an experience in my childhood (in the early 80s) of which I only remember bits and pieces, too and which definetely had the touch of an alien abduction (as it is called nowadays). I did not see an actual alien, just the shadow of something that looked like a typical Grey (approx. 1 m tall figure with arms and legs and a huge head). That's all I remember of its appearance. But what I also remember is that years later when I first saw the skull of an alien Grey on TV this gave me the creeps and I thought that I had seen that before. So, yes, I support the idea that what you have experienced could have been ET. They may have the tech you describe as they would be far ahead of us (if one considers the descriptions and ''impossible'' behavior of the crafts). I don't think that we have the technology to implant whole scenes - at least not from a distance via EM waves - into the conscious mind as scientists are still trying to use numerous electrodes on volunteers to figure out their brain waves (you know the kind of stuff you see on TV, people moving a mouse pointer on a computer screen while being attached to countless cables on their head). But that's just my opinion and I could be wrong. If you have some evidence I'd be glad to see it.
Last edited by stephan on Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
send me a signal
User avatar
stephan
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:10 pm
Location: Germany

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby puddlepirate » Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:10 pm

Hi John

Why send out more men to draw more attention to whats going on


It seems that they didn't draw attention to anything because none of the locals, the local police, the farmer or anyone else not in the USAF and not deployed to the forest knew anything about it. In terms of keeping it under wraps it was a job well done....
You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time (Winston Churchill)...causa latet, vis est notissima
puddlepirate
 
Posts: 637
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:47 am
Location: UK

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby stephan » Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:14 pm

John Burroughs wrote:About 2 weeks or so ago someone posted a couple of quotes from General Williams he did for Bruni book! I don't remember what thread it was in can you direct me to it or repost it!


I don't know if it's the quote you are looking for but I posted something in that regard on August, 25th:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=768#p6848
send me a signal
User avatar
stephan
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:10 pm
Location: Germany

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby AgentAppleseed » Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:26 pm

That is correct, they dont have the capability "to edit" if you will, entire scenes into someones mind "like a movie" and EM certainly isnt capable of doing it. That kind of thing is on the way, in the future, but its not here yet, and the people that are working on that, currently envisage the use of an interface which will take the form of some kind of invasive bodily tech. Now the method of achieving it will probably change to where invasive tech wont be needed, but thats all still a long way off.
At no time did I observe anything from the time I arrived at RAF Woodbridge.
AgentAppleseed
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 7:04 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby John Burroughs » Wed Sep 08, 2010 1:40 am

Unless you work for the department of defense with a above top secret clearance how can you be so sure what we can do or can't do for sure! I just retired in 2006 did 2 tours in the middle east and also was involved in the Bosnia conflict all 3 bases I was at had the top groups of special forces at them! I have seen certain things with my own eyes I also believe they kept the stealth fighter under wraps for many years before it became operational! The interesting thing is 2 of the most classified projects are radar cabilities and EM use and did they not test nukes on unknowing soldiers in the desert of Nevada. And Puddle they may have kept it quite on the outside but not inside the base hate to tell you this but if our command knew what was going on they would have handled much differently than they did!
John Burroughs
 
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby Ignis Fatuus » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:01 am

Just a slight detour...are we not all sceptics somewhere along the line? If you believe in, for arguments sake, an ET visitation and nothing else...does that make you become sceptical towards other peoples ideas?

Re the psychotronic hypothesis...yep that's some very trippy poop indeed.
That would be the ultimate 'meddled with' scenario. Definitely something that would keep you awake at nights. Yes I would have to agree that.. IF this is what you guys were subjected to then I can fully see how contradictions between what you and Penniston did or didn't see could arise. And if so, I'm more than happy to eat my own keyboard seeing as I've been giving him a hard time.
The first thing that popped into my minds eye when you brought this up, is a snippet from one of your interviews where you said you woke up knowing or sensing or with a feeling that something was happening in the forest.

Playing with some of those mind kontrol possibilities sure sounds like an express ride to a dark and lonely place. Could make a person even question whether anything actually even took place the way you all remember it. Everyone thinks they're in the woods, but instead there's a hangar full of tranced out base personnel receiving their hypnotic reprogramming.

Hypothetically speaking of course.
I've got so much torque I can tear a hole in Time - Jeremy Clarkson
User avatar
Ignis Fatuus
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:52 am
Location: Orfordness Lighthouse

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby tpreitzel » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:25 am

John Burroughs wrote:The UFO and Lighthouse story started within 2 days of the incident and the person who went into the pubs with the story worked for Zickler is still close friends with him made CMsgt less than 7 years later from SSgt which is almost unheard of plus he went on to work with the F-117.


Simply amazing ... TSgt, MSgt, SMSgt, CMSgt ... in 7 years. Personally, I don't know of ANYONE in the USAF gaining rank so quickly and retaining their integrity or dignity. ;) You're right to be suspicious!
tpreitzel
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:30 am

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby John Burroughs » Wed Sep 08, 2010 6:36 am

I beleive somebody just posted another quote from Bruni book! In it Bruni talked to Zickler wife who said after Zickler retired he received a vist by a OSI agent! Look at Zickler BIo head of GE aeorspace deception unit! Hmm and why would OSI be droping in anyway to vist a retired officer and noticed what his wife said the agent told her! Also why did Williams show up out of the blue when Bruni was putting together her book and then make those statements? What could cause different memories on what happened cause you not to remember things have them come back to you later and please explain what came out when I went under Hypnois! And one more thing why would anyone go through what Jim and I have gone through! Remember we didnot put this information out Larry Warren pushed for this to happen the Air Force released this then the Officers who we served under ran for cover even from the beggining they were covering each other ass## but who was covering our?
John Burroughs
 
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby AdrianF » Wed Sep 08, 2010 8:26 am

I think this is the CNN report that John was referring to. I had only seen a short clip of this before, but this seems to be most of the meat of the show.


We discussed this some time back on here, try searching the forum for MK Ultra if you're interested.

In it Bruni talked to Zickler wife who said after Zickler retired he received a vist by a OSI agent!

It was Wayne Persinger and his wife.
AdrianF
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:57 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby AdrianF » Wed Sep 08, 2010 8:44 am

PT2:-


Just a slight detour...are we not all sceptics somewhere along the line? If you believe in, for arguments sake, an ET visitation and nothing else...does that make you become sceptical towards other peoples ideas?

It seems so, but sceptic bashing seems to be the new black.
AdrianF
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:57 pm

Re: A challenge to the skeptics

Postby Frank » Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:08 am

John Burroughs wrote:I beleive somebody just posted another quote from Bruni book! In it Bruni talked to Zickler wife who said after Zickler retired he received a vist by a OSI agent! Look at Zickler BIo head of GE aeorspace deception unit! Hmm and why would OSI be droping in anyway to vist a retired officer and noticed what his wife said the agent told her!


I made this post, but ..

CORRECTION (before a false rumor starts to spread):
Bruni visited a retired OSI officer and talked to his wife, she did not talk to Zicklers wife.
She also did interview Zickler himself, who said that OSI investigated the case but found insufficient hard evidence.
Frank
 
Posts: 325
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 1:04 pm

PreviousNext

Return to The Rendlesham forest incident

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest

cron