A challenge to the skeptics

[Frank]

A challenge to the skeptics

Skeptics claim that this whole incident was caused by something mundane and that the seven witnesses who were actually on the spot when it happened that have come forward are embellishing or lying (I think the diplomatic term is “misinterpreting things”). I am referring to Jim Penniston, John Burroughs, Ed Cabansag, Col. Halt, Monroe Nevels, Adrian Bustinza, and Larry Warren.

Six of these witnesses have no doubts that what they saw was intelligently controlled and could not have been human technology. The seventh one (John) thinks this is entirely possible and has not found a convincing mundane explanation so far.

Their conclusions are mainly based on the performance of what they saw, not so much on its appearance (fantastic acceleration and maneuverability, no sound).

Statistically, the chance is infinitesimally small that all men that were on duty and went into the forest these nights were morons that could not recognize a planet, lighthouse, or burning manure truck…

So if the skeptics are right, it must be possible to produce just one witness who was on the spot when it happened and who tells us he merely saw a lighthouse/meteor/star/planet/piece of space debris/beacon/burning manure truck/police car/tractor/flare/Apollo training capsule/crashed secret plane/UAV prototype or whatever other mundane “explanation” has come forward over the years.

There are not many options: Bob Ball and Bruce Englund are the only known primary witnesses left. So, do your best and try to contact these men. Have them tell us how the other seven witnesses are completely wrong and maybe you have a case.

[Vortex]

Great post Frank. I sincerely hope that the sceptics take up the challenge. I know it's a controversial point, but I think it's important to acknowledge the fact that many of the sceptics are implying that the primary witnesses are lying (or at the very least, grossly exagerrating/embellishing) about their encounters. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I just don't buy the fact that all of the witnesses are lying about what they saw! What are the benefits of lying about this? Seriously?! I know cynics suggest that entry into the Ufology circuit is a lucrative, money-making career move, but again I just don't buy this! These witnesses have opened themselves up to ridicule and abuse from all angles (not to mention the possiblity of jeopardising their pensions) and if they've continued to pursue this case from 1980 until 2010, there must be a damn good reason to do so!

Can we really believe that these highly professional, no nonsense, military men 'misinterpreted' a lighthouse or a police car as a black, opaque, mechnical triangular object that displayed phenomenal speed and manoeuvrability? Or stars and some 'will-o'-the-wisp' lights as intelligently controlled objects that displayed fast, angular movements and fired pencil-thin laser beams down to the ground?! Come on, this is starting to insult the intelligence of all us!

I'm not saying by any means that we're definitely dealing with alien visitation here (although that's one valid theory, when considering what's been observed), but it's clear that we're dealing with something beyond the realm of mundance explanation. That's not based on some quasi-religious UFO-buff belief system of mine, but on the testimony of numerous individuals who witnessed the events of December 1980 in Rendlesham Forest. It's either that or the witnesses are: a). Liars or; b). They are complicit in some sort of cover story for another incident. I don't think they're liars for one second (as I've already made clear) and I've yet to see any convincing evidence that the UFO incident is a cover story for anything else.

Over to the sceptics...

Vortex.

[puddlepirate]

Challenge to sceptics? Why? Nobody - not to my knowledge at least, albeit limited as that might be - has called anybody a liar. Obviously the witnesses do not know what they saw or this forum would not exist. The whole point of this forum is to try and unravel the mystery that is the RFI. I might be repeating myself but it is important not to exclude the bigger picture and to remember that deep black projects are highly classified. Anybody not directly involved at the very centre of a deep black project would not know the details of that project unless there had been a security leak. And it has to be said the USAF are very security conscious when it comes to black projects, almost to the point of paranoia. Therefore someone outside the inner circle would have not the faintest idea of what lie at the heart of such a project and if it involved an aircraft built around stealth technology, they would not have been able to recognise that aircraft, not even parts of it, certainly not the fuselage, not even if it or they were stuck on the end of their nose.

Did anyone not involved with Senior Trend know what the aircraft looked like? They do now but they sure as heck didn't back in 1980. If someone totally unaware of the project had stumbled upon an F-117A when it first came into service they would have thought the Martians had landed. And so it is with many such projects and let us not forget also that several deep black projects were combined efforts - they involved both the US and the UK. Companies/locations like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, RCA, Area 51, Edwards AFB, Nellis AFB in the US and Marconi, BAe Systems, Orford Ness, RAF Bawdsey, RAF Macrahanish in the UK. The things that didn't happen in Dec 80 are as important as those that did.

Simply because there is a deeply ingrained belief that the RFI was an extra-terrestrial craft manned by alien abductors doesn't mean that it was. The sceptics are needed to maintain a balance between the real world and the fantasy.

Moving on...Ignis Fatuus... now that is an interesting moniker. One definition is Jack O' lantern or Will O' the Wisp but it also means 'somethng that misleads or deludes. An illusion'.......hmmm.

[John Burroughs]

You can take MSgt Ball out of it he is on the record in more than one documentary on what he saw! In the Cnn piece he went as far as saying there could have been some kind of life form inside the blue lights they saw flying around! The only one who has not gone on the record is Lt England who worked closely with Zickler and Conrad!

[Ignis Fatuus]

And it has to be said the USAF are very security conscious when it comes to black projects, almost to the point of paranoia.

Exactly. Thats why I'm keen to understand why security personnel started leaking like a sieve... and to people who would otherwise be busy herding cats.

I've thought about the stealth side of it to, but not as a case of mistaken identidy...
I could quite easily imagine the UFO cover story as a big kooky rug to sweep any subsequent visits by the like of Nighthawk under. Giving the spaceship (that was beyond all human comprehension) a similiar silhouette as the real secret of the time...genius.

Maybe the security wasn't leaking...maybe it was still on the job guarding.

[John Burroughs]

Did you not notice that Conrad stated that Halt went out on two different nights into the forest after our incident which is what I have been saying all along! I have never said it was ET because of what Puddlepirate has said about what was in the area! If you take a look at the bases including the radar sites and throw in Chicksands and Feltwell right next to Lakenheath which does have a underground facility and is only a hours drive away from Bentwaters. Lord Hillnorton had several questions about Feltwell
and what it was used for! 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. Also look at Zickler Bio after the incident and where he went onto work at! Look at Gabriel Williams Morgan and Bailzey they all went on to work in whats now called space command! But of course when I brought this all up before I was accused of trying to divert people from something else!

[Ignis Fatuus]

Oooh thats devious. Make the UFO and Lighthouse appear to be slugging it out from opposing corners, when in fact the fight is fixed with two fighters from the same stable.
Thanks for that.

[John Burroughs]

Why are you so sure that there from the same stable?

[puddlepirate]

Just going back over some stuff and, mostly prompted by references in previous posts, taking another look at LAEG, Skycrash and You Can't Tell the People.....

One thing seems to stand out above anything else, even above the unchallenged statements regarding the number of personnel in the forest from night two. Depending on who you read, there were between 40 and 70 personnel out there, possibly more. But it is not the number of personnel that stands out, it is what they took with them. Not the geiger counter or the cassette recorder, those are referred to frequently. What stands out is the fact they took with them into the forest several mobile airfield floodlight units. Large units with integral generators that had to be towed from Bentwaters, taken down rough logging roads then, once placed in position, they remained stationary when in use. They would not have taken floodlights unless those in command knew they would need them. The floodlights would not have been used to look for 'odd lights'. Nor would they have been used to search for something - they could have used powerful handheld torches for that. Surely the only sensible reason for taking floodlights was because it was already known that someone needed to work on something. Perhaps something static, possibly laying on the forest floor under the damaged branches. There is also a reference in LAEG (p42/p43 of the hardback copy) to a makeshift roadblock at the point where the road passes the eastern end of Woodbrige runway. An airman warns a female civilian driver whose car has been stopped 'that there might unexploded ordnance in the area and they were checking it out..'

It is widely known today that the USAF did indeed and against agreed protocols, store nuclear weapons at Bentwaters in the 1980s and it is also widely known that the USAF had habit of having accidents with such weapons both in the UK and elsewhere. Given, then, that the existence of such weapons on UK soil is known, why would an accident with a nuke still need to be kept secret? Perhaps the answer is that it wasn't a nuke but a different kind of weapon - assuming always that it was indeed an accident with a weapon. Something far more controversial. Something that, should it become known, would raise hysteria even in 2010.

All purely hypothetical of course. Just a throwaway thought.

[John Burroughs]

Does that mean everybody who was out there was involved in this or just a few people really knew what was going on! The only two people who have remained quite only this are Zickler and England! According to Nevils England came and got him on Sat night why would Conrad want somebody in DP out there? Yes he didn't go out with all of his gear but he did take out a geiger counter and a star light scope plus goggles! Could that mean somebody knew there might be some radiation out there but at very low levels? Would they risk a whole team of men knowing there could be a source of high radiation out there? And if they were already guarding it why would they send anybody else out there?

[Daniel]

You always bring some interesting ideas puddlepirate and that's what I like to see. I like to take in all information and then try to match it with the problem. If a weapon was dropped in the forest by accident I would have thought the Radar stations would have picked up some sort of Aircraft. Then again maybe some sort of stealth plane was visiting.

I believe the US Military wants to remain quiet about this issue, as they may see it as defense related. Taking light alls into the location does give me the impression that there were prior plans in handling the situation. If there were true visitations then the first night is the most important to me. What was so important about the base for these visitors to return many times? Why draw away many security personnel into a secluded area where they're partially blinded by forestry? Did the USAF have something there that had interested them?

This is an interesting topic and I like to read ideas from everyone, but I don't care for the insultive types.

[John Burroughs]

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!

[Ignis Fatuus]

Why are you so sure that there from the same stable?

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.

I hadn't thought of the possibility of the seemingly conflicting UFO v Lighthouse stories serving the same overall purpose until I read the above. If I read it differently from what you intended...my bad.

They would not have taken floodlights unless those in command knew they would need them. The floodlights would not have been used to look for 'odd lights'. Nor would they have been used to search for something - they could have used powerful handheld torches for that. Surely the only sensible reason for taking floodlights was because it was already known that someone needed to work on something.

I remember reading on this site somewhere a post from an engineer (think he went by the name of beentheredonethat) who was told to down tools and bugger off,and he suggested the purpose of the lightalls was to obscure the view from the road into the woods. Would be interested in knowing whether he was for real or otherwise.

Perhaps something static, possibly laying on the forest floor under the damaged branches.

The special effects projectors? The hidden immunity idol?

[Frank]

A UFO story to cover up tests with a secret stealth aircraft or a secret weapon? I fail to see the logic of that.

As an engineer I know it is a piece of cake so separate “signal” and “noise” if they each have different characteristics. For example if you would use UFO stories (the “noise”) to cover up test flights with a F-117 (the “signal”) there is bound to be some witness who recognizes the F-117 for what it is. The skeptics would immediately jump on the first witness who says “I did not see a UFO, I saw an aircraft. It flew like an aircraft and I even heard the engine noise.” The story of the secret aircraft would spread and bang – your signal would stand out like a sore thumb, including detailed descriptions and possibly even photographs.

No, if you add noise to cover up a signal it must be indistinguishable from the signal. To cover up F-117 test flights you would spread stories about a super secret high altitude spy aircraft that can reach mach 5 and several other stories like that. You would spread rumors and photographs of different types of aircraft on the internet. Then, when somebody spots the real deal it would not stand out among the rest of the rumors. Your signal will go unnoticed among the noise. (And a nice side effect would be that the rumors make you enemies very nervous.)

So how do you cover up a real UFO event? Simply by adding even more UFO stories that are inconsistent with the original one, or stories that are so fantastic that nobody believes them. That would sound more logical to me. And that raises one of the key questions concerning the RFI: What is the signal, and what is the noise ..?

[Ignis Fatuus]

A UFO story to cover up tests with a secret stealth aircraft or a secret weapon? I fail to see the logic of that.

It worked for high alt balloons, U2 and SR-71.
How many people were fooled by the Blackbird's dipsy-doodle manouvre from front on and at distance?

[John Burroughs]

What about the effect of straight line radar does anybody know what that can cause The whole area was full of radar sites with 3 of them creating a triangle over Bentwaters ! Also has anybody taken a hard look at EM goggle Chuck DE Caro EM he was able to conduct a test not to long after Bentwaters using stuff purchased from radio shack take a look at the effects they were able to do! Both of these are highly classified to this day! Also note there was a 707 with lazers fitted on it working with the SDI program in the UK at that time! There was a UAV that was built in the UK called the sprite and was fitted with lazers. There was more than one Satellite that came down over those 3 days all Russian did you ever wonder if they would maybe go after them and why did they come down in the first place? I know about the first one on our night but there was more than that! The 67th had the number one guy Col Wicker in recovering Satellites and when I contacted him he first stated he could not remember anything about Bentwaters even who worked for him at the time. I refreshed his memory on the second E-mail and he said he would have to check some things out and get back to me and never did! It was not the F-117 but what about the other stuff!

[John Burroughs]

The article is called mind justice! One of the statements was they could put something together in 3 weeks that could take care of a whole town!

[Frank]

I can imagine all kinds of strange effects if you pump enough radar energy in a small area. Plasma's and ball-lightning effects for instance. And UAV's hanging high up in the air sending down laser beams would sure look UFO-like.

But if you take Jim's description of a solid craft that was unidentifyable, made from a strange material, with strange symbols on it. And then take his description of the take-off:
"At that point, I backed away from the craft, because the light was starting to get brighter. Still, there was no sound. There was no physical contact with any kind of life form, but there did seem to be a life presence. It was mechanical, this ship, and it seemed to be under intelligent control.
The next thing I knew, I was standing about 20 feet away from the craft with Burroughs, who I thought I had left back near the tree line. The craft moved up off the ground, about three feet, still with absolutely no sound. It started to move slowly, weaving back through the trees at a very slow pace, maybe a half a foot per second. It took about a couple of minutes for it to maneuver itself back to a distance of about 100 to 150 feet, then it rose up just over the trees, about 200 feet high. There was a momentary pause -- and then literally with the blink of an eye it was gone. All with no sound. That still boggles my mind."

I simply can not think of anything man-made that could perform like this.

I get the same feeling when I hear Monroe Nevels describe how the lights "zap" between Bentwaters and the forest with incredible speed and accelerarion.

Plus: This is by far not the only account of silent crafts with fantastic acceleration capabilities. It is a general pattern seen all over the world for over 60 years now.

Of course I wasn't there, and maybe the things you saw, John, did resemble a UAV or ball lightning. The only thing we as bystanders can do is take the information that is in the public domain and that is provided by you and the other witnesses, and then try to make some sense of it.

[John Burroughs]

Did you look at the article on EM called Mind justice?

[John Burroughs]

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? Then why would they be doing that in the first place and what other effects could it also cause? Then which is more of a reasonable explanation something we were doing maybe the Russian or both of us! Or something from another world! Its very clear someone wanted the UFO card played from the begging did they not and of course we were all fooled by the Lighthouse planets and stars!