30th Anniversary Conference discussion/Binary Code [merged]

[nebula200]

Here are the links to view the Ancient Aliens programme (with the message decoded):

part 1 @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWxLcD...
part 2 @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yHRyq...
part 3 @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpvESh...

enjoy!

[Frank]

Thanks, nebula200!

Unfortunately the links were incomplete, so I'll repeat them here:

First half of part 1 and last half of part 3 contain the Rendlesham case.

HOWEVER: Look carefully at part three, point 12:32 where the computer screen scrolls from the binary code to the "decoded message".
You'll see that there is an encoded message in between that merely contains a more or less random mix of characters. Above it it says: "Decodes to:". So the binary numbers basically decode to a random mix of characters (I assume using ASCII or Unicode). Below that mix the screen says: "Possible message (removing noise and errors):" and below it is the message presented by the History Channel. In other words: It takes a lot of human interpretation (some would say phantasy) to arrive at the message presented by the History Channel ...
This does not mean I do not believe Jim wrote down an mental image of 0's and 1's. It only means that interpreting them as ASCII or Unicode characters is not very succesfull in my opinion.

[nebula200]

Doh! When I tried them they worked! Thanks for reposting

[Admin]

Exploration [of] humanity

52° 09' 42.532"N
13° 13' 12.69"W

Conti[nuous]

For plantetary advan[ce]

[Daniel]

I surely hope we can obtain the sequence of binary numbers that Jim has. I don't feel it's going to be that easy to decypher a sequence that may not be machine code related.

This message feels very subjective and translated to fit the decoders beliefs. For all we know this craft could have been trying to communicate through electrical pulses, or if it's machine code related, it could be using a future revision of the ASCII chart or using (future) CPU OPcodes to communicate with the object it normally comes in contact with. The message may just be the craft's identification in machine readable form.

Binary could be seen as a really basic form of communication that could be translated into almost anything.

Daniel

[Essexufo]

Interesting message re the binary code but I have no doubt a coachload of experts will now come out and question not only the message contents but also Penniston because of this programme so it may have done more damage than good. Ignoring this message for a moment the facts are that something did happen in the forest. I've been there and seen UFO's myself with multiple witnesses - even managed to get a couple of photos. Plus there have been reports of UFO's from different parts of the forest. Whilst eating at one of the local cafe's in Woodbridge the owner recounted an encounter from the forest where a car (with courting couple) was "buzzed" and followed by a white ball of light. So whatever the sceptics say something did happen in Rendlesham forest and well done to Burroughs, Penniston and Warren for having the guts to come out and say so.

[Frank]

I don't feel it's going to be that easy to decypher a sequence that may not be machine code related.

This message feels very subjective and translated to fit the decoders beliefs.

Yep, the youtube video shows that a direct translation from binary to text produces rubbish, see http://www.rendlesham-incident.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=897&start=15#p8516.
It's only after removing 'noise' and 'errors' that The Message comes out ...

One thing we shouldn't overlook: a 0 and a 1 are both very human symbols. Why would somebody else use the exact same symbols for 'nothing' and 'one'? So something tells me the origin of the message is human, or at least the message should be interpreted in a human context..

Can't wait to see what the next message is in JP's magic notebook- from which unsubstantiated evidence can be created as and when he feels fit- Genius!

The best thing Jim could do right now is to put all scanned pages of his notebook on the Bentwaters1980 site for all to see, and add the investigation report showing his notebook was written in 1980. Why hasn't he done that already? He shouldn't be afraid to to so if he has nothing to hide.

[Admin]

Silvertop's 'Ancient Aliens' binary code thread has been merged with Frank's 30th Anniversary Conference discussion topic. Seems easier that way.

[Daniel]

One thing we shouldn't overlook: a 0 and a 1 are both very human symbols. Why would somebody else use the exact same symbols for 'nothing' and 'one'? So something tells me the origin of the message is human, or at least the message should be interpreted in a human context..

Guess it all depends on how Jim perceived the information. Was he seeing 1 and 0's or feeling a pattern from electrical pulses or flashes of light, or simply the feeling of change between two conditions? I'd be really happy just to have the binary sequence to just play with and see what I can tell from it, which may be nothing.

Didn't like it how 'Ancient Aliens' had to get their answer through removing 'noise and errors' and also inserting extra characters to make their point across.

[Deep Purple]

being an expert in computing I have managed to decipher the simple binary message it says " Go Compare"

[Essexufo]

Rendlesham - agree totally. Maybe a TV producer could organise this albeit speak to as many witnesses as possible, accumulate evidence and then present it to the public to make up their own mind. At the moment, as we saw at the conference there is conflict between JP,JB and Halt. Why not put the accusations and counter accusations in the programme. It's the only way we'll get to the truth. All the witnesses, all the evidence. Would make a good programme. Leave out the TV career sceptics who just counter argument with any old illogical rubbish just to get their TV fee also.

[John Burroughs]

First of all I would like to wish everybody a Happy New Year. I have met alot of interesting people on this forum over the past couple of years. Admin thanks for setting this up I have enjoyed being on here. Over the years I have truley found so many of these post entertainning to say the least. The part about Halt is one of them. What Jim and I feel is he is holding back on what he knows! I have also read not just on this site but others how things get twisted around so fast. We came over to Bentwaters to talk about what we know. We did it in a open forum pre announced so all could attend and ask question. We offered to meet our skeptics face to face. We took questions for over 2.5 hours at the forum and in the forrest. We released that there were codes and they have been put out to a national audience. Now people want to come out and say there experts on this and it means this or that. That were lying about the codes or we have to release them this way and now! What I do find is so many people have been respectful and willing to listen to what we have told them. That does not mean they all agree but that there interested in what happened to us and I respect that. To those I say thank you and you know who you are! Thanks again for all of those who made the event happen and to those who attended it! I hope next year goes well for everybody take care. John

[Frank]

Guess it all depends on how Jim perceived the information. Was he seeing 1 and 0's or feeling a pattern from electrical pulses or flashes of light, or simply the feeling of change between two conditions?

According to the video recordings and the History Channel he saw a mental image, this mental image kept haunting him and he decided to put it in his notebook some time later.

Let's go along with this story and speculate:
If the craft was able to project a lasting mental image in someone's head, it could have projected text, pictures, plain numbers, etc. So why 0's and 1's ..? This is a very time comsuming and error prone method to convey information. And if it knows our ASCII codes and language, it could have projected the text in Jim's head instead - no need to make it more complicated than that. So attempting to use ASCII to decode the message doesn't make sense to me.

Who knows? Maybe they were codes to manipulate the nukes on the base ..? The message would be clear in that case: "Don't mess with us, we have your codes" ..

But first we need to know if this wasn't an attempt by Jim to put new life in this very old case...

Claims like these will win an army of blind believers on internet ufo forums but will be ignored by the general public and mainstream media, which won't help us ever get to the bottom of this.

I fully agree, RendleSham.

BEST WISHES TO EVERYONE (lots of glowing UFO's in the air here ..

[Frank]

Good to see you back on the forum, John.

We released that there were codes and they have been put out to a national audience.

Please tell us where we can find them. We are no experts on this but then again, nobody is ..
The guy who attempted to decode them for History Channel was a computer engineer, but maybe you need a mathematician, an army engineer, an atronomer, or an encryption expert to do the job.

[Daniel]

Thanks John and Jim for sharing some of your time coming out to share your experiences. The thing I really like about this case is that some of the witnesses were able to discuss topics with us. Jim's new information is interesting, and I think I recall him hinting to something new during one of the Return to Rendlesham episodes with Ben and Paul Eno.

I think a lot of people worry about the binary code is only going to ruin the credibility of this case, but I don't think so.

Going back to the 'download', with Frank, we can't be sure where this craft could have come from. Maybe the area Jim touched wasn't designed to communicate to humans instead to another machine, maybe something like RFID. We never know, but the future may be more transhumanist where brain implants could translate this information instead of the mind or memory.

I'm speculating a bit, but I'm always interested in information.

Daniel

[IsaacKoi]

On the programme they took the binary code to some 'expert' for decoding, probably to try and add a bit of credibility to the story.

Hi Rendlesham, All,

The name of the expert you mentioned is Nick Ciske. In the relevant episode of the "Ancient Aliens" series, he used a computer to generate the "possible message" from the binary code.

After watching the episode, I looked online for information about Nick Ciske. I've posted that information on another forum or two, but thought you guys would be interested. I'm not sure whether it is polite to post links to another forum here, so I'll just repost the same information. The discussion of the relevant "possible message" has become a bit disjointed and I'm currently trying to follow discussions on about 3 internet forums and several email discussion lists...

The first search result offered by Google (at the link below) relating to Nick Ciske is a tool for encoding and decoding binary code:
http://nickciske.com/tools/binary.php

Mmm. This is relevant to one of the questions below (Question 4). You may be particularly interested in the answer to that question.

I contacted Nick Ciske about his work on the "possible message" and asked him a few questions. He was kind enough to answers them all.

The questions I put (and Nick's answers) are below.



Isaac : (1) Could you possibly outline how the "possible message" that appeared on your computer screen was generated?

Nick Ciske : 1. I used the same convertor I have on my site. [Isaac - see link above]


Isaac : (2) The "possible message" you generated appears to be in English and I wonder if the receiver (and sender) would also have to be aware of any local/human conventions as to the translation of binary code into alpha-numerics (along the lines of the ascii convention)? If so, that would be relevant to the apparent suggestion by one of the other individuals interviewed for the documentary that binary code could be used as some sort of universal language.

Nick Ciske : 2. Yes, you'd have to start with an English message. Binary is far from a universal language. I know I talked about that, but it may not have made the episode (I haven't seen it yet). [Isaac - that bit did not make it into the episode and the documentary gave the opposite impression by only showing the bit from the other researcher I mentioned in my question]


Isaac : (3) In the documentary, in the frames before the display of the "possible message", your computer screen appears to show "decodes to" followed by several lines of characters. What are those lines?

Nick Ciske :3. That's the raw decode of the binary.


Isaac : (4) Could one of the online tools relating to binary code (including one that you appear to have developed) have been used in reverse to translate the relevant "possible message" into the binary code?

Nick Ciske :4. Yes, that's exactly what my tool does, and the most plausible explanation for how the message was generated. [Isaac - This view was not shown in the documentary. Indeed, Nick's comments as shown in the documentary implied that it would be difficult for somone to generate the relevant text. Nick is shown as saying "Could someone write out 6 pages of binary? Well, probably not. They would need some help or they would have to be some sort of savant or super calculator."]


Isaac : (5) Finally, you apparently typed up the relevant pages of binary codes. Is that typed up list of numbers available to others?

Nick Ciske :5. Sorry, the producers have asked me not to share it.


I have some questions for various others involved in that episode, but want to wrap up those points in a wider look at the Rendlesham incidents. I just need to find the time for that...

All the best,

Isaac

[Frank]

That's great new information Isaac, thanks a lot!

It also gives some inside information on how History Channel edits their programs..

Too bad they now seem to 'own' the rights to publish the binary code .. (?)

I'll just make some of my own then:

01001000010000010101000001010000010
11001001000000100111001000101010101
11001000000101100101000101010000010
1010010001000000010000100100001

Should be a piece of cake with Nick's tool ..

[John Burroughs]

H mm Frank the way you are handling this and statement from other's just re enforce what I just posted. You have no Idea who owns the rights to these codes or how this came about! You feel like you can demand a answer from us and tell us how we need to proceed with this. This statement has nothing to do with if you beleive what were saying is true. What I will say is this you then went on to post numbers poking fun at what has come out! 2 other people independent of the History Channel were also given the codes to analyze. They had no Idea where they were from just can you analyze them. Now there are staements that the guy who did this my not be the right guy to do this. That the History Channel should not be the one to handle this. Its just like our Hypnois as soon as it comes out people will attack it. And no matter what they will continue to attack it until it goes the way they want it to. Good luck with all of this because somthing strange happened to us out there that we don't understand! We try to tell you what we saw and what we know and then we have put up with the shit that we do! And what channel should we have picked to release this on? And should we just have ran them our selves and not let anybody else analaze them? That would have gone over well! I know Frank your the one who we should have picked! We should have ask permission from you! Or maybe we should have taken a survey on who's the best! And who opion will you agree with? And last but not least then we somehow where able to create this ourselves! Happy New Year to all...

[Frank]

John,

I hope you didn't think this broadcast would be without second opinions and critical analysis.

I just think it's strange when someone seeks publicity with this and is not willing to share the evidence with the general public.

If these binary codes are important, they should be put in the public domain.
If both of you are aiming for full disclosure, they should be in the public domain.
If there is nothing to hide, there is no reason not to put them in the public domain.
Jim promised in an earlier post that the material would be put in the public domain for everyone to review.

Yet it does not happen.. Why?

[John Burroughs]

H mm Yes we expected this! And its interesting you now word this as we seek publicity! Good luck Frank sorry were not moving fast enough for you.............