Patch in field at Larry Warren's site

[Admin]

I was browsing Google Maps, looking at the area around Rendlesham, when I noticed a patch in the field bordering Rendlesham forest, the area where Larry Warren claims the UFO landed.

It's most likely just an area where water collected, formed a puddle and 'drowned' the crops, but I thought I would post it up here anyway. It shouldn't do any harm!



Here's a link to the location on Google Maps:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=United+Kingdom&ie=UTF8&ll=52.086521,1.451536&spn=0.003797,0.011115&t=k&z=17

[Dave100]

Thats an interesting photograph indeed,its in the right general area,I remember back in the mid 90's there was still a patch which was roughly round shaped that was still visible despite about 15 years having passed,it was exactly the area Larry had described and walked into on the 94 Network First documentary,maybe Larry would like to comment on this image?
It probably is something natural in this case as admin says.On my last visit in May the original signs or circular area have to my eyes completely dissapeared but have been that way for years,maybe its had a load of topsoil/fertiliser dumped on it over a period of time.

[puddlepirate]

I was up there in May this year and at that time the whole field was covered in some kind of healthy looking, broad leaved green crop around a foot high, so whatever the whiteish marks are, they don't seem to affect plants/crops.

[Admin]

Did somebody mention that this area could have been an iron/bronze age fort of some description ?

Yes. Apparently an aerial photo from the 1940s exists, which shows a discoloured patch in the same area as the alleged UFO landing site, implying it was there long before the UFO incident took place.

I think James Easton uploaded a photo of it to his now long gone UFO debunking website, but I can't find a copy on my computer.
At the moment I am checking this page, which hopefully should have an identical copy of his old site.
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://ufoworld.co.uk

I was up there in May this year and at that time the whole field was covered in some kind of healthy looking, broad leaved green crop around a foot high, so whatever the whiteish marks are, they don't seem to affect plants/crops.

I agree. The last time I was there the crops looked healthy.

[Wolf]

As Woodbridge was a crash base during WWII it would not surprise me if something had fellen short of the runway and burned in the field.

I have some photos I took from the air in 97 and there is no sign of any discoloration in the field.

Wolf

[Admin]

I found a reference to an iron-age fort on James Easton's website. Unfortunately the 'Way Back Machine' doesn't have a copy of the RAF aerial photo (from 1953, I am corrected), but I was still able to grab some text. Reproduced without permission, but it's only a small section and I will quickly remove it if necessary.

That, however, is not the notable photograph referred to.

Robert has also obtained some aerial shots of the locale and one of these, taken by the Royal Air Force [RAF], captures Larry Warren's 'UFO landing site' in detail - see: http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/rafphoto.jpg

'Left at East Gate' includes some photographs of the site and soil samples with captions which read:

1. "Capel Green, site of the incident. Craft's point of contact clearly visible as discolored area...".

2. "Capel Green, 1990. Ten years after the incident, site remained mysteriously discolored".

3. "Soil samples from Capel Green. Soil on right from UFO landing site. Note difference in color and texture".

4. "Capel Green 1995 showing landing site still blighted fifteen years after Larry Warren's experience".

Is this all evidence of a 'UFO landing'? Evidently, we can now determine that it's emphatically quite the opposite. That RAF aerial photograph was taken on 23 Feb 1953! What we seem to have here are typical crop marks [no, not 'crop circles', for goodness sake].
Crop marks are evidence of underground archaeology, not an alien spaceship landing.

As explained by one source:
"A useful phenomena which has helped the archaeologist in the last half century, are the markings (visible clearly, only from the air) left by remains below the ground's surface. These marks, known as crop marks, arise because vegetation is sensitive to the quality of the soil immediately below it. Over the distance of a few centimetres the rocky remains of a castle wall hidden below the soil cause plants above it to grow that little bit less than those either side where the soil is deeper".

There's considerable more information easily available on the internet, for example:
http://www.emporia.edu/earthsci/student ... rchrs.html
http://www.univie.ac.at/Luftbildarchiv/ ... _aaint.htm
http://www.eaareports.demon.co.uk/roman.html

It's possible that the apparent circular crop marks are from an Iron Age roundhouse, or Anglo Saxon farmstead, which would be particularly common archaeology in this area of Suffolk. Did some aliens land directly on top of an ancient dwelling?

You must be the judge of that and other, related conclusions.

[Robert McLean]

I was the one who discovered that the circular patch in the field was present in an RAF aerial photo taken on 23 Feb 1953. Georgina Bruni was good enough to mention this this discovery in the new chapter she included at the end of the more recent paperback version of YCTTP.

It still shows up from time to time depending on what types of crops are grown in the field. I took a good photo of this 'crop circle' on 12 May 2001. The circle is not an indentation in the field, but an area with different soil. One theory is that a haystack, or a structure, may have caught fire there once and burned the soil. I don't know if this is true, but no doubt an archeologist or soil scientist could survey the area and provide the answer.

I was also able to show that this circle is at the very same location that Larry Warren refers to. His book was also released on CD which included a video of him and Peter Robbins in that field. I was able to positively identify an oak tree at the edge of the field, close to where Larry was standing in the CD video. The part of the field where he was pointing was the same as the circularly marked area in the photo.

Larrry Warren and UFO researchers over the years have made a great issue about this circular area as providing proof that something happened there in December 1980, but the RAF photo shows the same marking was there in 1953.

I have uploaded the aerial photo and the photo I took on the ground to Flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/28296368@N ... otostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/28296368@N ... otostream/

[Observer]

Hi all
I think that is some very good detective work and possibly elliminates this piece of alleged evidence.
Well done.
Obs

[IanR]

I was the one who discovered that the circular patch in the field was present in an RAF aerial photo taken on 23 Feb 1953.

Well done for turning up that aerial photo! But the patch you mark on that photo is not the one shown on the recent colour view posted by Admin. The patch shown on the modern pic is surely the whitish circle to the southeast of it - I have circled it in orange here.

Ian



PS: In fact, looking at it again it reminds me of a bomb crater.

[Observer]

In my glider flying days from RAF Martlesham Heath and later RAF North Weald, i often noticed patches, markings of all different shapes and sizes in farmers fields. I don't think the round patch in the Rendlesham area is anything significant. They can be found everywhere, most pilots will tell you the same. There are some interesting ones over Dunstable Downs.
Obs

[larry warren]

Fine and good, 1953? wow!
now explain the two soil anilisis done on that site, as conducted by Springborne enviromental labs.
like Jim Morrison said, no one gets out of hear alive! in rendleshams case no easy way out!

[Observer]

Larry
I never did read any reports from the labs on the soil samples. Does any one have them for us all to read.
Larry, Cherry Tree this Sunday lunch time, that's an order from Wing Commander Obs
Obs

[larry warren]

hi wing comander!
cant get down south quite yet, new job.
as to the soil i will ask peter robbins to get it on the site.
as to what some claim is the landing site the photo is not correct.
greenwells handyman told us that tons of dirt had been brought in since 97 to raise the level of the landing site!
also im starting to really wonder if this site is a front for debunkers, if you guys dont want people who was there to assist you then i will piss off, because some of you are starting to piss me off!
and this goes for who ever runs this site , dont you dare dismiss me, dont like? then ban me.
this was not aimed at you wing comander.
cheers larry

[Robert McLean]

But the patch you mark on that photo is not the one shown on the recent colour view posted by Admin. The patch shown on the modern pic is surely the whitish circle to the southeast of it - I have circled it in orange here.

PS: In fact, looking at it again it reminds me of a bomb crater.

Yes, you're right, it is a different patch.

It's certainly possible something might have crashed there during the war, as Woodbridge was a crash land airstrip - the original runway was famous for its width. Aerial photos from 1971 show swathes cut through the trees which must have been caused by aircraft that didn't make it.

[larry warren]

whatever,
hey let me just kick this one out to yous experts.
i forgot that Springborn sent over a field team in 90 or 91, did core tests to 10 ft depth, center landing site,
worked outward from that point, the discoloration had and has nothing to do with the lz,the fact that it is discolord
is interesting, more than that the soil work is facinating, now you all know that i am not a science guy, nor can i spell to good, DUH, but some science guys are on this site and would find the tests of interest as well, or at least i hope you would?
when i got to caple green in feb 88 i simply pointed that it sat there, and i mean the moment i got to the edge of the field
it was after that PR noticed the discoloration, i simply judged the distance to the out crop of trees, even on that night
i could see the forrests edges, thus used the tree to my left and walked at a slight right angle untill the outcrop of trees looked as close as they did in 1980, did i expect a soil effect, by the way only in the place the thing sat, hell no!
but i also never expected the halt memo to be releised either.
tell ya what some day i will take some of the interested to the exact spot , you do your own tests (its expensive)
and see what you come up with!
but to crap all over scientific evidence as some of you have is to me a bit disterbing to say the least.
you have to do more than sit around and pass judgements from your front rooms folks, its costly, tireing, and at
times frustrating, we did it and brought in scientists when we fell in to things that were out of our depth.
that is the scientific aproach, and adamnd good research aproach aswell, try it youll like it!!!!!
Cheers LARRY

[Observer]

Larry
I am not a debunker or a sceptic, and i have your book which i want you to sign and i love it that you live in my home town. I'm on your case as many of us are, but its damn hard to get any progress. The debunkers are in the minority so stop letting them wind you up.
Air chief Marshall Obs
Obs

[larry warren]

observer,
not getting at you i promise, the site is widly viewed, worldwide, and may i add by some silent wittinesses
waiting in the wings.
the problem, is that others that have first hand knowledge of events, dont want people to kick there faces in
over this, im in to that kind of thing, but most are not.
i have delt with some of the most vile of the debunkers in the states and ran most of them off, beleive me
they make some of the ankle bitters on this site look like cupcakes!

you and other decent men on this site are frustrated, i know so are we that were there.
what is it all about? im damned if i know sir! i want to know the truth of this matter as you and others do.
my concern is for the guys that lived this thing, when they come forward they will get the same treatment as i did,
but can thay handle it? i dont have the brass balls i did 28 years ago aswell.
in the final assesment of these events, would any of us really be able to handle the TRUTH, if in fact it wasent
from here? wonder if its not love and light(california!) and rather bad for us?
mabey we us are never ment to know, in the near future, many of us may be at the national press club, swear
to tell the truth if asked by our congress, and then tell our storys, as halt once told me when that day comes
i think youll find you have company! what ever could he mean?
the NPC event is indeed in the works, but even after that historic day, people will then say we are all liers
cia stooges, nsa puppets, lighthouse mistakers,loan sharks, pimps,mafia, transexuals, parinoid loonys

drug addicts, attention seekers,blind, out for cash(or woman) ,homosexuals, sheep shaggers,out of work circus clowns
the men who killed kennedy,hillery clintons staff, etc etc, and thats just what they say about me!
Liverpool is well, and thanks for the kind words , OBS! send me a pm witha mailing address and i will send you
a signed updated copie as im getting some soon, free to you me scouse brother!
hope we us and all can meet soon also must reconect with my suffolk mum and dad, Jan and Tony warnock.
beautiful people! the best thing out of all of this madness i think is the people we meet!
i wouldent trade a minute truth!
cheers!!!!
PS glad to see Dave Clark back on the sceen! got all his records, im in to old stuff.

[Observer]

Larry
Who do you support Everton or Liverpool? 'Glad All Over', the Dave Clark 5.
I'm sure what Halt meant with the word 'Company' is his way of saying we had/have visitors and the human race is not ready yet to take this on board. Halt needs to let it all hang out now, its been too long.
Profesor Steven Hawkin said once when asked about aliens and visiting space ships,"That is out side the boundaries of the human remit". What a wonderful answer and my personel interpretation of that quote is. We are not programmed for such things. Never mind all that, they can come in for a cup of tea any time
and watch my Beatles videos.
Flt Lt Obs

[Observer]

Larry
I can see that when some one suggests that this mystery was man made whatever that was, weapons etc, you seem not to agree. Hand on heart, you must have considered that it could have been an extra terrestrial event. Halt is hinting [why does he talk in riddles] it was as a few others have. So what are your thoughts on this? Come on Larry, point us in the right direction.

Pilot Of Obs

[robert]

The Best thing for JB and LW is to stay out there in the Public Domain so our first hand witnesses remain the focal point of this investigation and are able to agree with or refute any and all comers.

They are the most powerful weapon anyone interested in this subject could wish for (far more powerful than the Roswell witnesses) and will remain a thorn in the side of the Establishment for as long as they continue to stay out there.

We can only hope they will be joined by the others as they get nearer their own mortality ( the other witnesses, JB and LW, not you guys!) and decide to get things off there chest.

As they say in Yorkshire , 'Don't let the Buggers grind you down'!

Robert