This is a very interesting case. I have seen two documentaries and read a few reports on this case. Listening to the actual military witness makes one wonder what happend there.

Here is one site that has some info on it. The Videos (I think one was a unsolved mysteries) with witness interviews are even more compelling.

Take a look.

Rendlesham Forest Incident
http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case279.htm

One explanation has been "it was lighthouse light"
another was "It was nothing more than a meteor shower"

What do you think?

This is a very interesting part. Why did that happen?

It was normal, regular, UFO visit to Earth.

Extremely strong electric field around the space craft,
causes slower reaction between brain cells in brain.

So does marijunana. I was an MP from 1977 to 1982 and let's just say that some were less than pure.

__________________
You're a coward and a liar and a thOOF - Bart Sibrel

I can't recall the program, but I'm sure I've seen some pretty solid debunking of this incident on TV. I'll try to find it.

__________________
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data".

From Ian Ridpath's debunking here:

__________________
Join the Illuminati

PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLL

__________________
--Doug

"When your statics problem becomes a dynamics problem, you're in trouble." --me

Moor's Law: "As you go from freshman engineering to Ph.D., the amount of work required per credit hour doubles approximately every 18 months." --me, inspired by Prof. Scott Moor

Also from Ian Ridpath's page...

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

Come on guys at least read the case. There were 19 people involved on two separate nights. Meteors don't go back up. The lighthouse light does not match at all.

Three men see triangle craft on ground that left indentation marks. Radiation levels were 10 times higher than normal in that area.

Men saw a red object that broke into 5 lights then disappeared.

Men saw craft in air that shot down pencil beams of light at their feet.

I saw the men interviewed and were asked if it could have been a lighthouse or meteors. They acted as if the person that suggested that was nuts. Asking him to explain how meteors land, how they can go back up.

They did see where the lighthouse was during the initial sighting which means they were two different things.

The lighthouse and meteors do not match the reports. It could be that all men were lying about it but it does not seem plausible that it was a meteor or
Lighthouse.

Speaking as someone who has been to the site, I'd agree with Ian Ridpath.

You mentioned on another thread that you had pictures; I don't suppose you could upload them for us all, could you? Despite coming to the conclusion that Ridpath's explanation was the most likely, I'm intruiged by the case as it happened locally, and there have been a few other sightings of 'interesting' things in the area - it would seem that there were a few unusual craft flying out of nearby Bentwaters US airbase at the time.

Prove it, prove the meteors don't go back up!


Prove it, prove, there si no supporting documentation for such unbaised claims!


Prove it wasn't a firework! Prove!


Prove it wasn't 5$ laser beam, made in China!


Prove meteors don't go back up!


Prove it wasn't lighthouse! LOL!


Prove it, prove!

h_c...your sarcasm is not appreciated...

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

That's not sarcasm, that's being open-minded...

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

Who was it who said you shouldn't be so open-minded that your brain falls out?

It would just be nice if the sarcasm came from someone capable of showing any evidence at all for their claims other than "because I said so."

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Interesting. Do you have a cite for this?

When people work in electric generation facilities, or in close proximity to high voltage lines, do their brains slow down?

I've never noticed, but then some that know me would ask how I would know if my brain slowed down.

__________________
"I'm as accurate as any psychic. And I'm a cartoon!" -- Squidward

"Arrrgh, the laws of physics be a harsh mistress!" -- Bender

Lynne Kelly examines this case in her excellent little book "A Skeptic's Guide to the Paranormal." She takes Ridpath's explanation.

causes slower reaction between brain cells in brain

Could have been worse, could have suggested it slowed down brain cells in the feet.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

Well I have visited a glavanisation plant where they use VERY large currents...
The magnetic field was that strong, that a wrench lined up with the streamlines of the field when you came near the ponds.
I was incapable to move it in another position.

Oh, by brain cells worked pretty the same speed as normal , I guess...

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

I'm sure he does, he just won't produce it since we "wouldn't believe it anyway" like his UFO photo.

There are many fascinating aspects to the case, and although Ian Ridpath has done excellent work, he has only really cleared up one aspect of it successfully.

That is to say- the radiation levels; he checked with the manufacturer.
So we can dismiss the radiation readings with confidence.

As for the rest of the sighting- there are a number of conflicting possibilities, and it seems unlikely that they are all true. (although that is a remote possibility).
1/ the Lighthouse Theory. Ridpath has examined this in detail; it seems to explain the early part of the sighting;
http://www.debunker.com/texts/RidpathRendlesham2.html
but some of the later aspects are difficult to explain using the Lighthouse theory alone.
2/ The Cosmos 749 theory
Ridpath himself debunks this debunking here
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham6.htm
This re-entry did spark a number of UFO reports but apparently not the Rendlesham event.

3/ The 'Tractor Beam' theory
I like this one; it seems that there was a farmer driving a tractor around at the time with flashing coloured lights; this could explain some of the flashing light sightings in the later part of the incident.
http://www.forteantimes.com/articles...ndlesham.shtml
4/ The Security cop theory
Kevin Conde, a security policeman at the site, has admitted hoaxing the airmen there using the spotlights and flashing lights on his police car. His statement is here
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/statement.htm
This seems very possible. Using flashing police lights and spotights some very strange effects could be created in a misty forest. There is some doubt about the dates involved; Conde can't seem to remember exactly when he pulled his prank. But this could be faulty memory (a major factor in many UFO cases) or it may have been his (unnamed) accomplice mentioned in this statement.
Whatever the case, it seems that there were a number of pranks being played on that base around that time; enough to make the evidence much less convincing than it seems at first sight.

__________________
New Orion's Arm Site . The Starlark . Against a Diamond Sky (OA Novella Collection) . OA Flickr set

Been chatting with Ian Ridpath, nice fellow. The word is the radiation readings went up over the the areas in question. The instrument was not designed or calibrated for reading that low. But he admits "temporary peak in the centre
of the supposed landing area, but this could have been due to a cosmic ray"

So to me the radiation debunking is not quite bullet proof at the same time its not as compelling as once thought.

Basically its summed up as a bunch of scared military chasing a lighthouse one night and stars on another night. Its hard to swallow that people can be so easily fooled but I suppose some could be.

People love to think they've seen an ET spaceship. Explain that it was a model hot-air balloon or a guy with a searchlight and they're disappointed.

__________________
"The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head" Terry Pratchett

Given the right circumstances, anyone can be fooled.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

I have seen documentary film on this.

Why land in a forest?
Isn't that just the worst place to land anykind of craft ... ?
And there's an airbase not far away...plenty of open space available !

So, possibly, maybe ... it crashed trying to land .... and being an experimental top secret vehicle, of course it was hushed up/disinformed.

my tuppence worth ..

__________________
Round...everything is always round!

But, see, experimental craft generally get tested (by the US) in the Great Southwestern Desert, which is really a whole bunch of smaller deserts lumped into one heading that covers bits of maybe half-a-dozen states. The reason they do this is that it's primarily uninhabited--they really don't want people getting much of a look at these things--and presumably also because it's easier to find wreckage in a desert than in a forest.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Some more that others I suppose.

I have been looking up at stars/planets for years and have never thought venus was a space ship or thought stars were shooting lasers. I know some very ignorant folks could be fooled. I don't think I could be, but yes If I was on LSD and some other drugs it may be possible

That case is interesting because people were fooled on night one. Then the people that thought they were fools tried to debunk and they in turn were fooled on night two.

I am very bad at using the search function, but The Bad Astronomer "somewhere" on this board relates the story of how he was "momentarily fooled" by a flock of Ducks.

I certainly don't consider him to be "ignorant" and he knows the sky.

You start with the "belief" that there is something to these "reports", and then you go out of your way to try and justify your beliefs.

That is not objective reasoning.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

If we leave out the 'very ignorant' part of that sentence, it is more or less exactly what I believe. People don't have to be ignorant to be fooled by things in the sky or elsewhere, or by their own memories of their observations. Pilots, policemen, military personnel, even some astronauts and astronomers have been misled by fairly basic phenomena, sometimes (but not always) seen under unusual conditions.

__________________
New Orion's Arm Site . The Starlark . Against a Diamond Sky (OA Novella Collection) . OA Flickr set