May 3rd - Peter Robbins

[conor]

There are some dsoubts about Larry's testimony, I think, because it goes into more bizarre territory than the rest of the testimonies. Also, I may be wrong about this, but I think his testimony has changed over the years. I think as the years went on he added more and more. Now, there may be a perfectly adequate explanation for that (ie. pressure from the NSA, bad treatment from other UFO investigators, as Peter mentioned), but unfortunately it does seem to cast a slight doubt on his overall testimony.

On the otherhand, Holt's statement that Warren wasn't even there that night is a downright lie.

A complicated, fascinating case.

Good work lads:

 

[Gareth]

Fair enough. I would suggest that out of all the material out there on Rendlesham, Left at East Gate is the likely the most credible due to the fact that no one else has spent as much time with a first hand witness and just investigating in general than Peter Robbins.

 

[Siani]

I don't feel Warren is deliberately lying or misleading. But I don't necessarily think events unfolded as he recalled, either. After reading the book, and making a few enquiries of my own, I suspect Warren, and some of the other witnesses, had their heads messed with, to confuse them, and discredit their accounts of the Rendlesham incident. Whether this happened to cover up a genuine UFO incident, or whether the whole thing was a psy-op, from the UFO to the head-messing, who knows? Something happened out there in the woods, and whatever it was, it sure as hell wasn't a lighthouse seen through fog, or some guy flashing his car headlights as a prank.

 

[conor]

Just reread the chapter on Larry Warren in "You Can't Tell The People", and there are a lot of discrepencies. For instance, he told researcher Dot Street that he himself had not witnessed the underground base, but got it from other peoples' stories. At one stage he recalled an abduction type scenario where, following the incident he woke up in his bed, mucky and fully clothed, with no idea how he got there. He has since changed that aspect of the story. And then there's the photo he took of the craft which he managed to keep hidden for years, only revealing it to Georgina Bruni while she was writing her book, not even telling Peter about it (Georgina recalls how Peter felt a bit betrayed by this). There are so many things about his testimony that have changed over the years. Luckily the case doesn't rest entirely on Larry Warren's testimony - if it did it might fall apart. The case is still one of the best around without Larry Warren's testimony.

Not that he's lying. Maybe he was "messed with" by the military. Bruni reminds us that he was traumatised by the incident. Maybe it is the truest version of the events, it's just that they all didn't happen to Larry, but to his fellow service men? That's the excuse he gave Dot Street when he admitted to lying about the underground base, though he did feel threatened at the time and was under some stress.

There is also some question about him seeing Colonel Williams communicating with beings, whether it was Williams or not who was doing the "communicating", or whether there were beings at all.

As for Halt dismissing the fact that Larry was even at the spot where the incident took place ... perhaps you can see Halt's weariness towards Warren in light of all the changes to his story over the years. Halt may just want to tell his story the way it happened to him and not get bogged down in Warren's divergent tale.

In any case, to dismiss Warren would also be wrong as well. I believe he was involved in some capacity at least ... perhaps he saw too much:

 

[Frozen E.T. Burrito]

This, to me, is why this kind of thing, as far as *case documentation* goes, can only be taken as a sort of "possibilities stimulation entertainment"... I would find it to be completely unwise to allow this sort of "information" to alter one's "belief system" in any significant way, because there really is just no telling whether or not one is receiving accurate data... just *so many* folks willing to fabricate, lots of vacillation between details... it's just ridiculous that we are not able to take more of these kinds of data at face value and evaluate.

In the end, the only thing that can really be counted on are one's own personal experiences... and even *that* can be dubious!

Perhaps the reason that Larry has quit making appearances on this thing is because it's been realized that he can't keep his story straight enough, so it's best just to keep him quite and let the professionals who can rehearse things out properly do the talking?

I don't know... could be true, could be fabricated, but I definitely don't intend to let it shape my "belief in aliens", or my data on "what aliens are like" in much of a significant manner... but that's not to say that it wasn't "enjoyable" to listen to, because it very much was! I think the most *wise* way to take it is in allowing the stimulation of though on *possibilities*.

 

[Explorer]

I've heard that the beings who came to Bentwaters were us humans from the future. I think Sgt. Penniston told this during hypnosis.

Perhaps Peter Robbins knows something about this?

 

[Bixyboo]

I've heard that the beings who came to Bentwaters were us humans from the future. I think Sgt. Penniston told this during hypnosis.

Perhaps Peter Robbins knows something about this?

Welcome to The Paracast, Explorer! Interesting theory ya chimed in with there....

 

[kipspritely]

Wow! Great Show!

The whole phantom phone call thing to the woman in England was very odd indeed. Even more odd is the fact that Peter was busy with an intense sighting while this happened.

I may be reaching here, but this tells me that There may be a correlation between the two. Very strange indeed.

 

[BrandonD]

Awesome show.

Now, what about this soldier that Peter mentioned who disappeared for a few days (possibly abducted) and has never talked about his experiences? I'd never heard this part of the story before and I was waiting to hear some follow-up questions, but I think the conversation veered off to another detail.

Peter if you hop on the forums please add some detail to this part of the story. Have you or anyone else tried to contact this guy? Has he just sorta disappeared off the map?

(Or did I perhaps hear that part of the interview wrong?)

Absolutely fascinating case. I wonder why gov. people would continually meet with Larry over the years with the apparent intention of maintaining his interest in the Rendlesham case, showing him files and photos and stuff.

That doesn't really make any sense to me. The behavior of the gov. regarding this case (including the film briefing) almost implies to me the "extraterrestrial cover story" angle, and the possibility that some group is trying to promote the idea of an extraterrestrial presence, and encourage greater public acceptance of the idea via Larry and Peter.

 

[skunkape]

That was the best show in a while, guys. I rewinded and listened to his description of the encounter 3 times. I had heard of the Rendalsham case on television a few times, but they didn't really describe the objects seen very well. When he started talking about the little "triangles" my ears perked up. The bizarre distortions of one's cognitive abilities that he described also rang a bell.
Here's a crude illustration of the objects I described in the upcoming episode. The scale is fairly accurate. I wonder if they were a similar phenomenon to what these men encountered. The location in the photo is almost exactly the vantage point I had. Google Images rocks.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

 

[Bixyboo]

Peter, the part where you describe in this (and in another) interview how tall, Formally Dressed Man looked down at Small Beings Floating in Encased Light and they looking up at him, makes for some fascinating visuals!

 

[DVS]

This was a great show, great job. I find this incident to be way more interesting than Roswell. I really hope The Paracast revives this story somewhat and has several more episodes about this.

The thing about Larry Warren, from I have seen of him, is that he appears to have suffered a lot from PTSD and I sympathize with him.. Maybe he was really messed with and they really did a number on him. Obviously this technique would work if they wanted a witness to lose credibility or their mind - or both!

As for the others, someone linked to a site that said it was a hoax that they all fell for. I would buy that since the light he describes kind of would coincide with what the hoaxer claims. Except for the testimony of one of them (I think Penniston) actually seeing the 'object' in front of him and the drawings really makes it more interesting. I remember that there are other witnesses as well that I saw in a TV show.

Halt and Penniston would make great guests. Maybe Bruni as well?

 

[Drew UK]

I think this was the visual version that Mr Robbins was referring to.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay...iJqCi2wKHlrG3CA&q=rendlesham+forest+ufo&hl=en


I believe robbins said that 70% communication was non verbal but visual - i agree, I think when you see the characters of Halt and Warren it is pretty obvious that they are not going to get on.

More revealing after watching the video I was more inclined to lean towards Halt and Patterson, although there is some uncomfortability in there mannerisms.

Warren, enjoys telling a story - and I got the sense that there was more marketing and hubris in his personality than substance.

The video contains the hypnosis session with Pattieson, that a previous post was referring to - indeed he did point at it being more closer to home...

In regards to what P. Robbins was stating I am not so sure that nuclear weapons were stored there long time, and certainly i dont think they were intended for railroad launches - no tracks have been constructed on these either of these sites.

However the political situation with russia, does lend credence that temporary storage may have become necessary for military expedience, utilising prior storage facilities at the nearby AWE Orford Ness.

 

[Fcseven]

Great show!Peter Robins is an absolutely amazing speaker. It was good to hear him on the paracast.

 

[daz smith]

Fair enough. I would suggest that out of all the material out there on Rendlesham, Left at East Gate is the likely the most credible due to the fact that no one else has spent as much time with a first hand witness and just investigating in general than Peter Robbins.

Actually the 'skycrash' books authors spent more time and were there first - a much better representation of this case than the skewed 'later' larry warren accounts of the nites.

On another note I have 2 r-kive boxes of first gen photocopies of all the witness statements, sketches and research notes on this case form the early 80s - given to me by Brenda Butler one of the Skycrash authors. Maybe I should get them out of storage?

also I know this impedes the subject but it does have some small relevance - i tasked a group of CRV (remote viewing ) trainees the rendlesham case as a test project a few years back (BLIND - they did not know thet target) and they got this:
remote viewed - remote viewing results - Rendlesham forest UFO incident

daz

 

[Gareth]

Actually the 'skycrash' books authors spent more time and were there first - a much better representation of this case than the skewed 'later' larry warren accounts of the nites.

Could you qualify that? I mean, you cant just say that when Peter explicitly stated on the show that those earlier authors admitted they were fed a lot of incorrect info. Did you not hear that? Not saying what youre saying is not true, but considering how close Peter is to the case, and the statements he made on the show, I would have thought it made sense from your point of view to provide reasons for saying something like that.

And I made that statement based on Peter spending 10yrs of his life on the case. I get the feeling from a few people that some think Robbins was played by Larry Warren. Is that accurate?

My first true introduction to the case was through Peter on BOA last year.


edit, BTW - some fascinating results in that RV test of Rendlesham.

 

[conor]

Very interesting results Daz with the remote viewing session of Rendelsham. Just wondering, would you be able to do something similar with Roswell? Was it too long ago?

 

[daz smith]

Could you qualify that? I mean, you cant just say that when Peter explicitly stated on the show that those earlier authors admitted they were fed a lot of incorrect info. Did you not hear that? Not saying what youre saying is not true, but considering how close Peter is to the case, and the statements he made on the show, I would have thought it made sense from your point of view to provide reasons for saying something like that.

And I made that statement based on Peter spending 10yrs of his life on the case. I get the feeling from a few people that some think Robbins was played by Larry Warren. Is that accurate?

My first true introduction to the case was through Peter on BOA last year.

edit, BTW - some fascinating results in that RV test of Rendlesham.

Dot, Brenda, and later Jenny randles did some amazing work on this case that blew it wide open. They were the first to talk to halt and many of the people involved in the events as close to the event as was possible. Peters involvement was many years later.

IMO Peter has been fed just as much disinfo as everyone else - once it started to break into the public domain disinformation was the order of the day.

You need to look into the actual evidence, physical traces, radiation readings, the halt tape, look into what the people involved on the base at the time said at the time - then compare this to the expanded and totally different story coming form Larry warren this day - its akin to the disinfo that permeated UFOLOGY in the late ninties form Doty (see et's liking strawberry ice cream).

Peter is just the latest in a long line of people who have looked at this case - Brenda butler for example still was looking into this when I last conversed with her in 2000 that's over 20 years on the one main case with huge amounts of information and first hand accounts and details from the early 1980s.

I'mnot sure he was played by Larry - And Larry may even think that he did experience those things, it just has no evidence to back any of it up and im concerned it elaborated over the years and wasn't there until the case became public and a problem.

If you really are interested in the case you have to read the books:
skycrash - brenda butler, dot street and jenny randle
from out of the blue - jenny randles.

Also the book and details form just cause on how the got the original halt documents are also worth a read as the came form the US military as the MOD refused to admitted anything existed.

Remote Viewing and rendlesahm
One day in 2000 I told Brenda who was just going to have a round table discussion on camera with Col Halt to say to him she was going to get a team of remote viewers to look at the project. She did and reported back to me that his face drained, he asked how did she know about that and got very fidgety
Of course this means nothing - its just an anecdote - i think i have pic taken at the time somewhere of his face

all the best...

Daz

 

[daz smith]

Very interesting results Daz with the remote viewing session of Rendelsham. Just wondering, would you be able to do something similar with Roswell? Was it too long ago?

Time isn't an issue - blindness is - i can only do these if blind tasked them - to date none in thirteen years has tasked me Roswell. But I have done many others and they are on my webby:

Carlos Diaz - ufo video
Adamski ufo video
Ufo over mexican volcano
Area51 ufo

some not on the webby yet are:
keksburg ufo (worked by 9 remote viewrs)
clearwater ufo
UK Gurnsey mile wide ufo 2007 ()
1958 molten ufo metal

All these were tasked blindly to me and others over the years.
but this discussion doenst really belong here. sorry guys!

daz

 

[Gareth]

Im not sure I 'get' why Halts face drained... are you saying that she was sitting down with him for a discussion of a completely different topic, and Halt didnt know she knew anything about Rendlesham?