-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, 11 years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
Clueless article on "Rendlesham Forest"
- Thread starter Skymon876
- Start date
Free episodes:
Kandinsky
Curious Cat
The article was an outright stinker. There wasn't even a reason for posting it that I could see. It's the same old Ridpath approach (like a diluted Menzel) and who'd expect any less. What pissed me off was Davies bragging that he'd never read about UFOs and wasn't about to. So Ridpath tells him it was hoaxes, misidentifications and lighthouses...and that's good enough for Davies. Some great journalism and reporting there buddy! Hearsay and BS is all the article represents.
There's plenty of genuine discussion on Rendlesham and none of it was suggested in the crap article.
I posted a diplomatic and reasonable comment on the site and they haven't published any of the comments at all.
There's plenty of genuine discussion on Rendlesham and none of it was suggested in the crap article.
I posted a diplomatic and reasonable comment on the site and they haven't published any of the comments at all.
Skymon876
Paranormal Adept
http://www.facebook.com/?sk=2361831622#!/group.php?gid=118776534810576
That is a facebook group were this is being discussed.
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
I thought the article was fine. Those servicemen probably did see something that night, and the explanation of the light house makes sense. However, that's not all that was up in the sky that night - apparently there were a few bright meteors that night, as well as a Russian rocket launching a satellite.
What frustrates me is that the reports have grown with time from being only lights when they were first reported to full blown aircraft in later interviews.
How can you take someone's word when the event keeps changing?
As usual, Brian Dunning did a good job discussing the case in a better and more thorough manner than the article in the OP.
The Rendlesham Forest UFO
He seems to have actually researched it as opposed to just going out for a walk in the woods. You can chose to disagree with Dunning's assessment, but it makes a lot of sense, and is way more plausible than what some will have you believe.
What frustrates me is that the reports have grown with time from being only lights when they were first reported to full blown aircraft in later interviews.
How can you take someone's word when the event keeps changing?
As usual, Brian Dunning did a good job discussing the case in a better and more thorough manner than the article in the OP.
The Rendlesham Forest UFO
He seems to have actually researched it as opposed to just going out for a walk in the woods. You can chose to disagree with Dunning's assessment, but it makes a lot of sense, and is way more plausible than what some will have you believe.
Wickerman1972
Administrator
The laziness and forgetfulness of people amazes me. It has already been proven that it is IMPOSSIBLE for it to have been a lighthouse beam. That lighthouse has never emitted a beam into the forest throughout its entire history. There is a metal plate that prevents it from doing so. It shines out only to sea. Think about it. Why in God's name would it beam through the forest anyway? That would drive the people living around there nuts! Name me one lighthouse that beams its spotlight over land that isn't on an island. This is common sense! James Magaha is chiefly responsible for spreading this nonsense around but it is a product of his own deluded little mind and lazy thinkers have adopted it as gospel without taking even a moment to consider whether it is actually true or not. Since the day that lighthouse went operational a metal plate has always prevented the beam from shining anywhere but out to sea. Personnel at the lighthouse have confirmed this! Anyone saying this sighting or anything else for that matter was a product of this fictional lighthouse beam through the woods is woefully misinformed, a propagandist, an idiot, or a liar. At this point it seems pretty clear that the employees of that lighthouse could do an international press conference pleading with the world, "Quit blaming us for UFOs! Our lighthouse has never and will never shine a beam over land." and zealots masquerading as skeptics would continue to blame them for the Rendlesham incident anyway.
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
Did you read the article I posted? It broken down very clearly and he brings up really good points.
Also, from what I understand, the lighthouse's metal plate was not in place at the time of the incident.
Wickerman1972
Administrator
It has always been in place. Always! The lighthouse employees have confirmed this.
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
Okay, I'll take your word for it, I had heard otherwise, but I don't know for sure.
Here's another interesting take on the light house explaining how they saw the light:
Rendlesham Forest UFO the flashing light
However, since Ian Ridpath seems to be reviled in this thread, well, I don't know what the thoughts will be. Still, I think he makes a good case. It's at least an excellent possible explanation for what was seen.
justcurious
Flying Kitchenettes
Memorandum regarding the Woodbridge/Rendlesham forest incident by Charles I. Halt, Lt Col, USAF, Deputy Base Commander of the joint United States and United Kingdom airbase at Woodbridge in Suffolk, England. The memorandum was released via the Freedom of Information Act in the United States in June 1983.
what lighthouse ???
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
The lighthouse that they seem to have mistaken for an aircraft.
Wickerman1972
Administrator
It's been mentioned in a few books but the easiest way for you to confirm that the lighthouse staff has said it is to simply search youtube or google video for the Rendlesham episode of UFO Hunters. They interview the lighthouse employees on camera.
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
I did. But the same google search also pointed me to the article I posted which shows that they would have seen the light, and the other article I posted goes into great detail by showing how the light they saw was perfectly synchronized with the lighthouse. You read it, right?
Wickerman1972
Administrator
Lol, still won't give up on it, eh? I know, the truth sucks.
The lighthouse can be seen from a few miles away but all it's going to be is a flash as the beam strikes the plate. Magaha's beam through the trees exists only in his imagination and other scoffers have simply quoted him without bothering to check into whether it was accurate or not.
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
Lol, still won't give up on it, eh? I know, the truth sucks.
I'm not talking about Magaha - I don't like that guy very much.
Please do me a favour and at least read the Brian Dunning article I posted. He brings up excellent points.
Wickerman1972
Administrator
If you're referring to the skeptoid article I already did. It was nothing but drivel collected from other debunker pieces. That guy's website is one of the more humorous scoffer efforts out there. He should change the name to , "Every mystery of the world solved in a single page."
---------- Post added at 03:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:19 PM ----------
Well, it's impossible to discuss the lighthouse myth accurately without mentioning him. He is the chief proponent of it. Most of the others have just followed his lead.
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
Oh well, if you think that about Brian Dunning, we're not even close to being in the same mindset. You've made up your mind about what happened in this case and you're unwilling to look at other, more plausible explanations. I guess we'll just leave it at that.
SLVA
Skilled Investigator
Hello. As I remember it there was trace landing evidence. And it was recorded and photographed by a military team during the course of the three days of sightings. I've seen some of the photographs, they're in the excellent book on the Rendlesham incident. One of the three service men who approached the craft touched it. He observed markings. They observed increased levels of radiation (again recorded by the military) at the scene the next day. On the last night a team observed lights above the field they were in away from the woods of the previous night. I don't know what was behind the phenomenon but it wasn't a light house. And yes I've been there to check the lighthouse at night to see what I thought.
justcurious
Flying Kitchenettes
Anyway I don't see what a lighthouse has to do with what Lt Col Charles I. Halt reported in his memorandum. Have you read it ?
It is one of the most ridiculous debunking hypothesis ever, that shows that debunkers really are fanatics.
It is one of the most ridiculous debunking hypothesis ever, that shows that debunkers really are fanatics.
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
Oh yeah, it's definitely more ridiculous than aliens being responsible for an aircraft landing there, as seems to be insinuated by the witnesses (The Rendlesham Forest Incident). So, the lighthouse may or may not be the culprit, but at least we know for a fact that there was a light house in the area that night, along with a couple of meteors and a Russian rocket.
All I'm saying, as with all these types of events, why must we create a solution (aliens or unknown aerial phenomena) , when there are many possible solutions available known to exist in the physical world.
That's it - I'm not trying to debunk (although there's nothing wrong with that), but to show that other explanations are possible.