Radar + Visual over missile silos
- Thread starter Dejan Corovic
- Start date
- Copy link Copy link
humanoidlord
ce3 researcher
i think its a simulation of the salas case
pigfarmer
tall, thin, irritable
This is a nine year old post by Robert Hastings. The references provided don't exactly drip with gravitas - probably wouldn't be adequate for a straightforward paper submitted for a college class. Check out his site UFOs & Nukes
Always thought these were very interesting cases but like everything else is 99% eyewitness testimony taken years after the fact. Easy to be dismissive while sitting in my jammies drinking coffee and if I were to speak to one of the men involved I'd feel differently. Certainly some of the original documents he shows speak of all sorts of UFO incidents theoretically well before we had the ability to create tech that could do anything like that, and the affidavits are hard to just casually dismiss. No, these guys weren't looking at twinkling stars.
Problem is there's a Charles Halt affidavit in there and I think there are many good reasons to be careful when evaluating Rendlesham. Why does that need to be mixed in? It happened years later in another part of the world, but the man has a military rank and a story and it lends weight while not being directly connected. I've heard him speak in a few interviews and he sounds a little odd to me at times.
Another site to have a look at: UFOs: Nuclear Missile Warheads Shut Down
Somewhere, at some time, I saw part of the report from one of the contractors on exactly what they found wrong with the missiles and I just can't find it now. It don't remember it being supportive of these claims but I just can't remember. The fallibility of human memory it seems. Maybe someone knows where to find it.
Apart from this case just for the sake of argument consider this.
There is a reported incident(s) and eyewitness testimony.
Little or no way to actually prove anything occurred - some sort of physical evidence.
Years - decades - pass and the original story morphs over time.
Various discrepancies in the original accounts arise
More and more people come forward to support or dispute the case but are still just picking through the crumbs looking for some tiny facet that will be revealing. These same people plant flags on a mountain of opinion and become entrenched.
Lacking any new conclusions the speculation becomes wilder and wilder.
Uhhh - this is a general trend that applies to a lot of things. Ghosts. Bigfoot. Pick a few more. Just a cautionary note here.
As for these cases, what adds fuel to this particular fire is that project Blue Book was being dismissive - but that's what it was intended to do at that stage in the game. I believe something highly unusual happened on more than one occasion. I also believe that whatever it was bears a resemblance to what we have been told but there is a discrepancy between the popular stories and whatever the reality is. Also that the military has classified material that would be very revealing - and rightfully so when you consider the nature of the incidents. This is another thing to add to the WTF file but you just can't prove it was ET. Tantalizing, easy to use as support for whatever favorite theory one might have, but still short of the mark.
Always thought these were very interesting cases but like everything else is 99% eyewitness testimony taken years after the fact. Easy to be dismissive while sitting in my jammies drinking coffee and if I were to speak to one of the men involved I'd feel differently. Certainly some of the original documents he shows speak of all sorts of UFO incidents theoretically well before we had the ability to create tech that could do anything like that, and the affidavits are hard to just casually dismiss. No, these guys weren't looking at twinkling stars.
Problem is there's a Charles Halt affidavit in there and I think there are many good reasons to be careful when evaluating Rendlesham. Why does that need to be mixed in? It happened years later in another part of the world, but the man has a military rank and a story and it lends weight while not being directly connected. I've heard him speak in a few interviews and he sounds a little odd to me at times.
Another site to have a look at: UFOs: Nuclear Missile Warheads Shut Down
Somewhere, at some time, I saw part of the report from one of the contractors on exactly what they found wrong with the missiles and I just can't find it now. It don't remember it being supportive of these claims but I just can't remember. The fallibility of human memory it seems. Maybe someone knows where to find it.
Apart from this case just for the sake of argument consider this.
There is a reported incident(s) and eyewitness testimony.
Little or no way to actually prove anything occurred - some sort of physical evidence.
Years - decades - pass and the original story morphs over time.
Various discrepancies in the original accounts arise
More and more people come forward to support or dispute the case but are still just picking through the crumbs looking for some tiny facet that will be revealing. These same people plant flags on a mountain of opinion and become entrenched.
Lacking any new conclusions the speculation becomes wilder and wilder.
Uhhh - this is a general trend that applies to a lot of things. Ghosts. Bigfoot. Pick a few more. Just a cautionary note here.
As for these cases, what adds fuel to this particular fire is that project Blue Book was being dismissive - but that's what it was intended to do at that stage in the game. I believe something highly unusual happened on more than one occasion. I also believe that whatever it was bears a resemblance to what we have been told but there is a discrepancy between the popular stories and whatever the reality is. Also that the military has classified material that would be very revealing - and rightfully so when you consider the nature of the incidents. This is another thing to add to the WTF file but you just can't prove it was ET. Tantalizing, easy to use as support for whatever favorite theory one might have, but still short of the mark.
Last edited: