Wednesday, July 29, 2015

The Rendle-Sham Case: Phony and Phonier

The supposed Rendlesham Forest UFO landing case (sometimes referred to as "the British Roswell") involved the supposed landing (or at least Close Encounter - the story is inconsistent) of a UFO in Rendlesham Forest, Suffolk, UK in December, 1980. Just like the story of the fish that got away gets bigger with each telling, the more time that passes, the more exciting the Rendle-sham case becomes. Practically each year, one of the supposed witnesses invents a new and dramatic claim to 'prove' that the case is real.
The so-called "Science Channel" imagines the Rendle-sham UFO

British skeptic Ian Ridpath has long stayed on top of this case. Here is his summary of it:

 Although the overall case is complex, the main aspects can be summarized as follows:
1.  Security guards saw bright lights apparently descending into Rendlesham Forest around 3 a.m on 1980 December 26. A bright fireball burned up over southern England at the same time.
2.  The guards went out into the forest and saw a flashing light between the trees, which they followed until they realized it was coming from a lighthouse (Orford Ness).
3.  After daybreak, indentations in the ground and marks on the trees were found in a clearing. Local police and a forester identified these as rabbit scrapings and cuts made by foresters.
4.  Two nights later the deputy base commander, Lt Col Charles Halt, investigated the area. He took radiation readings, which were background levels. He also saw a flashing light in the direction of Orford Ness but was unable to identify it.
5.  Col Halt reported seeing starlike objects that twinkled and hovered for hours, like stars. The brightest of these, which at times appeared to send down beams of light, was in the direction of Sirius, the brightest star in the sky.
At its most basic, the case comes down to the misinterpretation of a series of nocturnal lights – a fireball, a lighthouse, and some stars. Such misidentifications are standard fare for UFOlogy. It is only the concatenation of three different stimuli that makes it exceptional.
The BBC reported on July 13 that Col Halt is now claiming,
"I have confirmation that (Bentwaters radar operators)... saw the object go across their 60 mile (96km) scope in two or three seconds, thousands of miles an hour, he came back across their scope again, stopped near the water tower, they watched it and observed it go into the forest where we were," said Col Halt.
"At Wattisham, they picked up what they called a 'bogie' and lost it near Rendlesham Forest.
"Whatever was there was clearly under intelligent control."
Halt does not name the supposed radar operators, and does not say how he obtained this information. He claimed that the operators said nothing about this until after their retirement, for fear of being "decertified" for reporting a UFO. Even if this unlikely claim were true, it does not correspond to what the supposed witnesses are reporting. A UFO allegedly whizzing by at thousands of miles an hour does not match the UFO(s) allegedly seen hovering for hours above the forest, and even landing there.

Col. Halt claiming more "proof" for his alleged UFO encounter in 1980
Lee Speigel wrote in the Huffington Post on July 21 that Halt says this new information will 'blow the lid off' the Rendlesham Forest sightings.
We previously reported how Halt accused the U.S. government of covering up UFO information, and he believes there's a top secret agency that's in charge of anything to do with possible extraterrestrial visits to Earth.

"There is a contract civilian agency, that is fed information, that is controlling everything. It's made up of either former military, high-level government agencies or high-ranking, very knowledgeable scientists. I can almost guarantee you. That's the way we do it. And disinformation is the biggest thing," Halt told HuffPost on Friday.
The Daily Express of London reported on July 14 that Halt said:
• Rendlesham Forest was mobbed with US military personnel "hunting UFOs" at the time

• A "UFO exploded " before his eyes and another "shot down a laser beam" from 3,000 feet above

• The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) later hid documents relating to Rendlesham

• US personnel who "lost 40 minutes" during the sighting have been denied access to medical files

Speaking at a UFO conference in Woodbridge, Suffolk, he said: "There is no doubt in my mind we are not alone and there are some people (in power) who know this, but even Mr (Barack) Obama won't get through to them."
 This is not the first time that Halt has 'jazzed up' his account of the Rendle-sham incidents. Ridpath describes Halt's "iffy affidavit," written in 2010,  as a "disastrous attempt to rewrite the facts of the case," suggesting that "this product of his 30-year-old memory differs so substantively from what he said and wrote at the time that it would be destroyed in a court of law."


What are other "top witnesses" from Rendle-sham reporting?

Airman Larry Warren claimed to have seen a light in the forest that "blew up," then re-assembled itself, and alien beings came scampering out of it. He says they resembled "children in snowsuits." By his account, many other Air Force personnel saw these creatures, but nobody else has reported them.

Larry Warren's description of alien beings scampering out of the Rendle-sham saucer (from 1985 CNN special on Rendlesham).

Another supposed witness, John Burroughs, has implied while supposedly under hypnosis that he and Sgt. Penniston were abducted by beings onto the UFO for about 45 minutes, and brought back to a different place. Supposedly base personnel saw them being lifted up to the object, and worried that they would never be returned.
 
John Burroughs ham-acting his supposed UFO encounter under "hypnosis." Hilarious!
Sgt. Jim Penniston (ret.), however, relates a completely different UFO yarn, in spite of supposedly sharing in Burrough's UFO abduction. He claims that he touched the landed UFO, and received a message from it in the form of a "binary code," which he subsequently wrote down. However, he did not tell anyone about it for thirty years.

Part of Penniston's telepathically-received  'UFO Binary Code,' miraculously turning up in his notebook thirty years after the fact. It reveals the UFO to have been sent by Time Travelers from the year 8100.
 Penniston now says that the binary data from the Rendle-sham UFO was sent by Time Travelers, which makes sense since aliens would hardly be expected to encode their messages using ASCII, the American Standard Code for Information Interchange. But time travelers from a future earth might possibly still be using ASCII 6,000 years from now (and probably Microsoft Windows as well). When Penniston was interviewed on a 2011 podcast by Angela Joiner, his story got all tangled up under her questioning.  (Hat tip to Danny Miller.) Penniston got confused whether he knew what the code meant as it was being transmitted. He  finally decided that he knew what six pages of it meant, but he thought that the rest of it "didn't mean nothin ." [If you have the patience to wade through over 200 comments on this posting, you'll see a spirited debate between two individuals who worked with Penniston on his "codes," raising substantial doubt about how many pages of  "codes" there are, and whether they were all written down in the same  year.]




If you can describe any of these "witnesses" as "credible," then you are much better at "believing things" than me.

Finally,

The Rendlesham Forest now has its own "UFO Trail." A UFO encounter is a terrible thing to waste.

230 comments:

  1. Whatever did happen to Penniston's "coded message" - did he ever state what he thought it actually said? It seems like that, as per most fantastic (and completely unbelievable) claims, there is an initial huge bruhaha, then...nothing. Either MIB took evidence, or it was "accidentally destroyed", or the person just ups and disappears, and so on.

    Just curious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And yet no matter who devised it, it is a fact that the seven sets of coordinates from the pages of binary code produce additional information that has proven useful and not only leads to something profound but also offers answers to a several mysteries that have confounded researchers for hundreds of years. The seven sets of coordinates have been in the public domain now for over a year, but as far as I know, no one as yet has deciphered or uncovered this additional information which remains classified for now.

      Delete
    2. So let's get this straight, Gary: you claim to have discovered some secret, hidden message from a series of random numbers made up by Jim Penniston 30 years after the event. But this "profound" new information, which holds answers to centuries-old mysteries, is "classified for now". Correct?

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. And are you not just the teensiest bit worried that the whole binary code thing might be a hoax?

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    7. In other words, complete fantasy.

      Delete
    8. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    9. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    10. A FACT is something that can be verified and is universally accepted. Your claim is not a fact. It is a FACT that there are scribbles in this notebook. It is NOT A FACT that those scribblings happened in December 1980. You have to demonstrate this is true. So far, all we have is Penniston's word, which, no matter how much you want to believe him, is not good enough.

      Delete
    11. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    12. I am always delighted when one hokey bunch of "data" generates another, so thankyou for adding to the Rendle Sham brew. But before you sink a fang into my leg, I suggest you look at the lessons to be learned from the Bible Code, in particular Dave Thomas's work, at

      www.nmsr.org/biblecod.htm

      and ponder on for a few minutes.

      —Peter B

      Delete
    13. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    14. Here are the seven sets of coordinates that have been in the public domain since the release of the book 'Encounter in Rendlesham Forest' in April 2014.

      52.0942532 N 13.131269 W
      16.763177 N 89.117768 W
      34.800272 N 111.843567 W
      29.977836 N 31.131649 E
      14.701505 S 75.167043 W
      36.256845 N 117.100632 E
      37.110195 N 25.372281 E

      For those who have either ridiculed or dismissed the binary code as rubbish and continue to ignore it:
      Until you have objectively studied and then deciphered the encoded information hidden within these seven sets of coordinates - discovering for yourself that there is indeed more to the code - then it is you who are living in a 'fantasy land' about it as having no significance. Until you solve it for yourself then your comments about it have no substance and are worthless.

      Delete
    15. Gary he say: "I see no comparison". First question: Have you looked at the site I cited? If you had, you might see the resemblance between what you're doing, and all those fun Bible-coders who find exactly what they're looking for. Numerologists have a strange way of doing this, as well as Nostradamus fans. The joy of Dave Thomas's work is the way he shows one can find hilarious denials of the Bible code too, if you care to look carefully enough. That's what you might ponder. Meanwhile, thank you, too, for the entertainment.

      Delete
    16. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    17. The only message I see here is: "Jim Penniston duped Gary Osborn – FACT".

      Delete
    18. Again, all I have seen here are wild assumptions. You have zero proof for the things you assume and state as facts.

      Delete
    19. Let’s look at it another way. If it turned out -- if -- that Jim had made up the binary codes to make a story for the 30th anniversary of the Rendlesham case, would this shake your belief in any way? Yes or no.

      Delete
    20. Ian: We seem somewhat short of the definitive answer. Ho hum.
      Gary: Listen, sweet pea, all your interpretations are of course FACTS, just as the weird calculations of numerologists are FACTS, and it is a FACT that George Adamski said he met a rather lovely young male Venusian. The problem is the shaky foundations from which they start. All I am asking you to do is consider how firm your foundations are. This you seem not prepared to do. I wonder why.

      —Peter B

      Delete
    21. I still see no evidence presented that proves that Penniston wrote those notes in 1980/81. In fact, there is evidence that he did not write those notes during that time frame. Look at the page where he got the date and times wrong. If he wrote it at the time it happened, he would have gotten them correct. Instead, it looks like he wrote them after reading Col. Halt's memo, released many years later.

      Delete
    22. Ian, first of all, I don't have any belief about it. I am not excited or emotionally attached to what I have found and so it's easy for me to remain objective - unlike most people who research these subjects. That's the reason why I am not really concerned if the results of the code are made public or not.
      I am only on here to express some common sense after all the BS I have read about the code by those who don't know what they are talking about and jump to conclusions without knowing all the facts - especially those who have not even looked at the coordinates properly - not alone tried to discover the encoded information for themselves, even though the coordinates have been in the public domain for over a year. Surely, it's not a crime for someone to look at it and find something, as I indeed have.
      Anyway, going back to your question: Jim did not create this and this will be self-evident once the information is released. If I had any suspicions, however slight, that Jim did create it, I wouldn't be on here now, and you wouldn't be asking me that question.
      To tell you the truth, looking at things in general, I think the information would be wasted on most people.

      Delete
    23. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    24. You realise that six decimal places implies an accuracy of latitude down to about 4 inches. For longitude it would be even less. How was this accuracy obtained (SATNAV?), or is this another piece of information you are not going to discuss, presumably on the grounds of secrecy?

      Mathematical & geometrical? And a 'well-known geometric construct'? Which geometric construct was used to get a determination of 4 inches on the earth's surface? Oh, I forgot that you will say no more. Just as well.

      Delete
    25. When you say, "Jim did not create this", I assume that you mean he did not simply make this all up. I ask again, "What evidence do you have to support this claim?". I don't want to hear things like JP is too stupid to make this up or JP told me so. I want proof that these pages were written shortly after his encounter as he claims. If you don't have this evidence you are ignoring a possibility based on a desire to believe JP and nothing else.

      Delete
    26. Irrelevant. None of that has any bearing on the information that results from the seven coordinates, which is produced by viewing them from a certain perspective.

      Delete
    27. My post above addresses the post by cda.

      Delete
    28. Tim, I don't have a desire to believe Jim. My reasoning that he did not create, or rather 'factor' this information into the code by the choosing certain coordinates, is based on the fact that the additional information contains things he just could not have known - especially back in Dec 1980 when he claims he received the code. As for proof of 'when' he received the code and 'how,' I leave that to other researchers and investigators. My focus has always been on the coordinates from the code, as I was asked to study it to see if I could come up with anything. What interests me is that the code contains elements of my own personal research work and discoveries made from 2001, and also certain discoveries and themes that made it into the book I wrote with Scott Creighton, The Giza Prophecy, published in Feb 2012. There is no way that Jim could have known about this material, which was kept between Scott and I until the book was published. In fact the final manuscript was sent to the publishers the same week that Jim first sent me the coordinates to look at, and that was on the 3rd Feb 2011. Now, again, I don't know who devised the code. That is something I would certainly like to know, but despite that the information I have been able to extract from the seven coordinates has been very helpful personally, as it has solved a few things that puzzled me in my own research, and not only that, but there is much that others will find extremely interesting.

      Delete
    29. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    30. Again the code is far more complex than people realise, and this will evident when the information is finally released.

      Delete
    31. You can of course stick your heads in the sand and go back to believing it was nothing but a lighthouse, which is as absurd a situation as someone with an unshakable religious belief.

      Delete
    32. I am trying to see where you have answered my point about the latitude & longitude. Are these supposed to be actual points on the earth's surface? And if so, how was their accuracy determined to a tiny length of 4 inches, or 10 centimeters? If anyone got to the exact point (assuming it was on land) and dug down, would they discover anything like, say, hidden treasure?

      Delete
    33. Chris, Those who have looked into this in detail have concluded that the coordinates of Woodbridge come from GoogleEarth, complete with spurious digits. This in itself demonstrates that the so-called binary codes are a modern construction. Ot that the time travellers from our future are navigating by reference to GoogleEarth.

      Delete
    34. "You can of course stick your heads in the sand and go back to believing it was nothing but a lighthouse, which is as absurd a situation as someone with an unshakable religious belief."

      There he goes finally, as if we didn't know already: Gary's magical mumbo-jumbo manipulations of Penniston's make-it-up telepathically received “binary code” nonsense is supposed to be evidence that something extraordinary really did happen in the RendleSham wild goose chases through forest and fields to the lighthouse in 1980.

      As I said, Gary, the whole RendleSham story is a compounded pack of lies, misinterpretations and hoaxing, so how can one small part--manufactured thirty years after the fact--of this ever-expanding, phony and phonier flying-saucer fantasy be taken seriously? It Can’t! We all know that already.

      You’re simply making an extraordinary though nonspecific claim while presenting no evidence and shifting the burden of proof to those rightly skeptical of that claim. It’s one of the oldest and most worthless of Internet woo-woo ploys, and a complete waste of time.

      Delete
    35. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    36. This super-[spurious]-accuracy was one of the things that reminded me of numerologists. In fact it reminds of nothing so much as the Eltanin Antenna of which Bruce Cathie and his unhinged acolyte Michael Lawrence Morton made so much. Tom DeMary solved this 'mystery' over a decade ago, and I followed up with an article in Fortean Times showing how Moreton arrived at his O-so-accurate co-ordinates. The famous 'alien' Antenna was/is actually a carnivorous sponge. From what Gary's said, one can only assume he'd go along with Cathie & Morton if their batty calculations generated something like a few renegade rhomboids or the exact diameter of the Moon, or the number of rabbits in Siberia. He really does NOT seem to realize what he's missing.

      —Creepy Peat

      Delete
    37. Gary and this is when the nine saga comes in right. Now John Burroughs has claimed he has met a couple of those alleged nine. And that aka person also claimed to be part of some small group. But then if we go down all this rabbit hole it just gets nuts. The point is Gary this stuff has gone on now for so long and Jim has allowed all this to continue. It simply is not right. Not for those involved or those who have been closely associated either. And remember I said lower down the string. Jim told Ronnie the binary code was only meant for a few people and he even said this on the AJ report, how does that one get reasoned also when it becomes suddenly for the whole of mankind in the new book and Pope throws it out like a raffle!!

      Delete
    38. For heavens sake if he was having a false memory then what on earth did Jim and I cypher re the binary he got when I was with him???? I mean really this is ridiculous. Something was happening to Jim and if he was upfront about it,one might be able to look at this even further. I mean I can even prove I wrote to Col.Halt with what I saw,so was all that a false memory also.

      Delete
    39. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    40. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    41. This Rendlesham affair has well and truly lost me. The time travel aspect has befuddled me to such an extent that I do not know if I getting older or younger. Anyway, thanks Gary for providing an amazing chapter and insight into our UFO history. I look forward to your next offering (on Roswell maybe?) but please, no more of these 6-decimal place numbers. And instead of binary code, please use hexadecimal.

      With that, I bow out of this debate.

      Delete
    42. Tracy, all noted, and we have gone over all this before. I am merely looking at different scenarios - something that would explain everything. However, at the end of the day it's not my job to look into who devised the code and why. I will leave that to you and others. Hopefully, we may find out one day.

      Delete
    43. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    44. I promise you Gary I do not have an especially fixed Weltanschauung; to various persons' disgust, I count myself a fortean, or Magonian, and find it amusing to be cast into the same blender as Zoam, who sees hokum under every bush where I see leprechauns. Nor am I projecting anything—always a dangerous accusation to make—on to you: I've just pointed out in various ways the objective illogic of your working on material that could be (IMO almost certainly is) factitious codswallop, and that your not caring about that, or shrugging it off, will inevitably compromise the validity of the "information" you think you're discovering in it. I had hoped that was pretty clear. What your discoveries turn out to be, I wait to learn with interest, and with popcorn also—if a trifle wry that I've been hooked by your massive tease campaign.

      —The Spooky Dook
      also Earl of Rubbersole
      and Baron Brothelcreeper of Suede

      Delete
    45. So, to summarize what Gary says is that 1) He can't prove the JP wrote this in 1980/81 or that it originated from some source other than JP. So he blindly accepts this because it fits his interpretation of the code. He could care less where JP got the code. 2) The code, like the Roswell slides, contains information so important to humanity that its reveal will occur when he is ready and, probably, will require people to spend money to discover its true meaning.

      Delete
    46. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    47. "If it is decided that it shouldn't be made public, I would accept it."

      Why shouldn't it be made public?
      Who is the Great Decider in this?
      If the result of your researches/calculations is truly important, why would you not publish it anyway?

      Isn't that the usual course with momentous discoveries?

      Whose feathers/privileges would be ruffled if you did so?

      —Peter B
      Soft Shoe Shuffler

      Delete
    48. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    49. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    50. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    51. So, this earth shattering information has to be "timed"? What is so important that such earth shattering information can't be released now? You act as if it has been decoded and there is no more work to be done. If so, there should be no reason not to release what you have. Instead, you now say that the release of the information is to be "timed" with something else. Timing indicates that it has to wait for some event that has to do with money generation/publicity. Like the Roswell slides promoters, it appears that you fear scrutiny of your work. The last thing you want is somebody to demonstrate your decoding/work is wrong before the "special event".

      Delete
    52. Not so. The timing has nothing to do with money or publicity. And I don't fear scrutiny at all. Nothing to fear on that score.

      Delete
    53. So G, After all these years, and myself sitting with Jim watching him write binary in 2011, translating it, knowing he had many more pages also, all the weird goings on ,and things which where nothing short of traumatic at the time. You tell us this is about timing. I say Jim is holding you back,someone is??? Because this is not right. Jim used the binary to bring serious attention to all things RFI and he has failed to play open cards even with you!! unless hes told you and you are not allowed to tell and you are now telling this page its all about timing. Gary Jim is clearly pulling your strings,or someone is??? Get it out, let the questions begin and information seen. And as Jim likes to say let the chips fall where they may. You have said you have cracked the code,its in black and white, that means you have completed it, otherwise it would not be cracked. I am not been nasty here in the least, but this binary has been nothing short of a disgrace and how it all has been presented and the dirty dealings behind it to boot.

      Delete
    54. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    55. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    56. So what happened to his big release, he said he was preparing for an upcoming release ,that was in 2014. Unless you missed it, its on the first responders page. And so far a big release of total nothing. So what changed his mind I wonder.

      Delete
  2. Love how they think the US military would be running around in British countryside. I mean, wouldn't that be a huge diplomatic no-no? And somehow no one in the British press caught on that the US had somehow established themselves there, even temporarily?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Flip, my understanding is that it was in violation of the "status of forces" agreement to have U.S. forces running around the countryside in uniform. Especially when armed (as they were according to "Airman Greg" in the 1984 CNN Special.)

      Delete
    2. Flip: I went into this in some depth in an article ("Stomping Around, Goofing Off") that you'll find in SunLITE 3.1. I followed up a couple of points with (now Col) Skip Buran, who was the OIC on the first night of the RFI, and who told me:

      "I had the same concerns when the initial incident occurred. That is precisely why I had the troops I sent out leave their weapons in the care of MSgt Chandler. It is also why I terminated any further investigation once nothing was found. I did have a concern that there might have been an aircraft crash, or something that may have been considered a threat to the bases.

      "Once nothing was found (as reported by Penniston himself), I recalled them. To me, it had become an issue for the Suffolk Constabulary.

      "Peter, I was not privy to who went with Lt. Col. Halt on the subsequent trips to the forest. However, I would have to assume at least some were on duty.

      "Recently, Penniston accused me of being derelict in my duty for not adequately reporting the initial incident. My counter is that I reported what he and the others reported to me: nothing found. Had he seen something (or touched something, or spoken to aliens, or took a trip to Mars) he was duty bound to report it completely and factually himself to his superior officer.......me.

      "It never ceases to amaze me how the incident has grown over the years."

      If anyone in Halt's party went out armed, then Halt was derelict or at least negligent. Given what else one's heard about him, this wouldn't surprise me. On the other hand 'Airman Greg' may be hyping the story, hardly unusual. But the essential point is that the SP were to go beyond the base boundary tooled-up only when under attack, in what's known, I believe, as "forward defence".

      Hope this helps.

      —Peter B

      Delete
  3. You guys in the US have Roswell, so who are you to deny us in the UK our own rival to Roswell? Rendlesham is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and don't you forget it.

    PS: Why was sliced bread thought to be so important anyway?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Too bad there weren't body cameras or Go Pro back then...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yes Bentwaters...or also Woodbridge to some. Two former airbases close to each other.

    Regarding the USAF running around the English country-side, one station was once "USAF Bentwaters" later also RAF Woodbridge etc., a primary Cold War airbase.

    By the way USAF security can and often do go beyond their gates, so not teally odd to find some in the forrest that evening.

    The binary code message? Well for the record it is claimed it says this when decoded:

    EXPLORATION OF HUMANITY. CONTINUOUS FOR PLANETARY ADVANCE. FOURTH COORDINATE CONTINUOUS.

    “Time” is the fourth coordinate of (x, y, z, t).

    Near the end of the message it says:

    ORIGIN 52 0942532 N (north latitude)
    1 3131269 W (west longitude)

    ORIGIN YEAR 8100.

    Obvious problems with the coordinates exist, as some say they are reversed. Other interpretations also abound.

    This incident has risen to a hoax like status due to the primary witnesses each claiming something different occurring.

    About the only verifiable fact is that British citizens had not been informed the USAF had nuclear weapons on that base.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  6. It’s also worth pointing out that Penniston’s notebook, which contains supposed ‘real-time’ notes made during the claimed close encounter, is headed with the wrong date and time. He first showed this notebook on a TV programme made by the Sci-Fi channel over 20 years after the event. I’d guess that he concocted the notebook for the TV show. By then he had forgotten the real date and time but thought he could get away with making anything up:
    http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/pennistonnotebook.htm
    Somehow the astute investigators of the Sci-Fi channel missed the discrepancy, and hence lost an exclusive exposé, as did all the following programme makers to whom he showed the same notebook.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This was of course the same notebook which contained the bogus “binary code”, but Penniston didn’t tell us about that until the 30th anniversary of the event in 2010.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. Well he sure was having more of it happen,as Halt has that info which I sent to him in 2011.

      Delete
    4. Gary asks (above): "where is your proof that the binary code is bogus?" Sorry, old bean, but the whole notebook is bogus, as demonstrated by the wrong date and time at the very start of it. Jim has given at least three different explanations for his error. Which one do you believe?

      Delete
    5. What Gary would argue Ian,is that it does not matter where the binary comes from,or how or even if he found it under a seat, its the data he has found which he has said is of importance, it could of been written last year by fred next door, none of that matters according to Gary and that would be his argument. Not when it was created or even how it was got,its simply the info from it which is relevant to him.

      Delete
    6. So even if the notebook was bogus, to Gary it really does not matter and it also does not matter that I have been by Jims side while hes written more of the stuff either.

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. Gary you should just get it out and get it over and done with, its been five years,just get it over with!

      Delete
    9. The very worst that can happen is everyone gets crucified like the Roswell mummy drama. And at the best it opens pandoras box to whatever.

      Delete
  7. RENDLESHAM FOREST UFO TRAIL
    Frequently Asked Questions

    WILL I SEE AN ALIEN SPACESHIP ON THE UFO TRAIL?
    Sure, why not. If you have no personal integrity and are good at lying with a straight face go ahead and say you encountered an UFO. You can also claim to see Bigfoot or a Unicorn but an UFO is preferable. I would not recommend claiming to see a Unicorn. People will think you’re crazy.

    WILL I GET ABDUCTED ON THE UFO TRAIL?
    That’s up to you. No imagination is needed because you “can’t remember anything” regarding your abduction. Be sure to report “missing time” to the Park Ranger since this a key component for your story.

    WILL I ENCOUNTER BEARS OR SNAKES?
    No. Mostly you’ll see on the UFO Trail is trees and rocks but encountering child-sized aliens dressed in snowsuits is a possibility. If you encounter an pint-size alien in a snowsuit:
    First, face the alien and back away slowly. Then raise your hands to appear larger and shout the Harry Potter spell “Ee-Tee-Disappearis!”
    If that doesn’t work shove your hiking companion towards the alien and run away.

    ARE THERE RESTROOMS ON UFO TRAIL?
    Unfortunately no, so be careful where you hike since there is a lot B.S. on the trail. Be sure to pack out your garbage and follow the “Leave No Trace” policy similar to what the Rendlesham’s UFO did.

    WHAT ARE THE “SHARE THE TRAIL” RULES?
    Hikers yield to Time Travelers.
    Aliens yield to Unicorns.
    Bigfoot yields to no one.

    IS THERE UFO TRAIL GIFT SHOP?
    Yes, located at the end of the trail. You can pre-order the Direct-to-DVD Rendlesham’s UFO movie. However, this movie may or not be made depending if Hollywood buys into Col. Holt’s story.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I’d like to hear just one of Gary’s imaginary “mysteries that have confounded researchers for hundreds of years.”

    Sounds like a line out of a Rosicrusian ad in the back pages of Amazing Stories or something you’d hear now on C2C. Gary, such “spooky” talk might sound good to you but it only signals to rational people that the speaker believes in nonsense. Those are hackneyed BS-laden paranormalist codewords: mysteries, confounded, researchers, signaling another failure of imagination.

    And if you thought about, you might understand that it really doesn’t make sense because it’s not the way the growth of knowledge works. Questions of the past have been answered or dismissed as misconceptions, and the big questions of the present could not even be conceived in the past.

    Anything found in hoaxster Penniston’s notebook is most probably pure baloney; I think we have more than adequate information to conclude that.

    We know this phony and phonier RendleSham (Halt’s Hoax) inside out thanks to Ian, and no appeals to “secret code” in a hoaxed-up notebook produced twenty years after the fact is going change anything. The whole story is a compounded pack of lies; so how a laughable claim of receiving a telepathic message from an ET spacecraft in the forest that was in reality a distant lighthouse beacon could even begin to be significant beyond the RendleSham might be the only mystery here to rational people. That is, if they bothered to consider it. I know I won’t.

    It’s pure fantasy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hardly rational and objective . . . And you write about rational people and count yourself amongst them. You have not studied the coordinates and instead have dismissed them outright. In other words, like many others you have not worked it out for yourself and are therefore not in possession of the facts as regards the information that emerges from the coordinates, so how can you make judgements like that and expect to be taken seriously?

      Delete
    2. If others take you seriously then good luck to them. Again, I am on here to inform you and others who would agree with you that you are wrong about the code having no significance; the truth is much more complex and what emerges from the coordinates will certainly be an issue in the future, and will be difficult to dismiss or explain away as someone's hoax or fantasy. Hopefully soon the information will be released.

      Delete
  9. They are also not aware I wrote to Col. Halt re the other binary code I saw Jim write either ;/ . Nor are they aware that all of this came from Jims alleged dreams of 23.5 of which he told me about and I put him onto you. The women from Ireland. Folks do not know half of it! and Jim has yet to tell re the stuff he chooses to keep hidden despite myself been involved with it all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I only need concentrate on the information I have found and I remain objective about it. The coordinates produce another level of information . . . Fact. Therefore my argument here is that the code should not be dismissed as having no significance.

      Delete
  10. Of course none of all of that matters :/ ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. The additional info which comes from 16 pages of binary when there was originally 3 pages less and those 3 additional pages came one year later. Has it been sorted out why that was yet? Just wondering?

      Delete
    3. Well I leave that to others to investigate. Again, my focus is on the additional information that emerges from the coordinates, which I am certain Penniston had no hand in factoring into the binary code. Why it is there, is something that is going to be discussed and debated for many years.

      Delete
  11. Then I would think by now Gary, Jim would have told you all things which surround this binary code then. If he has not done so by now, then I question why this has not occurred, Its only been five years.

    ReplyDelete
  12. You have avoided the question Gary, which I have asked you both privately and in public and is a simple question to answer after all this time. Has Jim explained to you and to Joe why you both received 3 pages of binary one year later to work upon?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I guess reading your above comment the answer is still no.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because I'm really not concerned about it. I was asked to look at the seven coordinates and decipher any additional information from them, and that's what I have focused on. It keeps things simple. Again, I leave these issues to other investigators to look into.

      Delete
  14. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sure but, it does not take away that three pages (totalling 16 pages ) was given to you and Joe aprox one year later. As you have said many times over, it does not matter where the binary comes from, how it really was received, it is the contents of the code which yields results according to your research. However that is all very well,but the public who has seen a stream of never ending weird goings on with all things RFI are not going to simply accept all of that without seeing info to support it. Remember you have also said you have cracked the binary code. For me from a personal level am more interested in what technology is still active to this day which can put binary code into a person mind and of which Jim still is playing secret squirrels .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  16. Gary I don't need to appreciate anything I was privy to activities when I was with Jim which included binary codes and we have discussed a thousand things between us too (you and I). What is not ok, is that people have been led a merry dance with all this and five years later its amounted to nothing. No one can be expected to understand with limited to no data, all they see is the never ending inconsistencies' which are never ironed out. And worse still Jim still plays his secret squirrel dance. Am afraid Gary the only time any of this will ever get any real attention re what you claim is when it is out in the open and proven and that Jim also explains himself with what has been going on over the years too. Until then way too many inconsistencies for the average bear to wade through let alone consider what you are wanting folks to consider when there is no data to see which demonstrates your claims. Nothing more to it really :/. And another factor too. Its in black and white, Jim told Ronnie Dugdale the binary code was only meant for a few people, this was also mentioned on the AJ report, the next thing, the book now says its for the WHOLE of mankind. I mean can anyone make up their mind in this thing. It changes with the weather. And since when has the binary become classified???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And am not arguing either, just saying.

      Delete
    2. About Nothing [or Tracy as the case may be]:

      Could you enlighten us Know-Nothings as to the circumstances of this extra three pages of binary code that appeared in your presence? Enquiring minds, etc. It may shed some light on the provenance of the previous 13 pages. And did JP have any interpretation of this latest batch of 0s and 1s?

      Thanks for whatever you feel free to reveal.

      —Peter B [among other names]

      Delete
  17. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hi Peter B. Yes. Back in 2011 . Jim was having very vivid dreams much like him having dreams of 23.5 in 2010 which resulted in the connection we see with Gary and his research. At that particular time I told Jim to simply write it down and he did so in front of me. As I have told a hundred times over to others it was translated and resulted in a short message. It was the only one I saw myself,but it was not the only time,there was other times Jim was having this happen and he wrote it down,but not infront of me,only that once. A succession of very unusual things took place during that time too. Bottom line ,I always felt there was some alternative explanation to all of this. Later in time it did bring someone out of the wood work explaining some things to me. I guess without proof, the long and short of this ,is there was/is some kind of techno involved,perhaps mind control, I don't really know. It could be argued he simply made it up. But the point is. I did write to Col. Halt and I did tell him what I saw and a few words of what I could remember. Which did include similar wording to the last 3 pages which came to Gary and Joe a year later. However this does not mean to say it was the same binary from 1980 but rather ongoing new binary. I have no idea really. I only know for sure what I saw and what I wrote to Halt and I know three pages came to Gary to work on a year later as just mentioned. I also know Jim was expecting more binary in 2010 back in Woodbridge. But all this opens a can of worms :/. That's really the very short of it. I have gone through all of this with Gary O and it makes no difference to him at all. He is simply interested in what results he has found in this code. I do understand this to a point,but there is no getting away,there was activities for lack of better words ongoing in relation to binary codes. (Tracy real name)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ps. There was only ever 13 pages that I was aware of. Meaning at the time of knowing Jim he told me there was 7 plus 6 pages (he wrote and told me that), Even their official web site stated 13 pages originally. I pulled this up with Gary as I could not understand as they where touting 16 pages all of a sudden but the page showed 13.. It was quickly corrected to the official total of 16 pages . There has been 12 pages and 14 pages too,it depends which site one looks over. However the three pages which came about a year later are the interesting elements in this.

    ReplyDelete
  20. My point am trying to make why was there a gap of one year or almost one year before the last three pages got in the hands of Gary and Joe which then made it 16 pages?? Was this because Jim received more binary in the way I had seen via his dreaming??,or is there some other explanation for the late arrival of the pages? I have never got a reasonable answer to this,its always been brushed aside as not mattering as it was only about the information in those codes which mattered and the rest was irrelevant. But as said, Col Halt was told about it. I hope I have been fairly clear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Thanks Tracy. So, as I understand it (and stand ready to be corrected), we have, so far, a bunch of binary code, or something purporting to be that, one in a batch of 13 pages and another of 3 further pages. A few questions, then:

      a) Was the entire batch of the first 13 pages allegedly transmitted to JP in 1980?
      b) If not, how many were?
      c) And if not again, how much of the remainder came to him in dreams or some kind of trance state? Is the 'transmission' you witnessed included among the total of 16 pages?
      d) How much of all this has been decoded?
      e) Does it all de-cypher into English via ASCII?
      f) Would you say that since 1980 JP has increasingly come under the spell of New Age ideas, or not?
      g) If so, do you know through what channels [no pun] he picked them up?
      h) Sorry if you've already answered this one, but: What was Col Halt's reaction to your communication with him?
      i) And belatedly—who is Joe?

      Sorry too if this all seems picky, but I am trying to get things clear, in my head and for everyone else intrigued by this previously unpublic background. And thankyou for whatever you can offer.

      —Peter B

      Delete
    2. Hi Peter B, to your questions. Answer a) As far as am aware the official count is said to be 16 and 16 pages were received in 1980. However information to me from Jim this was told to me 13 pages and as mentioned earlier, the official web site represented 13 pages until I drew this to Garys attention whilst I was looking at it the one day. It was at the time they announced 16 pages but the web page said 13. Gary was very confused about that also and went to check and found I was correct,at that time,Gary must have told them as it was then changed to 16 pages. If we then go back to information re the binary code,we can clearly see that it was very hap hazard and no clear cut answer from Jim re the exact amount, but it did differ, from 12 if Im not mistaken then 13 and so on. But to me personally 13 pages. And as I describe. Answer b) see a) Answer c) I would say that what I saw was additional to the 16 pages as it had a different message. What was the same or similar was Eyes of your Eyes. But with a different message. So no, it would be an additional. But remember, 13 pages in total where worked on by Gary and Joe and 3 more additional pages came later in time,which included Eyes of your Eyes. My only conclusions to this,was that Jim may have been dreaming again and that occurred making it 16 pages if he was dreaming more binary???,but this is speculation. And yes a trance state would also be a good word to use in regards to some things which had been occurring. As far as the binary goes, a person told me he seemed to be having some kind of photonic transfer by light communication occurring and that the senders would be able to choose certain times etc to do this(that info came from someone who claimed to be close to all things RFI). Or something to this effect. d) I assume all has been decoded unless there is ongoing binary am not aware of? I would not know as Jim and I are no longer together. Answer f) No, most certainly not. Answer g) No. No New age anything. Answer h) I wrote to Col Halt 24th July 2011. One of many mails I sent to him, sometimes he would respond, sometimes he did not. In this instance there was no response to that particular email. The next response from him was in August. I did not press for any responses. I was simply grateful at the time to be able to communicate to him what had occurred. Answer I) Joe is the other person assisting Gary re the binary code and its decoding and is one of the official people on the research team. I will give the link at the end . As far as my reference to the women from Ireland, that is a bit of pun. I happen to live in Ireland and close-ish to Hy Brazil the mythological Island, It just seemed uncanny that Jim and I connected and Gary and so on and here I am on the emerald Isle. That is what I mean. And no , no scrying. or hooped earing's am afraid :). http://www.binarydecoder.info/RFI-BinaryCode/BinaryDecoder_Analysis_of_Pages_1-5_by_Joe_R_Luciano.html

      Delete
    3. And goodnight. I tried to be clear :)

      Delete
  21. O, and more thing, if I may.
    Who are "the women from Ireland"?? And what did they say/do/scry??

    —Peter B
    Flat Foot Floogie

    ReplyDelete
  22. Gary - I don't know you or your decades worth of research on this topic. But your responses here beg further clarity.

    Interesting that you write that you don't care WHEN the code was revealed by or to Jim as you care only in deciphering its supposed hidden coordinates. That's odd.

    If you don't care about the source or the date received, then clearly if I were to write some code below, such as this....you would be interested:

    1100010010000111001100000110011

    Now if true, you would equally need to consider it a worthy addition to your research. Correct?

    Which begs the question, what exactly are you looking for? Aztec or Mayan secrets? Egyptian pyramids or artifacts? Chrystal skulls? Hollow earth cave portals? Jerusalem Cricket creatures? What?

    Any bloke can say he saw a saucer, and touched it, and then begin to write ASCII code claiming people from our future are communicating something important. Anybody.

    If it Jim's tale was real, which it clearly is not, why would advanced humans be so stupid as to use binary code to communicate when they could easily reveal themselves and speak any language they choose directly and with clarity?

    I might also ask what is Jim's current mental state? Medical history? Medication list? History of substance abuse? Family abuse? Depression? All factors to consider in his claims.

    Important to note that many patients with schizophrenia present claims (upon diagnosis) that aliens are speaking to them through a radio transmitter in a tooth inside their mouth. But it's not real.

    Ever consider that Jim is doing the same thing here with his binary code claims?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brian: is "1100010010000111001100000110011" a rude word, by any chance?

      Some persons involved in the RFI did most certainly see the lighthouse and took for something to track down. They recognized it only as a "beacon". So didn't actually know what they were looking at.

      JP may or may not have seen the same thing and translated whatever he was looking at as an alien or anyway anomalous piece of machinery. Perhaps he underwent some kind of altered state of consciousness at this point. You don't have to be schizophrenic or even remotely bonkers to do that, but it does raise the question of how prone JP was to such things, and if there's any evidence for him, or history of him, being in any way vulnerable to this kind of experience. [Reminds me of the UK's Alan Godfrey case.]

      This, I might point out to Gary as he caricatured skepticism in a now-deleted post, is how actual skeptics go about asking questions. That is, one wants to know what actually happened, and in what context. We know the broad version of the latter, but not that of this particular percipient.

      —Peter B

      Delete
    2. There are some observations I picked up in the above and I would like to ask a couple of questions if I may, but it is a bit late for me now and will ask later..

      Delete
    3. Thanks v. much for your answers, Tracy. By all means fire away if the questions are directed at me.

      —Peter B

      Delete
    4. A question re the above. I wont go into what is fact or what is fiction as to me it looks like minds are made up. But to further one of the comments. Quote..I might also ask what is Jim's current mental state? Medical history? Medication list? History of substance abuse? Family abuse? Depression? All factors to consider in his claims. end quote. With those factors in mind, would this not be a standard procedure to undertake in any investigation where people claim some kind of telepathic contact ? I would think it should be pretty normal to have that side of things evaluated especially in high profile public cases, so with that in mind has that been done? I ask because I do not know myself? Once all that is cleared up and everyone is satisfied, then what next? Brian I have considered everything but at the same time, there is a lot of very interesting scientific studies in the various areas by good scientists re telepathic kind of things. Why must someone be beaten to death and assumed everyone is mad who may have experienced such things. If one is medically cleared of any kind of mental health issue etc, then where does that leave one? Just wondering your views. @ Peter B. There is a lot more besides the binary, tho that is one aspect and was a known since 1996 (if my dates are right) when it was written about by Linda Houwe and Jims hypnosis. There is no getting away, it IS part of the RFI affair. Cheers :)

      Delete
    5. Hi Brian,

      You write:

      "If Jim's tale was real, which it clearly is not" . . .

      Do you have proof of that? Again, I understand that you believe you are looking at this objectively, using common sense and logic, but the fact is, at the end of the day you are still making an assumption like the other posters I have seen on here, and again, you state it as a given fact.
      In any case, this is not about Jim as such. You are missing the reasons why my attitude to the code might seem odd to you as you don't have all the facts and you are not me, and this is one of the problems I face in relaying what I have found to others.

      This is actually personal.
      Let's approach this another way, so you can appreciate my own position:

      I'm more interested as to why my own research work and discoveries made since 2001, some of which was confidential and first published in a book that I was working on while receiving the coordinates from Jim, are reflected in what emerges from the coordinates, and so for me, the message is more important than the messenger. Of course I am interested in who created it and how Jim received it. I have not just simply accepted his claims. I have gone some way in investigating this myself, but things are really not as simple as you and others think it is or make it appear - even despite your concerns about the encoder having used simple binary code. See my post about the book I co-authored with Scott Creighton. What makes things problematic about your own views on the matter is that to make sense of what I had found, I had to rule out the possibility that Jim had concocted this.

      Delete
  23. Congratulations Robert! You have reached a milestone - 100 comments; and mine is the 101st. Do you deserve an award?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Isn't there a rule somewhere where you delete a post if there are too many comments or the conversation is not to the bloggers liking???? Oh yeah....sorry...that's a different blog.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nope. As long as the comments make sense (more or less) people can keep making them. And we're learning a lot of new stuff about Penniston's Binary Code here.

      Delete
    2. Tim Printy, I must say I was actually feeling a little self-conscious that I was taking over the discussions on here, but really I came on here to make the point that there is more the binary code than people realise. Anyway, seeing your post I was about to delete all my posts and while in a response to Brian's last post, which I am still in the middle of. It's no skin off my nose if people on here are not taking this seriously. Things can of course wait until the information is released.

      Delete
    3. My comment was not directed at you but it was a commentary about a completely different blog altogether, where blog entries are posted and sometimes deleted within hours.

      Delete
    4. Fair enough. I did give benefit of doubt. I think I have said enough anyway.

      Delete
  25. Mr. Nothing, you say that you were "sitting with Jim watching him write binary in 2011."

    I thought Penniston's UFO Binary Code was written in 1980?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Hi Peter B, and others. I am just looking in and whilst I wish to answer your questions and shall do, I am a little cautious and feel a little out my depth. I realise this is a Skeptic page and I can also see minds and conclusions are already made up and with that in mind, I am not sure that anything I could say would be seen as useful for or against. @ Robert, I am a Ms and yes, I was with Jim back in 2011 where Jim was having things occur,. One of those things was more binary codes., Cheers for now. Tracy

    ReplyDelete
  27. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Regarding mental and physical examination in this UFO case or others, I don't recall any documentation or evidence in any such case that this type of assessment has been done on the witnesses immediately following their claims.

    Yes, some have had medical examinations years or decades after their experience, and largely to "prove" they are mentally stable people.

    But that's so much after the fact that it's useless in that it fails to capture the medical condition of the witness at the time of the event. This may seem irrelevant, but since I do and have worked closely with physicians of all specialties, they tell me there can be any number of reasons why a person might think something happened when it didn't.

    - Prescription drug interactions
    - Undiagnosed mental illness
    - Memory deficiencies such as Alzheimer's
    - Illness under treatment with new drugs
    - Mood alterations due to physical pain

    That's just a sample. I believe a full medical and mental health investigation would be in order when military personnel claim extraordinary UFO events happened to them, not to intentionally discredit but rather to confirm no acute or chronic illness or current treatment thereof is at play.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brian: in Alan Godfrey's case, which I mentioned somewhere here, his employers (West Yorkshire Police) had him psychologically tested for, among other things, epilepsy, in order according to the folklore to discredit his UFO sighting/experience/report. He passed as normal.

      Of course this doesn't mean he didn't see what he thought he saw while in an altered state of consciousness. He also had a history of somewhat 'visionary' experiences. The point here is that this can happen to perfectly sane & balanced folk who, unacquainted with almost everything that's happening to them, claim a paranormal experience that in reality [sic] is simply unusual, at best anomalous. The chapter on 'abductions' in Ronald K Siegel's "Fire in the Brain" is worth looking up in this connexion.

      Looking into this kind of possibility has never been a forte of ufologists. And many experients would rather opt for being 'alien abductees' because *to them* the alternative is being considered or, worse, considering themselves nuts. Which is a false dichotomy.

      Which, if anyone cares, is why I am interested to learn if anyone knows whether JP has any history in this kind of thing. It is certainly intriguing to learn that he's not unfamiliar with trance states. I wonder when that started. And so on.

      —Peter B


      Delete
    2. Hi Peter B, to your specific question about Jim and trance states. During my time with Jim from end of 2010 into 2011, trance states was incredible and escalated to a serious degree. If you are asking if Jim had and past situations or history of such things my answer would be this. There appeared to be things occurring to Jim for many years,of course I was not present and can only go by info Jim has told me. There was also a "presence" associated with this. If I go by my knowledge this would be from the very start of 1980 events.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  29. Hi Brian, 100 present agree. With all this in mind how could this be implemented into the RFI case in the present time, and could it? and most important, should it? And as you say with no intent to intentionally discredit bur rather to confirm the things you mention.? In the case of the binary code again it would be a catch 22. In Gary's views and with his findings, none of that would matter , the code stands alone and the information can be proven. Otherwise I do often wonder about things such as this in the ufo field in general.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Gary says, "I think I have said enough anyway." Think you sold any books?

    As if I didn't know as soon as I read Gary's “mysteries that have confounded researchers for hundreds of years” baloney appeal, woo-meister Gary's website reveals him to be nothing but one of those ancient Egyptian mysteries, Orion correlation, redated Great Sphinx and Giza power plant pseudoarchaeological loons of the Hancock, Bauval, Dunn, Schoch and West type.

    All of this fantastical lost Egyptian civilization pyramidiocy was thoroughly debunked twenty years ago by astronomers and geologists: Krupp, Feder, Heinrich, Harrel, and many others. So why Gary promotes such nonsense is anyone's guess.

    My guess is that―like all the other pyramidiots―he's only in it for the money.

    What a Shocker!

    http://garyosborn.moonfruit.com/#/author-bio/4516070738

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Really? These blanket generalisations demonstrate your stupidity and lack of ability in sound logic and argumentation strategies. You have no idea about my work in detail and the major contributions I have made from my discoveries. It's a nasty and totally wrong assessment. Read through properly. And money? Seriously? What money? You have no idea. Again, wild assumptions, with no knowledge of the facts.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. Thanks for the link, Zoam. I hope I don't sound churlish when I say I'd suspected as much. But (palliative) frankly couldn't be bothered to go hunting. Now I will.

      Gary: are you saying your website doesn't give at least an inkling of your "work in detail"? Your response could be taken to indicate furtiveness or incompetence (it's not for me to judge, yet). But it does seem to me that you dodge every criticism—or even question—directed at your work with (a) inculpations of ignorance, stupidity, nastiness, failures of logic, irrelevance, and wildness of assertion, and (b) a vociferous disinclination both to explain & justify your work and to repond to the problems perceived by disinterested [this word does *not* mean 'uninterested'] observers. (By whom I mean people unable to read your mind.) (That's enough parentheses—Ed.)

      You could at least tell us to what are your contributions, what your discoveries have been, and in what sense they are major.

      I agree very few people make very much money out of this stuff.

      I'm not arguing with you: I am arguing with your mode of presentation.

      —Peter B

      Delete

    4. Duke, "dodging" criticism? . . . OK, that brought a smile. I don't need to do anything. We are going off at tangents. None of that really matters.
      Let's go back to my original post - i.e., that the seven coordinates produce additional information that no one has discovered yet. I am simply saying, it would be folly to dismiss it outright. Now, I don't know who devised it, and I don't know for what reason it exists, but it does, and it contains useful information, and from what I have found - and I have been as thorough as I can in my analysis, making notes of the problems I have also found with it - I am certain Jim Penniston did not create the binary code that produces the seven coordinates. Why should I be vindictively attacked for that? Someone had to decipher it surely? Or is it ok to be criticised for having looked at it and found something, as if it should be rejected and not be touched as it is considered the work of the Devil? What are you people like?
      My work is also endorsed by two professors and others expert in their fields who have studied the results, so let's get real here, OK? In other words, the binary code should be taken more seriously. Anyway that will be evident once the results are released. This discussion has gone on too long. That was all I was saying initially.

      Delete
    5. 52.0942532 N 13.131269 W
      16.763177 N 89.117768 W
      34.800272 N 111.843567 W
      29.977836 N 31.131649 E
      14.701505 S 75.167043 W
      36.256845 N 117.100632 E
      37.110195 N 25.372281 E

      Solve this code Z, and then you might be in a better position to judge and assess me and my work, and perhaps I might have more respect for you and won't think I am merely dealing with an idiot who is as useful to this discussion as an ashtray on a motorbike.

      Delete
    6. Gary he now say: "I am certain Jim Penniston did not create the binary code that produces the seven coordinates. Why should I be vindictively attacked for that?"

      It would help if you clarified what you mean by "did not create the binary code" etc. You've been asked this several times before & not answered. There is also the further point (for the umpteenth time) that if the integrity & validity of the binary code & thus the co-ordinates is dubious, the plain folks & simple country lawyers around here will by elementary logic question the same concerning your 'discoveries'. Which you consider irrelevant (grunt).

      Please quote where you think you've been vindictively attacked. I see no evidence for that. You've been questioned & criticized, which just goes with the territory. And you shouldn't take it personally.

      "Someone had to decipher it surely? Or is it ok to be criticised for having looked at it and found something, as if it should be rejected and not be touched as it is considered the work of the Devil? What are you people like?"

      Decyphered, analysed, whatever—the criticism, as I read it, revolves around your refusing to say, for very obscure reasons, what you've allegedly discovered! Nothing to do with the Devil, although I might say in passing that my wife thinks I am an incarnation of the great god Pan. She also considers herself to be a witch. By association that probably makes me more demonic than you, if you think that way. Again, don't take it so personally. People want to know what is going on here, and you, whether you mean to or not, give every appearance of ducking & diving when pressed for precise information.

      Professors have been known to be wrong, by the way.

      —Peter Piper B

      Delete
    7. I did not come on here to reveal everything I have discovered. If you read my post, I gave the reasons why I joined in the discussions. Revealing what I have found here would take too much time and space, and would be difficult to summarise properly, and in any case I am still finishing up on the work I've done. And yes, I am certain Jim Penniston did not create it - meaning he did not choose the coordinates that together produce an additional level of information which is multi-levelled in its meaning and includes references to various discoveries published in a book I had co-authored with Scott Creighton - the final manuscript of which was sent to the publishers the same week I received the seven coordinates . . . Things which Jim could not have known.
      As for criticism, I have been long initiated into such things and welcome it, having been involved in long-drawn out debates with various critics of my work. I have been an author on ancient mysteries for many years now, and yes it comes with the territory. And I certainly don't take everything personally. I am also aware of all the tactics people will use to get more information - continually saying I haven't answered certain questions when I did and quite adequately enough for now. Also, one of the reasons why I came on here was for some amusement and to take a break from what I was doing. I thought I would tough it out on what many would label a 'pseudoskeptic's' page, and see what the author of the article and the subscribers here are made of. So, not at all fazed by the questions and have quite enjoyed it so far. :-)

      Delete
  31. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  32. Colonel Holt is still doing his mission....This was a weapon test, but not what all the foamers think, it was and most likely still is, a psychological weapon, which causes these sort of hallucinations. I was involved with a test in 1968, and I am sure they have improved it since then...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It might be, it might explain many things also. However if so, then it continued into later years.

      Delete
  33. Gary - actually you never did answer my question which seems to be somewhat akin to "dodging". And to others too.

    Since my question was about your research, and because you chose not to answer, I can only conclude some motive is at play here - a personal motive.

    Failure to answer is dodging in that I can only presume you are hiding something, have alterior motives of some kind, etc., as others in this "hobby" often do.

    If you did discover something in a unconsiously transmitted code, why not share it now? One can easily conclude, as in the "BeWitness" episode, that your motives may be related to exploitation and profiteering.

    By the way, at least three "experts" I am familiar with in the "ancient aliens" arena have made millions from fictitious stories long since having been thoroughly disproven.

    As I previously asked...what are you searching for in these codes?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have just posted an answer above Brian. My motives? Actually, I enjoy deciphering codes and solving puzzles, as well as looking into various mysteries, so that's really my motive when I received the coordinates from Jim Penniston, and really because I have solved a few in my time. I have made next to nothing from my endeavours, and really don't expect to make anything. My reward is the work itself which is interesting. Most people are naive about the literary world Being a writer and authoring books is not a lucrative business; most writers earn little more than pin money. If you have read through all my posts you would know that the amount of work I've done - three volumes worth of material - still needs revising and editing. At present I have my wife Heather, an English professor, helping me with it, amongst other things we are both involved in.

      Delete
    2. Can I ask Gary as I don't believe its private as you have announced this now on your own fb page, You have done a recent article and it is in Andrew Goughs magazine. I have not seen or read this article,but you do mention it has a mention of the codes in this. Would there be anything of interest to others on here which might enlighten or give further insight into your findings and work. Cheers.

      Delete
    3. I very much doubt it. The article was mostly written by my wife Heather. It is about the mythological Ark, and it merely includes an observation she made when looking at what I had discovered from my work on the Rendlesham coordinates.

      Delete
    4. Ok Gary , I was not sure, not read it yet. Cheers.

      Delete
  34. @ Vonmazur - interesting. Share your 1968 experience with us or private mail me with the details. There is evidence the US Military and the CIA have advanced such technology.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At Brian, A quick comment. Many seem to have overlooked one area. All of everything transpired from Jims alleged dreams of 23.5 of which led to Gary and his research. My point to this one. It was via dreaming that this came about.

      Delete
    2. There were tested certain types of psychological weapons. They would cause a soldier to hallucinate. That is, they made ones dreams appear real, as I found out, it took a lot of concentration on the task at hand to overcome the effect....I was piloting a helicopter at the time. These devices apparently use EM Radiation of some kind. I was debriefed and not given the technical details. I am thinking this was tested at Rendlesham, along with some type of advanced small aerial craft, but lacking evidence of the actual system it is hard to say for sure...

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. Hi Vonmazur, I note your comment to Brian. Very interesting and wonder if there is anything in that element which could account for Jims situation. Dreaming and producing binary codes. many years later. Trance states and the appearance of contact with something which gave information for lack of better words was also prevalent.
      I am not a scientist, so I do not know what can be done in these realms.

      Delete
    5. Fellows; One thing not mentioned here, is the possible exposure to other types of "Contamination". There were nuclear weapons store at this base, and in those times, many different chemicals were used for various purposes by the Military, many of these are banned or no longer used as they were. This possible exposure combined with the test of a psychological weapon could be the cause of later manifestations by those involved....I was wondering what the rational posters here think about this....

      Delete
  35. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Who are these "two professors"? Without names and statements by these professors, their endorsements mean nothing. I could say I have a dozen professors that find your work on the Giza Prophecy (among other things you write about) is a bunch of hooey. It does not mean a hill of beans unless you can name them and what they say about your work. BTW, the Roswell slides had all sorts of professors/phD's endorsing them as well. It did not help their credibility. Two professors out of thousands is a very small percentage. When you can say, the majority of scientists in this field accept my work and demonstrate this statement is true, then you can blow that horn. Otherwise, it means you are just trying to prop up your work. Since you refuse to present your conclusions and also refuse to even question the source of your data, then I can only assume that your work is incapable of standing up to scrutiny. Time to put up or......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shut up, yes I know. I will reveal all when the time is right, and on my terms. I'm fully confident about my claims, so assume what you like. I explained why I was on here initially.

      Delete
    2. As for the Roswell Slides, the hoopla over that was pathetic. I never gave it more than a glance because some things I can immediately recognise to be a fake, while other claims might take a little more time. That surprised me really, the number of researchers who were taken in by it - the same researchers who have also rejected the binary code. And actually, you're right. I don't need to prop up my work by saying it is endorsed by members of academia, but it helps.

      Delete
  37. Its always been very simple to me. Investigative wise and with all the new things, a full investigation should have been done, from mental health checks to investigations into everyone involved ,both past and present, all information re the binary looked into and once all done, then any findings by others then presented. Until then, there should have been no hints of anything, instead it has been used to hype and excite and I have felt this for a very long time, that would have been the more ethical approach, especially since people can be very gullible . In other words responsibility in this case, especially in this particular case . And I am sorry, but Jim is choosing to still not tell it all and that I find very concerning but has no bearing on the results of your findings Gary, at least according to your views and findings etc.

    ReplyDelete
  38. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I will ask again Gary re the pages of binary as I still am not seeing a really clear response, I will try to put it in another way. I cant put an attachment either, in relations to dates you gave me. We know the official web page stated 13 pages which was changed to 16. I can establish and prove there was 13 pages told to me via Jim in his mail to me. The official count is 16 pages. Did you ask Jim why three pages totalling 16 pages came one year later to both you and Joe to cipher etc? What was Jims response to this? There always has been a clue here,but I am not suggesting Jim made this up. But I would like to hear a clear answer. Did you and Joe not ever wonder why this was like this ? and what did you both think. Obviously I know you will say none of it matters due to your findings, but my question is, did you or did you not ask Jim and what was his response to all of that? Cheers G

    ReplyDelete
  40. Why did you not get all 16 pages at once and why the large gap to receive the remaining three pages?

    ReplyDelete
  41. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  42. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I’m sure this discussion is all very interesting, but I fail to see what it has to do with the Rendlesham Forest incident. As far as I am concerned, that has been a solved case for the past 30 years, and anyone who wants to prove otherwise needs to come up with something better than a phony notebook and a retired Colonel dining out on a tall story that gets taller with every retelling.

    ReplyDelete
  44. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  45. I will start this again and shorten it. Why did 13 pages become 16 pages??. Did you or Joe question Jim about this and if so, what was his reasoning. Why did 3 pages come separate and not with the other 13 pages which was the original amount. Surely this must have been discusses and reasoned? why the one year delay?? @ Ian, you say all this has nothing to do with the RFI. How can it not be? The binary code was the selling point of all things RFI in 2010. . If we go back into the past, Jim publicly told everyone, it was ALL about "Time" and the binary codes. The key focus was the binary codes, then came the book, which did not include Garry's work. And here we are in 2015.

    ReplyDelete
  46. https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x30mavw_col-halt-returns-to-rendlesham-part-1-of-8_travel

    ReplyDelete
  47. Tracy, I didn't receive any pages, and had never received any pages. It was Joe Luciano who was given photocopies of the pages - first 13 and then another 3 - and he gave you the dates he received them. I was only sent the coordinates that Joe had deciphered from the 2nd to 13th page and that was a year before I was introduced to Joe. At the time I received the coordinates, I didn't know who had deciphered them. Seeing as I never handled the pages, but was just sent the coordinates, you should direct your questions to Joe or Jim, or both.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Let me get this right. You are the principle researcher. I have asked all this time and time again and Joe has chosen to ignore or by pass this aspect on any public domain where this has been mentioned to include John Burroughs personal page. It makes no sense at all that a public web site would have binary code displayed as 13 pages their official web site run by the very men themselves and it takes me to notice this when they had suddenly decided to announce it was 16 pages,then after altering the page to 16 pages . So we had then a change already. Now as the principle researcher its only correct to assume that between you and Joe you would not only have discussed the number of pages but also wondered why three pages came a year later, which then eventually led to 16 pages. It makes no sense to me, that this area was not questioned by either you Joe, or both, if only to clear it up. Why not get everything at once, ether it was Joe or you, or both?

    ReplyDelete
  49. PS. I understand what you say above, but both of you have been working closely together.

    ReplyDelete
  50. So the bottom line 13 pages and 3 pages aprox a year later. And prior to that a web site which said 13 pages changed to 16.

    ReplyDelete
  51. And this is what am trying to get at,if others are wondering what all this is about. I have claimed to have seen Jim write binary codes. The email I have to Col. Halt demonstrates I wrote and told him about this in July 2011. With that in mind and looking at the area of the 13 pages and the other 3 coming later, it is very possible Jim was getting binary at a later time, therefore totalling the 16 pages. If that was the case, then Jim was receiving binary codes in the same way as I saw whatever that really means. I don't need to discuss this any further now,but this is what I am getting at , and it surprises me that Joe and you have not at the very least questioned Jim . On the other hand, its the same story, none of what I say matters. It is only about the information, which then also tells me,no one is wanting to get to the bottom of any activities which may be happening to Jim,but rather FIRST push out what the contents are from the binary which could be from any time period.

    ReplyDelete
  52. All of this back and forth in reference to Gary's numerology has nothing to do with the RendleSham or much of anything else in the real world. It's just some poor new-age nutter making imaginary mathemagical mumbo-jumbo connections ("discoveries") in his head and reaching a bizarre conclusion:

    "The only explanation I could see, is that it was/is believed by those who have encoded this information, that division, argument, war and all kinds of conflict – regarded as natural elements in human nature and experience – is really the result of the tilt of the earth’s axis; or that the tilt reflects this imbalance and general disharmony in the system linked to the collective human consciousness and vice-versa." --Gary Osborn

    "What's the frequency, Kenneth?"

    http://www.meta-religion.com/World_Religions/Ancient_religions/Egypt/235_degrees.htm

    http://www.crank.net/numerology.html

    http://skepdic.com/pyramidiocy.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Actually, I see nothing wrong with that quote. I am not stating my own beliefs. It just shows how ignorant you are. That's a fair observation and assessment of the views and beliefs of those who have encoded or made references to the Earth's axis angle which can be found in numerous sources, and others like Jocelyn Godwin have expressed the same theory and explanation.
      Not necessarily my beliefs, but there is nothing wrong with positing the theory.
      Do you understand that? No, obviously not

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  53. Also, I don't believe in any of the things listed under "Pyramidiocy" in the last link you have posted. I don't endorse or subscribe to those views or beliefs. You have completely misinterpreted my work and research and what you think you know about my own beliefs. Actually, I don't have any beliefs as such, but I am open to all possibilities, and I deal with facts, and no one as yet has given a valid answer as to what the Great Pyramid actually is or what it's function was. All theories, and explanations - even the orthodox beliefs that the Great Pyramids of Giza were originally tombs - are problematic. But again, you are going off topic. My posts are about the coordinates from the binary code.

    ReplyDelete
  54. “The opinions of the true believers are hard to swallow; and the opinions of the die-hard sceptics are not based on reality either. There is some middle ground.”
    John G. Miller.

    John G. MIller is referring to the point of balance, which is where the truth usually resides, and in my research I am always looking at things and weighing things up from that middle ground, and I am careful not to jump to conclusions. So Zoam, where are you?

    ReplyDelete
  55. Furthermore, seeing as you posted a link to "the number 23", obviously under the wrong impression that I am into numerology - again a wrong assumption - what does the degree value 23.5° mean to you?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Talking of 23.5. I mentioned this to Brian higher up the page. It is through Jims alleged dreaming of 23.5 that he connected to you. So in reality Gary, Jim was having dreams of all of that. Tells me about it and then I put him onto you?? So was he really dreaming, or is there more to it? I just thought Id mention this??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jim also told me he dreamed of that when I noted that his email to me was titled "23.5 Degrees" and I asked why. I mention this and my own thoughts about it in some detail and in my account of the study I have made of the coordinates.

      Delete
  57. Well my question is Gary, what was happening to Jim to have such dreams??? And I had known you before I met Jim, so was it possible that Jim had seen stuff on my page relating to you? had the dreams and knowing I knew you, knew I would suggest you? and that came about. Or was something happening to Jim and its exactly as he said? Of course one can suggest other things too ;/.

    ReplyDelete
  58. @ Everyone - relevance of topic

    IMO it does, sort of, have a connection to Rendelsham in that it's a supposed claim by a supposed witness and a dogmatic researcher coming directly from the case. Bogus or not.

    @ Aboutnothing

    Agree. In this case, as with others, (most others) the responsibility to do what is ethical and right with investigation is typically thrown overboard (and deliberately) by the investigator(s) themselves. They will whine and moan and attack anyone who says this is the case, but the truth is the majority have self-serving motives and that generally being building a reputation and notariety in Ufology, and to make some $$$$ from those who believe.

    Aggressive egos and researcher competition for the limelight is at play constantly in this "field". Look at Roswell for example, which Rendelsham even gets a nickname from -- different investigators claim one crash, no two crashes, no just one but in a different location, and so on, while at that time also racing around trying to get to witnesses as fast as possible before anyone else. When they hit gaps or inconsistencies from so called witnesses they conjured up details that embellished testimony to sell an idea or book. But no...they all deny that.

    The responsibility for due diligence and ethical research is on the investigator making the claims...unfortunately almost all fail miserably at this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  59. Well Brian, there are some points here I would agree with, and some of the reasons why I have delayed presenting my own findings on the coordinates and have instead concentrated on other things.

    ReplyDelete
  60. @ Gary

    What other things? I thought you were working on the coordinates that people have been referencing so far? I have no dog in this debate, but I do have an opinion or two about it. IMO:

    1) Hard to believe these guys really mistook, more than once, a lighthouse becon for a flying saucer or other aircraft. Unless they were all smoking weed on duty, given they were in the forest multiethnic times makes me think something was there at least a few of those times.

    2) It is also hard to believe the individual testimonies which now differ greatly and appear to have been embellished toward an ET explanation.

    3) IMO it has a prosaic explanation which may or may not include some misidentification of the lighthouse becon.

    4) Discounted consistently is the very strong evidence that deep black projects have and are being worked on, tested, and functionally deployed and fully operational. In such a case, for example, this could have been a remotely controlled triangular drone apparatus that may indeed have electrogravitic assist propulsion simply made by humans. The best place to safely test such survelliance aircraft off the range is near or on your own military base, and your allies, with unsuspecting troops as means to assess the stealth nature and psychological effect and reactions of your own military personnel, especially ones guarding nuclear weapons.

    Sounds far fetched, but there is a solid documentation trail clearly indicating in the US tests of this kind have been done since WW2.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brian, re your point 1: The witnesses were different on the two nights for which we have reliable first-hand records, and the circumstances of each sighting were different.
      On the first night, the guards were drawn out into the forest by a sighting of a fireball which made it appear that something had come down in the forest. The guards went out in search of it, and saw a flashing light which initially appeared to be much closer than it really was. Two of the three (Burroughs and Cabansag) later admitted in the written statements that they eventually identified the distant light as a lighthouse (they didn’t know its name at the time). Penniston’s report was more cursory and made no direct mention of chasing the lighthouse; perhaps he was already working on deniability.
      On Halt’s night, we have evidence from his real-time tape that they were looking at a light that lay in the direction of the Orford Ness lighthouse, flashed at the same rate as the lighthouse, and which Halt himself described as lying “off to the coast”. He has since admitted that he thought the lighthouse lay in a different direction, which explains why he didn’t recognize it.
      His “starlike objects” which hovered and twinkled for hours were indeed just stars. If he really thought there was anything hostile about them, why did he allow them unchallenged access to his airspace?
      Your point 4 can indeed be discounted. Testing secret devices over public land on foreign soil?

      Delete
    2. @ Ian what are your thoughts re John Burroughs and his payout and the Condign report? If I might ask. Cheers :)

      Delete
    3. As far as I am aware, John B was compensated for injuries that (he claimed) resulted from his military service. Evidently the Veterans Administration did not contest this claim. There is no evidence that his health problems were caused during his time at Bentwaters/Woodbridge. Indeed, I don’t think the VA has made any statement about how they think the health problems occurred. They probably thought it was easier to pay up rather than argue.

      Delete
    4. To the best of my knowledge they have not Ian, and I remain unconvinced. I also did question Nick Pope about the Condign report too and why his co authors where publicly saying the Condign report they believe is a "Fools Errand". His response was basically they simply had difference of opinions. Otherwise John is coming out in Dec to Woodbridge with his lawyer to discuss it all so it appears. Of course Dr Kit Green is involved in all of this too and the ATS site and other places made for interesting reading.

      Delete
    5. Hi Brian, what I mean is, I have been involved in other projects before and since I began working on the coordinates in Feb 2011, and again I can assure you what I have found in the coordinates has given me a greater understanding of the research work I was doing prior to my involvement in the code, and has even solved a few things for me personally. Also the story surrounding how I became involved in the code and the people and events related to my involvement, is an extraordinary one to say the least.

      Delete
  61. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. @ Brian you have said exactly how the ufo situation is and too true. @ Gary O, considering the situation and how all this has been presented over the months and now leading into years why do you not just present a paper on your findings and present it to academics publicly who can then give this attention and review. Why does it have to be in a book? Granted I know you have a large volume of material. But it could be condensed and a proper paper presented or something like that?? Jim has created by his own doing a very tangled web and it has created the discord and negativities we see today. @ Brian just to note. Jim himself has never said ET, he has always remained steadfast and believes this to be something from our future, but not ET. John Burroughs seems to lean towards this aspect currently and I do notice a push in this direction even further. The Condign report which I wont mention on this particular string is also another issue. Otherwise your item 4 Brian makes interesting considerations too. And lastly Gary O, why don't you discuss further your thoughts on Jim and his 23.5 dreams and how it all came to be, you mentioned you had written some thoughts/theory re that element. Is it not something you can discuss?

      Delete
    3. Just to mention also. Whilst I say Jim has always said the future story, in private he did mention he was not allowed to use the word ET. I could only assume at the time it was possibly part of programming or instructions given to him at the time.(Jim did not explain further) If however, I look back into all my material he clearly writes and tells me "They would follow all instructions given to them". What can I say, there is so much to it and what is real or not real is anyone's guess am afraid.

      Delete
  62. @ Ian

    Not so much testing as actually using. Prototype testing happens in restricted and remote airspace (the U.S. maintains an active base in the Australian Outback for example that is highly secret). In this case such a devise would have been operational but gathering intelligence on how it's own troops respond. You wouldn't do that over aggressor nations before you are ready for full operational deployment. They've done this sort of thing before. It allows for unaware yet controlled subjects to assess effect.

    ReplyDelete
  63. "Prototype testing happens in restricted and remote airspace"
    Therefore not over East Anglia.

    ReplyDelete
  64. @ Ian

    Did you read the post? I said "In this case such a device would have been OPERATIONAL..." Are you daft man?

    ReplyDelete
  65. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  66. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Gary, when you pass, please can you explain why there is a need for a book/s. I know you are a writer, but in the light of the binary situation, surely it would be better to condense the material to the main points perhaps and present it much like a report? . You are featured on the main web site of the men, the one where it was 13 pages and went to 16 ;) Sorry could not resist that as it has yet to be explained how it did jump to that. But on a serious note my only concern in all of this, are the inconstancies and information withheld by Jim to include those he has had working on his material along with the strange behaviours of all involved. It has been far from normal. Basically he is having people believe he received binary from a touched craft in 1980 and that what is it, which is far far from the truth of the matter. I also have very clear mail he was waiting to get some more in Dec (2010) back in Woodbridge as they never got all of it, it was incomplete . What a tangled web all this is :/.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Brian said "In this case such a device would have been OPERATIONAL..."
    Yes you did, and I misread. However, there is no evidence for any such operations in Rendlesham Forest at Christmas 1980. As I have regularly said, once you realize that there was nothing loose in Rendlesham Forest except a bunch of spooked servicemen, everything else falls into place.

    ReplyDelete
  69. In all seriousness, the most probable cause of Jim's binary code projection is undiagnosed schitzophrenia. As stated in prominent medical texts:

    Robert A. Berezin - 2015 - ‎Psychology

    "Clearly, paranoid schizophrenics are delusional when they hear voices that are not there or have religious experiences where they think they are God, or space aliens with mental powers, or that they can hear radio waves from their teeth, or that their thoughts are being broadcasted."

    In which case Gary, you are simply researching one man's mental psychosis and concluding what he says is genuine. If the man ever studied binary code, then his brain could produce the code you are analyzing as well as unconsiously imbedd aspects of things factual. Without a full and proper evaluation your chasing the delusions of a man with mental illness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am will to look at all the possibilities and have thought about that too. But it's not as simple as that Brian. As I said, the story surrounding how I became involved in the code and the people and events leading up to and related to my involvement, is an extraordinary one to say the least, and others who know this, including Tracy, would agree.

      Delete
    2. Quote.....Without a full and proper evaluation your chasing the delusions of a man with mental illness.
      ~@ Brian you have basically said this as factual when we are not knowing if any of those kind of evaluations have been done? I personally do not know myself. What I do know is that that during some correspondence to Col Halt and where I went over the things which occurred during my time with Jim, Col. Halt did respond telling me that he had tried to get both the men to get assistance in the past . Both men refused. I could say more things, but I will keep it at that for now. Surely at the time of the new book been written and during Nick Popes research investigations, he would have wanted something like that done as standard, I say as standard, because in my mind it would be applicable for anyone with such types of experiences and for obvious reasons. I can only assume re this one. At the end of the day, the codes come from a persons mind from the claimed craft. One has to be extremely cautious and anything further in the years which came after 1980,carefully examined as those later years are seemingly a result of 1980. One must be careful of label's also, such as mental health issues, as there could be other explanations too,imho.. To me everything should be examined past and present. As far as Gary goes and his own findings. Sure what I do know re his research, it certainly paints a very interesting picture, one of which I think also should be evaluated perhaps and maybe parts of it shared with those who could study it and see what they could glean from it and if any of it could be explained and reasoned ,because it sure makes for peculiar reading. I mean in respect to how everyone connected up etc. Anyway at the end of the day, there are many folks out there selling their wares ,telling their stories of receiving messages from wherever, and riding the cosmic wave to wonderland and there is no end in sight. Are they all delusional suffering mental illness too? One such person who I was looking over, claimed now 9000 cosmic messages and of course he is the ONE , and the most serious above all others:) The ufo community has very little if no restrictions to what it throws out to the public all the while leading folks a merry dance.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  70. @ Ian

    Yes possibly, but I would not rule out a military explanation to an event experienced by military personnel.

    ReplyDelete

Keep your comments relevant, and keep them civil! That means no personal attacks will be allowed, by anyone, on anyone. Commenters are welcome to disagree with me, or with other comments, but state your arguments using logic, and with a civil tone. Comments in violation of these rules will be deleted, and offenders banned.

Comments should be in English, although quotes from foreign-language sources are fine as long as they're relevant, and you explain them. Anonymous postings are not permitted. If you don't want to use your real name, then make up a name for yourself, and use it consistently.