Talk:Rendlesham Forest incident

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rendlesham Forest incident article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Paranormal Low‑importance

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is a candidate to be the project collaboration.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Aviation / British / European / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

East Anglia: Suffolk Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Anglia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Anglia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.East AngliaWikipedia:WikiProject East AngliaTemplate:WikiProject East AngliaEast Anglia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Suffolk task force.

United States: History Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as Low-importance).

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on December 24, 2012.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

The efforts to discredit tell us all we need to know

It's reassuring to see how much effort goes into trying to discredit the Rendlesham incident, especially given how paper thin the supposed explanations are. I say leave this page exactly as it is as an example of how badly the UK and US governments have papered over the cracks. My personal thoughts are that a UFO cover story was concocted right at the start to explain away a major emergency on the edge of the base. Something very embarrassing to the USA. Something involving a damaged nuke weapon in the woods for example. Rather than die down the story has grown wings over the year. While an outlandish story is good cover it attracts too much attention to Rendlesham/Bentwaters. 86.166.237.215 (talk) 19:52, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BBC News. Dec 2020. USAF guard John Burroughs

This is not currently referenced in the article.

Rigby, Nic (26 December 2020). "Rendlesham Forest UFO: Are we any closer to the truth 40 years on?". BBC News.. See quote (emphasis added):

One of those [USAF] guards was John Burroughs. He went to investigate the sighting, and says he first saw a beacon in the distance in the forest with green, red, orange and white lights.

As he and his colleagues approached, Mr Burroughs says they saw a white light silently explode and then a red, oval, sun-like object in the clearing. It lifted up through the trees and shot back towards the coast.

I like his attitude. He has some interesting theories. Read the article.

But that is not what is really important. What is important is what he saw. As to what it is that he saw, who knows. It's definitely not a lighthouse, star, fireball, etc. that causes what he saw. Stars don't change directions. Fireballs may explode, but don't show up in a clearing, and then lift up and shoot towards the coast. --Timeshifter (talk) 01:18, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rendlesham Forest incident article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject." --Lubiesque (talk) 13:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article can be improved by reporting what one of the witnesses, A USAF guard, saw. From a reliable source, the BBC News. --Timeshifter (talk) 14:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Burroughs medical disability due to Rendlesham events

Toby Martinez and Shane Frakes (7 May 2023). "John Burroughs and the government's unprecedented acknowledgment". Roswell Daily Record.

In 2015, the U.S. government made an unprecedented move by acknowledging the health issues of former Airman First Class Burroughs, resulting from his encounter with a UAP in England's Rendlesham Forest in December 1980. The decision to grant Burroughs total medical disability by the Veterans Administration (VA) not only recognizes the reality of the phenomenon, but also highlights the potential health consequences of such encounters.

--Timeshifter (talk) 12:37, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Greenstreet and Nick Pope

From The Basement Office (TV Series 2019–). Episode list. IMDb. Youtube playlist is more complete:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwNrNqsuwF1n43wh5nuV5hTFrdAN00kfk

By Steven Greenstreet and Nick Pope (journalist).

The above video breaks down deputy base commander Lieutenant Colonel Charles I. Halt tape, UK Ministry of Defence documents, and interviews Charles Halt. Halt describes what he saw, and that it was not explained by any of the other prosaic explanations.

Part 2 has info on Sergeant Jim Penniston. It interviews him. He says he touched the craft, and he described it. --Timeshifter (talk) 14:47, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]