• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Cumberland Spaceman

It was one of the reasons I wasn't a speaker at last years' Uncon ;)
 
Re: Re: Re: Solved?

sureshot said:
AAAAGGGGHHHHH!!!!! what's with all the pop up ads I can't close???!!!!

sureshot
Click to expand...

Yeah, that post should have a health warning.:mad:
 
So - I'm a great researcher when it comes to the 'Net, but not so good for off-line stuff.

How would we go about tracking down either:

a) The original negative?
b) The print?

The picture that appears all the time is cropped to only show the girl's head and the spaceman. The original is a full-length pic of the girl as her Dad wanted a pic of her new frock.

Has anyone got a good copy of the pic in a book that we could re-scan at a decent resolution without compression?

Does anyone know how we could track down Father + Daughter in a hunt for the original pic?

> Chaz <
 
Again!

Someone must agree. It's an OLD LADY, with her BACK TO US.
It is. It IS.
 
In terms of negatives, they are about. I imagine Jim Templeton has them (the father of the little girl). Kodak has analysed them and were just as perplexed as everyone else. They even offered a reward for an explanation. I get the impression that the family really want to be left alone. Jenny Randles interviewed them indepth for her documentary and they have done numerous interviews. I think they feel they have said all they can.

I find to hard to except the explanation that this an old lady, unless she can float or has very very long legs.
And it doesn't explain the Woomera connection at all. The same "spaceman/men" were filmed and seen there.
 
Old lady

I think the lady is right behind the girl, the girl being seated, or in a dip or something. Honestly - an old lady is all I can see.
I mean - I do WANT it to be a spaceman...
 
Fred?

Although.... having taken a quick gander maybe it's Fred from Scooby Doo with his back to us.... (tight sweater, cravat)
Hmm.
 
How about we ask Jim Templeton really, really nicely if we can borrow the negative.. get it scanned with a 9600dpi negative scanner etc.

Could host the resulting (huge) file on-line for people to download and analyse.

Thoughts?

> Chaz <
 
I remember seeing the interview with Jenny Randles a few years back, and it did seem he was a bit pissed off with the attention he'd got. Surely, he'd have admitted it was a fake by now, just to get the likes of us lot off his back!
As someone mentioned above, there was a certain amount of MIB contact associated with this case too.
From what I recall, didn't he take two pictures of his daughter in the same spot, within seconds of each other and only the second one showed the "spaceman"?
Or did I dream that bit...
 
Justin Lucas said:
I find to hard to except the explanation that this an old lady, unless she can float or has very very long legs.
And it doesn't explain the Woomera connection at all. The same "spaceman/men" were filmed and seen there.
Click to expand...

Where are the photos of the same "spaceman" at Woomera?

sureshot
 
The film reel was missing from the MOD files at Kew, in London. The only reel missing of all the Woomera missiles tests. However the files refer to the footage. See Jenny Randles Documentary if you can
 
Justin Lucas said:
The film reel was missing from the MOD files at Kew, in London. The only reel missing of all the Woomera missiles tests. However the files refer to the footage. See Jenny Randles Documentary if you can
Click to expand...
As the "spaceman" looks very much like someone in a fire-retardent suit, I suspect that finding someone similarly attired on a rocket range may not be too unusual. ;)
 
That is a very good point!

It does look an awful lot like one of those fire-redardant suits.

Still - if anyone has any idea how to contact Jim and/or borrow the negatives for scanning... That way we could at least have a fantasic copy of the picture and never have to bother poor Jim again!

> Chaz <
 
I still think it's a seagul taking off behind the girl, captured in a split second appearances can be deceptive.
 
I don't really buy the seagull thing I'm afraid!

I know how easy it is for the human brain to see things like faces, bodies etc, but I really believe there is more to that than a seagull.

Does anyone have an idea how to track down Jim? If someone could get an address I could write him a nice letter explaining my idea.

Would be nice to get a decent scan of the negative or print just so there is a chance we might put this darned thing to rest at last!

> Chaz <
 
Try

Have you thought of trying the Fortean Times board itself? I mean the magazine/website? I bet they'd know. Good luck.
(And no, I don't think it's a seagull (unless it's wearing a cravat!).)
 
featherz said:
An 8ft tall old lady?

> Chaz <
Click to expand...
Justin Lucas said:
I find to hard to except the explanation that this an old lady, unless she can float or has very very long legs.
And it doesn't explain the Woomera connection at all. The same "spaceman/men" were filmed and seen there.
Click to expand...

Did you not view The Cumberland Man?

The fact that the figure clearly isn't floating or is long legged doesn't necessarily kill the possibility that it actually is a real live 'Spaceman'.

Is this Woomera connection really all that strong?
 
Tubal Cain AAAAAGES ago said:
Sorry I can't remember the details but one of Jenny Randles' many books has some research into this picture that ties it in with bizarre events at a missile testing facility that supposedly happened at the same time the photograph was being taken.
Click to expand...
OK, possibly a bit of a late reply. The book is Randles's excellent book "MIB". A really good read, I re-read it as soon as I'd finished the first time - excellently researched, and it's not particularly biased either way on the MIB phenomenon.

[edit] Just noticed I added a comment to that two years ago. Must have enjoyed it :)
 
Spaceman?

I can't be the only person on Earth who also thinks this looks like somebody out for a run, with their back to the camera.

If you look at the 'non-expanded' image the 'bump' on the back appears to be a back pack of some kind. You can make out two slip straps that come down the back in a V shape to the area.

When the image is expanded the 'visor' appears more reflective and solid than in the original image. I wonder if this is a product of the image extraction process.

I also wonder if the scans are based upon digital scans of the original negative or scans of the physical photograph (or subsequant copy of it) as the quality / colour differences in between versions are quite striking.

8 feet tall? Where is the evidence for this? As you cannot see the exact spot where the feet lie (and the photographer claims not have seen the 'person') you cannot truly judge how far they are from the camera and cannot therefore assertain how tale they are. I think this link really does demonstrate the very real evidence for this:
http://www.geocities.com/lab_lav/the_cumberland_man.html

As for the comments relating to the photographer not seeing anyone that day. I once saw a chap nearly fall off the rock of Gibraltar trying to get a better angle on a monkey. I think its known as 'target blindness' where you become totally focused on one particular subject and you simply ignore everything else.

All comments relating to Men in Black and his wife seeing a flying saucer complete with alien pilots appears to come out some time after the event, as a means to support the claim.

It's not very compelling evidence and the image quite clearly does not show a spaceman, as originally suggested (8 foot or otherwise)

But I'm sure there are still people who still believe that this image holds a compelling truth about it. To them I say, please find a better example.

Many thanks for reading.
 
Re: Spaceman?

rleather said:
I can't be the only person on Earth who also thinks this looks like somebody out for a run, with their back to the camera.
Click to expand...
Certainly does look that way. The arm on the right of the image is bent in a way that looks very odd if it is the subject's left arm. It looks quite natural, however, if we accept that it is the back of someone running. I'm not sure you even need to postulate a backpack as it could be that the bulge is due to the scapula and other musculature of the back. It has a look of one of those near skintight running suits. Hmmm... :)
 
Re: Spaceman?

rleather said:
'target blindness' where you become totally focused on one particular subject and you simply ignore everything else.
Click to expand...
This was well illustrated in a recent episode of the Human Senses - the presenter had included a man in a gorilla suit in every scene of the half-hour programme.

Most people only noticed when he re-showed the relevent scenes at the end, stopping the action to show the 'gorilla'!
 
I t could be someone on a bike? That would explain the extra 'height' and the blurriness.

Also I think it could be a ghost, as ghosts are hardly ever clear due to the fact they are not exactly alive.....:eek: :confused: :eek!!!!:
 
Old lady?! Where has that one come from? I always thought it looked like a beefy-looking bloke in a white jacket standing casually with his back to the camera. But perhaps that's just my eyesight ...Then again, I have never understood the fuss that this photo has caused.
 
Its an action man in a space suit stuck to the back of the wee lassies head.Mystery solved.:)
 
Re: Solved?

Niles Calder said:
Look closely folks (and please excuse my excitement).

It isn't a tethered special-shaped balloon (with which I have some familiarity) as it is leaning against the wind, although it would be easy enough to check in any had been made at that time (I think you'll find that there wasn't). In fact I think that the 'spaceman' is a person standing with both their feet firmly on the ground... if you look at the top of the hill you'll see that there is a thick hazy dark blue line between the hill and the sky - that's the distant horizon and follows the hill top almost perfectly. It's the gril and the photographer who are at an odd angle!

The 'spaceman' is someone wearing a white jacket and a white/cream scarf. The scarf is drapped back over their left shoulder then wrapped left to right around their neck and then drapped over their left breast. They either have short platinum blond hair (in a bobcut?), are wearing a clear plastic hood or a whitish motorcycle helmet (although I think that this last option is pushing it slightly). So have I solved it? My first mystery solved? Folks?

Niles
Click to expand...

I dug this thread up again. My apologies. I've been noticing the head. I don't see a helmet at all. There's a faint wisp of white on our left side of his head, but nothing on the right. I think it's just a man in a white cap with his back turned to us. Also note the shadows. The sun seems to be hitting both objects consistently. More light on our left side of the girl's face and more light on our left side of the man's head.

With the original picture for reference here:

http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Palladium/9741/Spaceman.html

the stance of the man does look odd. But if you make the picture level with the horizon (without the humorous obstruction as seen on an earlier page) the angle is not unusual:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top