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

The Cumberland Spaceman

:blissed: Thanks Ogo, I'd almost forgotten about this myself...
 
Think Windy Day and Fly Away Hair!

Having had another look, it's just like someone with their back to the camera, hand on hip, wearing a white cardigan and with a headscarf on her head. Looks a bit masculine, from the back, but could just be the pose, braced against the wind!

Now, if that's not some 1960's female, standing looking at the view, behind the little girl, I'll eat my dinner!
 
My first impression - all of 3 minutes ago! - is a girl on a common where there are hot air balloons being flown. I saw one just like the 'man' behind her at the balloon fest at Ashton Court, Bristol 2 years ago. Looks obvious to me!
 
Yeah would be except the first "Special Shape" balloon wasn't flown until 1976 and the "Cumberland Spaceman" was photographed in 1964, some 12 years earlier...
 
<doh!> That'll teach me to read the whole thread won't it! Thanks Niles.
 
No problemo Meanderer. I just thought to check the timing on it (although having been a balloonist in the past I did recall that the special-shapes were much more recent than the photo)...
 
Isn't a cumberland spaceman just an ordinary spaceman, only curled-up like a catherine wheel and more spicy? :D
 
Somebody really should go out to that spot and check out whether there actually is a slope or not.

Perhaps they could take a child and a spaceman and recreate the photo.
 
A friend of mine visited that spot last year and said it was pretty isolated. I think you'd notice if someone else was hanging around there, but you never know. Unless the spaceman is the girl's mother perhaps?
 
I'll ask him, but I don't know if he was in the exact same spot. Just in the area.
 
I don't know, but I asked him last night, and he said the landscape is bumpy, and the sort of place where you could dig for peat. The sea is on the other side of the road. He didn't know the exact location of the photograph, but he was in the general area.
 
Regardless of what the figure actually is, there is a fantastic chapter in Jenny Randle's fantastic book "Men In Black" (probably mentioned it on this thread earlier, but I just found my ageing copy) about not only the Cumberland Spaceman, but what happened afterwards. Randles returned to Jim Templeton, who took the original photo, and asked him more about it.

Here is a brief summary of some of the things she writes:

- Templeton's wife was definitely *behind* him when he took the picture;

- Kodak analysed the picture and said they could not work out how it had been taken, even offering a lifetime supply of free film to any staff member who could solve it;

- He was visited by two strangers in black uniforms, who referred to each other only by numbers, interrogated him, took him to the moor again, asked him questions about the weather and animal behaviour, and returned to the car - leaving him alone on the moor, 5 miles from home;

- He took another set of photos later for a demonstration, but the frames from the moor were taken by the government and never returned - Templeton apparently wasn't too bothered about this since it was presumably in the interests of national security;

- One policeman let slip that other people had taken photos of "more or less the same thing" at the same time.

She also goes into great detail about a connection with secret British rocket testing in Australia, which is fascinating if a bit odd. Get the book if you want to know more about it :)

It's certainly very interesting but leaves many questions unanswered. Personally I like the theory that whenever something like this happens, the government is simply trying to prevent public panic - even if the photo is a hoax or trick of the light. I agree with whoever said it looked like someone jogging away from the camera (something Randles doesn't look into.)
 
Personally, I too see a man jogging away from the camera.

In the full length photo, it looks to me as though Jim Templeton is kneeling as he takes the photo. This would indicate that anything behind the girl would seem far bigger and elevated. When the image is levelled with the horizon, it does seem as though it is a man in a hooded white top with a white hat running. The hood is quite clear to me, and the arms appear correctly positioned. Even with target blindness into account, I struggle to think why Mr Templeton would not have seen someone.

Hopefully can hear more opinions from other newbies like me...
 
Did the girl have an Action Man doll in a 50's style spacesuit?
I seem to recall having one myself in the 60's.
I wonder if it was one of those strapped around her neck.
Though why, I can't think.
 
No offence, but that is not a great explanation :D

A girl... with an action man stuck in her hair...
 
I would still like to see the dungeness pic, anyone ever found it ?

The cumberland pic scared me when I was a kid, now it just looks weird.

It could be a guy jogging or any of the other normal explanations, but wouldnt that outfit have made the guy very noticeable in the 60's, even today you would look very weird walking around in something similar.

It looks as though the outfit is slightly padded, not nearly enough protection if it were a real spacesuit.

His fashion sense is criminal whoever he is :)

He should have tried the rabbit ears with his fingers, you know the move I mean when your getting a group pic taken, that would have been amusing.
 
taras said:
No offence, but that is not a great explanation :D

A girl... with an action man stuck in her hair...
Click to expand...

Well, it was just a suggestion, albeit a feeble one!
:)
 
I know it only took me about ten minutes to do in PS6, (All freehand)...But doesn't this look likely to be what happened in the pic a sec or two later? :D

PMSL!!!

Oh aye thannorz! ;)
 
Hehe, very excellent, though I would have thought (judging by the arms) that he was running the opposite way... but still very good :)
 
The apparent photographer, James Templeton, reportedly
claimed:

"As an amateur photographer on a day-trip with my family,
I took the photograph on Burgh Marsh on May 23, 1964,
using an SLR camera loaded with the new Kodacolor film
which was processed by Kodak. I took three pictures of my
daughter Elizabeth in a similar pose - and was shocked
when the middle picture came back from Kodak displaying
what looks like a spaceman in the background".

See, for example,:

ufologie.net/press/dailymail13dec2002.htm
Link is dead, and the domain name seems to have been reused for an unrelated site.
The MIA webpage can be accessed via the Wayback Machine:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090721033231/http://www.ufologie.net/press/dailymail13dec2002.htm


Can anyone please confirm a source for all, three, cited
snapshots being published?

Obviously, it would be essential and informative to see
each of these, consecutive, photographs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He must have been a very tall jogger and good at being invisible to the photographer! White seems to be his favourite colour.

I think the kid is the spaceman, look how big his dome is!
 
I think it's all bollocks and he, or someone at the time it was first looked at; thought it looked a bit wierd so they made the rest up.
It certainly fits the 60s genre of sci-fi.
If it'd been taken in the 50s, it would have had an orange helmet with shark fin shoulders on it!

IMHO
 
Thats just it... the jogger wouldn't need to be tall if Templeton had knelt to take the picture, perspective would make the trick as we see it. As to why he didn't see the jogger, that is probably the hardest question to answer if we consider Templeton's testimony to be flawless... but look back a few pages at target blindness for more info.

I would like to think that Templeton's testimony is accurate, but no-one is infallible, and the mind can play awful tricks. Memories are rarely 100% accurate, and it is very possible, like Spillage says, that he got carried away with the media circus.
 
Much :)

Good job, although you could say his legs were out ;)

One thing a bit dodgy in the original is shadow... (besides the supposed spaceman) as I'd have thought the shadow would come about 45-60 degrees from the horizontal to the right of the 'spaceman'.
 
I did the legs like that on purpose. I wanted "him" to mince as "his" hair looks quite girly, (Especially for 1964!) :p lol!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top