From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:06:32 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:15:00 -0500 Subject: Re: 1956 Lunar Path Light - Maccabee >From: Ray Stanford <dinotracker.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:24:08 -0500 >Subject: Re: 1956 Lunar Path Light >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 08:28:49 -0500 >>Subject: Re: 1956 Lunar Path Light <snip> >>I agree with the dust hypothesis (and some photographic noise, I >>presume). I am puzzled by the extremely bright overexposed(?) >>spot at the center. Without trying to scale the picture >>accurately I would guess that the arc is over 100 miles long. >Huh??? It all depends on the distance, Bruce, as you surely >realize. Are you presuming the alleged light source was at the >distance of the moon? If so, what is the basis for such a >presumption? Yup. I realized after I sent the message late last night that I should have included the assumption that the object - if it was an object - was actually on the moon. Actually, all we know is that it was between the moon and the telescope. The thin curved line appears to be in good focus (otherwise would be a fat curved line) and so is probably not close to the telescope. How close it could be and still be in good focus I don't know without knowing the focal length and aperture diameter of the telescope. If the arc was actually moving, as claimed, then it would seem to be anomalous. The angular length is 0.0005-0.0006 radians approx. (very quick estimate... might be wrong!). That would be 5-6 ft at about 2 miles. It appears to be brighter than the background. Don't know what time the photo was taken, but there would be some altitude above the earth at which something between the telescope and the moon would become lit by the sun.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp