UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > Feb > Feb 18

Re: 1956 Lunar Path Light - Franz

From: Capt. Alejandro Franz <alfafox.nul>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:01:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:51:07 -0500
Subject: Re: 1956 Lunar Path Light - Franz

>From: Ted Phillips - I.A.I. <archaeoanom.nul-linc.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 09:26:21 -0600
>Subject: Re: 1956 Lunar Path Light

>>From: Cap. Alejandro Franz <alfafox.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 04:44:02 -0700
>>Subject: Re: 1956 Lunar Path Light


>>I found that the picture of the moon is a fake. Maybe that's the
>>ridicule your good friend was afraid of. If you see the part in
>>which the other half side that is part of the moon couldn't let
>>the stars show in the background as it does.



>Those are not stars, they are dust particles and various debris
>from lying around for 50 years - you need a course on
>photography, my friend.

Hi Ted,

Thank you for your nice post.

I promise I'll take a photography course also I think you need a
course on Astronomy and on investigation.  <g>

You said you have the negative of that 'print' and you didn't
provide it. That negative days before could have been of
valuable help but now here is the real story about the 1956
Lunar Path Light that you said it was taken by a good friend of
yours and that's not true. What should I say of this one? is a
fake or a hoax?

I learned from a dictionary that a fake is something that is a
counterfeit; not what it seems to be. A counterfeit is a copy
that is represented as the original. A hoax is something
intended to deceive or a deliberate trickery.

As part of my 'armschair investigation" I've found that the
original 'print' is from 1953 that was discovered and
photographed in Oklahoma by Dr. Leon Stuart, an amateur


"In the early morning hours of Nov.15, 1953, an amateur
astronomer in Oklahoma photographed what he believed
to be a massive, white-hot fireball of vaporized rock rising
from the center of the Moon's face. If his theory was right,
Dr. Leon Stuart would be the first and only human in history
to witness and document the impact of an asteroid-sized
body impacting the Moon's scarred exterior.

Almost a half-century, numerous space probes and six manned
lunar landings later, what had become known in astronomy circles
as "Stuart's Event" was still an unproven, controversial theory.
Skeptics dismissed Stuart's data as inconclusive and claimed the
flash was a result of a meteorite entering Earth's atmosphere.

That is, until Dr. Bonnie J. Buratti, a scientist at NASA's Jet
Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., and Lane Johnson of
Pomona College, Claremont, Calif., took a fresh look at the 50-
year-old lunar mystery.  "Stuart's remarkable photograph of the
collision gave us an excellent starting point in our search,"
said Buratti.

See J. Buratti NASA video at:


"We were able to estimate the energy produced by the collision.
But we calculated that any crater resulting from the collision
would have been too small to be seen by even the best Earth-
based telescopes, so we looked elsewhere for proof."

Using imagery taken from lunar orbit by the Clementine
spacecraft in 1994, Buratti and Johnson discovered a crater that
was significantly brighter than others in the vicinity.

They had located "Stuart's Event" See:


Buratti and Johnson's reconnaissance of the 35-kilometer
(21.75-mile) wide region where the impact likely occurred
led them to observations made by spacecraft orbiting the

First, they dusted off photographs taken from the Lunar Orbiter
spacecraft back in 1967, but none of the craters appeared a
likely candidate. Then they consulted the more detailed imagery
taken from the Clementine spacecraft in 1994.

"Using Stuart's photograph of the lunar flash, we estimated the
object that hit the Moon was approximately 20 meters (65.6 feet)
across, and the resulting crater would be in the range of one to
two kilometers (.62 to 1.24 miles) across. We were looking for
fresh craters with a non-eroded appearance," Buratti said.

Part of what makes a Moon crater look "fresh" is the appearance
of a bluish tinge to the surface. This bluish tinge indicates
lunar soil that is relatively untouched by a process called
"space weathering," which reddens the soil. Another indicator of
a fresh crater is that it reflects distinctly more light than
the surrounding area.

Buratti and Johnson's search of images from the Clementine
mission revealed a 1.5-kilometer (0.93 mile) wide crater. It had
a bright blue, fresh-appearing layer of material surrounding the
impact site, and it was located in the middle of Stuart's
photograph of the 1953 flash. The crater's size is consistent
with the energy produced by the observed flash; it has the right
color and reflectance, and it is the right shape.

Having the vital statistics of Stuart's crater, Buratti and
Johnson calculated the energy released at impact was about .5
megatons (35 times more powerful than the Hiroshima atomic
bomb). They estimate such events occur on the lunar surface once
every half-century.

"To me this is the celestial equivalent of observing a once-in-
a- century hurricane," said Buratti. "We're taught the Moon is
geologically dead, but this proves that it is not. Here we can
actually see weather on the Moon," she said.

While Dr. Stuart passed on in 1969, his son Jerry Stuart offered
some thoughts about Buratti and Lane's findings. "Astronomy is
all about investigation and discovery. It was my father's
passion, and I know he would be quite pleased," he said. Buratti
and Johnson's study appears in the latest issue of the space
journal, Icarus."


NASA Solves Half-Century Old Moon Mystery


Best regards to you and all,

Capt. Alejandro Franz

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com