From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5.nul> Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 14:05:43 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 08:21:26 -0500 Subject: Apollo 16 Film [was: 1956 Lunar Path Light] >From: James Oberg <joberg.nul> >To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 07:13:49 -0600 >Subject: Re: 1956 Lunar Path Light - Oberg >>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:24:37 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >>Subject: Re: 1956 Lunar Path Light >>If you cannot get this issue of JSE through the inter-library loan >>system, you should be able to get a complete reprint (including >>the amazing images of an object which looks very much like a >>classic flying saucer) ... <snip> >I would like to determine whether the author interviewed any of >the witnesses or read any of the transcripts of the air-to- >ground and the mission debriefings, or viewed any of the other >imagery from the mission especially during this flight phase [as >well as imagery from other missions in similar flight phases]. >And if the author did not, I am interested in his excuse. Perhaps the "excuse" would be that there _were_ no witnesses. Mr. Oberg has said he interviewed the Apollo 16 astronauts and they didn't see anything, despite the fact that their camera did see something. As in the case of the STS-48 and STS-80 videos, the camera is the ONLY "witness." >I would also like to determine how the author decided my opinion >of the photograph without - as far as I can remember - asking >me. Mr. Oberg has been giving out his opinion for free for quite some time now. One place he posted it is: http://www.edmitchellapollo14.com/wwwboard/messages/2094.html#followups What's puzzling to me is that his description of the Apollo 16 film bears little resemblance to what is shown in the version available all over the place on the net. Here are two sources, for those who'd like to see it for themselves: http://www.ufocasebook.com/bestapollo16.avi http://www.geocities.com/futureshock2000/apollo16ufo.zip (mpeg format) In the post at the first link I cited, Mr. Oberg stated: "After discussion on the internet, a photo technician suggested it is a reflection of the sunlit camera lens in the Apollo window. Support for this view is that as the hand-held camera 'jerks' back and forth, the image seems to move twice as far as the image of the moon itself, indicated the image is not of something bright outside the window. ..." Running the mpeg movie slower than real time, I saw no movement of the "image" relative to the Moon whatsoever. I couldn't find any relative motion after measuring distances on frames grabbed from the movie, either. Perhaps there's a version of the film showing this relative motion, but it's not in the6-second movie I've seen. Oberg continues: "...Also, the portion of the illuminated arc changes during the sequence, as if the sunlit round object moved in and out relative to the shadow of the window's edge. " What the mpeg shows is that the camera pans to the right and then back to the "object" about 5 seconds later. The illuminated arc was considerably narrower than it was before the the camera was jerked away. And the object (or image, if you like) was at almost precisely the same position relative to the Moon that it was when it first appeared. Finally, Oberg states: "Note also that the image is always off to the side of the camera's main pointing, which is towards the receding moon. This is further indication that the photographer saw nothing unusual in his viewfinder, if he even noticed the image at all." Unless the version I've seen is incomplete, the object is almost dead-center in the frame when it first appears (the very first frame of the mpeg). It's about 1/4 the way from the left edge in the last frame when the camera pans back to it. The lack of motion relative to the Moon indicates that the object was not the camera lens (again, with the caveat that the 6-second version of the movie I've seen may not be incomplete). However, I wouldn't reject the possibility that it might be a reflection caused by some other light source other than the camera lens in the small space of the Apollo command module without more information. I'd be interested to read the JSE paper to see if the author considered the reflection possibility.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp