Alleged photos of aliens

[Han]

It has also occured to me that in the "solway"(uk) incident the "spaceman" was not visable to the photographer until afterwards , but in the "Woomera"(AUS) the "spacemen" were clearly seen on security cameras at the time this is a massive contradiction.

It is possible that it might not be a beekeepers suit, as it also looks like a "fire/proof/resistant suit".
The fact that the "Blue streak missiles" were made near "solway" and tested in "woomera" suggests to me, that not only was the missile transported but also the saftey equipment i.e "fire suits" this could explain the simularity between the figures seen in both places.

Also as a Fireman mr Templeton could quite possibly have been familiar with the the "missile manufacturing facility" its "staff" and have access to its saftey equiptment. as they(the base) could have been trained or advised on fire saftey or emergency procedures, as usaully civilian saftey services(fire,police and hospitals) are made aware of potentially hazardous situations near to the public although this is not always the case.

best wishes

 

[Sean Elifritz]

It has also occured to me that in the "solway"(uk) incident the "spaceman" was not visable to the photographer until afterwards , but in the "Woomera"(AUS) the "spacemen" were clearly seen on security cameras at the time this is a massive contradiction.

That is more of a consistency than an inconsistency. In both cases the entity was detected by equipment but not by human eyes. Templeton didn't see anything nor did personnel at the base when they went out to investigate. But both of them picked up something on their cameras.

 

[trainedobserver]

You know if it were a picture of some sort of Cephalopod behind her it would make it a whole lot easier to believe it was something truly alien.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

You know if it were a picture of some sort of Cephalopod behind her it would make it a whole lot easier to believe it was something truly alien.

Not even saying it's an alien. It could be the ghost of the Michellin Man for all I know. But this stuff about an invisible 8 foot tall beekeeper out in the middle of a field where there are no bees to tend to anyway makes no sense either.

 

[dyingsun]

Not even saying it's an alien. It could be the ghost of the Michellin Man for all I know. But this stuff about an invisible 8 foot tall beekeeper out in the middle of a field where there are no bees to tend to anyway makes no sense either.

I still think it is a 'lawn jockey', look at the angle the picture was taken.For all I know, it might be a beekeeper as well though.

 

[Han]

That is more of a consistency than an inconsistency. In both cases the entity was detected by equipment but not by human eyes. Templeton didn't see anything nor did personnel at the base when they went out to investigate. But both of them picked up something on their cameras.

vs "Technicians at the time did not know about Templeton's sighting until it appeared on the front page of an Australian Newspaper, and they said that the figure in Cumbria looked the same as the ones they had seen on the monitor at Woomera.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solway_Firth_Spaceman#cite_note-Secrets_of_the_Paranormal-1"((source))(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solway_Firth_Spaceman)
how did the look at the monitors did they use their "human" eyes?

also it is interesting the majority of reports about the "woomera" incident say the blue streak test at woomera was "using Cumbrian-built weaponry" but the official "blue streak missile" line is that "Although Blue Streak’s life as a military weapon had ended in 1960, it was immediately assigned to the European Launcher Development Organisation (ELDO) project. This utilised the Blue Streak rocket as the first-stage of a composite space vehicle designed to deploy satellites in orbit. This project was intended as a European to challenge the American and Russian monopoly on satellite launchers."((sorce))(http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/films/1951to1964/filmpage_rocket.htm)
there for it did not use "weaponry" Cumbrian-built or not.

in my opinion there is nothing to connect the figure in mr Templeton's photograph to space, and the fact that he(Templeton) drew that conclusion suggest to me he had knowledge of the "blue streak" project.

 

[TClaeys]

hmmm,.... beekeeper gear. Perhaps. Whatever it is, the figure seems to be wearing something that seems more snug than the usual loose-fitting beekeeper gear. It has always reminded me of fencing gear. It is snug enough that there even seems to be some definition in the arm area and the back. There even seems to be some marking or something that runs down the center area of the back. Maybe that is a clue.

I don't even have any speculation about it although I think this is an odd picture. I have to assume it is either a hoax or "something" real. The picture was taken in a field right?? How could the photographer have not noticed something as contrasting such as this figure?? I mean look at the backdrop, ... how do you not see something like this even if you are busy taking pictures??

 

[Han]

Not even saying it's an alien. It could be the ghost of the Michellin Man for all I know. But this stuff about an invisible 8 foot tall beekeeper out in the middle of a field where there are no bees to tend to anyway makes no sense either.

just to clarify do you mean no bees or no beehives?

if you mean no bees I could not possibly disagree more

if you mean no beehives,
although there is not one shown in the picture, I am willing to bet that there were some in the nearby area as as I have stated before "Burgh Marsh" is ideal bee habitat due to its large amount of wild flora.
"Burgh marsh A Site of Special Scientific Interest, the marshes are home to a rich variety of wildlife and vegetation, with native and migratory birds providing a constantly changing panorama of sights and sounds. Cattle are grazed on the marsh in summer and sheep from the high Lakeland fells in winter." ((source))(http://www.hidden-britain.co.uk/place.asp?id=10&os=all)

It is also usefull to know that farmers often keep bees in addition to grazing livestock.

And I must point out that "Burgh marsh" is not a field in the traditional sense it is actually open marsh land.

 

[Ron Collins]

Yeah, the bee suit looks similar but I think that begs the question of why this beekeeper doesn't show up in any of the other photographs? Also, why was he not seen by the photographer or anyone else? And exactly why is he standing at an angle despite the ground looking quite flat? It seems to me that a beekeeper walking around a large clearing in full garb would have garnered quite a bit of attention.

Ninja bee keepers? Hey, ninja's gotta eat!

I have to agree that this is the most likely explanation. Thanks to HAN for this!

 

[Sean Elifritz]

Lol, I give up. The way some of you go about "solving" something is comical. All you're doing is thinking of anything you can that might have a white suit of some sort and a hood. Never mind the fact that there is no evidence whatsoever that what you're guessing at was actually there but there is eyewitness testimony saying that it wasn't (Four witnesses saying there was nothing there that could account for what is in the photograph and 0 witnesses claiming to have seen Andre The Giant in a beekeeper outfit.). The picture is fairly famous and it seems logical to me that any beekeeper of abnormal height that might have been sneaking around there that day (And he must have been sneaking since four people failed to see him.) would have heard about the story and came out and said, "Hey, it was me." Outright hoaxing makes more sense to me than this Solid Snake or Sam Fisher version of beekeeper does. It is much more sensible to assume that the whole thing is a deliberate trick rather than some beekeeper that nobody noticed despite parading around in open marshland in such a ridiculous getup. There is absolutely no way somebody dressed in something like that could fail to get my attention in such a place yet you would have us believe that it is somehow feasible that not one but four people would fail to notice him. Well, fine then. I'm gonna' say it was Shaquille O'Neal dressed in a fencing uniform and motorcycle helmet. Never mind that he wasn't born yet and that he would be pretty hard not to notice and that I have no evidence placing him there. Petty details. That he vaguely fits the description is in and of itself positive proof that it was him. Evidence and basic logic works both ways. Sure, I understand that people want evidence for a paranormal explanation but a prosaic explanation should also have better evidence than, "I think it kinda' resembles that therefor that's what it is." Everything resembles something. Anything can be compared with something else by somebody. Just because you can think of something similar doesn't mean that's what you have.

 

[justcurious]

in my opinion there is nothing to connect the figure in mr Templeton's photograph to space, and the fact that he(Templeton) drew that conclusion suggest to me he had knowledge of the "blue streak" project.

Apparently there is a UFO connection.
Not long afterwards the editor of the Cumberland News newspaper contacted Jim and asked if he could borrow the negative to send a copy out to Australia. Apparently the photograph had appeared in the press there and staff working at the Woomera test range area in Southern Australia had seen it. Jim was told that the day after he took his photograph, a Blue Streak space rocket was due to be launched from Woomera in Australia. The countdown was postponed when two automatic survey camera had independently spotted two large figures in the firing area during the countdown phase. They were very similar in appearance to Jim's mysterious visitor. At the time of the launch, the photograph had not reached Australia and the staff had no knowledge of the bizarre image.
The Woomera missile test range was run by Group Captain Tom Dalton-Morgan from 1959-1963 and he came forward with his own story. Prior to the test firing of an earlier "Blue Streak" rocket, observers stationed 100 miles down range called to tell Tom that there was a "light" heading his way at incredible speed, towards restricted air space. Tom and several scientists watched as the light circled the facility, then shot away and vanished. He remarked that he "could not conceive of any plane or missile that was able to perform the manoeuvres seen by my team". He said UFOs were frequently seen in the area and that in 1964 they had aborted the launch of another test when a "white being" was seen on the automatic security cameras.

So a bee-keeper ... jumping (!) ...at an angle (!) in a picture taken close to a test range and the same figures, the same day, are seen on security cameras on the other side of the planet at the only other site where the same rocket is developed is a hell of a paranormal coincidence.

 

[Ron Collins]

Apparently there is a UFO connection.
Not long afterwards the editor of the Cumberland News newspaper contacted Jim and asked if he could borrow the negative to send a copy out to Australia. Apparently the photograph had appeared in the press there and staff working at the Woomera test range area in Southern Australia had seen it. Jim was told that the day after he took his photograph, a Blue Streak space rocket was due to be launched from Woomera in Australia. The countdown was postponed when two automatic survey camera had independently spotted two large figures in the firing area during the countdown phase. They were very similar in appearance to Jim's mysterious visitor. At the time of the launch, the photograph had not reached Australia and the staff had no knowledge of the bizarre image.
The Woomera missile test range was run by Group Captain Tom Dalton-Morgan from 1959-1963 and he came forward with his own story. Prior to the test firing of an earlier "Blue Streak" rocket, observers stationed 100 miles down range called to tell Tom that there was a "light" heading his way at incredible speed, towards restricted air space. Tom and several scientists watched as the light circled the facility, then shot away and vanished. He remarked that he "could not conceive of any plane or missile that was able to perform the manoeuvres seen by my team". He said UFOs were frequently seen in the area and that in 1964 they had aborted the launch of another test when a "white being" was seen on the automatic security cameras.

So a bee-keeper ... jumping (!) ...at an angle (!) in a picture taken close to a test range and the same figures, the same day, are seen on security cameras on the other side of the planet at the only other site where the same rocket is developed is a hell of a paranormal coincidence.

Any link or idea if the video footage is available? Honestly though, the figure seems silly. But, do you remember that Star Trek movie were they were observing the 'primitive' people and they had these guys walking around in clocked suits? I have a vague recollection of that. Can't remember exactly but i think it was one of the movies. I guess the supposition could (although extremely unlikely) be made that this is something similar.

 

[justcurious]

Any link or idea if the video footage is available? Honestly though, the figure seems silly. But, do you remember that Star Trek movie were they were observing the 'primitive' people and they had these guys walking around in clocked suits? I have a vague recollection of that. Can't remember exactly but i think it was one of the movies. I guess the supposition could (although extremely unlikely) be made that this is something similar.

Yes it is "Insurrection".

As for the footage : There is a letter in the Public Records Office in Kew, London uncovered by ufologist Jenny Randles which is dated 1964 December 29th referring to the Cumberland Spaceman by the Ministry of Defence (MOD). In it are references by the Department of Scientific and Technical Intelligence (DSTI) of an investigation into the matter. Another letter there dated 1964 June 15th is from a reporter enquiring about the aborted launch and the film in question which shows an extraordinary object hovering nearby that is 'impossible to miss'. A response to this letter from the MOD informs the reporter that he should contact them if he wishes to view the film.

Mysteriously, in the series of film canisters holding the Blue Streak missile launches, one is missing. The missing canister is the film of the launches for the week beginning Sunday, May 23, 1964.

 

[Ron Collins]

Yes it is "Insurrection".

As for the footage : There is a letter in the Public Records Office in Kew, London uncovered by ufologist Jenny Randles which is dated 1964 December 29th referring to the Cumberland Spaceman by the Ministry of Defence (MOD). In it are references by the Department of Scientific and Technical Intelligence (DSTI) of an investigation into the matter. Another letter there dated 1964 June 15th is from a reporter enquiring about the aborted launch and the film in question which shows an extraordinary object hovering nearby that is 'impossible to miss'. A response to this letter from the MOD informs the reporter that he should contact them if he wishes to view the film.

Mysteriously, in the series of film canisters holding the Blue Streak missile launches, one is missing. The missing canister is the film of the launches for the week beginning Sunday, May 23, 1964.

Now that is interesting. I had not heard this before. Thanks for the info.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

vs "Technicians at the time did not know about Templeton's sighting until it appeared on the front page of an Australian Newspaper, and they said that the figure in Cumbria looked the same as the ones they had seen on the monitor at Woomera."((source))(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solway_Firth_Spaceman)
how did the look at the monitors did they use their "human" eyes?

The parallels are exactly the same. In both instances the witnesses never saw the figure(s) with the naked eye. Rather they were detected by and then made visible by man-made equipment, a photograph with Templeton and monitors with the base personnel.

I fail to see how anyone can so casually overlook the amazing set of coincidences this case presents. If it were nothing more than a photograph that would be one thing, but in addition to that image is a host of fantastic coincidences that at the very least should be enough to leave one's mind open.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

I've never been impressed with the bee keeper suit pic. The lean and fact you can't see much of it is a red flag.

For whatever it's worth, which might be not much, Strieber has said this photo is close to an alien, or a certain type of alien he has seen. Unexplained Mysteries :: Paranormal Image Gallery - Extraterrestrial Entities/Alien 'Gray'

 

[The Pair of Cats]

Lol, I give up. The way some of you go about "solving" something is comical. All you're doing is thinking of anything you can that might have a white suit of some sort and a hood. Never mind the fact that there is no evidence whatsoever that what you're guessing at was actually there but there is eyewitness testimony saying that it wasn't (Four witnesses saying there was nothing there that could account for what is in the photograph and 0 witnesses claiming to have seen Andre The Giant in a beekeeper outfit.). The picture is fairly famous and it seems logical to me that any beekeeper of abnormal height that might have been sneaking around there that day (And he must have been sneaking since four people failed to see him.) would have heard about the story and came out and said, "Hey, it was me." Outright hoaxing makes more sense to me than this Solid Snake or Sam Fisher version of beekeeper does. It is much more sensible to assume that the whole thing is a deliberate trick rather than some beekeeper that nobody noticed despite parading around in open marshland in such a ridiculous getup. There is absolutely no way somebody dressed in something like that could fail to get my attention in such a place yet you would have us believe that it is somehow feasible that not one but four people would fail to notice him. Well, fine then. I'm gonna' say it was Shaquille O'Neal dressed in a fencing uniform and motorcycle helmet. Never mind that he wasn't born yet and that he would be pretty hard not to notice and that I have no evidence placing him there. Petty details. That he vaguely fits the description is in and of itself positive proof that it was him. Evidence and basic logic works both ways. Sure, I understand that people want evidence for a paranormal explanation but a prosaic explanation should also have better evidence than, "I think it kinda' resembles that therefor that's what it is." Everything resembles something. Anything can be compared with something else by somebody. Just because you can think of something similar doesn't mean that's what you have.

Yeah spot on Wickerman. The beekeeper suit theory is probably more implausible than any i've heard so far. The fact that 4 people would have missed seeing an extremely tall figure wearing some sort of suit in an open setting beggars belief. And do basketballer sized apiarists normally go gallivanting around the country side in their battle gear taking on rogue queens? Despite the fact that none present at the site mentioned anything about the presence of any bees let alone the amounts needed to get your friendly and local beekeeper out and about.

It is also worth noting that Mr Templeton described a visit from the "Bowler Hat Men" shortly after the event. Were these the English version of the Men in Black or were they working in league with the "League of Extraordinary Bee Keepers".

 

[trainedobserver]

I admit it is an odd photograph. Beyond that I can't say anymore than what I can see. It looks like a human being. We don't have a negative. The how/where/who of the processing is unknown. It's strange but ... I just don't think it is evidence of an otherwise invisible person showing up in a photograph.

 

[justcurious]

Anyway, like in all anomalous phenomena, a picture is nothing without the story that goes with it. And this one certainly has a good story.

Let's see a much more probable alien : This is a possible Martian on earth. And a good candidate for panspermia. My bet is that this thing is all over the solar system by now, I'm serious.

Deinococcus radiodurans is an extremophilic bacterium, one of the most radioresistant organisms known. It can survive cold, dehydration, vacuum, and acid, and is therefore known as a polyextremophile and has been listed as the world's toughest bacterium in The Guinness Book Of World Records.
Deinococcus radiodurans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Most extremophiles have optimized themselves for one or two extreme conditions corresponding to precise ecological niches on the Earth like the hot springs of Yosemite. But Deinococcus radiodurans is more than that: it has been dubbed a polyextremophile because it can endure many extremes, including the most dangerous space hazard.

​

Anatoli Pavlov (Ioffe Physico-Technical Institute in St Petersburg) announced in 2002 that the Deinococcus radiodurans microbe, could have evolved its abilities on the harsher environment of Mars. It would take far longer than life has existed on Earth for the microbe to evolve those abilities in Earth's clement conditions. On Mars, however, the researchers calculate that dormant microbes could receive the necessary dose in just a few hundred thousand years, because radiation levels there are much higher.

In its stationary phase each bacterial cell contains four copies of this genome; when rapidly multiplying, each bacterium contains 8-10 copies of the genome, so this thing can repair it's DNA even when it's dead !

I think this is the result natural selection in a space environment and not just on mars. (I'm a HUGE fan of panspermia, time will tell.)

And it can't be mistaken for a bee-keeper...

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Yeah spot on Wickerman. The beekeeper suit theory is probably more implausible than any i've heard so far. The fact that 4 people would have missed seeing an extremely tall figure wearing some sort of suit in an open setting beggars belief. And do basketballer sized apiarists normally go gallivanting around the country side in their battle gear taking on rogue queens? Despite the fact that none present at the site mentioned anything about the presence of any bees let alone the amounts needed to get your friendly and local beekeeper out and about.

It is also worth noting that Mr Templeton described a visit from the "Bowler Hat Men" shortly after the event. Were these the English version of the Men in Black or were they working in league with the "League of Extraordinary Bee Keepers".

So a bee keeper is more implausible than a dude from another planet? The truth is, we don't know what it is. It can also be the nature of film. I remember getting all kinds of strange stuff in my pictures when I used to use film cameras.

Great "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" reference though - that brought a smile to my face.