The Ilkley Moor Alien Photo – Was it a Fake?

a reply to: mirageman

Lol I didn't even notice! Same year both Policeman why the two names!!
Picture of alan

Alan Godfrey is a retired policeman who witnessed the The Ilkley moor encounter, which was an alleged alien incident in 1987, taking a famous picture of this being which was never proved as a fake, even nowadays he does not doubt his claim of what he saw.[1]

alienresearch.wikia.com...

Spencer:
Lol he was wanting to photograph LIGHTNING EFFECTS..NOT UFO or FAIRY LIGHTS!

Around 9.30am on the morning of Tuesday, 1st December 1987 an off duty policeman by the name of Philip Spencer set off across Ilkley Moor in Yorkshire. The morning was misty but Spencer had a compass with him. His stated purpose was to photograph lighting effects of the moor in the fog

www.britainexplorer.com...

a reply to: mirageman
OK think I have it!!

Someone crossed the names, this is 1980

mysteryscience.org...

Police Constable Alan Godfrey was on patrol on the night of 28 November 1980. Just before dawn he drove along Burnley Road on the edge of Todmorden looking for some cows that had been reported missing. They were only found after sun-up, mysteriously relocated in a rain-soaked field without hoofmarks to indicate their passage.

Giving up his nocturnal hunt, Godfrey was about to go back to base to sign off duty when he saw a large mass a few hundred yards ahead. At first, he thought it was a bus coming towards him that took workers to their jobs in town and that he knew passed about 5:00 a.m.

But as he approached, he realized that it was something very strange. It was a fuzzy oval that rotated at such speed and hovered so low over the otherwise deserted highway that it was causing the bushes by the side to shake.

a reply to: Char-Lee

Lol I didn't even notice! Same year both Policeman why the two names!! Picture of alan

Well errr no.

That's the problem. Alan Godfrey's experience happened in Yorkshire in 1980 in Todmorden. This incident occurred in 1987 on Ilkley Moor. It may also be in Yorkshire but that's the only link between the two cases.

a reply to: Char-Lee

You got it.

Still don't know what that photo really shows though.

It cant be debunked for the same reason its not proof, the picture is too poor.

The only way this story can be debunked is if the guy who took the picture were to confess, as far as I know he hasn't done that.
All each of us can do is say the we personally do; or do not believe it.

I do not think it was such a strange thing for the guy to have been on the moor's with his camera because for many years there had been reports of strange lights, this was well known at the time.

IMO, its a hoax, but thats just my opinion, and thats all any of us can do is to have an opinion.

Thanks for posting this op, I've seen pics of it before but yours seems to be a little clearer than what I've seen before.

a reply to: mirageman
You should do a thread on this one..murder involved makes it pretty special and i don't remember the case.

Note: In 2006, Howard voiced his interest in a collective book project on the family’s experiences with vessels and other life forms, to include a compilation of sensitive material gathered over the years. Howard suffered an untimely death by a virus of “unknown origin” on October 2nd- this was 14 years to the day after the Reed’s case was mentioned at the United Nations Symposium, October 2nd, 1992.

The CDC, on sweeping Howard’s office, reported finding a vial containing the deadly virus in his air conditioning unit. The building was closed and remains closed to this day. Oct. 6th was then proclaimed a day of remembrance in Howard’s honour, by the City of Bridgeport, CT as he was strongly supported by Senator Christopher Dodd. A Ph.D. who released his test results regarding the Reed case after evaluating family members, on September 15, 2010, was also found dead on November 12th, 2010, just eight weeks later.

mysteryscience.org...

What was the reason for not taking a photo of the domed craft that he saw?

If he was able to take a photo of the being in question, why not the craft?

The one thing I would certainly try and do is to take a photo of the craft, especially if I had a camera in my hand already..

That seems a bit odd to me.....

One wonders why the " alien " is exactly the same color and density as the surrounding shrubbery.

If it looks like the shrub, then it most likely is a shrub.

Spiro

I see an arm carrying something, whether or not it's a briefcase , I'm not sure.

Could be anybody sneaking around in the dark.

The spaceship story emerged once he contacted ufologists. They will do that. This false belief is enforced by hypnosis. Provided by the ufologists. If anybody doubts this, write to one with a fake story. See what happens.

originally posted by: davethebear
What was the reason for not taking a photo of the domed craft that he saw?

If he was able to take a photo of the being in question, why not the craft?

The one thing I would certainly try and do is to take a photo of the craft, especially if I had a camera in my hand already..

That seems a bit odd to me.....

Thsts because there was no craft. He didn't see one at the time. He "recalled " it later.

originally posted by: Spiro

One wonders why the " alien " is exactly the same color and density as the surrounding shrubbery.

If it looks like the shrub, then it most likely is a shrub.

Spiro

Thing is, the photo of the researcher standing in the same spot shows no such shrub there.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

So if that were the case then either the shrub died or it was deliberately removed to hide the evidence. Do we know how long after the event that photo was taken?

Personally I've always thought this thing looks like a prop. The way it is standing looks very unnatural, almost like it had to be jammed into the hillside at an angle to stop it falling over.

originally posted by: VoidHawk
It cant be debunked for the same reason its not proof, the picture is too poor.

The only way this story can be debunked is if the guy who took the picture were to confess, as far as I know he hasn't done that.
All each of us can do is say the we personally do; or do not believe it.

I do not think it was such a strange thing for the guy to have been on the moor's with his camera because for many years there had been reports of strange lights, this was well known at the time.

IMO, its a hoax, but thats just my opinion, and thats all any of us can do is to have an opinion.

Thanks for posting this op, I've seen pics of it before but yours seems to be a little clearer than what I've seen before.

The photo is interesting because of the poor quality - it's more suggestive than anything else, just clear enough to discern a pattern but not enough to be conclusive, much like the Face On Mars photo was.

I'm not sure of a deliberate hoax, but more likely a misidentification that took on a life of it's own. Frankly, I found Bob Taylor's incident the year before to be more compelling.

a reply to: Rob48

The quality of the photo is so poor that even blowing it up to roughly twice the original size shows a lot of 'noise'. From what I can gather the witness used a long exposure time because of the poor light on the moors that day.

Here are the two pictures discussed side by side at approx x2 zoom



I think taking it any further simply distorts the image. It doesn't look to be shrubbery, it could be a prop. Or it could be a someone walking their dog for all I know. But looking at the above can I see a bloke with a bike and a briefcase?

No I am none the wiser.

originally posted by: Emache

originally posted by: VoidHawk
It cant be debunked for the same reason its not proof, the picture is too poor.

The only way this story can be debunked is if the guy who took the picture were to confess, as far as I know he hasn't done that.
All each of us can do is say the we personally do; or do not believe it.

I do not think it was such a strange thing for the guy to have been on the moor's with his camera because for many years there had been reports of strange lights, this was well known at the time.

IMO, its a hoax, but thats just my opinion, and thats all any of us can do is to have an opinion.

Thanks for posting this op, I've seen pics of it before but yours seems to be a little clearer than what I've seen before.

The photo is interesting because of the poor quality - it's more suggestive than anything else, just clear enough to discern a pattern but not enough to be conclusive, much like the Face On Mars photo was.

I'm not sure of a deliberate hoax, but more likely a misidentification that took on a life of it's own. Frankly, I found Bob Taylor's incident the year before to be more compelling.

I tend to agree that it probably started off as a "...what the hell is that in your picture?" story. Then it took a life of it's own. This incident was in 1987 so Bob Taylor's incident happened 8 years before in 1979 and is perhaps the strangest case I've heard of in Britain.

Interesting story, i've never heard of this one before.
Looking at the picture and reading the story, my first instinct was to think, opportunity. He went out LOOKING for something like a UFO or alien. He took a picture of someone walking through the moors, just like he was, probably going home after a night shift or something and took a picture, maybe to see how it would develop.
On getting it developed, he noticed it looked strange and made up a story.

It doesn't look like an insurance salesman on a bike with a brief case, it could be a part of the landscape, or it could be a model he made because he was frustrated at the lack of anything concrete after searching for a long time.

I wish it was an alien walking through Yorkshire to his ship I really do. I never dismiss anything like this outright because you never know. It could be a genuine picture of an alien.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention, as I said i've never heard of this story before.

a reply to: rhynouk

It's one of those cases that comes up when "10 Best Alien Photos" or similar are discussed but otherwise quite a low key British UFO story.

I think we can go back to what Kandinsky said earlier in the thread. In 2006, Jenny Randles, worte a short piece in Fortean Times. You can view it here for yourself.

She used some carefully chosen words to close on :

While the witness has stood by his story for years, there are nagging doubts that have recently grown.

Are those nagging doubts the same as the ones we have expressed in the thread or perhaps something the witness said?

I'll see if I can find any more information on that comment but hope someone else might beat me to it.

a reply to: mirageman

Spencer gave an exclusive interview to Jun Ichi Yaoi from
Nippon-TV and the photo was analyzed in Japan by experts.

Philip Spencer also made a drawing of the small being and
the japanese tv crew made a great recreation of the incident
in the exact location where Spencer had the encounter.



The british UFO Magazine also published a story about the
Ilkley Moore Alien photo and in both cases the story resulted
inconclusive.

If you mean a fabricated pic. hardly, I think the creature fits very well with the surrounding and back then there weren't any means to make a good fake CGI. 80s had PCs.. I think.

Misidentification is the only probable case of fake - a man in a funny costume, there is nothing someone else would be doing in such a wild and a place too remote from civilization.

And as mentioned, could be a shrub, natural items looking like creatures is a very common case. And there needs to be proof that he fabricated the story using such a misidentified object, as well as the proof of fabrication of his hypnosis.

That is, without having the proof of fabrication it is not proven to be absolutely real but unless proven to be fake, should not be dismissed as such. Proving some part of it fake (like the hypnosis testimony) may however help decide that this is indeed some object/s that look like a creature and he took advantage of it to make a whole story.

This reminds me of some similar case where some reflection of the inside of a room that looks like a creature at the door could be used for making a whole bogus story out of it, showing yourself on TV and a lot of $$, for example:

1.bp.blogspot.com...
files.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: Rob48

The quality of the photo is so poor that even blowing it up to roughly twice the original size shows a lot of 'noise'. From what I can gather the witness used a long exposure time because of the poor light on the moors that day.

Here are the two pictures discussed side by side at approx x2 zoom

I think taking it any further simply distorts the image. It doesn't look to be shrubbery, it could be a prop. Or it could be a someone walking their dog for all I know. But looking at the above can I see a bloke with a bike and a briefcase?

No I am none the wiser.

The researchers picture would have to be taken not to long after to be useful because if it was a dead or dying shrub it could be flattened by then.
The researchers photo is as bad as the guy whose camera was set wrong because he was looking to shoot bright light in the low lighted area.
Looking at pictures of the moors there are plenty with bike riders and dog walkers in that kind of blurred shot it could be anything.

Interesting, I hadn't heard of this before, although I am relatively local, but just a little bit too young.

As soon as I saw it, it reminded me of E.T. So I checked if E.T. would have been out by then, and it was(1982), so I reckon it looks like a costume, or else just the zeitgeist of the time made people misinterpret it as an alien.

Also I personally don't put much stock in repressed memories being accessed through hypnosis, so that discredits his story more IMO