In 1950 Did The USAF Try To Debunk Picture Of Cylindrical UFO Over Manhattan?

Here's another UFO case I've never heard about, which is featured in a YouTube video that was just released today.

There was a thread posted on ATS back in 2007 that didn't mention the USAF's attempt to debunk the photo, or about Project Grudge.

Project Grudge was a short-lived project by the U.S. Air Force (USAF) to investigate unidentified flying objects (UFOs). Grudge succeeded Project Sign in February, 1949, and was then followed by Project Blue Book. The project formally ended in December 1949, but continued in a minimal capacity until late 1951.

In 1950, a cylindrical UFO was seen on a night photo that was used for a postcard titled "Night Lights from Queensboro Bridge." The photographer worked at a studio owned by one of New York City's most famous photographers, Irving Underhill. The name of the photographer is redacted and may have been Underhill himself. His name appears in one of the documents shown below.

According to these documents, the photographer insisted that the cylindrical UFO wasn't there before or after the picture was taken and it wasn't the result of a film defect.

Irving Underhill (1872–1960) was one of the most notable commercial photographers in New York City during the first half of the 20th century. He produced work that was featured in postcards and numerous publications while he was still alive, and that continues to be exhibited and receive recognition long after his death. Beyond work, Underhill was a long-time member of the Rotary Club of New York, and President of the Underhill Society of America.

Pictures and documents pertaining to this case:





tinyurl.com...

According to the Air Force (Project Grudge), the UFO was actually a time exposure of the moon. However, the video below indicates that the date, which the photograph was taken, may have been altered.

Why is this relevant? Because the photographer initially stated that the photo was taken on May 20, 1950. However, after being visited by a "special agent" he changed the date to March 20, 1950. A waxing crescent moon WAS present in the night sky on March 20...NOT on May 20.

In addition, on the original photo it looks like someone altered the date of the month, changing the month abbreviation from May to March.

There are other discrepancies that the following video clip discusses. Here are just a few:
...The moon's shadowing in the photo is different than what the Air Force claimed.
...The concave image of the moon, shown in the photo, was facing down towards the horizon, when in fact the moon's waxing crescent on March 20 was facing the opposite direction.


Video on the 1950 cylindrical UFO picture over Manhattan. Time-lapse image of the moon? Maybe not...

Also worth noting, is the fact that there have been many recent cylindrical UFO sightings in New York State. Back in the 50's and thru the 90's, these type of sightings were a rarity. However, back in 2009, it was if some intergalactic starship dealer threw a gigantic sale because suddenly huge cylinder UFOs began appearing in New York Skies at a rate of about a dozen a year, as evidenced by the following chart.

well, I'm a pilot and saw the 380 foot cigar Dallas....it was...1999 or so

mine was more airworthy looking.....I like this photo tho.....mine looked man made actually 10 facets running longitudinal....it really bothered me when I couldn't spot the flight deck windows.....not man made at that point, now that I think about it.

Seems there was another thing like this in Chicago or Denver or somewhere that lasted an hour or so and was seen by everyone at the airports, Passengers, crew and workers ?

I tracked it down.. www.npr.org...

**************************************************************************************************************************

Time exposure of the moon is plausable .... but..?

Why is this relevant? Because the photographer initially stated that the photo was taken on May 20, 1950. However, after being visited by a "special agent" he changed the date to March 20, 1950. A waxing crescent moon WAS present in the night sky on March 20...NOT on May 20.
"

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Easily the best UFO channel out there.

The night sky on March 20, 1950 looking West in New York City it was dark enough at 17:30


The sky on May 20, 1950 same location and was too light out.

originally posted by: abeverage
The night sky on March 20, 1950 looking West in New York City it was dark enough at 17:30

The sky on May 20, 1950 same location and was too light out.

Nice find. The pics look really dark, I wonder if it would be possible with that light. Photo expert needed I guess.

Also, if it was a time exposure, wouldn't the stars streak in the same direction? Does this suggest the possibility of some kind of hoax? According to the video, it wouldn't be possible to get the moon to look like that, so if it is the moon, the image would have to be manipulated somehow.

I would really like to see a pic of a moon time exposure using similar camera at various settings, that would be very informative.

Cool video, and either way the investigation is proven to be doubtful, even if it was just the moon.

originally posted by: AgentAnderson
Also, if it was a time exposure, wouldn't the stars streak in the same direction? Does this suggest the possibility of some kind of hoax? According to the video, it wouldn't be possible to get the moon to look like that, so if it is the moon, the image would have to be manipulated somehow.

I would really like to see a pic of a moon time exposure using similar camera at various settings, that would be very informative.

Cool video, and either way the investigation is proven to be doubtful, even if it was just the moon.

I am an amateur photographer and often take long exposures, night photos and astronomical photos. It is hard to believe that is the moon (although that is similar to what it would look like, both dates do not lead to a consistent image with the shadow to the lower right).


Yes you are correct that a typical long exposure would result in star streaks as well, given the moon was not very bright during both dates.


Either way something is amiss with the image either dates, or it was hoaxed as to why is it so lit up, yet was claimed to not be seen. To me it was used to promote UFO lore both for black projects and popularity...

I'm unsure of the pic in the OP, the image we have is not that convincing in its quality, although an interesting read, it reminded me of the case of the sky watcher from North Carolina, who purportedly captured a large cylindrical object whilst focusing his 8 inch Astrograph/Newtonian Telescope on M42 [Orion Nebula].

There are obvious similarities...


The article relates that the object was sighted near the Orion Nebula, although there is no way that claim can be substantiated and if true, the object would most likely be many times the size of the Earth. There is also a Gif image of several other objects he reported seeing. I think these could be satellites in earth orbit and they are not as distinct as the cylindrical object.

The article can be found here...
bendedreality.com...

a reply to: abeverage

Thanks for pics! And the information. Perhaps it could be due to different cameras, film type, etc, but the pics you posted look nothing like the images in the op.

originally posted by: AgentAnderson
Nice find. The pics look really dark, I wonder if it would be possible with that light. Photo expert needed I guess.

I suppose i might qualify, I used to sell cameras in a store, and advise photographers on the advantages and disadvantages of various cameras they were considering buying, so obviously I had to know something about it to do that. I was an active photographer myself and had my own darkroom for processing my own film.

Also, if it was a time exposure, wouldn't the stars streak in the same direction? Does this suggest the possibility of some kind of hoax?

Yes the stars would streak in a time exposure, if they were visible in the exposure, but, consider the moon is a lot brighter than the stars so if the stars aren't bright enough, and if the film isn't sensitive enough, it's not guaranteed the star streaks will show up.

According to the video, it wouldn't be possible to get the moon to look like that, so if it is the moon, the image would have to be manipulated somehow.

It's possible both dates are wrong, but it certainly looks like the moon. It's definitely a time exposure. You mentioned professional photographers and the video mentions a streak of light that proves it's a time exposure. The video has a point that the streak is squiggly and not representative of a car driving down a straight street, but whatever caused that squiggly streak, it was a time exposure. Sometimes you take time exposures and don't know what the light source was but you see squiggly lines from moving lights.

What I find incomprehensible is the photography studio or photographer saying they couldn't recall if it was a time exposure or "instantaneous" shutter. First, there's no such thing as "instantaneous" shutter, but when it was dark back then it had to be a time exposure, so when they could say they couldn't remember if it was a time exposure, that seems incomprehensibly incompetent; that was the only option, and the squiggly line proves it but it's really just shocking they wouldn't automatically know that it had to be a time exposure based on the lighting.

Also, the different bands of light and dark do suggest varying degrees of cloud cover during the time exposure so that would be consistent with the moon. There's no particular reason a UFO would have that feature.

That could also explain why the moon didn't show up in the immediately previous image if it was hidden by cloud cover.

Sometimes people get the dates wrong. Here's a UFO photo where the wrong date was recorded on it, from a screenshot of a UFO documentary, youtube title as shown in the screenshot:



Now here is the only photo I could find online in 10 minutes of searching, where someone has changed the date but claims it's an original scan (but the changed date is probably the correct one).

dbarkertv.com...


So if someone put a wrong date on the photo of the moon in 1950, it wouldn't be the only time someone put a wrong date on a photo. I think that's the simplest and most likely explanation, a photo of the moon with a wrong date on it. I don't get why people create elaborate theories which seem to be based on the idea that people are infallible, when people are quite fallible and make mistakes, all the time. That example photo was from a police officer, who is supposed to get the date right, but, he's only human.

originally posted by: fromtheskydown
I'm unsure of the pic in the OP, the image we have is not that convincing in its quality, although an interesting read, it reminded me of the case of the sky watcher from North Carolina, who purportedly captured a large cylindrical object whilst focusing his 8 inch Astrograph/Newtonian Telescope on M42 [Orion Nebula].

There are obvious similarities...

It's a shame they forgot to remove the label from that particular cigar-shaped object.

Or perhaps they were trying to be far too literal...

Like so many UFO investigations the conclusions are often intentionally misguiding although "not even wrong".
Tobacco tends to collapse the wave function early, so you tend to get a quilt work of analytical revisions from smokers.