The Ilkley Moor Alien Photo – Was it a Fake?

a reply to: Ophiuchus1
Did you watch the entire video?
I did wonder the same as you, however - looking at the entire picture, with the background hills and the side slopes, it does appear to be similar, if not the actual spot.
Also looking behind the 'alien', the growth seems similar also.
I did notice towards the end of the video, when he filmed the site from more of a distance, it did seem to be the exact location, looks exactly like the original photo.
That's what did it for me, the distancing.

originally posted by: RonnieJersey
a reply to: Ophiuchus1
Did you watch the entire video?
I did wonder the same as you, however - looking at the entire picture, with the background hills and the side slopes, it does appear to be similar, if not the actual spot.
Also looking behind the 'alien', the growth seems similar also.
I did notice towards the end of the video, when he filmed the site from more of a distance, it did seem to be the exact location, looks exactly like the original photo.
That's what did it for me, the distancing.

Upon further review…..after time 23:00





It is now compelling, imo, that the above comparison does lend to similarities such as the incline/decline angle of the top of the hill that meets the sky and the paralleling of rock strata where the creature and human are standing and the approximate curvature of the path. Once again …..growth of the topography over time would lend to closeness but not always exactness.

The creature is said to be approximately 4.5 ft.

I think it could well be the grounds in which the creature was photographed.

👽

Apologies if I have missed it, but didn't see any mention of the compass so far on this thread.

The compass:
On February 10, 1988, Spencer contacted Peter Hough to tell him about his compass. It was pointing South instead of North, as if its polarity had somehow been reversed. Hough took the compass at the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology where he spoke to a Dr Spooner, head of the university's department of electrical engineering.

There was no doubt that it would have had to be subjected to a strong magnetic field to alter its direction from north to south. Hough discovered that a magnetic resonance scanner would duplicate the effect. There was also the fact that there was no way to prove that the reversed polarity of the compass was accomplished at the alleged scene of the event. To perpetuate a hoax, Spencer may have affected the magnetic change before going into the moor. In his report, he wrote:

"Well the man who we took it to is Dr Spooner at Manchester university umist dept of electrical engineering. So how did the compass become reversed? Dr Spooner did not have a ready answer, he began very simply by exposing the compass to strong magnets but although they deflected the needle the effect ceased as soon as the magnets were moved away. A steady magnetic field had no permanent effect. Dr Spooner and his assistant had experimented with a rapidly applied, or "pulsed", magnetic field. Eventually it was found that this indeed would reverse the needle and back again under laboratory conditions."


"This was fine but could the reversal brought about with out recourse to such expensive and complex equipment? Dr Spooner showed it could albeit with a certain risk to life and property. A piece of wire was coiled round one hand, the compass was placed within it the ends were then connected to the main electricity supply and a switch was thrown. There was a bang, but yes, the polarity was changed North to South. This of course could be done in the house although at the very least fuses would be blown and there was also the more serious prospect of creating an electrical fire. Also would Jon have known how to carry out this dangerous process when Dr Spooner, an expert in his field - did not? In a report done by Dr Spooner, which in part said "It appears to be a relatively simple matter to bring about the reversal without the need for any special equipment and may be accomplished in the average house or garage. The intensity required is not great by some standards; in fact we could not produce a field sufficiently low as not to reverse the polarity of the needle. The minimum field we applied had a flux density of about 0.1 Tesla; this is still 2000 times greater than the earth's field (therefore) the required intensity is very large by other standards to leave detectable magnetisation in samples of rock around the area where the craft had been."

ufologie.patrickgross.org...

a reply to: Ophiuchus1
You're right - and I believe it was probably just an earthly animal, sheep or dog or something similar.
What do you think it might have been?

originally posted by: RonnieJersey
a reply to: Ophiuchus1
You're right - and I believe it was probably just an earthly animal, sheep or dog or something similar.
What do you think it might have been?

An optical illusion (delusion) someone posted elsewhere…

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1
Yes, an optical illusion!