UFO photos: Adamski footage
Location: Silver Springs, Maryland, USA
Date: February 26, 1965
George Adamski was a guest of Madeleine Rodeffer and her husband. On a Friday evening, they were taking a walk when Madeleine saw something behind the trees. A car sped up and three men said: “Take your cameras — they are here!”, and was soon gone. Adamski got Rodeffer’s 8mm camera and made a color movie of a scout ship. The ship’s image gets distorted in the footage, due to the effects of its eletromagnetic propulsion.
Comment: The movie is often attributed to Madeleine Rodeffer, but even sources related to Adamski admit that the well known contactee is the culprit. Mrs Rodeffer herself admitted that. This detail is important because, as we can see, the footage shows the classic scout ship photographed (and drawn) over ten years before. That’s not a surprise since the cameraman was the same.
But the ship is slightly different, and watching the movie, we can realize that its shape does indeed change, contrary to the first impression that it may have been just a flat paper cut-out hanging in front of the camera. So, how did Adamski create this footage?
Japanese researcher Junichi Takanashi successfully reproduced the Adamski-Rodeffer footage. At left, frames from the original movie, and at right, the images produced by Takanashi.
The model used by Adamski was three-dimencional, and didn’t hang like something suspended by a wire. And even though his scout ship had three outer spheres around a central one, in his footage we can only see two outer spheres around the central one.
All can be explained if we assume Adamski used half of a three-dimensional model glued to a sheet of glass. That explains the curious movements of the object as well as the “distortion” in its shape.
It was “half of a flying saucer”. In a way, and ingenious idea.
George Adamski passed away shortly after this last feat. His legacy was continued by the George Adamski Foundation (GAF).
See: Intiki UFO Shyashin (Japanese)
Subscribe to the RSS feed
if he was a hoax whats ur proof the ufos are completely different today from the ones from the “hoax” goerge adamski and if he lied where did he get his stories from all stories are some how based by some kind of a truth.
If something can be faked or not is beside the point. The only thing that matters is the original case. Everything else is just a pathetic waste of time.
[...] di bufale (gli articoli sono in inglese) Su Adamski: http://www.marc-hallet.be/Adamski.htm http://forgetomori.com/2007/ufos/ufo-photos/ufo-photos-adamski-footage/ http://ufologie.net/htm/germansaucersts.htm [...]
[...] prove che lo sputtanano, come potete vedre ad esempio qui: http://www.marc-hallet.be/Adamski.htm http://forgetomori.com/2007/ufos/ufo-photos/ufo-photos-adamski-footage/ http://ufologie.net/htm/germansaucersts.htm [...]
Yes, there are unexplained UFOs, but a couple commenters here need some help:
lele jackson says:
“if he was a hoax whats ur proof”
No, if what he claimed was real, where’s HIS proof? Better proof? What he produced over the years is easily explained as models, etc.
“the ufos are completely different today from the ones from the “hoax” goerge adamski”
What does that have to do with anything? Apparently you think that because later sightings, by different people, were of different UFOs, this must mean Adamski was being honest. There’s no logic here.
“and if he lied where did he get his stories from all stories are some how based by some kind of a truth.”
Where do you think stories come from? Inside a person’s head. Do you think it’s impossible for a person to tell a story without its being real? You are naive. There’s a big pink invisible elephant sitting next to you right now. You can’t see it because it’s invisible. There’s a story, so it must be real.
Mike Peters says:
“If something can be faked or not is beside the point. The only thing that matters is the original case. Everything else is just a pathetic waste of time.”
No, whether something can be faked or not is NOT beside the point. If it’s fake, it’s fake. Who says the original case wasn’t faked?
ok. I agree.
It’s very sad to see people, in 2008!!!, still believe in Adamski crappy hoaxes. Very sad!!!