trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
Does anyone know if a historical marker was placed at the Socorro UFO incident site and where that site actually was located? Name of roads, etc.?
-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
Socorro UFO Incident Questions
- Thread starter trainedobserver
- Start date
Free episodes:
P
pixelsmith
Guest
i thought that was a hoax?
No, but there is a little 'cairn' of boulders showing the exact supposed location where the craft landed. On 'UFO Hunters' they met with Lonny himself who personally pointed to the very spot.
This is a top case in my book but as always, that is going on the work of others. Certainly never heard even a remotely decent debunk.
This is a top case in my book but as always, that is going on the work of others. Certainly never heard even a remotely decent debunk.
P
pixelsmith
Guest
here is some info that seems to debunk it a little.
The UFO Iconoclast(s): THE SOCORRO UFO HOAX EXPOSED! (Famous 1964 sighting was a college prank) by Anthony Bragalia
Sentry
Paranormal Adept
I'm mostly a skeptic, but I disagree with Bragalia's story. All he's produced so far is conversation and speculation. That is poor evidence, either for or against UFO reality.
Whenever you have to invent a conspiracy to account for all the details of a mystery, it is likely that you are far adrift from resolving the puzzle.
Whenever you have to invent a conspiracy to account for all the details of a mystery, it is likely that you are far adrift from resolving the puzzle.
Bob Watson
Paranormal Adept
if this case is a hoax then I can't think of a more creditable case... Can you?
Kieran
Paranormal Adept
Little cairn of boulders that a recent thing or something that has been there forever?
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
Doesn't matter. What was the "reported" location of the "alleged" sighting, that is all I am after. Sometimes these things are best considered from a "historical" perspective of their part of the UFO mythos.
You people need to do your research. Start by reading what I consider to be the finest, most thorough book written about a single UFO (AAP) case, Soccoro Saucer in a Pentagon Pantry by Ray Stanford (1976). Here is Mac Tonnes review:
Unique and utterly compelling, September 13, 2003
Ray Stanford's 1976 "Socorro 'Saucer' in a Pentagon Pantry" is the definitive account of one of the most fascinating close encounters on record: the 1964 landing of an egg-shaped UFO in Socorro, New Mexico. As one of the case's few on-site researchers, Stanford is uniquely qualified and pursues the truth behind the landing with dogged persistance, interviewing the key players -- foremost among them policeman Lonnie Zamora -- and formulating sensible questions.
"Socorro 'Saucer'" is a superior piece of ufological sleuthing; perhaps its most valuable contribution to the field is Stanford's meticulous, scientifically informed analysis of the landing site. The implications of the Socorro landing are multiplex and Stanford does an admirable job of zeroing in on the salient issues. After reading "Socorro 'Saucer'," there is virtually no doubt in my mind that the Socorro incident was a physically real event involving an apparent craft of extraordinary manufacture. This is a fascinating, grounded volume well worth seeking out."
Then, gentle posters, after you do your own research of the case (listen to Ray's 2010 and 2011 Paracast shows--one of them talks about Socorro) and don't forget to review Dave Rudiak's recent slam dunk refutation of the so-called hoaxed "balloon" theory, we can talk about the physical evidence that Ray has managed to save for 40 years (the infamous burnt paper that Bragalia refers to).
*pppssstt* let you in on a little secret) Ray also has a stereo photograph he took of Hynek while they were investigating at the Socorro site and in the distant background is an unidentified flying object! No kidding...
Go ahead continue to try and debunk one of the most important UFO landing trace cases in history Tony. Ray has saved the physical evidence that DOES NOT indicate burns from a mundane heat source but rather from something far more exotic. *sigh* I only wish that we could get Ray to play nice with the kidz...
By
This review is from: Socorro "Saucer" in a Pentagon Pantry (Hardcover)Ray Stanford's 1976 "Socorro 'Saucer' in a Pentagon Pantry" is the definitive account of one of the most fascinating close encounters on record: the 1964 landing of an egg-shaped UFO in Socorro, New Mexico. As one of the case's few on-site researchers, Stanford is uniquely qualified and pursues the truth behind the landing with dogged persistance, interviewing the key players -- foremost among them policeman Lonnie Zamora -- and formulating sensible questions.
"Socorro 'Saucer'" is a superior piece of ufological sleuthing; perhaps its most valuable contribution to the field is Stanford's meticulous, scientifically informed analysis of the landing site. The implications of the Socorro landing are multiplex and Stanford does an admirable job of zeroing in on the salient issues. After reading "Socorro 'Saucer'," there is virtually no doubt in my mind that the Socorro incident was a physically real event involving an apparent craft of extraordinary manufacture. This is a fascinating, grounded volume well worth seeking out."
Then, gentle posters, after you do your own research of the case (listen to Ray's 2010 and 2011 Paracast shows--one of them talks about Socorro) and don't forget to review Dave Rudiak's recent slam dunk refutation of the so-called hoaxed "balloon" theory, we can talk about the physical evidence that Ray has managed to save for 40 years (the infamous burnt paper that Bragalia refers to).
*pppssstt* let you in on a little secret) Ray also has a stereo photograph he took of Hynek while they were investigating at the Socorro site and in the distant background is an unidentified flying object! No kidding...
Go ahead continue to try and debunk one of the most important UFO landing trace cases in history Tony. Ray has saved the physical evidence that DOES NOT indicate burns from a mundane heat source but rather from something far more exotic. *sigh* I only wish that we could get Ray to play nice with the kidz...
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
Here is a brief for those interested ( but don't want to read the whole book ).
I don't know of any specific markers for the landing spot.
I don't know of any specific markers for the landing spot.
boomerang
Paranormal Adept
The elaborate balloon hoax theory is frankly ludicrous. It doesn't match what Zamora apparently saw plus the trace evidence.
I am unsure: Did the Air Force put investigators on site soon after the incident? If so, did they admit something real and anomalous had occurred? I will (unfortunately) probably not read the book unless the local library happens to have a copy of it.
I am unsure: Did the Air Force put investigators on site soon after the incident? If so, did they admit something real and anomalous had occurred? I will (unfortunately) probably not read the book unless the local library happens to have a copy of it.
P
pixelsmith
Guest
here is a link of interest Investigating New Mexico's less-famous UFO landing | Crave - CNET
P
pixelsmith
Guest
i doubt a ET craft landed via some sort of flaming rocket power.
exo_doc
Foolish Earthling
I would consider this to be a case of "high strangeness" based on officer Zamora's observation of flames coming from the craft.
Pixel already pointed out that advanced visiting ET's probably wouldn't use something so primitive and inefficient as rocket propulsion. The size of the craft would not allow room for very much fuel.
So what the heck was it? It used a rocket propulsion to land, then take off. It created orange/blue flames.
At take off, after the object attained a few meters in height, the rocket shut off, it became silent, then flew away.
Why would two humanoids want to land there anyway? And get out and walk around?
It's really bizarre when you think about how illogical the whole event is.
My two cents about a possible hoax: How would hoaxers know there would be anyone around to see their craft? As I recall, it was a fairly remote area. If I went to all the trouble to build a rocket powered craft of some sort, I sure wouldn't fly it out in the middle of no where if I were hoaxing. I'd make sure there were lots of witnesses.
And how did they time it to coincide with officer Zamora's arrival?
Pixel already pointed out that advanced visiting ET's probably wouldn't use something so primitive and inefficient as rocket propulsion. The size of the craft would not allow room for very much fuel.
So what the heck was it? It used a rocket propulsion to land, then take off. It created orange/blue flames.
At take off, after the object attained a few meters in height, the rocket shut off, it became silent, then flew away.
Why would two humanoids want to land there anyway? And get out and walk around?
It's really bizarre when you think about how illogical the whole event is.
My two cents about a possible hoax: How would hoaxers know there would be anyone around to see their craft? As I recall, it was a fairly remote area. If I went to all the trouble to build a rocket powered craft of some sort, I sure wouldn't fly it out in the middle of no where if I were hoaxing. I'd make sure there were lots of witnesses.
And how did they time it to coincide with officer Zamora's arrival?
P
pixelsmith
Guest
considering the location of the sighting, it might have been an experimental moon lander being tested.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
That is one of the theories. If it was some sort of experimental moon lander they were far from the farm so to speak. But it also seems unlikely to me that a trained police officer would be spooked so by kids with a balloon and some fire works.
I thought this case was in most peoples 'strong possibility something abnormal was seen' basket? I haven't heard a remotely decent de-bunk and I will get round to reading Ray's book. There are quite a few classic-case-author combo's I feel obliged to read cos I am independently interested in them already.
'Left at East Gate' by Peter Robbins was gonna be my next mainly due to the resurgence in interest in the case, it being a strong case IMO and also cos it is a UK case and although we do get great cases, they are nowhere near as well publicised as the classic US cases.
Then, I wanna kick it a bit old-school in ufology books. Still need to get onto Vallees! It's like studying philosophy and not having done any Plato - or something!
Keyhoe, Ruppelt - thinking of going that way. Any reason I should not, cos there is a contemporary book that's better?
'Left at East Gate' by Peter Robbins was gonna be my next mainly due to the resurgence in interest in the case, it being a strong case IMO and also cos it is a UK case and although we do get great cases, they are nowhere near as well publicised as the classic US cases.
Then, I wanna kick it a bit old-school in ufology books. Still need to get onto Vallees! It's like studying philosophy and not having done any Plato - or something!
Keyhoe, Ruppelt - thinking of going that way. Any reason I should not, cos there is a contemporary book that's better?
P
pixelsmith
Guest
Absolutely it was abnormal... but rocket engines?!? really?!? That should debunk it right there.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
Everyone knows that when the para-power reactors overheat they shoot flames out the ports. It is a safety feature. Sorta.
I see the account too detailed to be a hallucination but maybe the weirdness of a rocket-like noise (can't remember if he actually saw flames from exhausts but maybe) is just another example of high strangeness.
I have no idea what Lonnie saw but I think he saw something that would today still be unknown, rockets or not.
I have no idea what Lonnie saw but I think he saw something that would today still be unknown, rockets or not.