It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Could Lonnie Zamora have seen the Lunar Lander?

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 3 2006 @ 07:41 PM
This was just posted to the List.

Watch the video:

Could 1964 UFO Be Lunar Lander?

"I think the policeman was sincere when he thought he saw
something strange." said Dave Thomas of New Mexicans for Science
and Reason. "I don't think it came all the way from outer

The scientists in Thomas’ group have a theory about what Zamora
really saw on that fateful night. Their evidence for this new
theory begins with a page from the log book at the White Sands
Missile Range, the expansive test range whose northern border
extends to the area of Zamora’s patrol.

I especially found this amusing-

"What was your immediate reaction when you realized this may be
an object from outer space?" one of his radio hosts asked.

"Well, I didn't think it was an object from outer space because
I don't believe in those things," Zamora replied.

I had never considered this possibilty but the more I think on it the more plausable it seems. But at least it wasn't pelicans(or blimps).
Enjoy all.
Thanks to Stuart Mille

[edit on 5/3/06 by longhaircowboy]

[edit on 5/3/06 by longhaircowboy]

posted on May, 3 2006 @ 09:19 PM
I find it very interesting that Charles B. Moore of MOGUL fame played a role in investigating the Zamora Case.

I believe that it was C. B. Moore who first suggested that Zamora witnessed the Lunar lander.

And if I'm not mistaken 1st Lt James McAndrew is the person who turned up this WhiteSands Logbook.

Seems like these two are quite the TEAM if you ask me?

Edit: Sorry if anyone does not recognize those two names.

1st Lt James McAndrew wrote the "Roswell - Case Closed" for the USAF.

Charles B. Moore is 1st Lt McAndrews "star" witness for Roswell having been a MOGUL Balloon , based in large part on C. B. Moores ' 93 -94 memories.

[edit on 3-5-2006 by lost_shaman]

posted on May, 3 2006 @ 09:38 PM
The same Guy that Debunked the Roswell Case wants to debunk Zamora Case? What... I don't think so.

I can’t believe this is the lunar Lander. The lunar Lander is not "egg shaped" or cannot "Float away" in the earths gravity. The Lander might probably float in space but not in earth. I just finished seeing the Zamora sighting in the unsolved mysteries show that I have, and no where in there did he ever compare that metallic "egg shaped" object to the Lander.

posted on May, 3 2006 @ 09:43 PM
Maybe, but would the LL work in an Earth atmosphere when it was designed for a moon landing.

I've been to the site where Lonnie said he saw the craft. Not an ideal spot for testing multi million dollar equiptment. The terrain around Socorro is very rugged compared to White Sands range and testing facility.

Still the connection that L____S made is very interesting.

NM experienced an incredible flap during the mid 60s. I even saw three disks fly from horizon to horizon during that time.

posted on May, 3 2006 @ 10:28 PM
I don't think the lunar lander had the necessary thrust nor controls needed to successfully navigate earth's atmosphere.

posted on May, 3 2006 @ 11:46 PM

posted by Cabanman

The same Guy that Debunked the Roswell Case wants to debunk Zamora Case? What... I don't think so.

Yes and make that the same two guy's.

The scientists in Thomas’ group have a theory about what Zamora
really saw on that fateful night.

What do you bet that one of those Scientists is none other than Charles B. Moore?

New Mexicans for Science and Reason

Previous NMSR Speakers:


Prof. Charles B. Moore on the Roswell Incident and Project MOGUL (February)

Plus the LM was a two part system , a Descent module and an Assent module.

So it would have left the Descent module behind because the LM can land without it.

posted on May, 3 2006 @ 11:57 PM

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
I had never considered this possibilty but the more I think on it the more plausable it seems. But at least it wasn't pelicans(or blimps).

Ah, gee whiz, fellas, what's wrong with blimps? NASA almost bought the idea.

Bethpage came up with a scheme for testing the lander in simulated flight by powering the vehicle with six jet engines, to overcome the pull of gravity, and using a modified descent engine to practice maneuvering the vehicle. Although the idea appeared workable, it would be both costly and complex. There were also suggestions for swinging the lander from a gantrylike frame at Langley or from a helicopter or a blimp at White Sands. After a second look, the last two were also scrapped.

Flight testing within the earth's atmosphere was finally ruled out when Langley discovered in wind tunnel investigations that the Little Joe II-lander combination would be aerodynamically unstable.

Attaching the lander to a balloon to reduce the load on the engines by 5/6 does seem a reasonable idea; however, I can't see NASA letting something that expensive fly around the desert untethered and unaccompanied by dozens, if not hundreds of engineers.

posted on May, 4 2006 @ 12:04 AM
I guess the same-day sighting by Gary Wilcox in New York has been dismissed by these debunkers. The object and occupants sighted in the Wilcox incident were of very similar description that Zamora gave. The difference being Wilcox held a conversation with the occupants of the craft and that the craft appeared to be hovering rather than on landing stilts.

[edit on 4-5-2006 by heelstone]

posted on May, 4 2006 @ 06:10 AM

This theory is just another pathetic joke. And very disrespectful for Lonnie Zamora. He clearly stated he saw an ovoid object, not an insectoid-looking lunar prototype. I just can't believe how stupidities like this can actually be discussed and even believed by some.

[edit on 4/5/2006 by Musclor]

posted on May, 4 2006 @ 05:03 PM
The LM was indeed designed to function in the limited gravity of the moon and would not have possessed the necessary thrust to function here on the 3rd rock.
I checked through all the NASA info on the LM and couldn't find any reference to earth bound tests(doesn't mean they didn't happen). If anyone else knows of info I may have overlooked please post it.
It does seem possible he may have witnessed some sort of test but of what I haven't a clue.

posted on May, 5 2006 @ 03:38 PM
If there's an account that should be scrutnised it's this one.
I believe that Officer Zamora saw someting strange that couldn't
be easily explained and I also believe he saw something that
belonged to this world.

Regardless and I don't say that lightly), of the idea that people
can't keep secrets for all these years, tests and experiments
went on that involved dubious flying craft and I wouldn't be
surprised that records no longer exist that could explain a lot of
the goings-on in the deserted areas of New Mexico.

I find the idea of a craft from another world coming here and NOT
landing on the White House quite silly.

posted on May, 5 2006 @ 11:02 PM
I actually find it very hard to believe that people out to show they're more intelligent than other everyone else would posit the theory that Zamora saw the lunar lander, which, as a previous poster pointed out, left its descent module behind even in the moon's one-sixth gravity. Are these people real? Is there proof of their existence? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, after all.

Blue Book investigated the Socorro incident and had to label it an unknown. As well as Zamora's testimony there were four circular imprints. While the lunar module had four circular landing pads, the imprints found at Socorro were in an unusual configuration: they formed an uneven quadrilateral - none of the interior angles formed by joining the centres of the circular impressions were 90 degrees BUT if you joined the diagonals, they crossed at 90 degrees very precisely. Not typical of the lunar module, very hard to fake, and highly anomalous.

posted on May, 6 2006 @ 08:40 AM
We still have yet to see the flowery tape Moore claimed was used in Mogul and found at Roswell. In fact, during the Popular Mechanics inspired special, the uncrated Mogul debris allegedly found possessed no such tape.

In addition, Mogul used off the shelf materials. The witnesses all describe the same otherworldly characteristics (unable to cut, burn, etc.), none of which applies to the balsa wood and tin foil of Mogul.

So, Moore has a history of ignoring witness claims and simply going off on his own.

Anyone who has EVER seriously looked into the Zamora case cannot even for a moment believe Ronnie saw the lunar lander. Despite the obvious fact that the LM cannot maneuver in the Earth's atmosphere (with the exception of parachuting down to Earth), it simply doesn't even come close to matching the description.

Not to mention, find me ONE NASA person who will testify to LM experiments being conducted in the desert, not in a government facility. You won't find one.

This isn't even grasping at straws, it's grasping at toothpicks.... Kind of like assuming the 4' "aliens" seen by the Roswell witnesses were actually human-sized dummies in flight suits from a program 5 years after the crash....grasp away fellas.....

posted on May, 7 2006 @ 08:47 PM
After going back and checkin on the LM tests it seems highly unlikely Zamora saw the LM. I could find no record of it flown in the desert.
The thrust of the rockets would not have been adequite for earthly manuevers.
Sorry bout the spelling.

posted on May, 7 2006 @ 11:27 PM
Let's see no military escort of what would of been a vital piece of NASA equipment.

Another witness in France claims to have seen the same thing.

And the biggie...why in the world would the US govt not admit to it by now since we all know about lunar landers? "Yep that was us in Socorro. We tested a lander that went off course." Let's see the picture of your lander to confirm it and the people who flew it. This hasn't happened.

The guy in the video hasn't thought any of this out. The news station didn't think any of this out either and ask these basic questions. Boooo on them both.

posted on May, 8 2006 @ 12:07 AM
I've gone back and looked at the video report linked at the top. It's interesting, and actually a very fair piece.

They do give footage of the 'lunar lander' and it actually seems to be a purpose-built airframe that would give Armstrong the chance to pilot something that would behave like the lunar module. It's a one-piece VTOL airframe, clearly visible in the video.

The piece is also very fair to Zamorra's testimony. They make the point that he did not change his story no matter how many times he told it, and they ask Dave Thomas (of whom more anon) of New Mexicans For Science and Reason how LZ could mistake the Lunar Lander or the Surveyor (the two possibilities he posits) for an ovoid object. The station also gives its viewers the chance to vote. I didn't look for the results of that, which would be interesting. Any takers?

So, NMSR and Dave Thomas? Who's funding them? one wonders. Here's a link to their (rather dull-looking, I have to say) website. OOH! It's part of the Skeptic Ring! Those tireless debunkers of pseudoscience... so it debunks pretty much everything, Roswell, chemtrails... plus a few things (we all got 'em) I quite like to see debunked, like the Bible Codes and Intelligunt Desine (only problem is, I don't think much of Darwinism either, which would make me a God-botherer by default in their binary world, no matter how much I'd deny it).

posted on May, 8 2006 @ 02:07 PM

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
I checked through all the NASA info on the LM and couldn't find any reference to earth bound tests(doesn't mean they didn't happen). If anyone else knows of info I may have overlooked please post it.

They did have some kind of training vehicles. Neil Armstrong almost died when he crashed one. Had to eject out at the last second.

But there's no way somebody could mistake one of those things for what Zamora saw. That's a real pelicanist stretch for an explanation.

Here's what it looked like:

[edit on 8-5-2006 by Enkidu]

posted on May, 9 2006 @ 08:27 PM
IIRC they didn't fly those near Soccorro anyway.
Can we leave the pelicans out of it? Brings back bad memories.

top topics


log in