The "Lonnie Zamora" case

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 11:25 PM
link   
Is the "Lonnie Zamora" case the best known eyewitness testimony supportive of the theory that the US military has been in the business of developing working craft that utilise anti-gravity technology since at least the late 1940s?

Despite the fact that I do not believe that we have been subject to the visitations by beings from another world, I am a pretty firm believer of the theory that the UFOs that we are seeing in our skies are, in fact, real objects - rather than mere figments of our imagination (e.g. swamp gas).

Did Lonnie Zamora see the product of a US military black-world project to develop craft utilising anti-gravity technology - technology originally developed as part of a Nazi black-world project? Were the craft's occupants merely test-pilots?




posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 02:54 AM
link   
67+ views and counting...but no replies? Am I the only here that finds this case to be a pivotal one in understanding UFOs?



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 03:04 AM
link   
Right. Yes.

Obviously the US military needs to go out and take soil samples in a top secret vertical take off craft, and leave behind ground traces.

And unless the crafts occupants were monkeys their size doesn't really fit.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Right. Yes.

Obviously the US military needs to go out and take soil samples in a top secret vertical take off craft, and leave behind ground traces.

And unless the crafts occupants were monkeys their size doesn't really fit.

Are you discounting the possibility that the craft was on a test-run, that it ran into problems and was landed by it's pilots as a precaution? The pilots could've simply been in the middle of a visual inspection of the outside of the craft, when they suddenly noticed that someone was watching them.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 07:24 AM
link   
One cannot ignore the size of the occupants reported by Zamora…

Zamora stated that the humanoids he saw were “two small figures in what resembled white coveralls”. He states that they were “the size of boys”, and noted that the heads of the figures fell noticeably below the bushes that were around the landing site. Among the indentations found at the landing site were small footprints.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 11:10 AM
link   
^^^

Yes I believe Zamora's description implies the pilots weren't human.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 12:19 PM
link   
The Socorro craft seemed to utilize two propulsion systems. It used a system with a 'roaring flame' to land and initially get off the ground again (Zamora said it looked like it took a lot of effort to get the thing off the ground). After that, the flame disappeared and the craft used a totally silent anti-gravitational system and zoomed off into the distance.

Altogether there were apparently 13 witnesses to this craft (11 visual and 2 auditory). Just before the craft landed (when Zamora saw it), a car with a family of 5 tourists witnessed the craft whilst on the highway travelling into Socorro - the craft was flying so low it almost took the roof of the car off!

The "Lonnie Zamora" case crosses over somewhat with the alleged Holloman AFB UFO Landing. Are they linked? See my post here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's claimed Richard Doty said to Linda Moulton Howe in the early 80's that the Soccorro event (24th April 1964) occurred a day before the Holloman AFB UFO Landing. Apparently the beings that landed at Soccorro screwed up a pre-planned Holloman landing. Of course the descriptions of small humanoids does not match with the description of human size 'Large-Nosed' Aliens which Paul Shartle describes embarking from the Holloman craft.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Egotosum
67+ views and counting...but no replies? Am I the only here that finds this case to be a pivotal one in understanding UFOs?


Well heres the deal as I see it.

You obviously do not know that much about the case, and you are trying to fit it into your theory, otherwise you would know about his viewing if the crafts occupants.

Zamora was a trained police officer of several years experience - a trained observer if you will - the occupants of the craft he described as being child sized.

Now unless the US was flying craft piloted by midgets, I'd say it rules out your theory, especially as Zamora decribed the object as being the size of a medium sized car, because nothing the Nazi's had on the drawing board - or supposedly had on the drawing board - was ever that small, and the jet engines of the day weren't that compact either.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Assuming, for a second, that Lonnie Zamora was simply mistaken about the approximate height of the craft's occupants, it makes much more sense that it was a top-secret test craft (of terrestrial origin) that Zamora saw, rather than little green men on a joy-ride, right?



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 12:44 AM
link   
Doty: Anything he says you can throw out the _ The guy has in my opinion now twice lied or been extemely evasive about finding answers that contribute to solving UFO cases. He may actually have bits of truth wrapped in a lie, but from now on I think people should probably work their way around his statements unless you find other reliable witnesses that corroborate his stories. Even then you better double check since he seems to pull in suspicious people to back his stories...Again just my opinion.

Egotosum: I'm not sure what the point is, but if you change Zamora's testimony and then throw it in the "top secret aircraft" box, you really haven't solved anything. You've mearly thrown the story into another catch all just like the "aliens did it" box that some people use. Do you have any other links that would back research into craft like this and the evidence left by it?

The one thing that bothers me most about people debating this story is when the moon lander stuff comes out. If it was a moon lander then why would it still be secret? We all know what moon landers or anything close to them can do. And if it was our craft then it sure was a much better Delta Rocket of the late 60's than the noisy one we built in the 90s that tipped over and blew up.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Atomic
Doty: Anything he says you can throw out the _ The guy has in my opinion now twice lied or been extemely evasive about finding answers that contribute to solving UFO cases. He may actually have bits of truth wrapped in a lie, but from now on I think people should probably work their way around his statements unless you find other reliable witnesses that corroborate his stories. Even then you better double check since he seems to pull in suspicious people to back his stories...Again just my opinion.

Egotosum: I'm not sure what the point is, but if you change Zamora's testimony and then throw it in the "top secret aircraft" box, you really haven't solved anything. You've mearly thrown the story into another catch all just like the "aliens did it" box that some people use. Do you have any other links that would back research into craft like this and the evidence left by it?

The one thing that bothers me most about people debating this story is when the moon lander stuff comes out. If it was a moon lander then why would it still be secret? We all know what moon landers or anything close to them can do. And if it was our craft then it sure was a much better Delta Rocket of the late 60's than the noisy one we built in the 90s that tipped over and blew up.

Operating on the basis that Lonnie Zamora did indeed see something (something completely out of the ordinary and not alike any conventional craft of the time) on that warm April day in '64, was it a craft of extra-terrestrial origin (a fanciful notion) or a military test craft?

As for evidence to support the claim, that i've made in this thread, that Zamora possibly saw some sort of military test craft that utilised a highly-advanced form of propulsion, one need only go back to look at the black-world research (into anti-gravity propulsion) the Nazis carried out before and during WWII. There's even anecdotal evidence to suggest that some of their research teams carried out successful tests, of craft that incorporated anti-gravity technology. Who's to say that the so-called "Foo-fighters" spotted by Allied aircrews, flying over Europe, in the latter stages of WWII, weren't semi-autonomous UAVs (technology demonstrators, if you will)?

If you'll recall, UFO sightings really began to kick off in the years immediately after WWII. After the Americans had had their fill of plundering Nazi-technology from war-torn Germany, did the US military begin testing craft, that incorporated anti-gravity technology, in the late 1940s?



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 04:23 AM
link   
Yeah in this case what Doty said doesn't seem to fit in my opinion – always be wary.

Suggesting the Socorro craft was of extra-terrestrial origin is a fanciful notion?

Why did officials tell Zamora "It will be better if you don't publicly mention seeing the two small figures in white"?

A witness to the footprint indentations, Patrolman Ted V. Jordan, stated that the footprints seemed to have been formed by a person or persons with small feet. It was confirmed that the place where Zamora saw the child-size occupants, is the precise place the footprints were found.

It seems you do not even wish to look at entire "Lonnie Zamora" case evidence.

If you don't believe that extra-terrestrials are visiting earth, whatever account is presented in relation to small humanoids, is always going to be a 'simple mistake' by the eyewitness. Always.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 04:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strawberry_Icecream
Yeah in this case what Doty said doesn't seem to fit in my opinion – always be wary.

Suggesting the Socorro craft was of extra-terrestrial origin is a fanciful notion?

Why did officials tell Zamora "It will be better if you don't publicly mention seeing the two small figures in white"?

A witness to the footprint indentations, Patrolman Ted V. Jordan, stated that the footprints seemed to have been formed by a person or persons with small feet. It was confirmed that the place where Zamora saw the child-size occupants, is the precise place the footprints were found.

It seems you do not even wish to look at entire "Lonnie Zamora" case evidence.

If you don't believe that extra-terrestrials are visiting earth, whatever account is presented in relation to small humanoids, is always going to be a 'simple mistake' by the eyewitness. Always.

I would've thought that if it was the case that the craft that Zamora saw, was of terrestrial origin, the military certainly would not want Zamora going around claiming that he had seen figures outside of the craft examining it. That would lend credence to the theory that Zamora had seen test pilots inspecting an experimental military craft.

As for Zamora's assertions regarding the height of the figures that he saw outside of the craft, it's not entirely improbable that, in a state of shock (at seeing such an improbable craft) Zamora remembered the larger details, but not the smaller ones (such as the height of the craft's occupants).

At the end of the day, what's the most likely explanation for what Zamora saw? Little green men or a military test craft?



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 04:56 AM
link   
I haven't read the case yet or heard of it, but I noticed someone said it happened a day before or a day after another sighting. If you study the ways the aliens have always appeared throughout the centuries you'll notice they frequently appear in two places a day or so apart. It's as if they want to get witnesses from two different locations to report what they saw, and in that way the UFO gets logged into the records easier or makes a bigger impression.

This sounds like one of those classic alien appearances unrelated to humanity. The aliens are beyond time and space so they don't have to travel any distance to get here. So they're not from 'out there' somewhere; they've always been around.

The aliens I am most in touch with are very small with big heads. They are around everyone but remain invisible. They're time lords of a type. They control time and space, and create parallel worlds by manipulating the 'light' people call God.

My guess is this case is dealing with the same beings and not the military.

===================================

Also I thought I'd mention something I heard on a radio talk show one night. The topic was UFOs and an old woman phoned up and said that when she was a little girl she woke up in the middle of the night and had to go outside to the bathroom. When she got out there she saw a giant spaceship had landed in the field, and small vehicles were driving around with people picking up jasper from the ground and loading it into the vehicles. Then something took over her mind and made her walk back inside the house. She said she had been looking over the wall at the spaceship for quite a while.









[edit on 31-10-2006 by probedbygrays]



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by probedbygrays
I haven't read the case yet or heard of it, but I noticed someone said it happened a day before or a day after another sighting. If you study the ways the aliens have always appeared throughout the centuries you'll notice they frequently appear in two places a day or so apart. It's as if they want to get witnesses from two different locations to report what they saw, and in that way the UFO gets logged into the records easier or makes a bigger impression.

This sounds like one of those classic alien appearances unrelated to humanity. The aliens are beyond time and space so they don't have to travel any distance to get here. So they're not from 'out there' somewhere; they've always been around.

The aliens I am most in touch with are very small with big heads. They are around everyone but remain invisible. They're time lords of a type. They control time and space, and create parallel worlds by manipulating the 'light' people call God.

My guess is this case is dealing with the same beings and not the military.






....right.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 05:13 AM
link   


Doty: Anything he says you can throw out the _


Richard Doty has been "dishing" out disinformation for so long that he probably believes half of it by now.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Egotosum
Assuming, for a second, that Lonnie Zamora was simply mistaken about the approximate height of the craft's occupants, it makes much more sense that it was a top-secret test craft (of terrestrial origin) that Zamora saw, rather than little green men on a joy-ride, right?


Well this post shows your agenda, because you used the phrase "little green men" - which is a really rather old and outdated attempt at ridiculing the subject.

As for your argument, what makes more sense is that a highly restricted aircraft is tested in highly restricted areas, and not at sites which the public can gain access to.

You completely ignored my point about the scale of the object. The purported disks the nazis developed were huge, and disk shaped, and if you look at the supposed drawings and photos of them there is no reference at all to an object of this type.

You have also convinently ignored the documented ground traces of footprints and indentations made by the vehicle.

So let me ask you a question - if the Nazi's developed such things, and the American government too the project over why isn't it mainstream now? This sighting is nearly 50 years old. Any need for secrecy back then would be far outdated now.

What you are implying is that in the late 1930's and the first half of 1945, only 37 years after the first powered flight by the Wright Brothers, and possibly around the same time as the first jet engines came into active service, the Nazis had developed anti-gravity technology which was adapted by the US military. Not only that but they developed it the point where it was fully operational in a small craft.

So why the billions spent on missiles and satellite production in the cold war? Why spend a fortune on stealth bombers, conventional aircraft and conventional weapons? To protect a secret for what reason?



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by Egotosum
Assuming, for a second, that Lonnie Zamora was simply mistaken about the approximate height of the craft's occupants, it makes much more sense that it was a top-secret test craft (of terrestrial origin) that Zamora saw, rather than little green men on a joy-ride, right?


Well this post shows your agenda, because you used the phrase "little green men" - which is a really rather old and outdated attempt at ridiculing the subject.

As for your argument, what makes more sense is that a highly restricted aircraft is tested in highly restricted areas, and not at sites which the public can gain access to.

You completely ignored my point about the scale of the object. The purported disks the nazis developed were huge, and disk shaped, and if you look at the supposed drawings and photos of them there is no reference at all to an object of this type.

You have also convinently ignored the documented ground traces of footprints and indentations made by the vehicle.

So let me ask you a question - if the Nazi's developed such things, and the American government too the project over why isn't it mainstream now? This sighting is nearly 50 years old. Any need for secrecy back then would be far outdated now.

What you are implying is that in the late 1930's and the first half of 1945, only 37 years after the first powered flight by the Wright Brothers, and possibly around the same time as the first jet engines came into active service, the Nazis had developed anti-gravity technology which was adapted by the US military. Not only that but they developed it the point where it was fully operational in a small craft.

So why the billions spent on missiles and satellite production in the cold war? Why spend a fortune on stealth bombers, conventional aircraft and conventional weapons? To protect a secret for what reason?

As one of the aerospace-industry insiders that Nick Cook interviews, for his book "The Hunt for Zero Point", points out, "...the aerospace and defence industry is inherently conservative. It doesn't like change. This...knowledge, if you can call it that, is dangerous stuff. It's change with a capital C and it's not easy to get your head around. The aerospace and defence industry says it likes people who think out of the box, because they're the guys who give us the breakthroughs...radar, the bomb, stealth and that. But think this far out and they look at you and like they're crazy. They might even put you away...", (pg. 346).

As for the fact that we've yet to see the implementation of anti-gravity technology in any white-world US weapon's systems is reasonably explained away by the fact that you'd want to keep that sort of technology up your sleeve. Do you really think the US military would risk that sort of technology (the most significant advancement in weapon's technology since the splitting of the atom) falling into the hands of, say, the Chinese and/or Russians?



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Well Egotosium I was just about to type this to recomend 'the Hunt For Zero Point' By Nick Cook when someone else mentioned it. Its a good read see if you can get it on Amazon or some such place. He stays away from any speculation about extraterrestrials so for someone who finds that concept uncomfortable it won't tread on areas you cannot
allow yourself to think about. It was made into a tv program so this is worth looking for on Google video. By the way the book's ISBN No. is 0 09 941498 8



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by tonyJ
Well Egotosium I was just about to type this to recomend 'the Hunt For Zero Point' By Nick Cook when someone else mentioned it. Its a good read see if you can get it on Amazon or some such place. He stays away from any speculation about extraterrestrials so for someone who finds that concept uncomfortable it won't tread on areas you cannot
allow yourself to think about. It was made into a tv program so this is worth looking for on Google video. By the way the book's ISBN No. is 0 09 941498 8

I was the one who mentioned it. Great read, I agree - plus there's the Channel 4 documentary you mentioned.

He makes a good case for the UFOs, we're seeing in our skies, most likely being black-world craft, rather than little green men joyriding around our planet.





top topics
 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum