Lonnie Zamora UFO Sighting on Unsolved Mysteries

a reply to: mirageman

Then what is the loud roar and flames he ran away from if it was a balloon? I don’t know, do balloons make such noise?

You see, the story about a hoax without Lonnie just doesn’t add up. I would then just say it wasn't a planned hoax at all, but an experimental craft of some sort rather than a hoax by college students.

..walked 3 steps to the front of the car to possibly 90 ft distance when he heard a very load roar increasing in volume and saw a smokeless blue-orange flame coming from beneath the oval object,

I searched soviet arrow symbols and some of the symbols could somewhat match with the symbol on the craft, so I'm thinking KBG spy balloon/blimp with two spies inside who may have had an issue with the craft and had to fix it.

I'm also taking into account in 1964 there were nuclear cut back agreements with both the U.S. and Soviets agreeing, so maybe they were checking up to see if the U.S. did indeed cut back on making nuclear weapons.

1964:
April 20: US President Lyndon Johnson in New York, and Soviet First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev in Moscow, announce simultaneously plans to cut back production of materials for making nuclear weapons.

en.wikipedia.org...

And around this time, the weapons laboratory was located in New Mexico, so this is why I think it was a manned spy blimp perhaps checking EMF levels(?)

In the wake of the signing of the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty in 1963, the Air Force Weapons Laboratory (AFWL) was created from the Research Directorate elements of the Special Weapons Center. The Special Weapons Center gave up much of its research and development work to the newly created Air Force Weapons Laboratory. The Center continued with its test and evaluation mission and as Kirtland's host organization. The Weapons Laboratory built facilities during the 1960s to simulate nuclear effects such as transient radiation, X-rays, and electromagnetic pulse (EMP).

The Special Weapons Center took over management of Air Force Systems Command's test and evaluation facilities at Holloman Air Force Base near Alamogordo, New Mexico, during the summer of 1970. And, just one year later on 1 July 1971, Kirtland merged with Manzano and Sandia Base, its neighbors to the east, creating the sprawling military complex known as Kirtland Air Force Base. The center then began providing base support services and continued to do so for the next five years, while Field Command, Defense Nuclear Agency, became a major base tenant rather than the base host organization.

en.wikipedia.org...#:~:text=The%20Weapons%20Laboratory%20built%20facilities%20during%20the%201960s,Alamogor do%2C%20New%20Mexico%2C%20during%20the%20summer%20of%201970.

a reply to: mirageman
But also, would a balloon have those 4 legs, from that sketch you posted above, by Lonnie Zamora?
Look quite large and intricate - doesn't look to be a balloon.
Just my opinion.

originally posted by: RonnieJersey
a reply to: mirageman
But also, would a balloon have those 4 legs, from that sketch you posted above, by Lonnie Zamora?
Look quite large and intricate - doesn't look to be a balloon.
Just my opinion.

Yes, I remain unconvinced by this story of how Zamora was hoaxed.

a reply to: quintessentone

Interesting.

However, after almost 60 years, why would any of this remain a secret?

Why would any experimental US tech from 1964 still be secret?

The 'hoax' story does have some provenance, dating back to the 1960s. But it remains unconvincing to me.

So what did Zamora really see?

a reply to: peaceinoutz

Then what is the loud roar and flames he ran away from if it was a balloon? I don’t know, do balloons make such noise?

Not that I am convinced. But it was (according to the story)...

...Another student was used to create the explosion, roaring and high-pitched sounds from material readily available at the school’s Energetics Lab which sponsors the annual July 4th fireworks.

You see, the story about a hoax without Lonnie just doesn’t add up. I would then just say it wasn't a planned hoax at all, but an experimental craft of some sort rather than a hoax by college students.

I agree.

I think there are too many variables that would be relied upon for that supposedly pre-planned hoax story to have turned out as perfectly as it did. Including Zamora, possibly getting close enough to see and identify these 'students' perpetrating a hoax. Add to that the windy conditions that would surely blow any balloon around and make a concealed recovery difficult.

I've tried to find the location of Zamora first sighting and then observing the landed craft. It was from here that he supposedly saw what he first thought was an overturned vehicle.

There are differing views depending on the source.

This seems to be the one NICAP considered the landing site.

goo.gl...

Unfortunately, Google's mapping vehicles have never ventured that far into New Mexico to date. So we have to make do with a satellite scan.

a reply to: mirageman

Obviously, the dynamite shack isn’t around anymore, I presume. Maybe its that place called Dicaperl Minerals on that map west of the site.

a reply to: peaceinoutz

There's a lot more development than there had been in the mid-1960s.

The original NICAP map is here : Map Link

Which places the landing site to the west of Socorro airport. However, there's another report that it was close to what is now the site of the Socorro Baptist Temple here : goo.gl...

Which is directly north of the airport.

a reply to: mirageman

The x on the NICAP map is pretty much at that same point ?

Yes. I stand corrected.

I must get some new specs .

The X is where Zamora first spotted the craft from his patrol car, and then it lifted off and headed SW in the direction of the arrow.

originally posted by: peaceinoutz
Lonnie is, without a doubt, a reliable witness, and I do believe his story.

I agree and I thought everybody did with the possible exception of Phil Klass, but I don't think anybody bought his theory Zamora was in on the hoax so I'm not sure why you wrote a long post about a theory of Zamora beiong a hoaxer. The theory about the NMIT students hoaxing Zamora is much more plausible.

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit
a reply to: mirageman


A true headscratcher, this one.

The student prank theory is interesting, but why would the culprits remain anonymous?

Your question is the opposite of what I would ask. Why would they come forward? I can think of a lot of reasons they wouldn't and not any good reasons they would. Here are Brian Dunning's thoughts on your question:

One criticism of the hoax explanation is that these alleged students were never named or came forward. But I'm not surprised. In this case especially, there's no way I'd expect any real hoaxers to ever reveal themselves. Why not? Because when you're a college student, and your little afternoon prank on the local constabulary turns out to mobilize not only the Feds but half the branches of the armed services, some of whom work with your professors, and you'd rather graduate than spend the rest of your life at Fort Leavenworth, you tend to zip your lip. No, I'm not at all surprised that these students — assuming they existed — never went public with their involvement.

Without names or any deeper detail, aside from a short 1968 line of scribble by Colegate, it is arguably the weakest theory of them all.

I'm completely shocked by this statement. Zamora said it looked like an balloon, and that it was egg-shaped, and Tony Bragalia went through the NMIT archives and found an egg-shaped balloon which is closer to Lonnie Zamorra's description than any other theory I have heard. So I have no idea what other theories you have that you think is going to match Lonnie Zamorra's description any better than this:

Archived College Photo Reveals How They Hoaxed The Socorro UFO

THE PHOTO AND ZAMORA’S TESTIMONY- A MATCH
Zamora would have been wholly unfamiliar with such an experimental balloon, introduced to the area the very year of his sighting. But four key elements are strikingly common to the photo and Officer Zamora’s testimony- the craft’s shape, features, size and color.

SHAPE:

Zamora radioed to another officer the sighting of the craft and what he had just observed. When the officer asked Zamora “What does it look like?” Zamora responded “it looks like a balloon.” The photo shows an unusually configured aerial (especially for the mid-1960s) but it still “looks like a balloon” and of course, that is precisely what it is.

Not only that, but one of the professors at NMIT said his graduate student went through the archives and was able to identify one of the hoaxers. So it's not just a line of scribble by Colgate, but Bragalia found another staff member at NMIT, Frank Etscorn, who claims his student identified one of the hoaxers.

Famous 1964 sighting was a college prank

Dr. Frank T. Etscorn was a Psychology Professor at New Mexico Tech from the mid-1970s until the early 1990s. Dr. Etscorn is famously known for being the inventor of the Nicotine Patch. A wing of the College was dedicated to Etscorn in 1993. Etscorn had known about the Socorro UFO event from the decade before he began work at the College – and it had always intrigued him. This author learned of his interest and contacted Dr Etscorn to ask if he had ever found out anything about the sighting and what had really happened. In a recent telephone conversation, Dr. Etscorn related:

"As a project, a former student of mine had examined the case in the mid 1980s. Using yearbooks and networking, she began calling alumni who were at Tech in 1964. She somehow located one of the former students believed to have been involved. He would not expand on the hoax or have his name used – but she found out it was a hoax."

Far more interesting is Jacques Vallee's find - the logo for a company called Astropower, Inc., a subsidiary of the Douglas Aircraft Company, dealing with advanced space propulsion.

As you can see in the balloon photo, it's not spherical but has a particular geometry. One hypothesis I saw for the symbol I thought was interesting is that it was a "this end up" marking, which the inverted V would be consistent with to point in the direction that was supposed to be up for inflation, deployment or whatever.

One objection to the balloon theory was that it flew against the wind, but I don't think this objection stands since you can see ropes attached to the above balloon which could be attached by a line to a car bumper and towed away against the wind, and in fact this would also be consistent with Zamora saying he didn't see it go above 20' for quite some time. As it went off in the distance I think he said it eventually appeared to go higher but he lost his glasses when he was running away from the UFO as it was taking off so I'm not really sure how well he could see at a distance without his glasses, or when he found them again. The glasses lookes pretty thick in photos of Zamora.

I don't know if it was a student hoax or not, maybe not, but I don't know of any stronger theories that fit Zamora's description better, and all the objections I've seen to the student hoax theory do not seem well founded. Too many things had to fall in place, I'm just not seeing it, but then I'm a techie so I can perhaps figure out how to do this hoax like the techies at the school did where it might seem puzzling to non-techies. Bragalia tries to elaborate on how it was done, but and some of his speculaitions I agree with like the pyrotechnics show that accompanied the balloon launch, but some of his and Colgate's other speculations are pretty poor and I can come up with much better, but they are just speculations so who knows? Speculative as it is, I can't think of any other speculation which fits events better, and I'm surprised you think you can, what are you thinking of?

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I agree and I thought everybody did with the possible exception of Phil Klass, but I don't think anybody bought his theory Zamora was in on the hoax so I'm not sure why you wrote a long post about a theory of Zamora beiong a hoaxer. The theory about the NMIT students hoaxing Zamora is much more plausible.

First, I wouldn't trust anything Class said. My take has NOTHING to do with him.

My take on the hoax potential is a hypothetical post in the spirit of objective research in that none of us know the absolute truth of any of these events.

But people can be fooled, and analyzing the data leads me to feel Zamora would have to be in on it if it was a hoax.

I personally don’t believe he was.
IMO, we must always think of every angle when we don’t know.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
I'm completely shocked by this statement.

I'm flattered you care that much, mate. You are clearly passionate about the hoax theory, but aside from anonymous "He Said/She Said"s after the event and the persuasive experimental balloon kits of the period, we still have the conundrum of how the students managed to lead Zamora into their carefully prepared web. Presumably, if the speeding motorist who was in on the hoax had been unsuccessful in alerting Zamora to the site (ie, he simply hadn't noticed during the car chase), would the group of dastardly students have re-waxed their moustaches and tried again?

The hoax theory and attendant anonymity depends on a hunch that the students wouldn't risk their reputation due to DELIBERATELY annoying the local constabulary. Which leaves us with the same conundrum. And if it wasn't deliberate, what's their beef? What a bunch of wet wusses.

I can't think of any other speculation which fits events better, and I'm surprised you think you can, what are you thinking of?

I have no idea, mate, it's an unsolved mystery. The lack of prints anywhere near the site is curious, but I lean towards *something* NASA-related, and think we can safely conclude that none of this is remotely ET-related*.

*Unless our little green men in white overalls really were bumbling around New Mexico territory in the interstellar equivalent of a clapped-out Robin Reliant!

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I think we are all agreed that we don't know what lies at the root of this particular mystery.

The balloon hoax theory has some provenance in that the letter dates back to the 1960s and there is certainly a logic that can be applied to conclude that this is how things panned out.

But I wonder just how much planning went into it.

1) The students would have to know Zamora's whereabouts at exactly the right time as they began to stage the hoax.
2) The speeding car driver would need to pass Zamora at just the right time to ensure Zamora saw him and also know that Zamora had no other higher priorities that would make sure he gave chase.
3) Then comes in other factors, like possibly being caught before Zamora got distracted by the 'balloon', driving safely enough to avoid an accident
4) What if Zamora missed the balloon launch altogether and carried on ahead after the speeding car?
5) If a vehicle was used to tow the balloon (which could be possible as it was said to never get higher than about 20ft or so) then why were no tracks found?
6) How did Zamora end up in the perfect spot to see the object but then also not see the perpetrators if this was the case?

I am not saying any of this is impossible. Maybe even multiple attempts were made to catch Zamora out? And he never linked a series of speedsters with the incident?

But for everything to fall into place perfectly seems to be a bit of a stretch to me.

If it was a balloon, then why was he all panicked---and describing flames and roars?
Possibly it was so strange looking he panicked, but the flames and noise?

There are questions about the balloon hoax( college pranksters) theory. If it were a balloon, what is the nature of said balloon? And with an insignia on it.

Do balloons have insular seating? I don’t know. Did these two beings ride in a balloon and directed it as Zamora claimed he saw it leave the location?

Reading that link, it is filled with speculation and few facts.

And the other claim on the hoax or misjudged craft says it was a craft. So, what is it, a balloon or some craft?


IMO, looking at all the data, I’d say it was a craft of some sort and not a balloon hoax by mysterious unknown students.

And Zamora sees those two beings and how the craft operated, and his reaction to it is one experiencing a high-tech craft, not any balloon.

Also, calling it a hoax is a misnomer since if it was an unidentified balloon or craft, how is that a hoax?

ONLY if one buys this unverified student prank hoax theory.

a reply to: peaceinoutz

Blimps/sky ships back in that time period were rigid, semi-rigid etc. So it may have appeared craft-like (rigid). Anyway, the fact is that there are not many facts to go on with this case. I'm looking at spying missions and what's around the area that may have been of interest for what was going on at the time between countries and don't forget the U.S had many spies in sensitive positions back then.

This is a great case to dump interest into. The car still exists and while Zamora is no longer with us the other officers that responded to the incident might be.

The story of the HOAX never sat well with me. I wonder what happened to the supposed "students" that were behind this HOAX. The main person that pushed this claim was a guy that used to work at Los Alamos and Livermore national laboratories. I wonder if the Government had him concoct this HOAX angle to either muddy the waters or just confuse the public in order to prevent that fear that the US Gov is always concerned about when it comes to UFOs?

Even if we did go along with the HOAX story, that doesn't explain the burning bushes and grass at the site that not only Zamora responded to, but the other officers at the scene reported seeing as well. Then you also have Zamora stating that he witnessed flames coming out of the bottom of the object while it was taking off. If the HOAX was to be believed, then who in their right mind would tow a hot air balloon behind a car at high speeds?

When you start to match up what Zamora reported and the claims that Colgate made about it all being a HOAX, the two don't add up. Another thing about this HOAX that doesn't sit well, and that's the point that if this was in fact a HOAX then wouldn't the Government have listed it as such a balloon in Project Bluebook? The Zamora encounter was one of the unknown cases in that report.

originally posted by: peaceinoutz
I’d say it was a craft of some sort and not a balloon hoax by mysterious unknown students.

🍻

👽