Lonnie Zamora UFO Sighting on Unsolved Mysteries

a reply to: Guyfriday

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?

I like that idea.

And the guy acts so diffidently--like he's not really wanting to rat out the students.

a reply to: peaceinoutz

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?

The flames and noise were allegedly created by the students or at least a student according to the 'hoax' details that I linked somewhere earlier in the thread to.

...Another student was used to create the explosion that had diverted Lonnie on a direct path to the “staging area.” This student may have also created the roaring and high pitched sounds that Lonnie reported emitting from the UFO. The sounds that Lonnie reported were actually resultant from “pyrotechnic whistles” according to the President of the world’s leading fireworks association (see prior articles.) All of this material was available at the school’s Energetics Lab which sponsors the annual July 4th fireworks...

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?

Lonnie never saw the 'beings' enter the craft. He only saw them for a second or two. He was running back to his car as he feared it was about to explode and lost his glasses at some point. So was unable to see clearly until he had found them and re-adjusted his vision. By which time the craft was heading SW. This is confirmed in his report.

The hoax story adds that

..Two short students in white coveralls (actually white lab suits) acted as “aliens” and had launched from the ground Lonnie’s landed “UFO.” Lonnie never claimed that he saw the short people get into the “vehicle.” By that time he was escaping or planning his escape to really note where they went....

Note, I am not saying I accept this hoax tale. I am just adding the details on to the thread

a reply to: Guyfriday

The car still exists and while Zamora is no longer with us the other officers that responded to the incident might be...

There were no other officers with Zamora initially to witness the craft. Sam Chavez turned up after it had disappeared. I think he passed away a few years ago. Allen Hynek investigated on behalf of Blue Book. He, too, has been long gone. But some of his work on the case will still exist. Perhaps worth digging for? Also, some civilian investigations were made.

Here's Lonnie in his own words

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?

....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.

The hoax story only became public knowledge around 2009 via a blog. So Blue Book would not have known about it in 1964 when investigating.

a reply to: mirageman

The flames and noise were allegedly created by the students or at least a student according to the 'hoax' details that I linked somewhere earlier in the thread to.

Yeah, with a candle in the balloon? Then Zamora was a hysteric...Understandable if it was a weird-looking thing. I'd have just pulled my gun out and said Go for it—ETs!

Lonnie never saw the 'beings' enter the craft. He only saw them for a second or two. He was running back to his car as he feared it was about to explode and lost his glasses at some point. So was unable to see clearly until he had found them and re-adjusted his vision. By which time the craft was heading SW. This is confirmed in his report.

I know that he didn't see them get into the craft. I’m asking the objective question that presumes the two beings got inside the craft and took off in a guided direction. How is that a balloon? I don't know; I'm not a balloon expert. Do they make them with seats and things to guide the balloon like an intelligent craft? Or were these two men lying down inside a balloon?

The data says it traveled over the shack and went in a specific direction. Do balloons do that?

I totally believe this case.

Here is similar case from 1950.

Dr. Botta this time has acctually entered the craft. Too bad he did not stay in it but ran. And question why he did not return back to the sciene same night? They waited til next morning,, Of course the craft was gone.

Two cases are nearly identical.

a reply to: peaceinoutz

Zamora was certainly shaken up by what he saw. If a candle was used, then it also begs the question how it stayed alight on what was reported as an extremely blustery day. Zamora reported seeing a blue and orange flames but no smoke, only dust kicked up. Zamora also said it flew off at around 20-25 feet in altitude, until it disappeared from view.

I don't think we can rule out a balloon completely. But if it was all part of a hoax, then the perpetrators appear to have got lucky in how it was pulled off so perfecty.

Hynek wrote a chapter on it in his Hynek Report. (I've left out Lonnie's recounting of the events as they were covered in the OP and UM episode). He seems convinced it was a real physical event. Which of course doesn't rule out a hoax. Even if Hynek rules out Zamora being a part of one. But Hynek didn't find any tracks on the ground beyond the marks originally found at the site.

....I was rather hoping, at the time, that I could somehow invalidate Lonnie Zamora's testimony, but I was completely unable to do this. He came through as a solid citizen, generally well liked and of a practical, down-to-earth nature, thus making his participation in a hoax seem extremely unlikely.

Of all the Close Encounters of the Third Kind, this is the one that most clearly suggests a "nuts and bolts" physical craft along with accompanying noises and propulsion....

Several days later, Zamora and I went to the site alone, and he kindly re-enacted the entire train of events. He showed me just how he had run from the scene, where he had hit the car and knocked off his glasses, and how he had crouched with his arm across his eyes, glancing back­ ward to see what was happening.

I examined the site carefully and took photographs. I also made a point of wandering pretty far afield to see if I could spot similar "landing marks" in the area. If there had been any, they might have indicated that the marks were attributable to cattle or some other "natural" cause. But there were no other similar marks anywhere.

The marks themselves were only two or three inches deep, sandy, clayed, and bard-packed, and they appeared to be scooped out, as though a heavy mechanical device had slid rather gently into position. Maybe there is a simple, natural explanation for the Socorro incident, but having made a complete study of the events, I do not think so.

It is my opinion that a real, physical event occurred on the outskirts of Socorro that afternoon of April 24, 1964. Because close encounters of the third Kind are so odd­ sounding, I suppose it is tempting to dismiss the many hundreds that have been reported as hoaxes or hallucinations. But there is very little evidence to support this contrived solution, and much more evidence to indicate that we are dealing with a most real phenomenon of undetermined origin.....

originally posted by: mirageman
But Hynek didn't find any tracks on the ground beyond the marks originally found at the site.

I'm not sure what significance the tracks or absence of is supposed to have, if any. Lonnie Zamora sketched some apparent footprints he found which were presumably from the two people in white suits, and his sketch indicates there may have been more tracks. It's not really that clear, but tracks in sandy soil are easy fake or hide with a broom if wanted but I don't see any need for that for students to pull off a hoax, it seems like maybe they left footprints or bootprints, and Zamora sketched what he found. Maybe that's just supposed to be confirmation of the two people in white suits walking around or something?

Hynek's phrasing of "scooped out" landing impressions interestingly seems to fit hoaxing them with a shovel pretty well, which would be the likely method of creating them in my estimation. Did you ever see the photo which looks like it was scooped out by a shovel?


from here:
web.archive.org...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Phage
To my eye, the stones around the "impression" have the strong appearance of having been arranged.

They do but I don't know if they would have been arranged by student hoaxers or someone else. The important thing is, it does look like that could be easily produced with a shovel.

originally posted by: mirageman
...if it was all part of a hoax, then the perpetrators appear to have got lucky in how it was pulled off so perfecty.

Maybe they needed a little luck, but it seems fairly predictable that Zamora would chase the speeder and that he would get distracted by the pyrotechnics going off near the dynamite shack. I think of it as more good planning than luck. I've heard claims that some huge complicated crop circles could not be made by humans because it's too hard to do. Some of those crop circle hoaxes take a huge amount of planning, a lot more than the alleged NMT Zamora hoax, because they would need multiple teams working in a coordinated effort using GPS devices to get everything to come together in a complicated layout probably done on a computer. That's not luck either.

I found this addition to IsaacKoi's old thread interesting, but can't vouch for the credibility of these claims except for the claim that tech students would be quite capable of pulling this hoax off. They had ready access to lots of special balloons, pyrotechnics, even white uniforms that appear to match Zamora's description. If it's all true, and that's a big if, it won't be easy to get a peek at the folder of how it was done, but I think I can make a lot better guesses than Anthony Bragalia on some aspects, though he may have some things right.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Researcher
Looks like I am a little late to this party, but here is my $.02...

I live about a mile and a half from the site of the Socorro hoax. you have to do some detective work to find it. don't ask the locals. most have never heard of it, most of those who have heard of it don't know where the site is, and the very few who do know won't tell you where it is.

The symbol seen on the hoaxed UFO is not used as a symbol by local businesses and sports teams.

if you ask about it, a committee of locals will politely ask you to STFU, because they don't want it discussed. It is known to be a hoax. The folder describing how it was done is held by students at NMT. The folder is rarely shown to people who are not students at NMT.

NMT is a tough technical school. Cal Tech, MIT, Stanford tough, but rather more affordable. NMT students are quite capable of pulling this off.

Lonnie Zamora was a badge happy cop. In this respect he is quite typical of Socorro law enforcement. He made a point of harrassing NMT students. He got punked. Everybody who matters in town knows this. The town does not exploit this for tourism, and the decision makers would be happy if it just went away.

a reply to: mirageman

That is interesting that even though Zamora said there were these two men there were no tracks or footprints.
Maybe they were floating on air.

..I was rather hoping, at the time, that I could somehow invalidate Lonnie Zamora's testimony, but I was completely unable to do this. He came through as a solid citizen, generally well liked and of a practical, down-to-earth nature, thus making his participation in a hoax seem extremely unlikely.

Of all the Close Encounters of the Third Kind, this is the one that most clearly suggests a "nuts and bolts" physical craft along with accompanying noises and propulsion....

Invalidate what? It was likely nuts and bolts, but that doesn't tell us anything.

I still say it’s no evidence this was any ET craft. Of course, we don’t know what it was. Still, it’s not reported it did anything spectacular to indicate it was from any extraterrestrial or extraordinary location outside of this planet.

IMO, people need to distinguish ordinary crafts though strange looking, from extraordinary ones.

Not that I want to diminish the incident, but if Zamora said the beings were greys or had big bulging eyes, or the craft went off at a million miles an hour--then we'd have something interesting.

a reply to: mirageman

Even at that time the notion of a HOAX is very off.
From your link:

THE REASON FOR THE HOAX

Collis also explained that Lonnie Zamora had a reputation for "hounding" the Techie students during that time. The students and the Socorro police did not have a particularly good relationship back then. He said that there was "a lot of friction" at the time between what were felt to be "elitist and educated Techies" versus the "under-educated and simpler town folk." Zamora was always harassing the students for seemingly no reason, and at every opportunity. Many of the college kids just did not like him. What better way to "get back" at Zamora than for them to fool a fool?

Little known is that Zamora himself had worked at New Mexico Tech as a mechanic for seven years before becoming a patrolman. He had developed an insiders view of these college kids' world- a world that was very different than his own. When he left to join the town police, he was then in a position to exert his "influence" on these same kids. Collis further explains that Zamora was known as being "not especially educated." Supporting this are the observations of USAF investigator Dr. J. Allen Hynek. He wrote in his report of his interview of Zamora, "I would conclude that Zamora, although not overly bright or articulate, is basically sincere."

The way this read is that the mastermind behind this HOAX was neither "overly bright or articulate" yet he was about to get the whole HOAX in motion. It seems to me that at a time when these odd UFO reports were getting a look into, the story gets sidetracked by claims of a HOAX. I wonder how many investigators turned their noses at this case and wandered off to other cases.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

If there is a folder at NMT detailing exactly how the "hoax" was planned and executed, then aren't these folk just as guilty as withholding evidence, as national governments are often accused of in UFO cases?

It will have been 60 years since the incident, next year. Zamora has been gone over a decade. I get that people don't want to be harassed and questioned. If they were students in the 1960s, then they will be getting up there in years themselves now. Maybe someone will have a change of heart while there is still time? Or perhaps the file will be released to the public once those involved have all passed away?

That is, of course, if it really exists.

a reply to: Guyfriday

The way this read is that the mastermind behind this HOAX was neither "overly bright or articulate" yet he was about to get the whole HOAX in motion....

I think you have misinterpreted what is being claimed.

Zamora was not the 'mastermind' behind the hoax. He was the intended target of it by a group of students at NMT.

... It seems to me that at a time when these odd UFO reports were getting a look into, the story gets sidetracked by claims of a HOAX. I wonder how many investigators turned their noses at this case and wandered off to other cases...

Again, I think you are getting confused.

The hoax story only surfaced in 2009. Just a few weeks before Lonnie Zamora passed away and some 45 years after the incident. There were numerous investigations in 1964, including military, FBI, police and civilian ones such as NICAP.

There are over 200 pages from Project Blue Book here : www.theblackvault.com...

originally posted by: peaceinoutz
a reply to: mirageman

That is interesting that even though Zamora said there were these two men there were no tracks or footprints.
Maybe they were floating on air.

In the post immediately before yours, I linked to Zamora's own sketch of the footprints in the area, so I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but your statement "Zamora said there were these two men there were no tracks or footprints" appears to be inaccurate based on his own sketch of the footprints, which is literally labelled "Footprints" at the top of the sketch. The sketch mentions there may have been more prints that were harder to see etc.

It's really not hard to hide or fake footprints. If I wanted to hoax Zamora and didn't want to show footprints leading to or away from the site, I would use the old smuggler's trick of carpet overshoes to hide them, then stomp around a bit maybe making some exaggerated prints like the photos appear to show near the "landing site", then put the carpet overshoes back on when leaving. Not that I think all that is necessary based on Zamora's footprint sketch, but if someone came to the conclusion it was necessary it would be a lot easier to wear carpet overshoes than floating on air.

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: Arbitrageur

If there is a folder at NMT detailing exactly how the "hoax" was planned and executed, then aren't these folk just as guilty as withholding evidence, as national governments are often accused of in UFO cases?

If the question is how much is 2+2 one could argue there is such a things as a right or wrong answer. But in cases like Edward Snowden, is he more guilty for sticking to his confidentiality agreement and invading people's privacy illegally without their knowledge? Or is he more guilty for admitting publicly his invasion of people's privacy, and violating his non-disclosure agreement? I don't think there are clear right or wrong answers in cases like that as with the what is 2+2 question. It seems like he would be guilty of something either way.

The president of NMT said he was a personal friend of one of the student hoaxers, and would not reveal the hoaxers name, and the other staff at NMT also said his student found the hoaxers name but would not release it. One could argue for or against either withholding the name or releasing it, and maybe doing either one makes the person "guilty" in one way or another. But if I was in the position of the president of NMT and knew the hoaxer as a friend of mine, I also would not violate the friendship trust by releasing the hoaxer's name.

It will have been 60 years since the incident, next year. Zamora has been gone over a decade. I get that people don't want to be harassed and questioned. If they were students in the 1960s, then they will be getting up there in years themselves now. Maybe someone will have a change of heart while there is still time? Or perhaps the file will be released to the public once those involved have all passed away?

That is, of course, if it really exists.

Right, the last chance of having the hoax somewhat proven is as you said, releasing the folder after everyone involved has dies, or maybe a deathbed confession by the last survivor? But without something like that, we may never be able to prove the student hoax theory, at least not beyond a reasonable doubt.

You may know OJ Simpson was never convicted of murdering his wife in criminal court, because it couldn't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it, which requires a high standard of evidence. However in civil court in the US all one needs to do is show that it's more likely than not he did it, and he was found liable for his wife's death in civil court based on that lower standard of evidence. And so with Lonnie's description of an egg-shaped balloon, so far it can't be proven to be a student hoax, but I still have yet to see any alternate theory that matches his description as well as an egg-shaped balloon, and everything else can be explained by NMT techies planning a good hoax. Without confessions etc, the NMT hoax may remain unproven, but could still be the most likely explanation available.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Sure, it’s possible I read wrong statements by people who investigated who said there were no footprints. Marks on the ground for the craft, yes, but no footprints.

Footprints or not, I don’t relate that to any hoax scenario

Of all the written or oral accounts of the Zamora sighting……can it be agreed by all, that after the roar was heard and the blue to orangeish flame was seen………the direction of the flame was seen to be heading outward and downwards towards the ground and not heading inward into the craft?

Below is a hot air balloon burner….notice the blue to orangeish white flame …..you can agree that when firing off inward into the balloon envelope, it makes a roaringish sound. I’ll assume a much smaller hot air burner for the Zamora case example.

You can agree a hot air balloon pilot fires the balloon burner in (roaringish) spurts for gaining a certain altitude (perhaps to the 20+/- foot level as described by Zamora…and then said to go silent). For purposes of the hot air balloon burner….that would be normal operation to turn off the fuel to the hot air balloon burner when a desired altitude is reached (I assume there’s a pilot light for older models before going with piezoelectric igniters for re-firing the burner)

A hot air balloon envelope shaped like an egg with a burner rigging in Zamora’s sighting? That would possibly be only IF the flame was seen to heading inward into the balloon envelope.

But….as I read writings and oral descriptions…..it appears to me that the blue orangeish flame was heading outward (exiting) from the egg bottom for lift…..so much so as to cause charring of the surrounding shrubbery.

Below are pictures I put together to show the upward direction (on the left pic) of the hot air balloon burner flame as it would be for normal operation and the filling of the balloon envelope with hot air.

Also, the downward direction of the hot air balloon burner flame which is not normal operation. The hot air from the flame would not be entering the balloon envelope entirely to inflate. Instead, the hot air produced by the downward flame would disperse into the surrounding air around the balloon envelope and the ground area.

I’m leaning to the object not being any type of balloon, if a hot air type balloon was even used…needing a typical hot air balloon burner (that could emit blue orangish flame) of the times back then.

Imo…the up or down direction of the blue orangish flame is pivotal to determine whether it was a balloon or other craft.

General fyi From wiki…..

hot air balloons, with an onboard heat source, were developed by Ed Yost, beginning during the 1950s; his work resulted in his first successful flight on October 22, 1960.[18] The first modern hot air balloon to be made in the United Kingdom (UK) was the Bristol Belle, built in 1967. Presently, hot air balloons are used primarily for recreation.

As an exaggerated example……using the hot air balloon burner from the above pic. (couldn’t find a egg shaped horizontal balloon envelope example to use)


The hypothetical setup in the right pic….just wouldn’t fly…in my opinion

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Thanks for that. I wasn’t anxious about searching for balloon knowledge over this event, which I think was a very terrestrial event, not ET balloon or not.

Would they have such an apparatus inside a vehicle Zamora described?

originally posted by: peaceinoutz
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Would they have such an apparatus inside a vehicle Zamora described?

One could only speculate…….what the inside of a craft, man-made or non-man-made, contains …. while surrounded by the shape of an egg shell outer skin.

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Of all the written or oral accounts of the Zamora sighting……can it be agreed by all, that after the roar was heard and the blue to orangeish flame was seen………the direction of the flame was seen to be heading outward and downwards towards the ground and not heading inward into the craft?

Here's what the Blue Book report says:-

...At the same time that the roar was heard, be saw a flame. T!he flame was under the object. The object started to go straight up, slowly. Object rose slowly and flame was coming from the bottom. The color was light blue and sort of orange....

So the flame was under the object but no mention of it heading outward or downwards.

A hot air balloon envelope shaped like an egg with a burner rigging in Zamora’s sighting? That would possibly be only IF the flame was seen to heading inward into the balloon envelope. ..

Was it a hot air balloon though? Or just a balloon.

It never rose in altitude beyond around 25' according to Zamora's report. Which maybe implies it was pulled along by a vehicle. Maybe not?

a reply to: mirageman

Going back over what I wrote, yeah, I need to get better sleep at night. Though I swear I heard this HOAX angle before '09.

originally posted by: mirageman
Was it a hot air balloon though? Or just a balloon.

It never rose in altitude beyond around 25' according to Zamora's report. Which maybe implies it was pulled along by a vehicle. Maybe not?

If you assume it to be just a balloon, versus a hot air balloon of sorts…..either way I have seen no reporting of additional tire treads marks by a vehicle being left behind in the ravine / gully leading out and headed in the westerly direction of the dynamite shack.

Also, if your familiar with western desert brush and loose dirt……to drive vehicle at a speed to not be noticed ….would kick up a trail of dust and dirt. Zamora doesn’t mention that otherwise he would have concluded the balloon was being pulled by a vehicle.

It was reported there was a south bearing wind……if the balloon was tethered to a vehicle traveling to the west…….the balloon although headed west would have pulled and pivoted to the wind bearing in a southerly direction. The balloon would have to had fly westerly in a crosswind.

I don’t think …whatever it was ….was tethered to a vehicle.

Have you ever pulled a small regular balloon on a string, on a day with winds? The balloon tends to follow the direction of the winds….like a kite. Pulling against a cross wind would surely cause a erratic trajectory being pulled or tethered and much flopping around.

Imo…I don’t buy the balloon (or hot air balloon) hypothesis



As for what blue book mentions about the flame and it’s description

So the flame was under the object but no mention of it heading outward or downwards.

You can also say…….there no mention of it heading inward or upwards.

I’m curious as to your specific reference within the blue book report you have cited that from. The blue book report is made up of different opinions.

Who exactly said and wrote this? “

...At the same time that the roar was heard, be saw a flame. T!he flame was under the object. The object started to go straight up, slowly. Object rose slowly and flame was coming from the bottom. The color was light blue and sort of orange...

Link or highlighted document with author’s name would be fine.

Just curious

👽

Again, I ask whether any balloon would have seating like an ordinary craft.

I refuse to go to google and start checking out balloon technology in the 60s.
Although a case is always worth researching to me, this case is just not worth doing all of that.
Also, it would take a rocket expert to know all about the pyrotechnics of this craft.

Are any balloon techs or rocketry experts in the house?