Comments on: Socorro: The Latest http://www.ufomystic.com/2009/10/05/socorro-the-latest/ UFO News, Views, and More Mon, 22 Mar 2010 02:12:28 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Ed V. http://www.ufomystic.com/2009/10/05/socorro-the-latest/#comment-10573 Ed V. Tue, 06 Oct 2009 23:26:08 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/?p=2127#comment-10573 Seeing the source, the RR group, I wouldn't hold my breathe in anticipation of shocking revelations. Seeing the source, the RR group, I wouldn’t hold my breathe in anticipation of shocking revelations.

]]> By: Nick Redfern http://www.ufomystic.com/2009/10/05/socorro-the-latest/#comment-10548 Nick Redfern Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:31:46 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/?p=2127#comment-10548 I will be the first to admit that these claims to require evidence if we are to put matters to rest (or not!). However, I think these revelations have less to do with these people coming forward, and more to do with Tony seeking them out. But I agree - something substantial is needed to take this further. I will be the first to admit that these claims to require evidence if we are to put matters to rest (or not!).

However, I think these revelations have less to do with these people coming forward, and more to do with Tony seeking them out.

But I agree - something substantial is needed to take this further.

]]> By: crgintx http://www.ufomystic.com/2009/10/05/socorro-the-latest/#comment-10520 crgintx Mon, 05 Oct 2009 16:02:26 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/?p=2127#comment-10520 I read Ray's book in the 70's and have a vague recollection of it. The nagging question is why after 45 years are the hoaxers coming forward? If they, being tech scientific types, in fact did build a hoax aircraft, show us the plans and/or photos of the build process and other processes used to hoax the landing. You can claim just about anything but without hard evidence, you sound just as whacky as Bob Lazar. I read Ray’s book in the 70’s and have a vague recollection of it. The nagging question is why after 45 years are the hoaxers coming forward? If they, being tech scientific types, in fact did build a hoax aircraft, show us the plans and/or photos of the build process and other processes used to hoax the landing. You can claim just about anything but without hard evidence, you sound just as whacky as Bob Lazar.

]]> By: chris obrien http://www.ufomystic.com/2009/10/05/socorro-the-latest/#comment-10516 chris obrien Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:05:25 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/?p=2127#comment-10516 Anyone doubting the true, high-strange nature of the Soccoro case is advised to find a copy of Ray Stanford's seminal work: Soccoro Saucer in a Pentagon pantry. IMO the finest book ever written about a single UFO case. There are far too many unexplainable facts with the Zamora case and Ray's excellent on-site investigation 3 days after the sighting dovetailed with Hynek & the AF. Vitrified quartz, fused sand, radiation-fogged film, metal scrapings from the landing gear, no evidence of hydrocabon fuel on plant and soil samples—the list of unexplained elements is long and the case is still classified as a true unknown by the AF. Anyone doubting the true, high-strange nature of the Soccoro case is advised to find a copy of Ray Stanford’s seminal work: Soccoro Saucer in a Pentagon pantry. IMO the finest book ever written about a single UFO case. There are far too many unexplainable facts with the Zamora case and Ray’s excellent on-site investigation 3 days after the sighting dovetailed with Hynek & the AF. Vitrified quartz, fused sand, radiation-fogged film, metal scrapings from the landing gear, no evidence of hydrocabon fuel on plant and soil samples—the list of unexplained elements is long and the case is still classified as a true unknown by the AF.

]]> By: Greg Bishop http://www.ufomystic.com/2009/10/05/socorro-the-latest/#comment-10515 Greg Bishop Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:30:15 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/?p=2127#comment-10515 I'm still waiting for the actual confession of the hoaxer with details, which Bragalia seems to indicate will be forthcoming. He might have made a better case if he had waited on this before making his announcements. It seems paradoxically easier to prove this case as a true unknown than a hoax, probably because the evidence for a UFO is by definition unidentified, while a hoax explanation begs details which should be known. I'd be interested to see if he can prove his case, but so far, most remain unconvinced, including me. I’m still waiting for the actual confession of the hoaxer with details, which Bragalia seems to indicate will be forthcoming. He might have made a better case if he had waited on this before making his announcements.

It seems paradoxically easier to prove this case as a true unknown than a hoax, probably because the evidence for a UFO is by definition unidentified, while a hoax explanation begs details which should be known.

I’d be interested to see if he can prove his case, but so far, most remain unconvinced, including me.

]]>