Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> Aug -> Re: Socorro: The Zamora 'Insignia'

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Martin Phillips <martin.phillips@dtn.ntl.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 23:18:59 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 09:59:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro: The Zamora 'Insignia'


 >Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 13:44:00 -0400
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Socorro: The Zamora 'Insignia'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >I mean what I say, 'identify', ie work towards the state when
 >the nature and origin of the Socorro object is known.
 >Unfortunately in this discussion all I've seen so far is a lot
 >of self opinionated people stating what it can't possibly be
 >because...well, because a lot of reasons I suspect.

 >Now those points, to my sceptical mind, makes me think there is
 >a very real possibility a hot-air balloon may have been
 >involved. True, it doesn't explain some of Zamora's statement -
 >but much of what he said fits a hot air balloon. So why this
 >theory hasn't been taken seriously by many on this list astounds
 >and worries me.

 >With any UFO case it's perfectly reasonable (before you all
 >start yipping) -nay, essential - to fit any relevant parts of
 >the sighting to phenomena we already know exist. Which in this
 >case is why the balloon theory is perfectly feasible.


As someone without any firm theories as to what's going on with
UFOs, and therefore neutral in the ET/human arguments, I watch
'debates' like this with interest.

As normal, there are strongly-argued views which use the same
evidence to argue for opposite points of view. I agree that
balloons should be considered, but I'd say they have been
considered here.

Going purely from messages on this list, and re-reading some
books which mention Socorro, balloons might explain some things.
But they don't explain everything, so a balloon isn't the
answer.

I'd say 'nice try, but needs more work to be convincing'