Ray Stanford has a photo of the Socorro craft & Martin Willis has seen it and is impressed but...

[William Strathmann]

I can easily see how easy it is for someone to be duped into being visited and/or abducted. I was one of them (at one, extremely small point in my life). Here's the set up;

I was about 19-20 yrs old. In the U.S. Navy stationed in Brunswick, Maine but living in West Bath, Maine. We had the coolest apartment that was down a long, windy road that parallelled a river. There were only two apt buildings. Each building had 4 units. Our driveway and parking lot were dirt. We had a semi-obscured view of the river. Our unit was an upstairs one. Then my room was the entire second floor which was a loft which had sky lights in it. We were tucked away nicely in the woods. I had been interested in UFO's since 1979. Now this took place at approximately 1991-1992. Here's what happened;

I was sleeping in my loft (one roommate downstairs in his room). I became aware somehow of my surroundings even though I was still asleep. I felt a strong sensation that a presence was standing right next to me. I then felt a sensation of something going into my right ear. At this point, I was terrified and thought for sure there was a visitor(s) in my room. My entire body was tingling/buzzing. My heart was beating 1000 mph (1609/kph). I couldn't open my eyes though. Once the feeling of someone being in the room with me was gone, I was still terrified. I didn't want to open my eyes because the thought was too terrifying - especially if something was still in the room with me. After a 1/2 hour or so of lying their terrified, I finally had the nerve to open my eyes. Once I did, I was relieved to not see anything in my room. But I was still terrifie. d. So much so that I called a girl I went to school with growing up in New Jersey in the middle of the night. I just needed to hear a familiar voice and have someone calm me down. The next couple of days I was so traumatized (for lack of a better word), that I went so far as to contact John Mack's office in Massachusetts. I eventually wound up not following up with Mack's office but as time elapsed, I chaulked it up to sleep paralysis. Now as a 44 year old - I would definitely say it was sleep paralysis. But in the moment (and the next few days) - I was convinced I was visited.

So I can see how some people could just run with the notion of being abducted/visited even though the more likely explanation is sleep paralysis. I am not advocating that there are no such things as abductions, because I do believe it's possible (and probable). But I don't believe it happened to me that night in Maine.

CGL, I really don't see how your experience has any relationship to the channeling phenomenon. Channelers, during their sessions, are speaking, or doing automatic writing, etc. Some portion of channelers are either in a self-induced trance, or are led into deep hypnosis and it is then that they speak. Afterward, they claim not to remember anything that happened during the session. Such is what Kevin Randle reported. Such is what Joe Fisher reported. If you've read those books and would care to elaborate on how your experience relates to them, please do.

FWIW, I listened to the last three Paracast interviews with Stanford and during one of them he said that he did not believe the Socorro photos he took would have much scientific value, since he was not actually photographing the "objects." If I recall, he said that in the 2014 interview. So, to me, some comments in the last few pages of this thread have not properly represented what Stanford actually thinks about those photos.

Mishlove's account is very brief.

I had a look at this article, down at the Automobile Teleportation paragraph, and the account is indeed very brief.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

CGL, I really don't see how your experience has any relationship to the channeling phenomenon. Channelers, during their sessions, are speaking, or doing automatic writing, etc. Some portion of channelers are either in a self-induced trance, or are led into deep hypnosis and it is then that they speak. Afterward, they claim not to remember anything that happened during the session. Such is what Kevin Randle reported. Such is what Joe Fisher reported. If you've read those books and would care to elaborate on how your experience relates to them, please do.

I was just sharing a personal experience. At no time was I trying to compare or associate what happened to me with channeling. If I made that impression, it was done inadvertently and I apologize.

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

Is it possible to connect with other electromagnetic waves of other human beings going the late Ingo Swan it might be and why would governments spend so much dosh on investigation on the matters. Will robotics take over RV work in the future or already here?

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

Chris...This thread proves beyond any doubt that you will not be taken seriously until the evidence is proven. Open Source "online" is the best way to go.

I told you to put a sock in it and stop attempting to bait me. I mean it STOP!

I trust my own abilities to analyze original unaltered and not enhanced high resolution scans of the original negatives or original film frames over any Goddard scientist, or Adobe, or the Pentagon, etc. etc.

I don't give a crap what you think about your abilities. You are nothing more than an anonymous person whining while claiming to be more expert than our top space scientists. For some no name yahoo, you sure have an overinflated view of your abilities, and yes, I have extensive darkroom experience along w/ analog super 8 and 16mm camera experience. I also have videotape experience that goes back to 1974.

The Roswell Slides proves what can and will likely happen if Ray Stanford does not do this soon!

Oh, I see: now you are a prophet/psychic and are predicting the future...such hubris...

Again. This is the last time I am asking you to put a sock in it and stop whining, complaining, pontificating and baiting me. I even made it rhyme this time Mr. Too-Paranoid-to-Post-on-the-record like a real man. Go find a sandbox filled w/ anonymous wimps to flail at... Please? OK?

 

[Jeff Davis]

I was just sharing a personal experience. At no time was I trying to compare or associate what happened to me with channeling. If I made that impression, it was done inadvertently and I apologize.

I didn't take that to be your intent whatsoever. I think I am guilty of helping to do what may have created the confusion however. I responded off topic as well. It's tough not to do sometimes when you see the possibility of an intelligent exchange, with others just as fascinated with the subject as you yourself are, as we are inspired tangentially. I am a very spontaneous and expressive person so it just comes a little too easy for me at times. I apologize for being guilty in part of taking this thread in a direction that led away from MR. Stanford and his photo. @Creepy Green Light, if you do want to further discuss your experience, I for one would be very interested in doing so in a different/new thread. IMO, the round about subject that was inspired here by Burnt State & Honey-Pot in an of itself dwarfs the central topic of this thread. This being both in a real overall relevance, and importance, with respect to what is the UFO phenomenon and a positive approach to better understanding it.

 

[Bob Watson]

Chris:
For the record.
If you have seen the pics and within the scope of any confidential agreement you have with ray do you concider what is shown on the pics to be authentic?
I just want your honest opinion on this.
Bob/vesve
Unlike honey pot I never have hid behind a fourm alis

Sent from my SCH-I435 using Tapatalk

 

[Honey-Pot]

Chris:
For the record.
If you have seen the pics and within the scope of any confidential agreement you have with ray do you concider what is shown on the pics to be authentic?
I just want your honest opinion on this.

This post is addressed to everyone but Chris O'Brien.

Opinions are fine, but no one can seriously consider this evidence. We need to know the following: Before anyone starts making claims on Ray Stanford's behalf, including Chris O'Brien, IMO, we need to know whether Chris or anyone else "credible" has personally seen the original analog negatives and original analog film frames [when used for other ET or UFO proofs] enlarged at least 10x and 50x times on a light table aka a specialized magnification loop designed for this purpose [assuming you have excellent vision] -or- have seen enlarged and projected the original analog negatives and analog film frames on a large projection screen. Until Chris O'Brien or someone else that is credible and independent of Ray Stanford claims to have done this, imo, then no one has seen any real proof of Ray Stanford's image evidence.

I can quote Chris from elsewhere in this forum that no one should take anyone's word for proof of anything. We need the evidence too, but Chris has already proven repeatedly that he is going to avoid and not answer these Socorro photo questions I've already posted directly to Chris. [See my previous post marked 1) and 2) within that post.] I'm not asking Chris "here" to respond now, because he's told me "to put a sock in it" and not ask him about it again.

No one's opinion is helpful here. Why? We already know Chris O'Brien's opinions about Ray Stanford stated endless times on the forum, including this thread, and many times on the Paracast too.

IMO, the round about subject that was inspired here by Burnt State & Honey-Pot in an of itself dwarfs the central topic of this thread. This being both in a real overall relevance, and importance, with respect to what is the UFO phenomenon and a positive approach to better understanding it.

If you want to start a tread topic about this, then I'll be happy to participate. I've enjoyed reading many of your posts and ideas to this forum, and I'm happy to see you posting again just recently.

 

[Bob Watson]

This post is addressed to everyone but Chris O'Brien.

Opinions are fine, but no one can seriously consider this evidence. We need to know the following: Before anyone starts making claims on Ray Stanford's behalf, including Chris O'Brien, IMO, we need to know whether Chris or anyone else "credible" has personally seen the original analog negatives and original analog film frames [when used for other ET or UFO proofs] enlarged at least 10x and 50x times on a light table aka a specialized magnification loop designed for this purpose [assuming you have excellent vision] -or- have seen enlarged and projected the original analog negatives and analog film frames on a large projection screen. Until Chris O'Brien or someone else that is credible and independent of Ray Stanford claims to have done this, imo, then no one has seen any real proof of Ray Stanford's image evidence.

I can quote Chris from elsewhere in this forum that no one should take anyone's word for proof of anything. We need the evidence too, but Chris has already proven repeatedly that he is going to avoid and not answer these Socorro photo questions I've already posted directly to Chris. [See my previous post marked 1) and 2) within that post.] I'm not asking Chris "here" to respond now, because he's told me "to put a sock in it" and not ask him about it again.

No one's opinion is helpful here. Why? We already know Chris O'Brien's opinions about Ray Stanford stated endless times on the forum, including this thread, and many times on the Paracast too.

If you want to start a tread topic about this, then I'll be happy to participate. I've enjoyed reading many of your posts and ideas to this forum, and I'm happy to see you posting again just recently.

Umm honey pot he answered it to my satisfaction. Look at his response after my question.
Vesve/bob
Who wont hide under a fourm ID

Sent from my SCH-I435 using Tapatalk

 

[Creepy Green Light]

I didn't take that to be your intent whatsoever. I think I am guilty of helping to do what may have created the confusion however. I responded off topic as well. It's tough not to do sometimes when you see the possibility of an intelligent exchange, with others just as fascinated with the subject as you yourself are, as we are inspired tangentially. I am a very spontaneous and expressive person so it just comes a little too easy for me at times. I apologize for being guilty in part of taking this thread in a direction that led away from MR. Stanford and his photo. @Creepy Green Light, if you do want to further discuss your experience, I for one would be very interested in doing so in a different/new thread. IMO, the round about subject that was inspired here by Burnt State & Honey-Pot in an of itself dwarfs the central topic of this thread. This being both in a real overall relevance, and importance, with respect to what is the UFO phenomenon and a positive approach to better understanding it.

No worries. The exchange of information & ideas is great - especially on these forums. I'd be happy to further discuss. It sounds like you have some experience and/or feelings regarding channeling? I really don't have a lot of knowledge when it comes to that area. What I know is just what I've seen on TV the last 40 years. If I had to pick, I would say there's a far greater likelihood that that nuts & bolts UFO's exist over channeling. Maybe you have some information or a story to relate? Maybe we should start up a new thread as to not aggravate the rest of our forum brothers & sisters?

 

[stonehart]

 

[Honey-Pot]

The lynch mobs in this thread are quite different in size, but there are about two here that can and will shoot and hang someone's screen name. Is this a balanced and fair debate with Open Source information or even reasonable answers provided? This thread seems quite typical of Ufology and their gurus.

If some simple easy to answer questions were answered, then I seriously doubt there would be any lynch mobs or even any debate here. Makes you wonder why this is happening...

 

[Jeff Davis]

Please be inspired to stay positive: UFOs & The Human Fortean Channel Network

I for one am extremely interested in what Chris and Ray are mutually cooperating to forward. As a physical species, we have no choice but to allow all matter of things to render themselves in their own time. Hopefully, as gracefully as is possible.

 

[mikeclr]

As usual, threads like these spur me to do further reading.

As a result I found this article...

ARCHIVED COLLEGE PHOTO REVEALS HOW THEY HOAXED THE SOCORRO UFO by Anthony Bragalia | Strange

Is it out of the realm of possibility this could not only be what Lonnie saw, but also what appeared in Ray's later photograph?

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

lol—from beforeitisnews—our favorite authoritative source! Yes, totally out of the realm of possibility. The Bragilia claim has been effectively discredited in my (and many other's) estimation. The balloon shown looks nothing like what Zamora and the other cop claimed they witnessed. Going from the fact that Bragalia's entire theory is derived from a single aside in a letter written by Colgate to Pauling, he has nothing else to support his revisionist theory. The object that landed outside of Socorro left into a fairly strong breeze and flew away at high speed. Doesn't sound like any balloon I've ever heard of.

 

[Burnt State]

What the Soccoro incident highlights about Ufological history is this repeated memetic narrative: Someone sees something inexplicable...The impact of the sighting on the individual is so intense they feel compelled to tell their story. In some cases witnesses are so moved by the event that they become repeaters, where they start to experience all manner of weird phenomena (I.e. Dale Spaur, Dr. X, The Andreasson Case). These cases are then picked apart across history by skeptics. The repeaters are called hoaxers and the one off incidents will be attempted to be taken down by balloons, swamp gas, gov't planes etc.

Sometimes I say to myself, if all it ever was about were these mundane answers, misperceptions and human shock and awe then would we still be talking about it?

So is the reason why we still talk about these cases because the imprint of human shock and awe is so great on history that it lasts, essentially creating folklore? Or is folklore really based on sustained inexplicable external stimuli that we have yet to comprehend and so dress them up in whatever is culturally appropriate at the time: dragons in the sky, angels in the sky, airships in the sky, UFO's in the sky etc.? I prefer the latter myself; otherwise, all this talk above is just bullshit time wasting about the delusions of crowds and is in fact then a religious cult of belief.

 

[Wade]

But you have to admit it livens things up when things get a little stale around here.

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

Historically speaking the great work many of the investigators like Gene, Don , Rich and other academics into this field have done the ground work today the field is fighting and self destruction name calling. Hoaxes from the 1950s today on you tube crappy UFO photo shop crap by nutters mucking around with folks minds who seen or encountered odd and even terrifying events. It seems Chirs just out to discover what hell the shit is and folks seem to use personnel attacks against researchers who do ground work not computer tappers. There is some strange events around these UFO sighting what hell they are who fuck knows still enjoy old cases of military and police officers like Socorro no doubt it been muddled by those who seek it to go away going folks reactions on the forum and lets not forget these military , police officers get hell off shit to come forward to inform or provide a eyewitness account and crap given too their families by skeptics or nutters to discuss those military base encounters by manipulation by covert human ?or unknowns visitors? (not just so called ET maybe a natural occurrences ).

 

[Honey-Pot]

Sometimes I say to myself, if all it ever was about were these mundane answers, misperceptions and human shock and awe then would we still be talking about it?

No UFO organization has ever conducted a proper investigation. Vallee has already suggested why. There is no long-term focus to understand the witness or witnesses on any case deemed worthy to fully study.

Also, no effort is made to study or test the witness or witnesses mind and mental/physical health and life history to really understand what is happening. Vallee may have some case studies, but I doubt he has even done the necessary studies due to lack of funding and time available.

We need to learn far more about the Human mind and psychology to understand what is happening. Documenting external observations is meaningless without the detailed witness information that is always missing.

ET UFO's could all be cult magic and belief until this happens. Right? You did say this:

[...] otherwise, all this talk above [this thread topic] is just bullshit time wasting about the delusions of crowds and is in fact then a religious cult of belief.

Well, seriously, isn't the necessary witness information missing?

 

[Honey-Pot]

The object that landed outside of Socorro left into a fairly strong breeze and flew away at high speed. Doesn't sound like any balloon I've ever heard of.

Surface winds can vary in direction. Investigators that refer to weather bureau information [at some distance away from the sighting] and then use this distant weather information to try to prove a point about the Socorro object located at some distance elsewhere are misleading the truth about what may have happened.

Fact: Surface winds can change directions.

Fact: Wind gusts can carry light-air objects at high speeds for long distances in level flight and even track near the ground. The Socorro object behaved exactly this way tracking near the ground in level flight before changing altitude.

Fact: A thermal can carry a light-air object upwards at a very high rate of speed too.

Fact: The desert-like and flat conditions can enhance or dramatically increase the wind gusts, direction changes, and thermal lift conditions for all of the above.

The balloon shown looks nothing like what Zamora and the other cop claimed they witnessed.

Fact: There is documentation that Zamora said it looked like a balloon. There is a Zamora quote available on this thread.

Fact: There is documentation that Zamora said he first thought it was an overturned car. A science [or hoax or black project] light-air object or balloon can be shaped and sized to approximate the shape and size of an overturned car. Zamora obviously did not observe the "car object" long enough to identify it properly, because he was moving to another position to get a closer look.

There were other unique test balloon shapes being used and tested at the time of Zamora's sighting. The fact 4 UFO objects claim to be photographed by Stanford 4 months after the Zamora sighting just point .6 miles away, according to screen name Socorro aka Ben Moss, lends evidence that these are man made objects probably seen numerous times in the area.

Look at the size of this thread to learn just how people flock together to create folklore out of nothing amazing. A few will believe it's not man made, it's belief, but without the witness information that is still missing we know nothing factual.

Zamora was quickly managed by Military Intelligence! He changed his story. He was escorted at media events with Military Intelligence operatives aka "media handlers" or "security" but definitely Military on Duty under Orders. WTF. Do you have a need to know the truth? There may have been some Human UFO [but not ET] technology being tested and people like Hynek and Stanford want you to believe it's ET. I wonder why? Walter Bosley can provide an answer. This is exactly what Intelligence Ops will do. It's merely a cover for black projects, and, yes, it may have even been planned to be exposed too. This would discredit any local witnesses from further reporting with ongoing testing, but nothing proves it was not just misidentification and/or a hoax too. Had Zamora not been manipulated to change his story, then he would be a more credible witness. I understand why he probably did this. Lots of possible patriotic or classified and security reasons.

Stanford was denied initial access to interview Zamora. I wonder why? He was a self-appointed UFO investigator. A true blue believer in ET Nuts and Bolts UFO's. He self-invited himself to Socorro. At the police station he was not credible to do any initial interviews or get police reports. It's not surprising he was denied this attempt. Stanford was just 26yo and a nobody to anyone there. Will the police consider this "investigator" [I can see the police cringe at that idea.] who believes in ET UFO's worthy to be taken seriously by police? Where is his official UFO Badge of Investigations credentialed from the ET UFO Academy of Believers? Jokes are allowed, right?

Too bad Ray doesn't have a Doctor Who ID Card to flash around.

Hynek later allowed him to get in on some of the investigation process. I wonder why? I can just imagine the Human Trickster possibilities that have lasted a lifetime...

 

[mikeclr]

I'm not any kind of UFO investigator, professional paranormal pundit, or hokum huckster. I am merely a fairly well educated person who has had an interest in UFOs since I was a kid.

Something did happen at Socorro that day. Based on what I have read, heard, and seen of this particular case I do not feel the evidence supports any claim of extraterrestrial visitation in any way, shape, or form.

To be honest, I wish it did. To paraphrase Agent Mulder, I want to believe. For me, critical thinking and Occam's razor put this one to bed fairly early. It's an interesting case, extremely interesting, but - to me - from a historical and folkloric view point only.