UFO Conjecture(s)

Thursday, September 09, 2010

UFOs, Zamora, Zamorro, Big Foot, and ?

The tale in a clipping we found in our batch or UFO stuff intrigues in several ways.

Click here to see clipping

Lonnie Zamora saw a UFO with two beings near by. Zamorro saw a “saucer” with a Big Foot creature near by.

What’s our point?

That observations of UFOs and other paranormal artifacts (ghosts, sea monsters, fairies, et al.) are connected by synchronous delusions, variegated by the mind-sets of the observers, posing a psychological or neurological link amongst witnesses to UFO events, as we and Paratopia’s Jeff Ritzmann would have it.

UFOs, while having, sometimes, a tangible effect on materiality, the residue or remnants of that original tangible effect are lost or muddled in the observational aftermath.

UFOs have remained elusive for millennia. Collected data has provided no distinct clue as to what they are.

Ritzmann, among others, think that UFOs alter their presence or appearances to correspond to the cultural/societal conditions at the time they are observed.

That is, UFOs adopt the technological attributes of the period in which they are seen or witnessed.

No, it’s not a matter of interpretation by witnesses – such as chariots of fire in the early historical records of humankind or the 1890 airships. What is seen or reported is exactly what is seen; the UFO (or flying saucer) manifests itself precisely as witnesses have reported them.


The “saucers” of the 1950s, the occupant-sightings too, were geared to the mind-set of the observers.


The zeitgeist determines how UFOs will look -- their apparent construct.

But as the old philosophical saw goes – if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? – applies: if a UFO is in the vicinity of humans, but no one is around to see it, does it produce a tangible presence (for cameras, radar, et cetera)?

It seems that real UFO incidents need humans to perceive them, directly or indirectly.

And when humans perceive the UFO(s), they do so with all the aggregate mental detritus that suffuses their mind or memory.

Is there a UFO reality that is concrete or uniform? Apparently not.

UFOs alter themselves – we’re suggesting a living attribute obviously -- or are altered by the mental configurations of those perceiving them.

There is no one UFO presence, no one UFO reality. UFOs are all things to all people, manifesting their reality dependent upon the mental make-up of the person or persons taking in their presence, in the air, on the ground (as in previous years, more so than today), or via technology (radar, for instance).

And those who refuse the reality are also determinant mentally. They refuse the “reality” or “delusional reality” of others because they are saddled with mind-sets of a restrictive kind.

Until neurology, psychology, sociology, and other disciplines tackle the UFO phenomenon within the parameters of human mental vagaries, the mystery will remain elusive.

Hypothesizing about UFOs with an extraterrestrial orientation seems a futile enterprise. The folkloric aspect, propounded by Jacques Vallee or Dr. David Clarke, is a sensible approach.

But one shouldn’t eschew the ET interpretation out-of-hand. It remains a possibility, in the great scheme of things, but it shouldn’t becloud other interpretations, as it has for the past 60 years or so….


  • So you argue that these are fluid phenomena, as easily capable of becoming a "flying saucer" as a strawberry-scented My Little Pony? While I don't doubt that a small percentage of witnesses are truly seeing tangible phenomena, I think it is highly likely that their descriptions are often informed by experience. There have been countless experiments involving memory recall in excited or stressed situations and they can often fare poorly for the percipient. However, we must remember that not all recollection is flawed. If it were, we wouldn't be able to rely upon it for testimony in a court of law. At least, I would hope we wouldn't - cuz... well, there's that court date coming up and...

    By Blogger Cullan Hudson, at Thursday, September 09, 2010  

  • C:

    The memory/mind element pays a larger part in observed incidents than noted by courts of law, ufologists, and almost everyone else.

    Recollection is always flawed; Aristotle recognized this and addressed the issue in his "Metaphysics."

    But it's recent and current psychololgical studies that pin-point just how flawed memory and observation are.

    The human mind is awash in aberrant cognition.

    And those who report UFOs are predilected to be pathologically oriented.

    I'll be addressing this in an upcoming post here.

    (I know -- you just can't wait to read it.)


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, September 09, 2010  

  • Excellent post, Rich!

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Thursday, September 09, 2010  

  • Thank you Nick,

    You are too kind.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, September 09, 2010  

  • "That is, UFOs adopt the technological attributes of the period in which they are seen or witnessed."

    Or people report UFOs in the language, and its metaphors and analogies, available to them.

    In, say, 47 AD, a shield is reported. In 1947 AD, it's a shoe heel with scalloping on the concave side, ie a shield.

    UFOs are rarely reported on land (to have landed) and even less often under water.

    So, why are nearly all UFOs reported to have appeared in the sky? Why not in the garage, the house or refrigerator?


    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Thursday, September 09, 2010  

  • It's all about context, Don.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, September 09, 2010  

  • I'll take this a step further just for the sake of discussion and risk sounding like a complete fool (someone has to do it).

    Please note before reading that this is a very abstract concept, but one I've talked about on the show recently and on other programs. It's little more than me thinking out loud so bear with it.

    I have lately been describing the interaction with paranormal phenomenon as a "feedback loop".

    I've played guitar since I was 9 years old and became intimately familiar with tape delay units back in the 80's. Now, digital delays offer other soundscapes.

    When playing with a delay device on guitar, you hit a note - *ding*.

    The delay takes that note and sends it back - *ding. Your end result is *ding...*ding.

    But there's adjustments to fiddle with, one being length of time between delay - and feedback, meaning the length of repeat as it dwindles to silence again. When both are set to a significant level a very interesting thing happens - your echo becomes a tone, and a weird tone that has little to no resemblance to...*ding*. It becomes a surreal sound, that feeds upon itself...the echo repeats it's own delay signal.

    So it got me to thinking, re: cultural filters and focus of intent. If we focus upon say, a disc in the air, we're sending out that thought - *ding.

    But, let's postulate something else is answering - *ding.

    We continue...*ding ding
    Reply comes...*ding ding

    It then becomes a 2 way street between the "other" and an individual, and the result is frequency oscillation that reaches a kind of climactic weirdness.


    At the point of climactic overload between the enigmatic and ourselves - manifestation occurs - and it's every bit as surreal and bizarre as the tonal quality of a feedback delay in massive overdrive.

    It's a manifestation of idea and thought - and this is not to say it isn't "real", or that it explains every aspect of this phenomena. I could go as far as to call the UFO phenomenon a symptom of something much larger and more complex.

    I'm no writer, so I hope I've explained this very abstract idea well enough for people to understand.

    The end result to my ever changing outlook on this whole paranormal issue is questioning whether someone or something is trying to communicate and we're just not understanding the bone it's throwing us.

    "That's a flying saucer, so we're being contacted by another more advanced culture from the cosmos."

    The problem is we see this as spacemen in ships, or any number of other things, and some not even included in the "paranormal" because few speak of them. We're not recognizing the same concept Robert A. Wilson said about those trying to model the universe: you can't model it accurately unless you include us (the neurological / human perception) in the equation, as these are the tools we're measuring with when everything gets boiled down.

    (cont' in next post...)

    By Anonymous Jeff Ritzmann, at Thursday, September 09, 2010  

  • This idea that somehow UFOs are part of a collective conscious is based on the same human centric thinking that permeates religion. Everything that is happening is link to the human observer. Yea and the world's flat too. The people who pose these theories are just not up to the smarts of the ETs. Darn, what a bummer. Neither is anyone else but at least some of us don't have to make a fairy world for humans to explain psychological advancements of a superior race or how they may use them on us.

    Joe Capp
    UFO Media Matters
    Non-Commercial Blog

    By Blogger Joseph Capp, at Thursday, September 09, 2010  

  • "(I know -- you just can't wait to read it.)"

    Excellent parenthesis !

    Sure, I cant wait it !

    Suspens... Tic tac, tic tac...

    When !? ^^

    I'm not seduced by "mimetism" or "elusivity" of "your" or the ET phenomenom.

    It is well explained by human sciences imho !

    Best Regards,

    Gillles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Thursday, September 09, 2010  

  • Part Two...

    Is it real? It can be. But it doesn't have to be - that's the variable. Can others see this manifestation if say, it "belongs" to you or is tailored to an individual? Absolutely. Will others always see it as real or in the same "packaging" as you do? Not likely.

    I personally had a shared sighting some years ago as my wife, son and I were flying kites at a suburban park. A silver sphere appeared from nowhere and quite close in proximity as the crow flies.

    My wife, standing right next to me, could not see it. I pulled her directly in front of me and she was shocked as it was unavoidably there in front of us. As I side stepped, it seemed to fade as if a visually perceptive tunnel was formed between my exact previous vantage point and it. Had I not pulled the wife in front of me, she would not have had the experience. The object vanished as I sent Lisa (my wife) down the street 1/2 a block for a camera.

    Was it real? Who's to say. I saw it. She saw it. But it wasn't like I pinged a rock off it, so I can't say for sure. I can safely say it wasn't anything natural or a mis-identification of any kind.

    However I cannot deny one thing that renders the entire event absurd and strains my own credulity: Minutes beforehand while laying on my back in the park looking dead up at the sky I said "I haven't seen anything in a long while."



    By Anonymous Jeff Ritzmann, at Thursday, September 09, 2010  

  • "The people who pose these theories are just not up to the smarts of the ETs."

    Oh, Joe. As I've said before countless times, I'll stop theorizing deeper aspects of this subject when someone can show me the evidential proof of your flesh and blood ETs in their nuts and bolts craft.

    While I cannot remove the ETH from the table of possibility, I haven't seen much progress in that direction since the modern inception of UFOlogy. Is it providing us answers? Or, better questions? How's that working for you?

    I'll tell you what it has provided: an easy belief system for those seeking the Reader's Digest version to a complex enigma.

    The very idea that you make a statement like, "The people who pose these theories are just not up to the smarts of the ETs.", implies that you have insight into the alien mind. This is the sort of absurd comment that has earned the UFO subject it's facade of silliness over the years.

    I'll be direct and to the point: You have no idea what the UFO represents. No one does. The effort at belittlement you show to someone's thoughts on the subject that are not in line with your own, speaks to a bigger issue in this field: that to go outside the widely held theory is to be ridiculed, shunned and dismissed.

    Wait...no that can't be right. That'd be religion. Pot, kettle, deepest black. Sir.

    "Everything that is happening is link to the human observer. Yea and the world's flat too."

    So, if I understand this correctly, you've also figured out the nature of consciousness, human perception, and the tenets of reality. That's fascinating! Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us all. Oh wait, that'd make you a preacher. Well, that won't work will it? To use your word, bummer.

    Here's what I see - Your belief system has yielded nothing about this phenomena. You are no closer in progress than when you started. I'm not involved in this subject for your beliefs no matter how long held and precious you may find them. I've grown exceedingly tired of the ETH cultists telling me they "know" the point of origin as extraterrestrial when they don't actually "know" anything. But what's worse? I've had it with those same ETH cultists forcing the UFO inquiry into the stagnation it currently resides in, when someone suggests alternate theories or directions of thought.

    That M.O. no longer flies, and I'm the last one who'll be chastised into silence by the ETH clique.


    By Anonymous Jeff Ritzmann, at Friday, September 10, 2010  

Post a Comment

<< Home