UFO Conjecture(s)

Sunday, April 03, 2016

UFOs: The semiotic lacuna

My fascination with the Zamora/Socorro symbol – no matter which one is the real insignia he saw on his observed alien [strange] craft – is not augmented by UFO symbols reported by observers of the phenomenon, and highlighted in the literature.
Why not?

There is a dearth of credible witnessing of writing or signs/symbols on UFOs or the alleged uniforms of beings associated with a UFO encounter.

There are these (which I’ve covered at this blog and others):

But are their any credible (authentic) signs or symbols ufologists could research (or better, have a qualified expert, a semiotician, review)?

There are none.

The Socorro insignia/symbol is a creation of a human agency [CIA/Hughes Aircraft].
 The UMMO symbol was a hoax. 
The Adamski-provided symbols on Orthon’s shoe-imprints and film slice are contrivances – and not good ones – by “Professor” Adamski.
An absence of signs or symbols can mean a number of things:

UFOs are figments of imagination, where a symbol cannot be induced, unless hoaxed (as an imagined UFO doesn’t have the linguistic neural, syntactical connection necessary to replicate a symbol):

Alien [ET] cultures don’t rely on linguistics (where symbols are an integral part) but use another form of communication (telepathy?):

An extraterrestrial civilization employs emotions (or something else) to communicate, without a need to verbalize or create language associations; that is, aliens would not use thought or thinking like the human model of reason and language, as one sees in whales or dolphins.

The lack of received transmission sounds, verbalizations (“voices”) in UFO encounters via aircraft or on the ground indicates a non-hearing kind of communication where one might see symbols employed. But as there are no such symbols, one has to conclude that UFOs are either a false phenomenon or space craft containing species so unlike Earthlings that connecting with them will not be, cannot be, a rational interplay.

Although Betty Hill proclaimed a map and book aboard the UFO that allegedly abducted her and her husband, Barney, the inclusion of both in her testimony bespeaks either a confabulation or an induced hallucination anchored in human reality, not alien reality.

While a few UFO encounters [the 1967, Police Officer Schermer episode, for example, where a serpent insignia was seen on an alien uniform -- http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case659.htm -- such imagery comes by way of hypnosis and, thus, have the intrusions of memory material implicit in them.
Of course, any supposed recorded (witnessed) extraterrestrial intrusion might be an observation of a civilization so removed from a need for linguistics, and symbols or signs, that to expect any is a human projection only.

With odds against ET visitation – Earth is too inconsequential for the many reported UFO sightings – a lack of symbols seen on the tangible phenomenon is either caused by that lack of neural ability to insert symbols or signs upon an hallucinated vision or UFOs are a phenomenon devoid of communication aspects; that is, a natural or unknown amorphous phenomenon.



  • The provenance of the Socorro symbol could give credence to the Iron Skeptic's thoery of it being a lunar module being towed by a helicopter (see also this link: http://www.nmsr.org/socorro.htm).

    By Blogger scherben, at Sunday, April 03, 2016  

  • I've always been of the opinion that the "IH" symbol on the 1967 Madrid sighting was nothing more than the witness imagining the event had some "holy" significance.

    The overlapping IH is in fact a lesser known Greek symbol for Christ.


    I recently visited the Socorro site where Zamora claimed he saw an "egg shaped" object with the inverted V shape and three lines. I believe he's on record for stating that Ray Stanford is the only investigator who "got it right" on the event and the symbol which, as we know, was supposedly deliberately altered to allow for possible repeat witness corroboration. I believe Hynek also drew his own "version" of the symbol.

    In any case having been at that site (which is basically just as it was then), I can tell you for certain there could never have been any students hoaxing this sighting with a balloon. The terrain is rather flat and open and such an object (with its hoaxers in tow) would have been well seen after the event happened, if not before.

    It wasn't hoaxed in my opinion. An experimental human craft? Probably yes.

    By Blogger Brian Bell, at Sunday, April 03, 2016  

  • I'd be interested, Brian, in seeing Officer Zamora's imprimatur of the Stanford symbol.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, April 03, 2016  

  • Good evening,

    Just for fun, the Hong Kong subway logo looks similar (although not identical) to the Ummo sign.




    By Blogger Rare phenomena lover, at Sunday, April 03, 2016  

  • I doubt students did hoax the Socorro event, but Zamora's glasses had fallen off his face, presumably reducing his vision(?)

    Steuart Campbell, an astronomer, is of the opinion that he witnessed a mirage of the star Canapus (see his book The UFO Mystery Solved); although I'm doubtful of that, too (though I'm hardly qualified to comment).

    By Blogger scherben, at Monday, April 04, 2016  

  • Scherben:

    Officer Zamora dropped his glasses, at the very end of his observation, just before the "object" accelerated and flew off.

    Everything up to that point was viewed with good eyesight via corrective glasses as David Rudiak (a doctor of optometry) has often noted.

    Lonnie Zamora was an impeccable witness, one of the best in UFO lore.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, April 04, 2016  

  • Thanks for that information. I don't believe Zamora was lying; just mistaken (about a probable lunar module), and filtering his sighting through the PSH.

    As an aside, Brian's insight on the Ummo symbol and the ancient symbol for Jesus, is excellent work. As is the whole blog post. Thanks to both of you.

    By Blogger scherben, at Monday, April 04, 2016  

  • I can prove that Hughes nor any other Earth bound company made that symbol.
    I have all of the internal Blue Book documents. Hughes said not ours to the office of the President, not lunar lander (it had no internal engine in the time frame) White House asked, AF could not answer, said unknown (and still classified as such), the real symbol is an inverted v with 3 bars. Come see our presentation in Orlando, www.mufonsymposium.com We are not guessing we have all of the documentation.

    By Blogger Ben Moss, at Saturday, July 16, 2016  

  • There is no mistaken.We re been visited by many folks from outer space.Over the years.The agencies and nasa itself stand for it.Astronauts too.But they ve not the permission to.talk about.But on their deathbed its no matter of loyality anymore.Like armstrong did.Its fact.And everybody who do not recognize it or believe it is really a idiot.Its true.Cause keyhoe ve said it too.But something happenend between june 1949 and december 1949.Then the usaf changed their policy.No clue why?Keyhoe too.Its the real deal.And we as humanity must be aware of it.We ve a lot time.And nasa member talk about it too.His words ,quote"We ve chased many many of these objects over the years.But not with the visibility of that ones."So?Please...sceptic this quote.

    By Blogger SINGER SONGWRITER MIKE, at Sunday, March 19, 2017  

  • NASA quote...we ve chased many many of these objects over the years.But not with that visibility of that one."Live on tv...And armstrongs deathbed quote.."For those who re able to remove one of the protective layers?"Thats all i must know.sorry.There re too much agencies and members and civilians that were witnesses.Its fact...that we re visited.And there re reasons why.No clue if harmless or hostile ,but i really hope its for our all good.Thanks.Always looking up..

    By Blogger SINGER SONGWRITER MIKE, at Sunday, March 19, 2017  

Post a Comment

<< Home