Lonnie Zamora - Blue Book Conclusion

Blue Book Conclusion

The Air Force issued their formal report on June 8, 1964. Jerome Clark suggested that the report was "riddled with errors," including the claim that there were no other witnesses (several reported their sightings within minutes of Zamora's encounter), and the claim that there were no disturbances to the soil (manifestly false, based on Jordan's photos of the scene taken less than an hour after the encounter). Noting that they made no conclusion as to the object's origin (other than to rule out the extraterrestrial hypothesis), the "Air Force was continuing its investigation, and the case is still open."

However, in a secret report prepared for the CIA, Project Blue Book's director, Major Hector Quintanilla offered further details regarding the Zamora case, "There is no doubt that Lonnie Zamora saw an object which left quite an impression on him. There is also no question about Zamora's reliability. He is a serious police officer, a pillar of his church, and a man well versed in recognizing airborne vehicles in his area. He is puzzled by what he saw and frankly, so are we. This is the best-documented case on record, and still we have been unable, in spite of thorough investigation, to find the vehicle or other stimulus that scared Zamora to the point of panic."

Read more about this topic:  Lonnie Zamora

Famous quotes containing the words blue, book and/or conclusion:

    The extra worry began it—on the
    Blue blue mountain—she never set foot
    And then and there. Meanwhile the host
    Mourned her quiet tenure. They all stayed chatting.
    No one did much about eating.
    John Ashbery (b. 1927)

    And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
    Bible: New Testament Revelation 20:12.

    The conclusion suggested by these arguments might be called the paradox of theorizing. It asserts that if the terms and the general principles of a scientific theory serve their purpose, i. e., if they establish the definite connections among observable phenomena, then they can be dispensed with since any chain of laws and interpretive statements establishing such a connection should then be replaceable by a law which directly links observational antecedents to observational consequents.
    —C.G. (Carl Gustav)