Friday, January 17, 2025

The Zamora Symbol Controvery


Like David Rudiak, I really didn’t want to go down this particular rabbit hole because it was one of those no-win situations. More importantly, even if we could resolve the question of the “true symbol,” what did it gain us. And now there may be a third version to add to the mix.

I have advocated for years my belief that the “umbrella symbol” is the correct one. I based that on the documentation available in the Project Blue Book files and the testimony of some of the participants made at the time, that is in April 1964. I can see no reason that the officers involved in the investigation in the hours and days after Lonnie Zamora’s sighting would document that umbrella symbol as the true symbol if it was not. The every first is a scrap of paper on which Zamora said he scribbled that symbol as the craft was taking off. That seems to be very persuasive testimony.

On the other side of the argument are those who suggest the inverted “V” with three bars through it is the correct symbol. Ironically, it seems that Zamora is also the advocate of that symbol. It was released to some of the media, in those days meaning the press, within a day or two of the sighting.

J. Allen Hynek, in a letter dated September 7, 1964, produced a weird version of the inverted “V” symbol. It showed two parallel bars inside the “V” and a third bar over the top.

Rather than recap all this, the simplest solution for those who wish to read more about it, and to see the various pieces of evidence being discussed, is to follow this link:

https://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-socorro-symbol-resolved.html

Now, in the last few hours, I have received additional information. As you’ll read, one of these correspondents is less than patient. I will note that I made no changes in his comment, other than to divide the paragraphs for greater clarity. He wrote:

Hi. This is Patrick Richard, former MUFON investigator, ufo artist, portrait artist, MUFON New Mexico member and a very close alliance of Lonnie Zamora up until his passing. I lived in San Antonito, 8 miles south of Socorro, from July 2004 until August 2011. Let me point out something about this blog's ruminations. There is controversy about the paper sack...whether it was a stray scrap of paper at the landing site in the arroyo, or that Lonnie had a paper sack in his cruiser that day...I never asked him. I don't know. But I do know what he divulged about the insignia when we were having coffee at the NWestern-most window table at the El Camino Restaurant in Socorro some 7 months before his well-attended funeral at the mission.


The correct insignia is, as he stated to the dispatcher, "un 'v' invertido con tres lineas debajo". Debajo is slightly different but noteworthy. He didn't say 'abajo' (below and not necessarily related to a reference point in Spanish). He meant that the horizontal lines were not apart from the inverted V, per this nuance of Spanish grammar --- according to my wife who is latin american Spanish. Lonnie's use of 'debajo' is like saying 'is attached to the subject in the bottom area' --- otherwise he would have used 'abajo'. Spanish, like German, is very fussy about exactness in location. Regressando a la vaca fria...let's get back to the cold cow : the El Camino restaurant in Socorro (which is still open). I asked if he 'd have coffee with me because I wanted to ask him in person to come to my little house in San Antonito to finish an oil portrait I was painting for the purpose of donating it to the Socorro Historical Museum. Lonnie agreed to both, to my surprise. To the El Camino I brought the Albuquerque Journal's 25 year anniversay edition of the experience. Lonnie said he never saw this. So he leafed through it while I was doodling the variations of the red insignia. I had intended to bring it up, but I was sensitive to his needs for privacy, still, after 45 years. He looked at the black & white pages of the Journal as we began talking about it. I mused which insignia it was -- not asking him directly as he looked at the Journal's photo of the paper sack or "scrap"...Then, he pointed to my doodles and said "That one." The inverted V with three horizontal lines at the bottom, running through the bottom of the inverted V.

His two sons, or his daughter, may kniw something different, HOWEVER, Lonnie was truly and irreversibly dedicated to the safety of his family until the end of his life. To me, that is in itself, the smoking gun of his reality in the arroyo.

And that is persuasive argument and I would counter with the comments I made before. There is no motivation for the officers who provided written reports for Project Blue Book to have concealed the real nature of the insignia given the circumstances. While they might not have wanted it out in the general public arena as a way of eliminating follow on hoaxes, in their internal communications, that purpose is moot.

An hour after this first comment (made about seven hours ago) he furnished the following:

I would never argue in support of just a theory. As ufoguy remarked: get away from the computer and go outside to interview. That's solid.

An hour after that, he wrote:

Not the umbrella. Lonnie and I talked briefly about the ongoing fear for his family. The AF really did a stereotypical intimidation on him and did it well...and then crystalized the veiled threat with a sickly idea of patriotism thrown at a latino man who loves family and country, in that order. "Un 'v' invertido con tres lineas debajo" means the inverted v with 3 horizontal lines at the bottom of that v in a slightly cramed cluster. He told me.

And finally, he provided the following an hour later, “Where is my comment?”

The answer was simple. I hadn’t looked at the blog. I no longer allow unapproved comments to be posted directly. I was getting too many comments like, “Loved your post Good story. See http;//blab, blab, blab.com which was just an ad for a product that had nothing to do with UFOs.

But I digress.

I had also received another comment from TheUFOGuy, who posted his comment before those of Patrick Richard. He wrote:

Once again. I have a first hand witness who discussed this with Lonnie at the local coffee shop. Here is the conversation: At El Camino, while Lonnie was talking softly about the Albuquerque Journal edition, i was sketching (doodling) a couple of versions of the red insignia.

He looked from the newspaper and pointed to "that one" . I didn't expect him to answer my rhetorical question ( more to myself than to him) "well which one was it?"

The one in the upperleft of the photo I just sent.

He pointed to the drawing of the inverted V with 3 lines, but this site will not let me paste that drawing. I could send it to you, but your mind seems to be made up. Your also forgetting that Lonnie described the inverted V with 3 lines in spanish when he called the dispatch from the site. So, I have the drawing from the first hand witness with Lonnie, but I guess you will not post it?

Once again, I’m not sure why the snarky comment. Why wouldn’t I post it? It is relevant to our discussion. But there was no attachment and I looked at my email but didn’t see anything from him… until I realized who he was: Here is the drawing he sent.

 


If you look at the following post, you can read some additional information about this controversy. David Rudiak makes a few very interesting comments about this issue. Like him, as I say, I didn’t want to get dragged down this rabbit hole, and since the information that set it all off has been discredited (that presentation about Tesla), we really didn’t need to do this. The source for the original story is from a not so credible source and I knew that if I posted that information, we’d quickly learn more about it. That turned out to be true, and that part of this episode should be reduced to a footnote.

There really isn’t way to resolve this dilemma. I have posted illustrations made by Lonnie Zamora within hours of the sighting, signed by him, as the real symbol. Ray Stanford, who was in New Mexico within a couple days, and within two weeks, wrote to Dick Hall that the inverted “V” was not the real symbol. The real symbol is the “umbrella symbol.”

When the mayor of Socorro asked that Lonnie Zamora provide an illustration, Rick Baca was the one who drew it. A version of that drawing was published in the newspaper without any symbol on it but under Zamora’s guidance, the “umbrella symbol” was added later. This information is in the following post’s comments.

And there are the comments by Harden, who lives in Socorro and I’m sure both Richard and TheUFOGuy have spoken with him. He provided some interesting commentary, found in the following post about the “true” symbol.

TheUFOGuy (sorry, I didn’t realize who you were until later in the conversation) and now Patrick Richard, provide some compelling testimony. He provided a copy of the material that Richard provided that, as noted, came about with his discussions with Zamora and approved by Zamora.

A solid case can be made for either symbol (or the new third one that developed on that illustration above). I believe, based on the interviews I conducted and the documentation from the Blue Book files, that the “umbrella symbol” is the correct one.

However, the other side makes a compelling case for the inverted “V,” so you look at the evidence and decide which you think is the right one. I’m just not certain that it makes any difference in the world today. And remember, at the chief of Project Blue Book said at the time. He was going to make the UFO people happy because he, Hector Quintanilla labeled the case as “Unidentified.”

No comments: