UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2003 > Dec > Dec 3

Re: Socorro - Harney

From: John Harney <magonia@harneyj.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 21:42:36 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 03:21:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Socorro - Harney

>From: James Easton <voyager@jeaston.com>
>To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 04:41:10 -0000
>Subject: Socorro

>The following might be of interest:


>Please note inherent copyright and also the latest update


There are some problems with the hot-air balloon explanation
(which has previously been discussed at great length on this
List). The ones which occur to me are as follows:

1. There were very few such balloons in the USA at the time, so
it is thus odd that those did some research on them failed to
identify one which could have been drifting over Socorro on 24
April 1964. (It is also odd that the CIA should want to keep
secret any records they might have of experiments with hot-air
balloons at that time.)

2. Reports of the incident state that the wind was very strong.
In such conditions hot-air balloons can obviously become
unmanageable if they touch down

3. Even with a strong wind, it is difficult to see how a large,
low-flying balloon could have apparently escaped the attention
of everyone in Socorro apart from Zamora. I have seen hot-air
balloons and they are very conspicuous, even at a great
distance. It is puzzling that it managed to disappear from view
before anyone else got a chance to look at it, after Zamora had
drawn attention to it, it being impossible for such a device to
travel faster than the wind.

It is also of interest that no evidence has been discovered (to
my knowledge) which would suggest the possibility that Zamora
was telling anything but the truth about what he saw.

I think it would thus be unreasonable to say that the object
_must have_ been a balloon simply to remove it from the
"unexplained" list.

John Harney