The UFO phenomenon seems to “pre-select” its observers !!

“Human beings are under the control of a strange force that bends them in absurd ways, forcing them to play a role in a bizarre game of deception” – – Jacques Vallee

by Norio Hayakawa, September 24, 2021:

The UFO phenomenon appears to me as a paraphysical intrusion into our physical dimension by an unknown intelligence or unknown sentient entitities, paraphysically materializing themselves to a “pre-selected” observer  (or a group of observers, whether small or large)  and presenting to the observer as a physical extraterrestrial phenomenon and visitation for reasons yet unknown.

The “pre-selection” also seems to include a particular location as well as a particular time.

The phenomenon seems to be able to materialize and de-materialize at will and even seems to be capable of “transmogrifying” itself into any shape or form  (as in the words of  John A. Keel).

However, the phenomenon does not seem to be able to survive in our physical dimension except for a few seconds or a few minutes at a time.

Some researchers claim that the phenomenon seems to be able to temporarily affect our physical parameters  (such as radar, etc.).

Yet the phenomenon also seems to be incapable of being photographed with clarity, if at all.  This also seems to be the case with other “anomalous” phenomena.

And on many occasions, it seems to me that these “UFOs” only deceptively appear  (to the observer)  to be utilizing some type of a propulsion system as they seem to take off into the distant sky at an unimaginable rate of speed.

In other cases, “UFOs” seem to simply hover or “float” (again, as if they’re utilizing some form of a propulsion system capable of “floating”)  before taking off or even de-materializing.

Could this be a deception?

Finally, by ‘phenomenon’  here,  I would like to include both the ‘craft’ as well as the ‘entities’ and their seemingly paraphysical capabilities.  Again, this also seems to be the case with other “anomalous” phenomena.

By the way, here is another of my favorite quotes from Dr. Jacques Vallee, the world’s top-most authority on the UFO phenomenon in my opinion:

“Contact between human percipients and the UFO phenomenon always occurs under conditions controlled by the latter.  Its characteristic feature is a factor of absurdity that leads to a rejection of the story by the upper layers of the target society and an absorption at a deep unconscious level of the symbols conveyed by the encounter.”

I am the first to admit that all of the above is purely my personal speculation, but it’s the best that I could do, considering this sobering fact that:

Even though the UFO phenomenon seems to exist, it has not proven itself to be absolute, tangible evidence that we have been visited by actual physical extraterrestrial biological entities in any actual physical spacecraft of any kind.  The term “UFOs” is misleading since we still do not know if they are really objects or if they are actually flying as we understand flying to be  (as through the use of a propulsion system),  as often mentioned by Dr.  Jacques Vallee.

It is a well-known fact that John A. Keel and Jacques Vallee were two of the first big name researchers who had departed from the physical Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (ETH) of the origins of UFOs and the UFO phenomenon.

Although it is still considered to be a minority view in the field of Ufology, quite a number of researchers followed suit, including J. Allen Hynek, Arthur C. Clarke, Whitley Strieber, John Mack, Karla Turner, Guy Malone, Joseph G. Jordan, L.A. Marzulli and Nick Redfern.

Many of them seem to have gone from ETH to the “Fallen” and “Malevolent”

They seem to have concluded that UFOs are extra-dimensional and not from far outer space.

I totally agree with them.

Since the late 1970s, I, too, have maintained  (and will continue to maintain)  my opinion that we have never been visited by physical ETs in their physical spacecraft.

In fact, science has yet to prove that UFOs represent any conclusive evidence whatsoever of physical ET visitations.

The reality, in my opinion, is that “they” are deceptive, manipulative and malevolent entities from another dimension, deceiving us by paraphysically materializing and “posing” as “ETs” from highly advanced civilizations from outer space.

This does not mean that “benevolent” ones do not exist.

In fact, it is my belief that the “benevolent” ones not only exist but they are in the majority, i.e., with the ratio of 2 to 1 against the “malevolent” ones.   (i.e., for every “malevolent” one, there are two “benevolent” ones).

Eons ago, one third of all cosmic, sentient, paraphysical angelic entities were thrown out of their special domain by the Creator for participating in a cosmic-shaking revolt led by Lucifer who became Satan, and his followers “fallen angels”  – – as suggested in Revelation 12:4 – – many biblical scholars seem to support this interpretation.

Perhaps the “benevolent” ones are doing good works without being seen by most of us.  Perhaps they are what are believed to be “guardian angels”.   But the ones that are deceiving people and causing “confusion” are certainly not the “benevolent” ones.

Tom Farmer, a researcher, stated:

“John A. Keel pointed out 50+ years ago that UFOs come in too many form factors, “crash” too often and spout too much nonsense to contactees to be nuts-and-bolts spacecraft crewed by explorers from afar.  They are a current-frame-of-reference manifestations of a trickster intelligence that has always been with us.”

……….

Norio Hayakawa’s CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE NEWS SERVICE

E-mail = noriohayakawa@gmail.com

Facebook = http://www.facebook.com/fernandon.hayakawa

Please also watch Norio Hayakawa’s YouTube videos

A classic case from 1964 – – the Lonnie Zamora incident of April 24, 1964, outside of Socorro, New Mexico

by Norio Hayakawa from Albuquerque, New Mexico, September 22, 2021:

This is definitely one case that still fascinates me, even after all these years !!

It happened on April 24, 1964, just outside a small town called Socorro in the State of New Mexico, USA:

Was it a US made experimental craft?    I doubt it.

Was it NASA’s Lunar Module?    I highly doubt it.

(NASA would never mistakenly or even intentionally test fly its Lunar Module way beyond its test range and land on a populated area)

Was it a prank orchestrated by some college students of nearby NEW MEXICO TECH, as some researchers such as Anthony Bragalia and Frank Stalter later started claiming?

I do not buy that theory, even after reading such theories as posted in:

https://skepticalinquirer.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2010/03/p25.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3spdvyNVhYZIrz7FdJagiKIegXUng06b_cptdWQdT4ShNNQAI_tB74DBY:

“If it was a college students’ prank, how such a hoax might be pulled off has never been fully explained.  Some claim that a rear projection device was stolen from the college on the day of the Zamora UFO incident.  However, it is not likely that a rear projection device would have been of any use in creating an illusion in the desert in full sunlight.  While we might suppose that two students wearing white coveralls may have made some marks in the ground and released a helium balloon when Zamora arrived, it is difficult to see how they removed themselves from the scene before Officer Chavez arrived minutes later.”

Could a bunch of students develop a shiny, polished metallic oval object that could take off into the distant sky at an incredible rate of speed as was described by experienced law enforcement officer, Lonnie Zamora?

 

AND HERE IS MY WILD SPECULATION:

Or, was this a ‘mischievous’ but purposefully staged event orchestrated not by some college students but by some unknown paraphysical entities who, for some inexplicable reason, suddenly materialized themselves, temporarily breaking through the barrier of dimension and presented to a “pre-selected” observer  – i.e., officer Zamora – – a staged scenario,   as if he were watching an extraordinary extraterrestrial type of visitation?

 

It is not an exaggeration to say that this case was exactly what attracted to me to New Mexico and became my secondary reason for coming to New Mexico in 1965, all the way from Japan.

(By an unbelievable coincidence, I had been offered a partial scholarship to attend a college the following year, 1965, here in New Mexico.)

After arriving at Albuquerque in 1965, unfortunately my college studies began to continuously preoccupy me until 1973 when I had to move to Arizona to become a high school teacher and I regretted the fact that I had never had the privilege of meeting Mr. Zamora in person in Socorro.

However, in 2008 when my wife and I moved backed to New Mexico to retire, after living and working in California, I decided to call him on the telephone from Rio Rancho, our new residence.

I had a very pleasant conversation with him on the telephone, even though it was only for a few minutes or so.

He was such a friendly-sounding person, a very polite and pleasant-sounding gentleman.  He was already a 75-year old senior citizen by that time, but his mind still seemed to be very sharp and he verified to me on the phone his unforgettable sighting just as it had been reported in the newspapers. 

He invited me to visit him at his home, but I never had a chance to meet him.

He passed away the following year, in 2009, I was told later.

I firmly believe the Lonnie Zamora case was a legitimate case in every sense of the word.

As to what the object was, that is a separate question.

It is still unsolved.   It is still a mystery.

What impressed me was that Lonnie described the two persons  (of rather short stature)  as wearing some type of white cover-alls.

Lonnie initially described them as more or less “normal” people.

Above is just an artist’s illustration, not an actual photo

In any case, this is definitely a noteworthy case.   CLICK THE FOLLOWING LINK AND WATCH:

The best short video on the Socorro incident

ALSO, CLICK THE FOLLOWING LINK AND WATCH THIS VERY IMPORTANT VIDEO:

Capt. Richard T. Holder’s comment on the Socorro incident

Here is an interesting letter from C.B. Moore, Professor, Atmospheric Physics and Chairman, Langmuir Laboratory at NEW MEXICO TECH   (courtesy of Ben Moss and Tony Angiola)

(CLICK TO ENLARGE ABOVE)

Here is the main portion of this 1981 letter:

“In regards to the unidentified sighting by Officer Zamora in 1964, I have investigated this on my own and can assure you that there is little probability that it had anything do with with students of the Institute.

If we can believe Officer Zamora  (and there is no reason except for the strangeness of the observation that we should not)  then it appears that he saw a Luna Landing Module but his observation was at least 12 months before the module was first tested here.   We have no further information nor conclusion about this report.

Sincerely,

C.B. Moore

Professor, Atmospheric Physics and

Chairman, Langmuir Laboratory

NEW MEXICO TECH

By the way, here is an interesting comment by Nippa Downey on the INSIGNIA controversy, mainly because someone claimed that the insignia seen on the outside of the craft was not the one shown on illustrations:

THE 1964 LONNIE ZAMORA SOCORRO INCIDENT INSIGNIA.

WHICH ONE IS GENUINE?…WHICH ONE IS DECOY?…by Nippa Downey:

“I think that the so-called ‘Inverted V’ with 3 horizontal lines through it, is the decoy insignia.

It is a much easier symbol to remember and describe, when compared to the genuine one.

Plus it has lines through it, which to me suggests a kind of crossing out”, like – it’s NOT THE RIGHT ONE, cross it out three times.

Just so Lonnie and Hynek could remember it without getting confused.

It is so much easier to remember for a decoy, rather than the curved arch with the arrow and lines underneath.

That would be too overly complicated to have as a decoy.

Decoys are usually always simpler in definition and execution.

This would also tie in nicely with why I don’t think you would describe the three lines across shape as an inverted V.

You would say it is an A with three lines across it, or through it – so hence why it seemed a little odd, and why I believe it is the decoy.

So let’s analyze the insignia.

This is a possibility of what the GENUINE insignia could represent in my opinion.

I design icons and symbols and fonts everyday, and if this was on the side of a rocket or spacecraft I would easily understand why it had been designed that way. Can you?

Let’s examine the construction of it.

I used a very common font from 1964 called Franklin Gothic to create it. This font would have been widely available in all sizes in 1964.

What I noticed about Zamora’s insignia sketch  (as I am also a font designer), was – and here comes my ‘NEW INSIGHT’ – is that the symbols used in it are all available on a typewriter keyboard.

It uses the left bracket ‘(‘ , the less than character ‘<‘ , the minus character ‘-‘ , and the vertical line separator ‘|’ or upper case ‘I’ when a sans serif font is selected on some IBM electric typewriters (which were used extensively by the scientific community in 1964).

When it is written like this (<-| and when turned 90 degrees clockwise it matches exactly.

How crazy is that?

Of all the billions upon billions of shapes, characters, letterforms, symbols and glyphs that we know, this set of four shapes (although very simplistic), when combined, can be written sideways using a typewriter from 1964!  Most likely the IBM electric one.  (Although I am still awaiting confirmation from a US typewriter expert)

…………….

Norio Hayakawa’s CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE NEWS SERVICE

E-mail = noriohayakawa@gmail.com

Norio Hayakawa on Facebook = http://www.facebook.com/fernandon.hayakawa

Also watch Norio Hayakawa’s YouTube Channel

New Mexico flag voted the best in the nation

Flag of New Mexico, from State Symbols USA page.

(QUOTE)

The colors on New Mexico‘s state flag are the red and yellow of old Spain.  The simple, elegant center design is the ancient Zia sun symbol, which represents the unique character of New Mexico .

The Zia Indians of New Mexico regard the Sun as sacred.  Their symbol for the sun  (a red circle with groups of rays pointing in four directions)  is painted on ceremonial vases, drawn on the ground around campfires, and used to introduce newborns to the Sun.

Four is the sacred number of the Zia and is seen repeated in the four points radiating from the circle, each consisting of four bars.  To the Zia Indians, the number four represents:

the four points of the compass (east, west, north, and south);

the four seasons of the year (spring, summer, autumn, and winter);

the four periods of each day (morning, noon, evening, and night);

the four seasons of life (childhood, youth, middle years, and old age);

the Zia’s belief that with life comes four sacred obligations:  one must develop a strong body, a clear mind, a pure spirit, and a devotion to the welfare of others.

(CLICK TO ENLARGE ABOVE)

NEW MEXICO FLAG VOTED THE BEST IN THE NATION – – ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL:

New Mexico’s flag is unique and bright-colored which is exactly why it has been ranked as the best flag in the country.  Ted Kaye who wrote the book “Good Flag, Bad Flag” conducted an online survey for the best and worst state flags.

New Mexico came in first because of its colors and the distinctive Zia symbol. Texas and Maryland rounded out the top three.

None is as well designed as New Mexico’s, at least according to the survey conducted by the North American Vexillological Association, dedicated to the study of flags.  Its members favored “strong, simple, distinctive flags,” the group wrote in announcing the results of a survey conducted in 2001, its most recent such poll.  Unlike the flags of Nebraska, Montana and Kansas, which sport the crowded landscapes of each state’s seal, New Mexico’s conforms to all three principles.  In the center of its yellow flag sits a red circle representing the sun, with four rays extending in each cardinal direction, forming the rough shape of a plus sign. The flag, adopted 90 years ago, borrows that design, the Zia symbol, from the tribe of the same name.

………..

Norio Hayakawa’s CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE NEWS SERVICE

E-mail = noriohayakawa@gmail.com

Facebook = http://www.facebook.com/fernandon.hayakawa

Please also watch Norio Hayakawa’s YouTube videos