Thursday, October 08, 2009

Veteran Ufologist & Expert On The Socorro UFO Case, Ray Stanford Challenges Newcomer & Hoax Pronouncer, Anthony Bragalia To a Live Debate On C2C!!

By Ray Stanford
Organization for Physical UFO Science

Ray Stanford      Bragalia and Sterling Colgate are going to end up with egg on their faces from promoting the unfounded 'student prank' rumor concerning the Socorro CE-III case. Their claims are of such character as to be unacceptable as testimony in any US court of law. The egg on their faces will be facts about the egg-shaped (albeit an unusually elongated 'egg') vehicle which displayed two distinct modes of sophisticated propulsion technology (also seen in cases describing the same thing, from as much as ten years earlier, in 1954) that actually landed at Socorro after being observed by five Colorado tourists because it almost took the roof off their car, so they reported it to Socorro service station operator Opal Grinder and his son BEFORE the Zamora encounter was ever known publicly.

For some well-researched facts (instead of 45-years-after-the-fact totally unsubstantiated silliness) about the case from the only other person (me) who investigated the Socorro case with official USAF investigator, Dr. J. Allen Hynek, click The Paracast link, below. My in-Socorro investigation began on April 28, 1964 (the fourth day after the event), and next day, I was on-site participating, at Allen Hynek's unsolicited invitation, in the public-barred official USAF in-depth investigation involving, other than me, only Hynek, the central witness, Socorro police officer Lonnie Zamora, and N.M. State Police Sergeant Samuel Chavez (first person to arrive at the landing site after the object left), details of which are explained below:

I can substantiate the facts presented there, and except for more recent and highly important physical-evidence findings described on The Paracast, I substantiated those facts in my 1976, 211-page book on the case titled Socorro Saucer [a pun, not the actual object shape, chosen for use in context of the rest of the title]in A Pentagon Pantry, subsequently praised in a now-published letter. To see it, click the link below and scroll down to Hynek's letter:

Hynek Letter To Stanford

- click on image(s) to enlarge -

A hard-bound copy of my 211-page, well-documented report on the Socorro case was donated to the technical library of the NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center by J. Allen Hynek. Personally, I'll take that as a recommendation, along with Hynek's praise letter, which you may have already read via the above link.

To anyone who can convince me that he or she is a bona-fide and relevantly-engaged employee of any of the main-stream TV, movie, radio, or print media, who provides me a 'snail-mail' address, I will quickly mail a like-new, never-read First Edition copy, with postage paid by me, of that hard-cover, 211-page, 1976 book. Just request the book and provide me evidence of employment status acceptable to my offering conditions, to:


I hereby challenge Anthony Bragalia and/or Dr. Sterling Colgate to A DEBATE ME ON THIS MATTER, provided that George Noory is agreeable, on Coast-to-Coast AM, and, that is, if both the prank proponents doesn't chicken-out.

But, hey, George, if they chicken out, I'd be happy to present evidence for that important case on your show, anyhow. Heck, in that case, we could share chicken barbecue, or just an old fashioned chicken plucking good time. :o)

From what I hear, I'm not the only person tired of seeing third-generation make-believe mislead a poorly-informed but UFO-interested public about the important Socorro CE-III ("Close Encounter of The Third Kind", Hynek's terminology) case of 45 years ago.

By Ray Stanford
Founder and Director:
Organization for Physical UFO Science
Author of The 211-Page Book On The Socorro Case
© 11-5-09


  1. Dear Mr. Colgate:
    Thanks for a great piece and your professionalism in how you wrote it.
    I just wonder how these bright students drampt up scaring a man almost to death with a gun at his side. Zomora did put his hand on his gun. If they thought he was over zealous didn't they think he might use it?
    There is a way to do this better. Let them take a polygraph tests. Many famous UFO witness have taken them. Here these guys are admitted liars and they get a free ride. Maybe Mr. Noory would offer to give them polygraph test. It's not conclusive but it can go a long way to indicate evasion.
    I wrote a piece on this in a post suggesting that maybe we should demand from these people the same that is demanded of us; like what I wrote above. I also suggested that we ask Charles Moore of Roswell MOGUL fame if he would take a lie detector test. He claims he can remembered Mogul 4 was launched and what it had on it, despite a notation that it was cancel due to weather. Mr. Moore from some 40+ plus years ago remembers that day and "couldn't" be mixed up. Could he in fact be lying, not in some greater conspiracy but through pure disdain I am not saying all skeptics are lying but skeptics do lie. Why should the UFO investigators always come from the deficit side. There are two standards, and I don't care what Carl says, the standards should be the same.
    It is almost like we accept this. We don't have to take this. Throw the polygraph idea out there on the public stage see what happens?
    Thank looking forward to what happens.
    Joe Capp
    UFO Media Matters
    Non-Commercial Blog

  2. Anonymous10:51 AM

    The thing that worries me about you guys is that you were the first to support Bragalia when he came out with his pro-Roswell articles - yet, now that he tries to take down Socorro, you've all got your panties in a knot. The simple fact is: none of Bragalia's articles, pro or con, are particularly well-researched or compelling. If the UFO Iconoclasts were half the journalists they purport to be, they would know that a single source never makes a story.

    If anyone alive has a good idea of what happened at Socorro, it's Ted Phillips. He has the definitive collection of evidence and witness testimony in the case, which he himself collected on-site in 1964. To this day, Ted's convinced that something real occurred. I'll take his word over Bragalia's any day of the week.

  3. Mornin' D47,

    Thanks for taking time to make comment; I'm not sure who you're addressing, so allow me to chime in. I did and still do support Tony Bragalia; I was intrigued by his effort re Roswell, and felt/feel what "items" he's uncovered need to be pursued.

    Accordingly, I also feel that the hoax angle be explored (in this case), if nothing else for due diligence; however, in this instance (re Socorro) he has put the cart before the horse i.e., made confirmative statements and or come to conclusions based on hearsay, and misinterpreted or misstated the facts of the case.

    These things were brought to his attention, and he continued in the same vein in writing his sequel piece and adding more hearsay etc., this has given me great pause in regards to his research methodology, and also makes me curious about his work re Roswell.

    Having said all that, I'm still hoping he will come to his senses, and at least admit fault and continue from there.

    AS to the UFO Iconoclasts, they are not journalists, they are a media watchdog group with an interest in Ufology. Moreover, just because they, or more specifically, Rich Reynolds publishes Tony's articles, it doesn't mean they (he) embrace the ideology. In fact, I can state emphatically, that Rich does not concur with the "hoax" mythology. His theorem is the "craft" was an "experimental contrivance" of our government.

    As to Ted Phillips, you're singing to the choir as he has my full respect; however, I'm not sure of the "extent" of his participation at Socorro (I have since sent an inquiry to him).

    Ray Stanford, literally and figuratively "wrote the book" about Socorro, and his research is unmatched in the case. (One of the first people to proclaim this of course was Allen Hynek himself! [see letter above])

    No offense intended, but taking "someone's word" is how this whole thing got started; Tony neglected proper and basic research protocol and promoted hearsay and propaganda; at the end of the day science trumps hearsay every time!



Dear Contributor,

Your comments are greatly appreciated, and coveted; however, blatant mis-use of this site's bandwidth will not be tolerated (e.g., SPAM etc).

Additionally, healthy debate is invited; however, ad hominem and or vitriolic attacks will not be published, nor will "anonymous" criticisms. Please keep your arguments "to the issues" and present them with civility and proper decorum. -FW