It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Could Bob Lazar be who he says he is?

page: 8
18
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 08:08 PM
link   
I grew up in a NASA neighborhood and there were lay-offs going on all of time where we would be seeing NASA engineer's and physicists working at the corner drug store as stockers just make ends meet waiting to be re-hired again...

So don't belittle Lazar for taking on odd jobs .... they all do that when the gov't cuts back on federal funding.




posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by PalasheeaSo don't belittle Lazar for taking on odd jobs .... they all do that when the gov't cuts back on federal funding.


That doesn't square at all with Lazar being a talent of a Galactic caliber, with 885 levels of clearance above "top secret", being admitted to sancrosanctum of human knowledge, which is to reverse engineer an alien UFO. Don't you think? I've known a few extremely sharp people (physicists) in my life, and they weren't sequestered by the govt to do a UFO disassembly.

His snafu with protons causing release of antimatter from Element 115 speaks volumes. I'm referring to that cozy evening he had with John Lear, where he showed a piece of the alleged 115... Which would have been immediately irradiated by the protons from cosmic rays! Which the poor chap didn't know. He knows a piece of this, a piece of that... With huge gaps in between and no real knowledge. A self-educated charlatane.



posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by ZeroGhost
Everything I have heard from Bob has the "ring of truth". and my own sense is he is on the up and up.


You know, ZG, I recognize the fact that your mileage may vary. You didn't catch his snafus when Bob attempted to wander into the realm of physics. You don't know that, the way physics education works, it's impossible to become a "ghost" without record or recollection either at MIT or Caltech. You also don't seem to realize that once you lose your qualifications real quick if you elect to switch from physics to running photo finish shops and brothels in Vegas. Fine. For the members of Heaven's Gate, whatever their guru said had the "ring of truth". Amen.
Watch out for the comets.




reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Thanks Bud.

I take such into account. I know that a few missteps that we all have in our histories really does not invalidate everything about us. That would be irrational and illogical. It only adds to a probability factor and qualitative equation and in a tiny fraction of a reality.

I know physicists who are bad at everything but what they do. I know astronomers who have never looked through a telescope and if questioned by the likes of an amateur would fail to convince anyone they know anything. No detail for in most cases on why Bob did what he did. I do know the man cannot walk on water. So what?

We can pick at molecules in each other until we blue-shift. Reality affords an infinite gradation in time and space in which to play. Reality and facts are ripples in a sea of Quantum Foam. We find what we look for, but it is subjective experience and we cannot prove anything either way. What is true is what makes the world exist, and that is consciousness. When you rely on awareness and not a ledger, you get much more out of your path.

I sense Bob is just a sharp but harmless nerd who had the integrity to point out the lies we are told. Plus he loved the wonder of such implications as I know I also do. So he got clumsy and made some bad decisions. Who doesn't?

My Buddha compassion lets me jump over such small stones on the path and I see Bob's spirit without all the little bumps blurring my view.

By the way,
"If you see the Buddha on the path, kill him."
Gautama Buddha

Having fun at your expense, but in a good way.


ZG



posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 





His snafu with protons causing release of antimatter from Element 115 speaks volumes. I'm referring to that cozy evening he had with John Lear, where he showed a piece of the alleged 115... Which would have been immediately irradiated by the protons from cosmic rays! Which the poor chap didn't know. He knows a piece of this, a piece of that... With huge gaps in between and no real knowledge. A self-educated charlatane.


I understand that element 115 did in actuality exist in our cyclotrons at that time but only for thousandths of a second as it was unstable like Californium and other exotics. Now we have a stable version. Got to update the table!

This element was supposedly from reactions in the cores of stars (like Iron) but that this particular atom would only form in a double star, of which 2/3rds of the stars actually are. We do not find it in our solar system in any stable form or quantity due to our single star not having a companion.

I was on a thread where an abductee said that there he observed alien mining in the Kuipner Belt. Likely, if anywhere, such transient materials from other systems would find elements like 115 there firs,t as it would be collected and in larger quantities. The OP did not say what they where mining for. I just surmised. But if they could not find it inside the Sol system, it would be in the most external belt around us caught up by the system gravity. (yes I did consider the abduction account as I know that such is likely real, so I listen.)

BTW, I do not know if any tests have shown how proton bombardment of 115 yields 116, but we likely do not have enough spare 115 to try. Just what is in found or recovered technology, that testing would not be afforded to external testing due to dark DOD secrets. Yet you cannot prove any more than I can. We wait for the future to unfold.

ZG


[edit on 1/26/2008 by ZeroGhost]



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 12:21 AM
link   
Los Alamos...... don't get me started on those people. IMO they're the type that, if they don't know you can't tell 'em.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Palasheea
I grew up in a NASA neighborhood and there were lay-offs going on all of time where we would be seeing NASA engineer's and physicists working at the corner drug store as stockers just make ends meet waiting to be re-hired again...

So don't belittle Lazar for taking on odd jobs .... they all do that when the gov't cuts back on federal funding.


Lazars current employment isn't in question. It's the various lies he's told and the various and obvious, physics he doesn't know anything about...



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 02:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by OSSkyWatcher
and did the scientists working on the atomic bomb produce anything during that time they were working on the atomic bomb? i really doubt it because it all would have been top secret for the safety of the nation

why would lazar or any scientist working on a secret project produce anything for anyone without a clearance?


that is a red herring - while it is true that non of the MP scientist published anything in the public domain between 1941 and 1945 , ALL of them were extensivly published prior to 1941 - look up the carreeers of fermi , einstien , teller , rutherford , oppenhiemer

also the military career of general groves

all well documented on thier rise to the top - yes what they did in los alamos was top secret - but the carreer and education that erned them thier place there was well documented before the war - and open source

we are not asking for lazars papers published while @ LANL , but the work that got him there - see the difference ?????????????

if you want a clear analogy to the manhatan project - look at fermi , he is one of the best published and most widley known scientists who was ` hands on `

you cannot find anything published in the 140s about his work at the university of chicago - where he oversaw the building of the first atomic reactor

but his work in the 30s is abundant

so the question remains - hiow did lazar get to LANL unpublished ?



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 03:50 AM
link   
Well, if government want to 'muddy' the waters by discrediting Bob Lazar and get us all off the 'real' issues of aliens, then they have achieved it. The fact we are contributing to this argument proves that. Of course, we don't know whether contributors here are also working for the government, fuelling the debate - we only have aliases to go on. Mind you, we could just as easily be aliens ourselves, I suppose.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 05:14 AM
link   
I will entertain many things, even ridiculous speculation about reptoids, but John's posts are making me scream obscenities in my own head at this point. WHO are the people starring him? They certainly don't respond to the thread! Or I would see more people employing his ideals.

Bob is more believable based on that fact that he provides long-winded, detailed explanations.

John Lear is only a negative factor on the Bob Lazar believability scale. Why don't mods ever comment on his claims?

Deny ignorance my ass.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by spooknost
 


Yes, but people who make a living BSing the planet can be easily identified. These people give false hope. They lie for personal gain at the expense of not only the truth, but of the integrity of the issue at hand. The bulk of us here are good natured intelligent people trying to seek real world answers to real world issues. But we won't be any closer giving audience to people like Lear and Lazar. Because all they do is work the system to gain...Whatever. Notoriety, fame, money, or just an ego boost as many pay very close attention. The fact is, if you want disinformation and to be lead down a road with no destination(Yet one alluded to), you are in effect being lead to your own ignorance. And people like Lazar and Lear perpetuate this. I'm not saying they're knowingly trying to knock us off track, but they are. And this is the crux of the issue.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 06:49 AM
link   
projectvxn,

a few questions if i may?

1. what are the points of light on the globe you have for your avatar?
2. if either one of them or both, are actually telling the truth, how will you deal with that, now that you've basically called them liars and charlatans in the company of many other people?
3. do you have any dealings with jpl?
4. is it okay for people to disagree with you? or should they be concerned that disagreement could lead to unpleasentness?

[edit on 27-1-2008 by undo]



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 07:38 AM
link   
Long time reader and first time poster here. I love the way some of the people in this thread operate. If you can’t attack the message attack the messenger. Who cares what Lazar’s involvement with a whore house was; does that make him a liar? Who cares he went bankrupt. As a person who has worked with many intelligent people I can tell you most are extremely eccentric ( as can anyone who has worked with those type people) Instead of attacking Lazar or Lear’s credibility lets get to the facts

Can anyone show me a link where Element 115 was talked about before Lazar talked about it? Don’t give me the bunk that so and so said there were papers published on Element 115,show me a actual link that has nothing to do with Bob Lazar that talks about Element 115 before Bob Lazar did

How do you account for the 1982 story in the Los Alamos Monitor news article mentioning Lazar, a physicist at the Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility?

How do you account for the documented fact Lazar could bring people out in the desert to watch lets say- usual test flights?


So what do we know for sure? We know Bob was employed or worked at some capacity at Los Alamos- that a local paper referred to him as a scientist – anyone who has worked with scientists would know that if the paper referred to him as a scientist and he wasn’t one the local community would have been outraged.

We know from the W2 that Lazar worked in some capacity at Area 51- and forget the amount; it was only for a short period of time, and who knows how much Lazar was paid from other sources. Let’s get back to facts instead of needless character assassination. There are plenty of consistencies with Bob Lazar’s story . I’d like to see some of “attack the messenger” types actually refute the consistencies in Lazar’s story. Please enlighten us


[edit on 27-1-2008 by Topcat14]



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Just some info I would like to share.

Sometimes I really wander,
how many people who constant keep saying about Ufo cases that it is all based on lies, fake or bunk supported with the sometimes available proof, are fully aware how things about keeping secrets really works.
I don’t claim here that all the Ufo cases are absolute true, but only show how people who come forward with very sensitive Ufo info where / are manipulated to keep it secret or make it look fake.
A faked picture of an UFO doesn’t proof that all the pictures are fake.
Even I can with the available photo- image programs today make a perfect fake of an in reality original real picture
and distributed on the net.
Or make a small model throw it in the air, take a picture, and claim therefore that pictures by other maked are faked to.
It is a trick those intelligence groups do for decennia and probable laugh their heads of many times.
So, for those who hasn’t the slightest idea, are here some examples in the form of a few witness testimonies of the Disclosure project.


Sgt. Clifford Stone: US Army

But one of the greatest weapons the intelligence community has at their disposal is a predisposition by the American people, the American politicians and the debunkers — people who wish to try to debunk Ufo information.
They immediately come out and say, oh, we can’t keep secrets, we can’t keep secrets. Well, the truth is, yes, we can.

Brigadier General Stephen Lovekin: Army National Guard Reserves

“One older officer discussed with me what possibly could happen if there was a revelation. He was talking about being erased and I said, ‘Man, what do you mean erased?’ And, he said, ‘Yes, you will be erased — disappear.’

And I said, ‘How do you know all this?’ And he said, ‘I know. Those threats have been made and carried out. Those threats started way back in 1947. The Army Air Force was given absolute control over how to handle this. This being the biggest security situation that this country has ever dealt with and there have been some erasures…’
“I don’t care what kind of a person you are. I don’t care how strong or courageous you are. It would be a very fearful situation because from what Matt [this older officer] said, ‘They will go after not only you. They will go after your family.’ Those were his words. And, so I can only say that the reason that they have managed to keep it under wraps for so long is through fear. They are very selective about how they pull someone out to make an example of. And I know that that has been done.”

“Dr. B”: [I know who this is]

“I know that some people I worked with did disappear on certain programs and were never heard from again. They just disappeared. There has been evidence of that all through my work. You know, that people go out on projects [and disappear]. But [to protect myself from this] I wouldn’t go any further on a project because I could see something strange coming. So, a lot of people have disappeared you know, that are higher up.”

Master Sgt. Dan Morris: US Air Force, NRO (National Reconnaissance Office) Operative

“I became part of a group that would investigate, gather the information, and in the beginning it was still under the Blue Book, Snowbird and different covert programs.

I would go interview people who claimed they had seen something and try to convince them they hadn’t seen something or that they were hallucinating. Well, if that didn’t work, another team would come in and give all the threats. And threaten them and their family and so on and so forth. And they would be in charge of discrediting them, making them look foolish and so on and so forth. Now if that didn’t work, then there was another team that put an end to that problem, one way or another.”


Source; Testimony that Explains the Secrecy.
From the, Executive Summary of the Disclosure Project Briefing Document



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroGhost
I understand that element 115 did in actuality exist in our cyclotrons at that time but only for thousandths of a second as it was unstable like Californium and other exotics. Now we have a stable version. Got to update the table!


We don't have the stable version. Elements do not "exist in our cyclotrons" but are created by a variety of techniques, and the 115 was made by fusion of two lighter nuclei, accelerated, indeed in a cyclotron (or other type of accelerator). "Versions" of elements are called isotopes, by the way.


This element was supposedly from reactions in the cores of stars (like Iron) but that this particular atom would only form in a double star, of which 2/3rds of the stars actually are.


I am sorry I have to say that, but the above paragraph of your is sheer nonsense. It would be best to avoid comments on areas of human knowledge in which your own understanding is severely lacking. Which, in my theory, is why Lazar "rings true" to you, with his outlandish claims.

For your reference, elements heavier than iron are thought to be created in supernovae explosions. What "double stars" have to do with that, beats me. Is that another claim of Lazar's?


By the way, you didn't read into what I said about proton bombardment. Lazar says that the 115, while bombarded by protons, goes into 116 which emits TWO antiprotons. There are multiple reasons why that is impossible, but even IF it were possible, the reaction would have happened the moment he opened the protective container (and I would argue even before that). It's easy to spot holes in the Lazar's scarce knowledge of the field. He may "ring true" to you, but to me he "rings charlatane" so much my ears hurt.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Topcat14
Can anyone show me a link where Element 115 was talked about before Lazar talked about it? Don’t give me the bunk that so and so said there were papers published on Element 115,show me a actual link that has nothing to do with Bob Lazar that talks about Element 115 before Bob Lazar did


Another red herring. I can talk about the Higgs boson before it's actually discovered in the lab. We all are pretty sure it will be. Does it make me in any way a credible source with regards to the Higgs particle? Hell no, especially if I screwed up basic physics when trying to explain to the public the process of my own alleged scientific discovery.



How do you account for the 1982 story in the Los Alamos Monitor news article mentioning Lazar, a physicist at the Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility?


I can call myself a secret messenger from Serbian weapons smugglers, and there is a fair chance this will be published.


How do you account for the documented fact Lazar could bring people out in the desert to watch lets say- usual test flights?


Nah... I wouldn't call it "documented". Was there any evidence produced? Hardly.



We know Bob was employed or worked at some capacity at Los Alamos


So?


We know from the W2 that Lazar worked in some capacity at Area 51


The fact that the name of a non-existent government agency is on a tax document delivers a mortal blow to that piece of forgery.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


The Star Wars Star Destroyer looks a lot like a Triangle UFO.
I'll trade the Bob Lazar Sport Model for a Star Trek Runabout
no problem. Give me a port and starboard nacelle and
a manual load matter/antimatter reactor. Better throw in a
small gravity lense so i can set a course and engage.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Dont you have anything other to do than debunk lazar in every thread on this forum?



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by MajesticTwelve
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Dont you have anything other to do than debunk lazar in every thread on this forum?


Very good point MajesticTwelve, but he desperately wanted to proof it a fraud.

[edit on 27/1/08 by spacevisitor]



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

We don't have the stable version. Elements do not "exist in our cyclotrons" but are created by a variety of techniques, and the 115 was made by fusion of two lighter nuclei, accelerated, indeed in a cyclotron (or other type of accelerator). "Versions" of elements are called isotopes, by the way..


A more accurate statement would be at this time we don’t have a stable version


Originally posted by buddhasystemI am sorry I have to say that, but the above paragraph of your is sheer nonsense. It would be best to avoid comments on areas of human knowledge in which your own understanding is severely lacking. Which, in my theory, is why Lazar "rings true" to you, with his outlandish claims...

For your reference, elements heavier than iron are thought to be created in supernovae explosions



That’s not necessarily true, heavy elements are thought to form in super massive stars, Stars 60 to 90 times more massive than our sun


Somehow I think 10 years ago you would have been saying there is no such thing as Element 115, or 600 years ago saying the world is flat and the earth is the center of the universe







[edit on 27-1-2008 by Topcat14]



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Topcat14
 


You sound very certain of things. If you are, in a situation with so many unknowns, then you are talking about your religion in a thread about science. We will never convince you of anything, because we are adducing facts and rational analysis and you are reciting articles of faith.

The example of scientists being conservative in the face of new theories is well known. Atiyah in fact wrote a whole thesis on science turning into a religious faith rather than a rational system. That overstates the case. Science requires us to be open-minded and conservative with respect to information. In fact being a detective requires the same thing. Being a PARENT requires the same thing. It's basic to the human condition to both ask questions with an open mind- and at the same time be skeptical enough not to pay good money or waste valuable time on every bill of sale for the Brooklyn Bridge.

No matter how much we may want a thing to be true, if the facts are against it- not the beliefs, not the hazy just over the hill anecdotes, the facts- then the thing is NOT true.

Fiction leaves no paper trail. Con men who know this try and create a paper trail. And then we have them cold because their fake papers- MJ 12, Majic labels on pay slips, whatever- condemn them.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join