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.

 

Bob Lazar seems to confirm Zecharia Sitchin

page: 10
38
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 03:32 AM
link   
reply to post by JoseChung
 

"As to Stanton Friedmans' take on Bob Lazar, thats all it is, an opinion. And contrary to popular belief, Stanton does not know everything about every aspect of the UFO field (No one does). His critisisms fall into 2 main categories: It's not possible given the known laws of physics, and that erasing his past records is not possible. Both assertions are sadly shallow and naive, standing in stark contrast to most of Stantons excellent early work.
Also note his published derision of Randle & Schmitt's 2 books on Roswell. Their 500+ witnesses must all be wrong, but of course all his Corona witnesses must all be right. He also continues to defend his MJ-12 documents, (even after some were proven to be a hoax) with the questionable line "Well just because some of them were hoaxed, doesn't mean all of them were."

Thats ok, I don't know of ANY infallible researchers anyway.




posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 04:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by A51Watcher
reply to post by JoseChung
 

"As to Stanton Friedmans' take on Bob Lazar, thats all it is, an opinion. And contrary to popular belief, Stanton does not know everything about every aspect of the UFO field (No one does). His critisisms fall into 2 main categories: It's not possible given the known laws of physics, and that erasing his past records is not possible. Both assertions are sadly shallow and naive, standing in stark contrast to most of Stantons excellent early work.
Also note his published derision of Randle & Schmitt's 2 books on Roswell. Their 500+ witnesses must all be wrong, but of course all his Corona witnesses must all be right. He also continues to defend his MJ-12 documents, (even after some were proven to be a hoax) with the questionable line "Well just because some of them were hoaxed, doesn't mean all of them were."

Thats ok, I don't know of ANY infallible researchers anyway.





Cool, thanks for the info. Think I read his MJ-12 book years ago and that was one of the things that really got me into the whole UFO area, so have respected him since then. But yeah, I get that he could be, and probably is, wrong in certain areas.

As for the MJ-12 documents, there's that many strange things related to them, like the typewriter some docs were written on not even being out until years after they were supposedly written, that I can't get my head around them now either. That's for another topic though, will probably have to research into that again at some point.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Lazar Critique

^^ this critique kills it for me for Lazar, pity it's such a great story.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Clavicula

Originally posted by Clavicula
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Nice try. Tritium an isotope of hydrogen is technically not a transmutation since it is the same basic element. Looking forward for your documentation of actual transmutaton observed in nature. Good luck with that.


As an additional note. You know as well as I that a neutron does not have to overcome the electric repultion that another proton has to overcome in order to blend into an existing nucleus. Which of cause is the challenge in fusion energy systems.


What does it matter? Protons observed in cosmic rays cover ALL of the spectrum of terrestrial sources, and in particular, as you may expect, the soft component is the strongest, and that's exactly what you need to get proton capture as opposed to fragmentation of the nucleus.


We then return to your original statement, that proton capture could happen naturally at sea level, for which you have provided no documentation what so ever.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem


There are moments I feel blessed, and that's one of them. I just don't want to visit that backward, dreadful place. Boy it must suck down there.


Not everyone can handle logic (like you), so it would definitely suck for you.



... and that's why he didn't feature his (non-existent) solar power plant in that video. It would have been really cool and conducive to green environment, right? Instead, he showed you a blinker on top of a pile of scrap metal and said this is how he gets his supply of Li6 (which you don't know what it is, bruhaha).

Time for you to prove that the solar panels don't exist. For your information, I do know what Li6 is. There are many Lithium isotopes besides just that one, such as Li7, which is produced in some carbon stars during stellar nucleosynthesis and it was one of the first isotopes produced in the big bang nucleosynthesis. In case you didn't know, Li6 can be generated with a particle accelerator, hence the particle accelerator he had in the video. Right... like he would take such time to build all of those devices just to "hoax" the experiments. He must be an extremely dedicated hoaxer, according to you.

Time for the pointless argument to end before moderators remove more posts and possibly worse. It's completely off topic, thanks to you. Great job.
edit on 1/8/2011 by Condemned0625 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by mobtek
Lazar Critique

^^ this critique kills it for me for Lazar, pity it's such a great story.



In looking at your "critique" that is supposedly so overwhelming that it "kills it for you", I notice he says "I can't possibly demonstrate conclusively that Lazar's mechanism is impossible."
Whoah great stuff there.
He continues with "All that I can hope to demonstrate here is that his scenario would require a COMPLETE overhaul of our theories of gravity and particle physics in order to work."
Oh no! That sounds like a lot of work! A lot of work certainly proves what he is guessing at must certainly be true!

The writer of that page along with many others will have twice as many questions once they are confronted with the reality of Lazars' story.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by A51Watcher
 


Very nice explanations. I've noticed that you too pay attention to details. It annoys me when mainstream physicists totally dismiss Lazar's model. They forget that their currently accepted model is only theoretical, so it's hypocritical to accept their theoretical model while rejecting his "theoretical" model. That's like saying "Your belief contradicts my belief, therefore yours is nonsensical and wrong."



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by A51Watcher

In looking at your "critique" that is supposedly so overwhelming that it "kills it for you", I notice he says "I can't possibly demonstrate conclusively that Lazar's mechanism is impossible."
Whoah great stuff there.
He continues with "All that I can hope to demonstrate here is that his scenario would require a COMPLETE overhaul of our theories of gravity and particle physics in order to work."
Oh no! That sounds like a lot of work! A lot of work certainly proves what he is guessing at must certainly be true!

The writer of that page along with many others will have twice as many questions once they are confronted with the reality of Lazars' story.


I think the main point of the article is that Lazars knowledge of science is not what he claims it to be.
That said Lazar consistently points out that he doesn't understand it all and this was what he was told.
I know element 115 has been created back in 2004 (IIRC) but not in the fabled 'island of stability'. It takes time for other laboratories to confirm that is also can be created with the same methodology. Has this happened?
Don't get me wrong I'm not a debunker but I am skeptical. For me being skeptical about big claims is not a belief system like it seems to be for some, it's just the way I approach these things. I've seen weird stuff in the skies too (back in the '80s and as recently as 2009 but that doesn't make me a blind believer in ET's) but Lazar's story seems to have just enough truth and science to appear legit but when looked at more closely by physicists they find inconsistencies in his scientific knowledge. My background is IT and programming, not physics


cheers mob



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by JoseChung
 

Yeah, gotta tell ya I was crestfallen when I saw Stanton start slaggin other researchers and what not, cause up till then I really respected the guy. He is actually the one that privately gave me the tip that I should dig into the newspaper microfiche files in my area for the 2 week period before Roswell, because according to him the skies over the U.S. were full of UFO's daily for that 2 weeks, with the majority of the sightings happening in my area. He turned out to be 100% correct. Daily headlines and stories including the entire Police dept. reporting sightings one day, the entire nation reporting sighting on another, on and on it went. I'll share the results in another thread.
Aside from that he still is responsible for uncovering several major milestones in the UFO field. The primary one of course was bringing Major Jesse Marcel forward, the first man to put Roswell on the map.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

I didn't misunderstand anything, thank you. My point was that photons are irrelevant, and that there is a flux of protons that would lead to 115 experiencing constant energy release and depending on the product spectra, chain reaction (protons released from nuclei triggering other nuclei etc).

The only protons that you can "plug" into a nucleus are rather low energy, otherwise the latter will simply disintegrate into fragments before it can form the magical 116.


The only thing which makes sense (barely) is that the proton is causing fission of this hypothetical Z=115 isotope, which technically would "be" some excited state of Z=116 for a few nanoseconds.

Of course there's the big engineering problem that protons and nuclei are mutually repulsive so most of the energy in the proton beam will be scattered away and dissipated. I.e. it's thermodynamically preposterous as an energy source. (Same reason that uranium fission reactors are commercial products and fifty years later, fusion reactors are still 30 years in the future).

ps: Thanks for denying ignorance of physics.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Condemned0625
reply to post by A51Watcher
 


Very nice explanations. I've noticed that you too pay attention to details. It annoys me when mainstream physicists totally dismiss Lazar's model. They forget that their currently accepted model is only theoretical, so it's hypocritical to accept their theoretical model while rejecting his "theoretical" model. That's like saying "Your belief contradicts my belief, therefore yours is nonsensical and wrong."


Well said. The annoying part is they are adult physicists and should act as such instead of squabbling children with a massive terrestrial chauvinism complex. (Side note: Did you hear how when cars were first being built, "experts" and "scientists" of the day told us we would never be able to drive faster than 30 mph, because it would suck the air right out of our lungs and kill us. Thanks for the expert opinion guys.)
Anyway from what I've seen you state, we both share the advantage of knowing for sure these guys are gonna wind up with egg on their face, big time. The second advantage is not having to spin our wheels like most, for X amount of years on trying to answer the first basic question of "Are They/It real... and does proof exist?" Having gotten past that major first hurdle, we instead get to spin our wheels on more relevant matters such as who what where and why. That's why I come to ATS, to read informed opinions from people like you.
And yeah I do tend to pay attention to details on certain subjects, especially the ones that I discover to be true. I am still amazed that none of these armchair quarterbacks ever had the bright idea to go to Nevada and personally investigate Bob's claims. It certainly occurred to me at the time, and not surprisingly it resulted in my being confronted with the reality.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 12:04 AM
link   



...Don't get me wrong I'm not a debunker but I am skeptical. For me being skeptical about big claims is not a belief system like it seems to be for some, it's just the way I approach these things.



Fair enough. That is a prudent normal approach. Without you personally having been confronted by any extreme evidence, any other approach would be illogical.
I just found your one-liner pointing to a web page that purportedly was the -be all end all- answer to Bob Lazar very short sighted and arrogant without merit. Your follow up response and explanation sounds more reasonable.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by A51Watcher
 


I wish I could visit him and investigate his claims, but not as a skeptical extremist. I would like to investigate his claims in order to obtain more information than was given. I'd like to know what the name of the physics model is and what principles it applies to make the anti-gravity propulsion and antimatter reactor work. Clearly he was working with a level of physics that goes far beyond what some physicists claim to "know" as universal "facts". For all we know, there could be a group of extraterrestrials somewhere laughing their asses off at our ever prideful physicists because the ratio of their supposed knowledge to the unknown is 1:1000.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 

It old ... seen it many times before.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Condemned0625
 


Good comment, re: budhasystem (lowercaps as "it" isn't enlightened, nor using logic). I will now use the term "it" for bhudhasystem avatar. I agree with what you say;

This comment is to teach bhudhasystem;

it is so easy to prove and "it" hasn't understood Faraday, Telsa, Goedal nor Lord Kelvin. Very simple math, very simple physics. "it's" forgotten that i can create energy using 2 buckets of water with 2 steel rings. basic electrohydrofluidicdynamics that proves a passing particle of a differentiating valence cause an inherrent electrical value creating a magnetic field. AC/DC, the principle is the same. That's how batteries work,

To make it very simple;

There is a positive & a negative, but to create electricity you need a catalyst end of story.

"it" can research Lord Kelvin, apply Tesla, extrapolate James Clark Maxwell. 100-200 year old technology

Viola'

We have gravity, electricity, wifi, harmonic manipulation of a standing waveform etc.

We (collectively the scientists, philosophers, mathematicians) agree you can't explain simple things.

Your last comeback to me you spoke about your cats, you should have used the basic principle of quantum theory using Shroedinger instead.

Poor effort

For every action ther is an equal & opposite reaction, but you forget the inverse variable.

They don't teach that in school, or uni etc.

We teach ourselves that. Everyone thinks that quantum theory has 2 variables, there "ARE ALWAYS 3", Omega point, zero point, flux, plasma, etc.

So,Bob is a physicist, Zech is a historian, they have looked at both sides of the quantum data.

Yes we were here, we taught you, we gave you knowledge, now it's time for you to learn how to use what we have taught you. history & science.

Old Sumerian / Egyptian adage;

As Above, So is below, but in between is MAJIC

HADES



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by maxwellsdemon
 


Bob has attempted to teach us, Zech has also attempted to teach us.

just read your history, understand you math, listen to your elders.

It is as simple as that.

We know more than you will until the human race catches up. Think for yourself. If you can do that, that makes you a human.

my race has continually lived longer than yours in recorded history on this planet. We accept our star brothers & sisters.

HADES



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 01:35 AM
link   
reply to post by maxwellsdemon
 

Damn good demonstration. If you claim to be a scientist, I believe you. If you're not, then you've done your research well.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 01:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Condemned0625
 


Thankyou,

I've always been employed as an IT Systems Engineer/Scientist (according to the Fed government classification industrial award). Level 4

Any other quals I have are "classified". So I speak from "public" knowledge you guys are allowed to know, I provide no information, I just teach, and extrapolate the B/S from the truth, hence my mythological avatar name.

HADES



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by A51Watcher
 


stantons just jealous because he was never offered the job at s4 or 51



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by anumohi
reply to post by A51Watcher
 


stantons just jealous because he was never offered the job at s4 or 51

Lol. Maybe he is jealous. I wish I had that job too.



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join