Bob's Home Video

page: 13
19
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 


I think Ive seen your fire ring actually! As for the dudes messing with cars left alone. Ive had that happen on a couple occasions. We came in two cars, and took one to the inn, and when we got back there were obvious fingerprints all over the car and even a friendly mean face on the trunk. Pretty funny actually... PM me when you have a date for when you are heading out in April, maybe we can meet up and share a drink. I usually bring my other late 20 something early 30 something friends, and they will probably all be rooks, but you and I are vets to a 51 so im sure we can share a few tales.




posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
reply to post by FosterVS
reply to post by gariac
 

Out of the woodwork at last. Hopefully one of you will be honest here.


I'd absolutely love to hear any of you three explain to the members of ATS why visiting the desert near to Groom Lake in 2012 is going to throw light (pun not intended) on what was happening there in 1989. Could you please enlighten us? We are discussing events 23 years ago. How is snooping around the range relevant today?

Here is a question for you to duck. If you aren't trying to deceive members into thinking you know more than you do, answer it. Or are you concerned members might think that you are irrelevant to this debate or trying to deceive them?

So, what year did you first visit the range/GroomLake. How many years out of date is your UNPROVEN testimony that there are no non-conventional tests. Or are you going to keep that from the members?
edit on 4/2/12 by Pimander because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Pimander
 


Where have I claimed that my visiting groom lake proves or disproves lazar's claims? I haven't even given my opinion on the subject.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 

Right answer. It is not relevant. I appreciate your honesty.


P.S. Apologies. The second part of that post wasn't especially appropriate in to you. I have taken it as read that you do not make any false claims from your response and posts.
edit on 4/2/12 by Pimander because: (no reason given)


ETA: Of course, you could still answer the question about when you first visited. Nobody seems to want to tell us that.
edit on 4/2/12 by Pimander because: (no reason given)


 


reply to post by FosterVS
reply to post by gariac
 

One down, two to go. Hopefully one of you will be honest here.


I'd absolutely love to hear any of you two explain to the members of ATS why visiting the desert near to Groom Lake in 2012 is going to throw light (pun not intended) on what was happening there in 1989. Could you please enlighten us? We are discussing events 23 years ago. How is snooping around the range relevant today?

Here is a question for you to duck. If you aren't trying to deceive members into thinking you know more than you do, answer it. Or are you concerned members might think that you are irrelevant to this debate or trying to deceive them?

So, what year did you first visit the range/GroomLake. How many years out of date is your UNPROVEN testimony that there are no non-conventional tests. Or are you going to keep that from the members?
edit on 4/2/12 by Pimander because: NOT OFF THE HOOK!

edit on 4/2/12 by Pimander because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Pimander
 



In 1989, Groom Lake was an airbase. In 2012, it is still an airbase. In 1989, passenger planes landed at Groom Lake. In 2012, passenger planes land at Groom Lake. Passenger planes in 1989 had landing lights. Passenger planes in 2012 have landing lights. A plane landing on 14 (i.e. from the north) in 1989 needed to fly high, make an arc, then approach at a 3% slope to land. A plane landing on 14 in 2012 will need to fly high, make an arc, then approach at a 3% slope to land. The landing light from a plane in 1989 or 2012 on that approach will be visible from the public land east of the base.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   
This is a night shot of the runway lights at Groom. The blinding orange lights are at the passenger terminal. Those are the lights that might be detectable when turned off. The lights are probably yellow (i.e. sodium), but have a color change due to viewing through 26 miles of atmosphere. They even wiggle a big just like stars due to thermals.





posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 02:14 AM
link   
I found a night panorama from Tikaboo and started another thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pimander
I'd absolutely love to hear any of you two explain to the members of ATS why visiting the desert near to Groom Lake in 2012 is going to throw light (pun not intended) on what was happening there in 1989. Could you please enlighten us? We are discussing events 23 years ago. How is snooping around the range relevant today?

If this was directed at me, then I only wonder at the location of a possible light source visually detectable, at or near the location Lear/Lazar claims they saw the "saucer tests", due to high-intensity lights from Creech/Indian Springs. Neither Area 51 or Creech has moved in 23 years, so it is relevant.
EDITED TO ADD: Furthermore, whose to say they aren't still testing now what they were back then? Or are you not only qualified to say what they were testing then, with if or when they moved the program somewhere else.

Here is a question for you to duck. If you aren't trying to deceive members into thinking you know more than you do, answer it. Or are you concerned members might think that you are irrelevant to this debate or trying to deceive them?

If this was directed at me - how are YOU relevant to this debate? Other than the myriad folk legend surrounding Lazar, and your knowledge of it. I am familiar with the legend as well, though not as well versed as some as I had written it off entirely as BS long ago. I have been researching all things Area 51 since listening to Art Bell back in the early to mid 90's. I CAN say that I have been to the range 10+ times, camped out there, travelled the same trails that Lazar and Lear did on their "saucer test" sightings way back when. At the least, I can say I was there, I know the terrain and layout, I know how crystal clear the night sky is there due to lack of light pollution, how bright the lights from Vegas are in the night sky from 80+ miles away, you would swear it is over the next hill.

re: element115 - Here are some snips from an ATS thread from 2007; John Lear speaking about "Element 115". I am sure that this lunacy will be written off as Lear being "short a few fries". I haven't researched it completely as yet, but I am pretty sure this WAS the Lazar party line, in all its whacky glory.

John Lear
5-10-2007
I am one of 3 persons who knows where one of the arrowhead shaped 233 gram pieces of Element 115 is, or at least was. I was not with Bob when he hid it but he told me who the other person was that knew it and drew me a map. There was no discussion as to when, if ever, it would be retrieved. I will take no part in any attempt to retrieve it nor will I discuss where it is. I have no idea whether the Element 115 is still where I was told it was. It would not be easy to check. I drive by the site occasionally but I cannot get to exactly where it is. There are many considerations why I say I will take no part in its retrieval.

Number 1, it would serve no use to anyone outside of the government.
Number 2, in the wrong hands it would be highly, highly dangerous.
Number 3, I find it highly unlikely that no matter what precautions were taken it would never be proved what it is.
Number 4, there are an infinite number of reasons why, even if certified by an independent lab, that most would reject that certification.
And number 5, and most important of all, regardless of what you personally believe, I have told the story exactly as I remember it happening. I have stated many times that I have no proof. It doesn't make any difference to me whether or not you believe the story. It happened exactly the way I said it did.

I have answered all of your questions to the best of my ability. I know what Bob’s desires are on the subject and mine reflect his. I have stated at least 4 times, 2 on the Art Bell show and 2 on ATS that I will not comment on the location of the piece of 115 that was not taken back by the government.
=======================================
Bob obtained 3 "arrowheads" about 2 inches long machined at LANL. Bob, Joe Vanniniti and I did the 'dry ice'/coleman lantern pintle experiment which was videotaped. Bob kept them in round lead containers about one inch thick. 2 were stolen back by the government.
=======================================
Yes, that is correct Lexion. But our piece of Element 115 came from outer space and was given to our government by aliens. They gave us 500 pounds of it. We (the U.S. Gov) had to machine it into the shape that we made the experiment with, the arrow-head shape. It was machined at Los Alamos National Laboratories which is where we got it from.

19 years ago we had 500 pounds that the aliens gave us. We were unable to use it for gravity shielding because the technology, although we understood it, was just too far ahead of us. So they made a bomb out of some of it. The estimated power of that bomb was to be able to blow up half a continent the size of South America. I doubt if they ever used the bomb but they had it.

If he did I don't remember it. He may have and it flew right over my head. There were so many things going on at the time. It was several months after Bob refused to go back to S-4. George Knapp was airing the Lazar special. The 115 had been taken from Los Alamos National Labs were it had been machined. Somebody borrowed three of the machined pieces and gave them to Bob.
edit on 4-2-2012 by FosterVS because: (no reason given)
edit on 4-2-2012 by FosterVS because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pimander
It also has no bearing on the question that certain members continue to duck, as I am absolutely certain you and every other person including Gariac and Foster understand. They weren't around then and DO NOT KNOW what was in the skies. Others including a witness on this thread were.


Yes, yes, A51Watcher has been continually hinting at it. Big secret, and just begging for someone to ask.

So let's see - a Youtube video, with almost unreadable text overlay, The date stamp is 10.29.91.
This puts it about 2 years past the time when Lear and Lazar claim they saw the "saucer tests". I'm not sure if this qualifies as "I Was There" or "Johnny Come Lately". It's seems that the "I Was There" definition is between when Lazar was there, up until "they moved the acitivities at S4 to another location", which I quote from a post here. I would love to hear where that bit of information came from.


The True Story of Area 51
The Secret Story of AREA 51 - Official Test Flight Program of recovered Alien Craft
Forget the rumors and disinformation about AREA 51, here is an actual video log of the U.S. Government's test flight program of recovered Alien Craft viewed from Public Land - Part 1
"I came to investigate the case of -Robert Lazar- "
"saying that the US government at a secret military installation out in the Nevada desert that no one had ever heard of before, but soon the world would know... it's called Area 51"
"the most top secret project in history"
"for going out into the desert in order to see for myself if the reports were true that you could observe these tests from public land "
"oh -bleep- -bleep- I'm in trouble"


"Forget the rumors and disinformation about AREA 51, here is an actual video log of the U.S. Government's test flight program of recovered Alien Craft viewed from Public Land - Part 1"

Wow, presumptuous or what. So where is part 2? The subtle hints indicate you saw and presumably videotaped something. Spit it up, let's have a look, I would love to analyze it. Or is it being held back, looking for a buyer?



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by FosterVS
 


Of course the hidden element 115 won't be retrieved. That would be physical proof. We don't need any stinkin' honesty here. (Though we do need stinkin' badges, even if they are fake.) No, the Lazar clan thrives on being called liars.

Now the kind of person that steals government property most likely steals documents too. So we are expected to believe Bob steals something he needs to store in lead (though he touches the triangular pieces with his hands in that asinine video he made), but no paperwork was stolen.

Why bring up paperwork? Because while the government was busy stealing back the element 115 (eyes roll), they would have nailed Bob on stolen paperwork. The feds wouldn't expose having element 115 (more eyes rolling), but they would prosecute on stolen documents.

BTW, we only have testimony that Lazar knew "test times". We don't know if there was a daily transport flight at the particular time these tests (cough cough) were performed. It could be as easy as knowing a Key Air pilot, a controller at Nellis, or a Rachel resident that established a pattern.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   
This is awesome.We got agents blowing more smoke than a Pink Floyd concert!


Fire up the lasers boys!



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by A51Watcher
This is awesome.We got agents blowing more smoke than a Pink Floyd concert!


Fire up the lasers boys!





Who are these supposed agents??



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by bknapple32

Originally posted by A51Watcher
This is awesome.We got agents blowing more smoke than a Pink Floyd concert!


Fire up the lasers boys!





Who are these supposed agents??


Is it not obvious?



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 05:16 AM
link   
Welcome back Shillstomper. always good to see a real thinker. 8) You might be interested in this thread as well....

The Peak Oil Lie


Originally posted by gariac
In 1989, Groom Lake was an airbase. In 2012, it is still an airbase.
And if they re-started/continue non-conventional craft testing tomorrow at Groom Lake it would still be an airbase. False logic. Epic fail.


Do we have any special agents who might be able perform a rescue operation here? They're still talking about S4 and non-conventional craft.


edit on 5/2/12 by Pimander because: (no reason given)
edit on 5/2/12 by Pimander because: When are you going to learn? :shk:



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain

Originally posted by bknapple32

Originally posted by A51Watcher
This is awesome.We got agents blowing more smoke than a Pink Floyd concert!


Fire up the lasers boys!





Who are these supposed agents??


Is it not obvious?



No it's not. If gariac foster or I are being referred to then I'm a little disappointed. Just because a couple skeptics and someone on the fence disagree with a point of view, and defend our own opinion, doesn't make us dis info agents lol. You can't just write off a dissenting opinion as "they aren't on the believers side, so they must be govt agents protecting the lie"... It's unfounded paranoid thinking, and it gives true cters a bad name.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Pimander
 


Pomander, is your memory faulty? I answered the question, but here we go again with a shorter version:

Groom Lake in 1989:
It was an airbase. Transport planes landed there. There was a runway marked 14.

Groom Lake in 2012 is an airbase. Transport plans land there. There is still a runway marked 14.

What happened then is relevant now. Sure the test aircraft are more advanced now than in 1989, but the transports are not all that different.

Since you have apparently no knowledge of how the Janets land, let me educate you AGAIN. The plane will approach the runway at a 3% slope. Remember, this is an approach from north to south. Given the plane is going to need some altitude to do the approach, its landing light will be visible from points east of the front gate area as it travels northward. The plane on approach looks like a light in the sky. It turns, and the light is gone.

You may want to cut this text out and save it to your desktop. This way I won't have to answer your repetitive questions.

Note that military planes don't have to do the same approach. If you ever get to visit the range, try to catch the cargo planes landing at Keno. They come in low then rise a bit before making their approach, then descend to land.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 

So you will agree then that anyone who saw something different to that did not see a Janet landing! Good. Yes Janets also land there, we know.

Other things are tested there which we also know. Some have exhibited flight manoeuvrability not possible for a conventional craft. Get over it. You weren't there so you don't know.

Further deflection from you. You have not answered the most important question regarding whether you have any relevant data. When did you first visit Groom Lake area?
edit on 5/2/12 by Pimander because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pimander
reply to post by gariac
 

So you will agree then that anyone who saw something different to that did not see a Janet landing! Good. Yes Janets also land there, we know.

Other things are tested there which we also know. Some have exhibited flight manoeuvrability not possible for a conventional craft. Get over it. You weren't there so you don't know.

Further deflection. You have not answered the most important question regarding whether you have any relevant data. When did you first visit Groom Lake area?


Yeah gariac, you better answer them. Then they will allow you either the "I Was There When The Tests Were Happening" badge, or the "Johnny Come Lately" pin. My first trip there was 2003, so I am surely of the "Johnny Come Lately" ilk, and not qualified to refer to Lazar as the lying POS that he is. And that any further trips to the range are a complete waste of time. Oh wait... wasn't the first report of the F117 by a lucky civilian with a camera hanging around out there? Hmmm...
edit on 5-2-2012 by FosterVS because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by FosterVS
 

Congratulations. Better late than never. 14 years after the Lazar story and 23 years after some early reports.

Yes, you are a Johnnie-come-lately and like Campbell, you do not know whether non-conventional craft were tested in the 80s near Groom Lake or whether hangers and tunnels (not a full base with runways!) were hidden and in use at an alleged S4 in the 80s. You were not there and do not know.

 



Originally posted by bknapple32
Just because a couple skeptics and someone on the fence disagree with a point of view, and defend our own opinion, doesn't make us dis info agents lol. You can't just write off a dissenting opinion as "they aren't on the believers side, so they must be govt agents protecting the lie"


No, that is not the reason for any suspicion. I deal with skeptics who are clearly not agents all the time.


What would a second rate counter intelligence agent do if they were tasked with gathering information on people watching A51 or S4 (if it is real)?

1. They would hang around the base and try to link up with anyone interested to gather information and influence researchers

2. They would pose as or even be experts without ever revealing the most important information (need to know says they would likely not even have it) but would share some real material so they appear to be legitimate researchers.



What would a counter intelligence agent do to cover up real witness reports on testing of non-conventional craft?

1. They would present false illogical arguments and present as fact what can at best be described as opinion to mislead researchers.

2. They would claim it is not about them even though their claims are partly responsible for researchers mistaken belief that there were no non-conventional craft tested. Why should their claims not be subjected to scrutiny?

3. They would try to deflect the debate by constantly referring to cases known to have been manipulated by AFOSI as a snowscreen. (AFOSI are the counter-intelligence branch of the USAF. i.e. Bennewitz and Dulce)

4. They would persistently try to keep the debate about a part of the story we cannot prove one way or the other and is down to opinion rather that allow a proper discussion of the craft sighting. (i.e.What Lazar claims he thought was element 115, which he may have believed or may be true however unlikely sounding.)

5. They would focus on the perceived credibility of certain witnesses in the hope that researchers forget that there were other witnesses too




What would someone trying to suppress knowledge of the existence of S4 do?

1. They would lie about the direction of Las Vegas to explain away a glow coming from that direction. Anyone as familiar as you guys with that area WOULD KNOW what direction Vegas is in.

2. They would pretend that views of Papoose Lake from a distance would prove whether hangers and rooms hidden within a mountain exist.



I could go on. There are plenty more reasons but you get the gist.

The suspicion may be wrong and is an opinion. However, it is not difficult to answer questions like, "when did you turn up at the range?" In fact it is very easy unless you are hiding something like the fact that you have worked there or more likely that you only turned up in recent years. Not replying to such a simple question makes a person look dishonest. Many members agree on this as the posts of support indicate. If you are not trying to mislead people you would have no problem about telling the truth. Doing so weeks later to try to save face is pretty lame too!
edit on 5/2/12 by Pimander because: sorted text formatting
edit on 5/2/12 by Pimander because: Second rate.

edit on 5/2/12 by Pimander because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 10:34 PM
link   
So we're clear, foster and gariac are dis info agents? Im one too? Or just one of us? Based on our actions..





new topics
 
19
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join