Lazar Camp Vs. Friedman Camp

I have always been a Bob Lazar supporter if you will and its just a shame that Ufology has almost berated the poor man for disclosing what he knew about UFO's and alien spacecraft. The fact is he did work at Los Alamos even though they tried to deny at first he did, it was only after they were presented with information that they had to admit, to an extent Lazar did work there. Also his phone number was in the directory. Why were they so keen to hide Lazar's existence? Why did Lazar have a tyre shot out on his vehicle? I sincerely hope that one day, before Lazar passes away we hear the full story on his job and exactly what he witnessed and what he knows. In regards to Stanton Friedman I have lots of respect for him but I think he tries to discredit Lazar to make himself look better.

reply to post by ProfessorT


I wanna know about his education.

Lazar is a fraud, and Friedman is a troll just looking to make a quick buck. There's a video floating out there in the web of Lazar stating "It takes a lot of energy to get to the speed of light". Actually, Bob, it takes an infinite amount of energy. What are the chances a physicist working to reverse-engineer UFO's at area 51 doesn't understand basic relativity? He probably did work at these top secret facilities, but he was definitely no physicist. Probably the facility janitor or something.

As for Friedman, the wild claims he pushes without any sort of evidence and then labelling those who don't accept his wild claims as "debunkers" and implying they are agents of the government, has cemented his reputation as a crackpot just trying to make money and not as a researcher in search of the truth. His fantastic claims such as aliens from Zeta Reticuli abducting people, UFO's being reverse engineered in top secret facilities, and most famously his Majestic-12 documents which he likely forged in order to write a few more books and profit, is all the evidence the average sceptic needs to dismiss this charlatan.

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by ProfessorT

 

I wanna know about his education.

So do I. However, look at how easy it is for the government to discredit someone like Bob Lazar and wipe any record of him away. So it would be easy, especially in those days to destroy all documents pertaining to Lazar's educational background. We can assume what sort of education he had been privy to considering he worked at Los Alamos. What I would absolutely enjoy seeing is a video or something from Lazar putting all the wrongs right and giving us proof that he was educated where he said he was as well as opening up further on one of the worlds greatest secrets.

reply to post by ProfessorT


Why would discrediting Lazar make Friedman look better? A lot of what Lazar says backs up Friedman's claims. He says he had Majestic clearance, which gives credibility to the Majestic 12 documents. He says he read documents confirming the existence of little grey aliens from Zeta Reticuli, which gives credibility to Betty Hill's star map. And, of course, he says he worked on a flying saucer, and we all know Stanton's opinions on those!

Originally posted by SloAnPainful
reply to post by ubeenhad

 

Lazar's claims pin to close to other claims made by other famous abductees. Benny and Barney Hill.

Being from Zeta Rec.

Must be true...

-SAP-

You are misinformed as to the Hills being abductees. Not even their doctor accepted their abduction tales. Do serious, in-depth research and what you will learn will not please you. Betty Hill was very active in UFOlogy. The words they used to describe their claims seem to come from a TV show that aired shortly before their claims. Look into it.

Originally posted by Damsel
I would absolutely disagree with the notion that Stanton Friedman is a fraud. In my opinion, he'll forever be one of the best ufologists of all time.
(snip)

There is nothing special about Friedman. He knows what side his bread is buttered on and that's the side that contains the most gullible people who accept everything he reports whether he is saying something or nothing. He has no special knowledge. What he knows anyone can know. He supports bs 'cause it sells and he's in the business of selling. He doesn't have to provide proof 'cause no one requires or demands it. He takes what is known, maybe gives it a new form and the gullible just eat it up. He promotes Roswell 'cause he knows he doesn't have to prove that a UFO crashed there since the popular tale overrides critics such as myself. He sells and sells and doesn't deliver anything new, just old news. In my opinion he is worthless.

Or maybe Lazar is the fraud and the disinfo agent just trying to stir the pot??

I want evidence of either claims, but so far Lazar has nothing to back his claims up.

Like many of you, I've seen all the videos of Lazar and Friedman, read everything 'Ole Stanton has produced, some several times, and listen carefully, when Knapp et al have some comment on either one - as there is no denying that some of what the two of these long-time UFO-characters have said corroborate each other and some of what they say vehemently contradict each other.

My own conclusion: Stanton Friedman is a strong, passionate, eloquent believer who has simply figured out a way to make a 'career' out of his personal passion for the Aline/UFO enigma. Although he regularly reminds his readers and audiences that he is (was) a nuclear physicist, he actually holds no PhD in the discipline (admittedly) and really has very little 'hands-on' background in the field. Instead, Good 'ole Stan has merely parlayed his personal interest in the UFO phenomenon into authorship of related books and articles. I've met Stanton and spoke to him a couple of time, and find him to be quite erudite and sincere about the subject. I've also concluded that he especially enjoys being "comped" for air travel and hotels to several UFO Conferences and Trade shows each year, giving him repeated venues to repeat his quite articulate presentations, sell a few more books, and be continuously promoted as an "authority" on the UFO subject. A bit of self-aggrandizement is always evident with Stan (especially if you are cognizant of it happening while he is doing it), and I don't really blame him for taking the path in life he has. I must admit I admire him for, if nothing else, his ability to make a career out of nothing more than some dedicated research, a "professor" look, and excellent communication skills. Frankly, however, (IMHO) he really hasn't said anything new or earth-shattering in some twenty years.

Lazar, of course, is a whole different animal. I also believe him to be quite well-educated (though perhaps not the level he claims), articulate, and certainly knowledgeable about the most common, popular (though as yet unsubstantiated) UFO propulsion technologies. It's a little disconcerting that there is not a single colleague, superior, subordinate, classmate, relative, friend or any casual acquaintance who has come forward to validate any of his claims. Note - I am purposefully leaving John Lear out of this equation, as the two became 'friends' (accomplices?) only subsequent to all the hoopla surrounding Lazar's claims. Lear (who I also spoke with in person at a UFO convention a few years ago), also strikes me as a mellow, down-to-earth, genuine article - as far as his own beliefs are concerned -but he has segued into a rather egotistical opportunist with some rather far-fetched ideas, many of which just did not add up (in a physical/natural scientific perspective [again, IMHO]. I know there are many here on ATS (some good friends of mine) that disagree with me on this, and that's ok, Let's just say he certainly added some color and thought-provoking commentary here on ATS a few years back - I kinda miss the old coot. He sure has a killer office at home and lot's of neat toys, mementos, and such. But I digress. Back to Lazar:

You may have checked out Lazar's United Nuclear company at some point. An intriguing fall-back position, considering he lit the UFO world on fire with his claims and then sort of drifted out of sight. Threatened? A disinfo plant? A pre-disclosure seed? You can bet the gubbmint has kept a close eye on him since day one if not before. He was never silenced, but he sure hasn't had much to say lately. Why not? Kinda reminds me of my late childhood hero, Neil Armstrong. Look at the similarities: both were witness to something profound and magnificent -claimed, fabricated, or documented -it matters not. What does matter is that the public, or at least a significant number of them, "believed" in them, some so much so that they have dedicated their lives to finding out the "truth" they believe is (or was) hidden within. Both of these men were employed by (or claimed to be employed by) a branch of the government that was intimately involved with space travel. Both witnessed (or claimed to witness) something magnificent that the rest of us among the lowly unwashed masses can only dream to experience for ourselves.

Yet - both became withdrawn and reclusive to the extreme. Why?

Logic would tell us that if what they saw, or has been suggested that they saw was, in fact, true, and considering the level of intelligence and professional preparation they both had, that they would know, instinctively and intrinsically, that all of humanity must share in such a truth because making it known to the world would shake the very foundations of human history -and human evolution. Religion, politics, economies, society - maybe that's it after all: they were made to keep quiet, as are all similarly endowed individuals, so as not to rock the fragile boat.

reply to post by Outrageo


Awesome post. Starred.

But you think the moon landing was a hoax?

reply to post by ubeenhad


No, I do NOT think the moon landing was a hoax - not in the slightest. It definitely took place - and then some.

I do, however, believe that more was discovered there than was released to the public.

Originally posted by Outrageo
reply to post by ubeenhad

 

No, I do NOT think the moon landing was a hoax - not in the slightest. It definitely took place - and then some.

I do, however, believe that more was discovered there than was released to the public.

While I do not agree with nor promote that the moon landing was a hoax there are many pertinent questions that have to make one wonder.

1. Whe Neil jumps in the "air" and salutes, Buzz takes his photo. At the same time there is a video being taken from behind Neil. The video shows Neil in the "air" with his life support top flap secured, or flat. In the photo taken by Buzz you see the triangular flap raised. How can this be?

2. When the rover is shown you rarely see the tracks it should shown as it was allegedly driven about. In closeups you see the undisturbed soil between the tires!

3. The astronauts shot color film while allegedly on their way to the moon yet all we see of the lunar activity is grainy black and white images.

4. Why do some of the photos of the astronauts' helmets visors show strange and bizarre images without any explanations?

5. Why is there no lunar dust resting on the bowl shapes of the landers' legs?

6. Why do some photos show light sources not originating with the sun?

7. Why do some photos show a well-lit area where the area should be in total darkness when it's opposite the sun?

Originally posted by The Shrike
While I do not agree with nor promote that the moon landing was a hoax there are many pertinent questions that have to make one wonder.

Can you show examples of these so they can be explained to you?

Originally posted by The Shrike

Originally posted by Outrageo
reply to post by ubeenhad

 

No, I do NOT think the moon landing was a hoax - not in the slightest. It definitely took place - and then some.

I do, however, believe that more was discovered there than was released to the public.

While I do not agree with nor promote that the moon landing was a hoax there are many pertinent questions that have to make one wonder.

1. Whe Neil jumps in the "air" and salutes, Buzz takes his photo. At the same time there is a video being taken from behind Neil. The video shows Neil in the "air" with his life support top flap secured, or flat. In the photo taken by Buzz you see the triangular flap raised. How can this be?

2. When the rover is shown you rarely see the tracks it should shown as it was allegedly driven about. In closeups you see the undisturbed soil between the tires!

3. The astronauts shot color film while allegedly on their way to the moon yet all we see of the lunar activity is grainy black and white images.

4. Why do some of the photos of the astronauts' helmets visors show strange and bizarre images without any explanations?

5. Why is there no lunar dust resting on the bowl shapes of the landers' legs?

6. Why do some photos show light sources not originating with the sun?

7. Why do some photos show a well-lit area where the area should be in total darkness when it's opposite the sun?

Like Neil Degrass Tyson says "Atop 6 millions pounds of rocket fuel, were do you think they were going?"

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by The Shrike
While I do not agree with nor promote that the moon landing was a hoax there are many pertinent questions that have to make one wonder.

Can you show examples of these so they can be explained to you?

While I appreciate your offer I don't want to continue hijacking the thread which I did when I replied to Outrageo's reply to ubeenhad.

If I may be frank with you and not have you think I'm insulting you, I don't think that you will be able to explain to my satisfaction. Examples can be found here and in a ton of places on the web, especially Google Images.

Originally posted by ubeenhad
Like Neil Degrass Tyson says "Atop 6 millions pounds of rocket fuel, were do you think they were going?"
snip

I'm not a Tyson enthusiast and he is just expressing a belief. The answer to his question is simply: "To earth orbit".

William Cooper said that both Friedman and Lazar were agents.

I am not sure what to really believe. I absolutely believe in the "UFO phenomena" and in visitation by more advanced races, but I am just not sure who is telling the truth. It is very frustrating, this enduring UFO mystery. Yet, it has me anticipating more.

Originally posted by VoidHawk

Originally posted by TheProphetMark
Trust Bob Lazar if you want to trust anyone at all. This guy actually makes sense.

I agree.

1. Lazars name was in their phone directory. He DID work there, and THEY DID try to say he didn't.
2. Whenever you see the dissinfo engine being started its for a reason.

ETA: Friedman. Not sure he's dissinfo, I've heard some good stuff spoken by him, but the art of dissinfo is to mix truth with lies.

edit on 28-9-2012 by VoidHawk because: (no reason given)

I wouldn't say Friedman is a knowing misinformationist (new word?), he just gives his opinions on UFO related stuff. Secondly, Lazaar working there and them saying he didn't, does not confirm he was telling the truth. I can also add, that Lazaar started saying his stuff when UFOs were very popular, so that could imply he was trying to cash in? Friedman didn't need to cash in, he could have studied nuclear physics if he wasn't in the Ufology scene.

At the end of the day, does it even matter? Ufos are real, no matter what propulsion system they use.

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist
Lazar is a fraud, and Friedman is a troll just looking to make a quick buck. There's a video floating out there in the web of Lazar stating "It takes a lot of energy to get to the speed of light". Actually, Bob, it takes an infinite amount of energy. What are the chances a physicist working to reverse-engineer UFO's at area 51 doesn't understand basic relativity? He probably did work at these top secret facilities, but he was definitely no physicist. Probably the facility janitor or something.

As for Friedman, the wild claims he pushes without any sort of evidence and then labelling those who don't accept his wild claims as "debunkers" and implying they are agents of the government, has cemented his reputation as a crackpot just trying to make money and not as a researcher in search of the truth. His fantastic claims such as aliens from Zeta Reticuli abducting people, UFO's being reverse engineered in top secret facilities, and most famously his Majestic-12 documents which he likely forged in order to write a few more books and profit, is all the evidence the average sceptic needs to dismiss this charlatan.

Naw, it takes an infinite amount of energy to accelerate matter to or past the speed of light. Im pretty sure lazar knows about SR.

Originally posted by Toxicsurf
After doing alot of reading and research into Doty. Moore, the Aviary and the whole early 80's ptb disinfo campaigns, there is a good chance that Lazar was just another dupe. Similar to what happened to Bennewitz. ...

edit on 29-9-2012 by Toxicsurf because: (no reason given)

In the early 1980s Moore personally delivered a book I ordered from him and normally he would have mailed the book but I think that he came to my door to scope me out to see if he recruit me!