Stanton Friedman Debunks Bob Lazar

reply to post by stormbringer1701


Haha yeah and I told you that when it exists in more than just the minds of Lazar fan boys than I'll give it to you

Me and Gariac work for Dennis at Indian springs so we know there's no way Bob did.

dang I've been up long enough to be getting spastic. i meant to say that strictly speaking anti-gravity is not necessary. only control of or the ability to create gravity or redirect it. gravity from above is equal to anti-gravity from bellow. and gravity from the front will get your tukis off the ground almost as easily as anti-gravity from below or behind.

Stealthbomber
reply to post by stormbringer1701

 

Haha yeah and I told you that when it exists in more than just the minds of Lazar fan boys than I'll give it to you

Me and Gariac work for Dennis at Indian springs so we know there's no way Bob did.

i don't doubt you and i am not saying bob worked there-- but i worked for years at a certain directorate on a less exotic military base. and i bet that everyone I worked with is retired, my monthly counseling statements and other administrative records long destroyed as per military record management regs. probably the only trace of me left is in any remaining courseware i created in the metadata tags. but i believe everything i managed is now superseded by newer materials and the equipment i taught operations on long replaced by newer technology. in short if i went back to reminisce there would be no one there to reminisce with and the equipment i made my living on would not be there unless as a museum piece.

reply to post by stormbringer1701


Yeah but it's not like Bob came out with the revelations 20 years after the fact if was pretty much straight away so his paper trail should have still been there if he had one..

reply to post by stormbringer1701


Also where's S-4?

Stealthbomber
reply to post by stormbringer1701

 

Also where's S-4?

In Bob Lazars head.


You can see from google earth maps its not there. And why put a underground base there when you can just stick it with the normal base.

reply to post by crazyewok


That's what I never understood with bob, that became one of his many undoings but why bother making up another base when at the time Area 51 wasn't as big of a deal as it is now so he could have just said they keep the saucers in a hangar at Area 51. Ah well who can understand the mindset of an idiot.

Stealthbomber
reply to post by crazyewok

 

That's what I never understood with bob, that became one of his many undoings but why bother making up another base when at the time Area 51 wasn't as big of a deal as it is now so he could have just said they keep the saucers in a hangar at Area 51. Ah well who can understand the mindset of an idiot.

Exactly, Area 51 is already the most secret place on earth. Why build another even more secret base within the already black of blackest spots? Its just redundant.

stormbringer1701

gariac
reply to post by stormbringer1701

 

You have it backwards. You have to prove everything Bob Lazar said is true. He has a piece of element 115. All he has to do is hand a sample to a lab and the case would be closed.

It had been decades. He hasn't produced one bit of physical evidence to prove his case.

Bob was a photo tech at LANL. He had a photo lab in Vegas. That is about all that is true.

oh no i don't. i only have to prove that his science was plausible or proven. i have done so. see; no matter how one views issues like his ability as a gearhead or whether he performs personal hygiene to everyone's satisfaction or not. none of that has any bearing on the science theories he put forward. on the other hand the articles and other cites i provided prove his science was real or highly plausible.

i don't have to prove everything he said was true. most of it has nothing to do with whether the core of his claim about anti-gravity is real or not.

Call me crazy, but I have a hard time accepting scientific theory from a person who hasn't mastered capitalization. Just sayin'...

gariac

stormbringer1701

gariac
reply to post by stormbringer1701

 

You have it backwards. You have to prove everything Bob Lazar said is true. He has a piece of element 115. All he has to do is hand a sample to a lab and the case would be closed.

It had been decades. He hasn't produced one bit of physical evidence to prove his case.

Bob was a photo tech at LANL. He had a photo lab in Vegas. That is about all that is true.

oh no i don't. i only have to prove that his science was plausible or proven. i have done so. see; no matter how one views issues like his ability as a gearhead or whether he performs personal hygiene to everyone's satisfaction or not. none of that has any bearing on the science theories he put forward. on the other hand the articles and other cites i provided prove his science was real or highly plausible.

i don't have to prove everything he said was true. most of it has nothing to do with whether the core of his claim about anti-gravity is real or not.

Call me crazy, but I have a hard time accepting scientific theory from a person who hasn't mastered capitalization. Just sayin'...

Just woke up. well see... thats like dismissing Nixon on subjects he is proficient in because he lied about watergate. I'm not going all out on the debate no no that is but it is a debate no no.

if a someone who is a liar tells you that energy is equal to it's mass multiplied by the speed of light raised to the second power you would miss out on something important if that were information you didn't already know because you would dismiss this true bit of monumentally important information. message is not the messenger.

also i could tell you a bunch of things and get some stuff wrong. if you dismissed the whole pile of information because part of what i said was false you would miss all the true bits.

furthermore; the science bits of Bob's story are for the most part verifiable by people with thier nose to the ground in science matters. unlike the other stuff. you guys may be uniquely able to test the parts of his story not related to science but the rest of us really can only go by the science.

that's what i like about it. with the science if a statement is true you can either check it immediately or you can wait for the science to catch up. well science appears to be catching up. and the science is, perhaps surprisingly, beginning to vouch for what Lazar said (about the science bits of his story.)

for most of us onlookers science can't vouch for the location of or existence of S-4 or whatever. in my case the term S-4 would mean a logistic department of a military division. S-2 would be the intelligence branch of a division; actually battalion level or higher. that does not mean designations aren't different in the other branches of service or in nonmilitary agencies. It doesn't mean some idjit didn't name a facility or a range area that. But my own experience doesn't include that type of facility designation. so the terms S-4 and S-2 in this context have always been peculiar to me. it doesn't mean it isn't that way on some secret base. it just means i have not encountered it in my own experience. Fortunately; i don't need to know. it's not like i plan on bum rushing the place.

Lets pretend Bob Lazar does not exist. Let's pretend that he never told his story at all.

lets not even posit stable element 115 or element 116 or antimatter reactors or nearly 100 percent efficient thermo-electric converters.

we don't need any of that.

ok now. you read this: www.scientificamerican.com...

and then this:

www.preposterousuniverse.com...

Along the way, Zvi, John Joseph and Henrik, thanks to the time-honored method of “just staring at” the loop integrand provided by unitarity, also stumbled on a new property of gauge theory amplitudes, which tightly couples them to gravity. They found that gauge theory amplitudes can be written in such a way that their kinematic part obeys relations that are structurally identical to the Jacobi identities known to fans of Lie algebras. This so-called color-kinematics duality, when achieved, leads to a simple “double copy” prescription for computing amplitudes in suitable theories of gravity: Take the gauge theory amplitude, remove the color factors and square the kinematic numerator factors. Crudely, a graviton looks very much like two gluons laid on top of each other. If you’ve ever looked at the Feynman rules for gravity, you’d be shocked that such a simple prescription could ever work, but it does. Although these relations could in principle have been discovered without unitarity-based methods, the power of the methods to provide very simple expressions, led people to find initial patterns, and then easily test the patterns in many other examples to gain confidence.

OK. Bob Lazar never existed. what do you make of this new knowledge you just read about?

To me Bob Lazar is basically irrelevant now. i am not looking for a conspiracy story. I am looking for a means to control gravity.

Don't get me wrong, that article does not affirm that gravity and the strong force are identical in the real world or even that if you manipulate the gluon field a certain way you get a long range gravity force. but it does say that mathematically they appear to be identical in a respected award winning scientific model. but it is support for the *possibility* that it may be that way in the real world. the reality of the model must be tested.

reply to post by stormbringer1701


But that's what you've got to look at, say if the existence of these facilities, or the existence of his academic records they would give you credibility.

Stealthbomber
reply to post by stormbringer1701

 

But that's what you've got to look at, say if the existence of these facilities, or the existence of his academic records they would give you credibility.

well; we see things differently. in my opinion the science is the goal. Bob Lazar could be completely impeached in every other particular and the science will not change. not only that but the science is the really good part anyway, because you can do something with that. secret bases, alien goblins living under the ground and infernal conspiracies; you cannot really do anything with that.

I think the science is the really good part. The other stuff may make an interesting story but i cannot disprove nor prove it and there is not much to do with it if i could. I mean you can't make a star cruiser with the rest of his story. You can with the science if it is real.

and credibility is kind of mutable. i mean if you levitate something non magnetic above a polarized hunk of spinning bismuth you go from the nut or liar category to the "hello George Washington!" category as far as that is concerned.

reply to post by stormbringer1701


You're not an engineer. This is obvious. You can read all sorts of crap in real scientific journals, but that doesn't mean you can exploit that technology. Real life is way harder than doing something in the lab.

Scientific American has been a crappy magazine since the mid-80s when the ownership changed.

Besides, we WERE talking about Lazar. If you want to talk fantasy physics, perhaps their is a more appropriate forum.

besides with all the credential stuff...yes there are a lot of articles debunking them but there are also articles that allege to have found documentation that supports his story. so the whole area is pretty murky. if you add to that any conspiracy kook worth his salt will be able to claim that Bob is the victim of a nefarious plot to cleanse him from the records and it's kind of a useless avenue of approach anyway.

I mean there isn't even any necessity to go through all that muck anyway. the science cannot be white washed.

gariac
reply to post by stormbringer1701

 

You're not an engineer. This is obvious. You can read all sorts of crap in real scientific journals, but that doesn't mean you can exploit that technology. Real life is way harder than doing something in the lab.

Scientific American has been a crappy magazine since the mid-80s when the ownership changed.

Besides, we WERE talking about Lazar. If you want to talk fantasy physics, perhaps their is a more appropriate forum.

I gather you did not read the above post where i said this:

Don't get me wrong, that article does not affirm that gravity and the strong force are identical in the real world or even that if you manipulate the gluon field a certain way you get a long range gravity force. but it does say that mathematically they appear to be identical in a respected award winning scientific model. but it is support for the *possibility* that it may be that way in the real world. the reality of the model must be tested.

I know that models do not always have an exploitable real world analog. i know that even those that do may be extremely difficult to work out.

i suspect this case may be a bit easier because of prior art in legit science research (such as at the ESA) and also in the fringe science category all have a locus centered on certain protocols. there have been a few exceptions but by and large they all follow the same general tactics materials and so forth.

Scientific American may be as you say but as usual the article isn't the origin of the subject. A paper and the research that lead to that paper are. and they won a Sakurai prize in Theoretical Physics for it. Scientific American's bone fides have nothing to do with it.

that is an ad hominem logical fallacy. a some times useful debate tactic (if your debate opponent or debate judges don't call you on it) but it is not one based on sound scientific principles.

stormbringer1701
Scientific American may be as you say but as usual the article isn't the origin of the subject. A paper and the research that lead to that paper are. and they won a Sakurai prize in Theoretical Physics for it. Scientific American's bone fides have nothing to do with it.

that is an ad hominem logical fallacy. a some times useful debate tactic (if your debate opponent or debate judges don't call you on it) but it is not one based on sound scientific principles.

I know all those logical fallacies. You picked the wrong person to pull that crap on. You are using ad ignorantiam and the argument from authority. Your arguments are a combination of cuts and paste from articles that might or might not be relevant, but just because person X works at Y, it must be true. [Hint: medical doctors can be total quacks, so authority doesn't mean they are correct.] I don't fall for that crap. The ad ignoratiam argument is to put me into a spot where I have to prove a negative, which can't be done.

Again, we were talking about LAZAR. Where is his photographic evidence? Oh yeah, somebody kicked the tripod before they could take a photograph. How convenient. Where is is physical proof? Did his dog eat his sample of element 115. Where is the base at S-4. Oh, yeah, it can't be seen. That is sure handy.

By your logic (or lack thereof), we have to believe in Jrod, Dan Burisch, and all those sick pathetic people that crave attention. Hint: all sorts of people say all sorts of stuff, and believe it not, sometimes what they say isn't true.

Ad hominem means I attacked you, which is not the case. i just attack your dubious arguments.

stormbringer1701

gariac
reply to post by stormbringer1701

 

You're not an engineer. This is obvious. You can read all sorts of crap in real scientific journals, but that doesn't mean you can exploit that technology. Real life is way harder than doing something in the lab.

Scientific American has been a crappy magazine since the mid-80s when the ownership changed.

Besides, we WERE talking about Lazar. If you want to talk fantasy physics, perhaps their is a more appropriate forum.

I gather you did not read the above post where i said this:

Don't get me wrong, that article does not affirm that gravity and the strong force are identical in the real world or even that if you manipulate the gluon field a certain way you get a long range gravity force. but it does say that mathematically they appear to be identical in a respected award winning scientific model. but it is support for the *possibility* that it may be that way in the real world. the reality of the model must be tested.

I know that models do not always have an exploitable real world analog. i know that even those that do may be extremely difficult to work out.

i suspect this case may be a bit easier because of prior art in legit science research (such as at the ESA) and also in the fringe science category all have a locus centered on certain protocols. there have been a few exceptions but by and large they all follow the same general tactics materials and so forth.

If I quoted it, I read it. Geez people.

And fix that shift key!

stormbringer1701
as i said earlier they are not my primary concern. this is because what Lazar said about the science is testable while the credentials can be muck raked. As to credentialed scientists. scientists are famous for their ability to often be wrong. i have already laid out a powerful case for Lazar's science claims. if he was right his credentials do not matter.

if your scientists said there was no element 115 they were wrong. if they said no stable isotope was found they would be leaving out the fact that stable atoms were not looked for in the experiments. If they believe there cannot be a stable isotope of element 115 they may be right but they also may be very wrong because element 115 was more stable the heavier it was. if they said gravity and the strong force are not related they were wrong.

A REAL physicist debunks Lazar:
Link

Or read the whole saga here; not sure where I compiled all this from, Tom Mahood, or the Dreamland Resort website:
www.topsecretbases.com...

Regardless - I have no doubt Lazar is a smart guy, credentials or not. He has however been thoroughly debunked. His whole tale, in my opinion, was concocted in the minds of Lazar, Huff, Lear and others. To fleece the Sheeple with tapes, seminars, appearances, etc. Someone with physics knowledge probably came up with the technical part of the tale, and Lazar memorized it. He has presented it almost as if he was quoting it from memory, but never able to answer any deeper questions into the science of his tale.