Who is Bob Lazar: A Revisit

It was when I tried to reply the thread asking if someone really believes Bob Lazar that I decided to revisit the Bob Lazar story seriously.

Basically there are three possibilities concerned with the role Bob Lazar played:
1. He is a liar/hoaxer.
2. He is part of certain conspiracy of disinformation attempt.
3. He is a top secret informant.

I am going to examine the motives, means/contents with respect to each possibility.

1. Liar/Hoaxer

1-1. Motives

People lie for reasons, mostly for fun or for money through gained fame. In Bob Lazar case, hardly is it for fun because a joke would not attract any attention of the government at all. Further, if it was for fun, the fun part could just be realized after revealing the truth.

It seems to me that it would be more likely for money through gained fame if Bob Lazar was a liar/hoaxer. Did Bob Lazar gain enough attention for making money? The answer is positive. Then the following issue is how to make money and we will soon understand that the probability Bob Lazar being a liar/hoaxer is quite small.

What would be the best way to make money? Writing books of course. Bob Lazar could have written books through which he could make money fast. Why no books? Lack of materials? It does not make any sense if he was a liar because a liar could create as many materials as he wants. Maybe he just CAN’T write a book or he does have no more astonishing materials, in either case his possibility of being a liar is ruled out and I am going to elaborate why Bob Lazar may not have enough materials to write a book even if he can in the last part.

1-2. Means/Contents

We categorize information into two kinds: verifiable information and unverifiable information. If you were a liar, what kind of information would you lie about? Of course unverifiable information. Because once you choose to lie about something verifiable, your credibility can be easily destroyed and your tale won't be sold. If Bob Lazar was a liar and decided to sell a huge take, how could he be so stupid to cheat on his educational background which can be easily verified?

Further, what would you use to defeat a lie? Of course the truth. You don't use a lie to defeat another lie. Bob Lazar claimed he had worked at Los Alamos. Interestingly his claim was denied officially. However, hard evidence had yet been found (a phone number list and a publication) proving his claim. If Bob Lazar was a liar, why would the government use a lie to defeat a liar?

1-3. Conclusion

Is Bob Lazar a liar? He may lie on something, but it is unlikely he lies on everything especially the key part of his story.

(to be continued)

2. Part of certain conspiracy of disinformation attempt

2-1. Motives

Generally such attempt will be made especially when there are risks of leaking critical information or there is of great need for deception. If this was the case, then what Bob Lazar leaked would not be true.

The core part of Bob Lazar’s claim is the attempt of reverse engineering of alien technology. Generally you use UFOs to cover up your own technology. This claim is super huge and admits both extraterrestrial existence and terrestrial attempt to copy extraterrestrial technology. It is just beyond my imagination to think about any information more critical than the claim itself.

Then there comes the idea what if the core part IS true and the disinformation attempt was made to cover up something else and related to the core part. The reason of telling the truth is it may not remain a secret to the targets and it is the only way to establish credibility for the faked part of information in order to achieve the objectives of disinformation.

Naturally my attention is drawn to some other details Bob Lazar mentioned. One of the reason I don’t believe Bob Lazar was a liar is that he mentioned during some time Russians were also involved and later for some reasons they were kept out from the project and were angry about that. If the U.S. was trying to reverse alien technology, 99.9999% of people would believe that it should be kept cosmic secret. How could a liar dare to say that Russians were also involved? To me, it just can NOT be a lie. If it is not a lie, it means that Russians DID know about the alien technology thing in a way to some extent. Then suddenly I realize that there exists possibility Bob Lazar was part of conspiracy of disinformation attempt for strategic deception.

First of all, let’s consider the possibility that Russians possible involvement in such super-secret project. In 1985, Reagan raised the issue to Gorbachev "how easy his task and mine might be in these meetings that we held if suddenly there was a threat to this world from some other species from another planet outside in the universe. We'd forget all the little local differences that we have between our countries ..." in his speech to the 42nd session of the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1987, Reagan again said to the world “In our obsession with antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to make us recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world. And yet, I ask you, is not an alien force already among us? What could be more alien to the universal aspirations of our peoples than war and the threat of war?” O.M.G., Reagan asked “IS not an alien force ALREADY among us?” At the same year during their conversation, Reagan asked Shevardnatze, Reagan asked “Don't you think the United States and the Soviet Union would be together?” Shevardnatze said yes and added “And we wouldn't need our defense ministers to meet.“ Not for once, but for several times the U.S. president passed similar information to the Soviet leaders and even to the whole world. What if Reagan was seeking possible cooperation from the second strongest nation at the time? May we assume that there really existed cooperation in the following year of 1988 or even earlier since 1986?

Bob Lazar came to the stage in the year of 1989 and claimed that Russians were also involved for some period. It seems to me that there exists possibility of disinformation. But what was that part of information? Bob Lazar claimed that he did not think there had been any progress of reversing alien technology. What if the situation was somehow sophisticated that the U.S. had made some big progress and did not want to share it with the Soviet and the both party kept cooperation in other fields? I have to address two important things. One is the widely spread rumor of TR-3B anti-gravity aircraft which was firstly sighted in the early of 1990s. What if TR-3B was one of results of reverse engineering of alien technology Bob Lazar mentioned and the progress the U.S. did not want to share? Apparently if it was the case we have found the motives of disinformation. The second is the element 115 Bob Lazar mentioned to the world. Interestingly element 115 was firstly created by a team composed of Russian scientists at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR) in Dubna, and American scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in 2003. What if the cooperation went to another direction to the material study?

2-2. Means/Contents

If Bob Lazar was part of conspiracy of disinformation attempt, he would tell some truth to gain credibility because the other party knows it as well. And the U.S. government would also react in a way as if Bob Lazar was an informant and try very much to destroy his credibility, which seems similar to what has happened in reality.

The whole process seems interesting too. Bob Lazar showed his friends strange flying object somewhere around Area 51 and gained credibility, then they were spotted and intercepted some time later (at the third time?) and he lost his job. At the same time, his marriage ended and then he decided to tell everything he knew after a failed meeting with his superior Dennis. It looked a little bit perfect.

Further, if there existed a plot, a perfect candidate would be someone who were involved in the project but did not know the latest progress. Bob Lazar’s United Nuclear Scientific Equipment and Supplies was formed in 1986, but he claimed to have been working at S4 till 1989.

2-3. Conclusion

It seems to me the possibility exists. It turns more interesting if we consider possible relationship between Bob Lazar’s claim that some stable element 115 went missing and the business he has been running: selling equipment and materials.

(to be continued)

3. Top Secret Informant

3-1. Motives

His wife cheated on him. He lost his job after been caught when bringing his friends to see the UFO. The failed meeting with his superior Dennis made Bob Lazar felt imminent threats. These may be the motives for Bob Lazar to go public to protect himself. Are those sufficient? Only Bob Lazar could answer this question.

3-2. Means/Contents

If you were to tell the world cosmic level secrets in order to protect yourself, what would you do? You would tell every piece you know because since you could not bring more damage, you were not a threat anymore. Damage control would go to discredit you rather than silencing you. This is partly why Bob Lazar had no more materials for writing a book if he was an informant.

Bob Lazar mentioned the UFO was nuclear powered and a couple scientists died of nuclear accident. The rumored TR-3B is nuclear powered.

Bob Lazar mentioned element 115, which is consistent with later US-Russia joint scientific discovery. If he was a liar, he could call the fuel an alien material, which would be much safer to protect his lies than calling it element 115.

Bob Lazar mentioned he was hired by Naval Intelligence, which is consistent with what Gary McKinnon had found in 1997.

3-3. Conclusion

It is possible that Bob Lazar was telling the truth, at least part of the truth. The issue I have is that if TR-3B did appear in the early 1990s, there should have been some progress in reverse engineering in 1989. Why Bob Lazar claimed there had been less progress?

My final conclusion:
1. Bob Lazar a Liar: highly impossible
2. Bob Lazar part of disinformation: possible
3. Bob Lazar an informant: possible
Both conclusion 2 and 3 lead to the conclusion that there exists reverse engineering attempt and there exists direct contact between extraterrestrials and human race.

(The End)

a reply to: Paperjacket

Appreciate the effort you've put into an interesting UFO case IMO.

I don't think Lazar exploited his sudden fame for money. He was involved in lots of talks right after coming out but didn't really profit. As you stated, he didn't go heavy into book writing which is where the money was at those days.

Personally I think Lazar fibbed about his 'resume'. Doing this happens a lot actually, so doesn't destroy his credibility really. Friedman investigated his educational claims very carefully and didn't find much truth beside some college courses. I suspect Lazar was a genius who didn't fit the education system and simply dropped out doing his own work, reading and learning whatever he was interested in at the time. His building a 'jet car' back in the days when that was original demonstrates his hands on approach over education. Lazar's time a Los Alamos was basically proven by Friedman to be with a contractor and not at the highest levels.

I agree that Lazar can't really be a dis-info attempt. He spilled way too much with specifics. He attracted the national spotlight on a secret base that ended up forcing many secret projects to go elsewhere. If Lazar was dis-info to cover other projects then it was a massive failure. Highly unlikely.

I know lots of people shoot down Lazar, but I still find his story worthy of study. George Knapp is absolutely rock solid in accepting Lazar's story and Knapp is no fool and has credibility to spare.

Worthy of reading to refresh on the Lazar subject....
en.wikipedia.org...

People who lie are not always explainable.

My dad was a liar, not for any apparent reason, just because.

Sometimes he was a very good liar, other times and most of the time a really bad liar.

One of his "best" lies was that he worked on the Thule base in Greenland, he was part of a support team for a bunch of scientist/expert that traveled across greenland for various reasons.

But the fact is that he was working in the kitchen for the Danish staff stationed up there, and he was only up there for six months.

But if you heard the story from him, you would believe him, as he had all the facts right and some pictures and papers, but it was all just a lie.

Some people are just very convincing with very little evidence.

I have no real opinion on Lazar as it's to blurry unfortunately.

Anyway S+F

a reply to: Mianeye

...And just because your father did not benefit monetarily from his lie does not mean he didn't lie.

Some people just lie without having any perceivable motive or benefit.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
a reply to: Mianeye

...And just because your father did not benefit monetarily from his lie does not mean he didn't lie.

Some people just lie without having any perceivable motive or benefit.

cough - Brian Williams - cough...

I think Lazar just lied about his CV.

originally posted by: noeltrotsky
a reply to: Paperjacket

Appreciate the effort you've put into an interesting UFO case IMO.

I don't think Lazar exploited his sudden fame for money. He was involved in lots of talks right after coming out but didn't really profit. As you stated, he didn't go heavy into book writing which is where the money was at those days.

Personally I think Lazar fibbed about his 'resume'. Doing this happens a lot actually, so doesn't destroy his credibility really. Friedman investigated his educational claims very carefully and didn't find much truth beside some college courses. I suspect Lazar was a genius who didn't fit the education system and simply dropped out doing his own work, reading and learning whatever he was interested in at the time. His building a 'jet car' back in the days when that was original demonstrates his hands on approach over education. Lazar's time a Los Alamos was basically proven by Friedman to be with a contractor and not at the highest levels.

I agree that Lazar can't really be a dis-info attempt. He spilled way too much with specifics. He attracted the national spotlight on a secret base that ended up forcing many secret projects to go elsewhere. If Lazar was dis-info to cover other projects then it was a massive failure. Highly unlikely.

I know lots of people shoot down Lazar, but I still find his story worthy of study. George Knapp is absolutely rock solid in accepting Lazar's story and Knapp is no fool and has credibility to spare.

Worthy of reading to refresh on the Lazar subject....
en.wikipedia.org...

Only one point, as I'm less educated on this topic probably than you guys.

How do you know that Lazar didn't "expose" area-51 to deflect the public away from a much more real secret base elsewhere such as in some other state or location?

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

That was my point, my father never tried to gain anything from it, he just lied, sometimes knowing the people around him knew, but once started he couldn't stop.

I think he just did it to pass time, and avoid awkward silent moment, and then got caught up in it and had to finish it .

Sometimes i would say it to him "dad, you are lying!", and he would go silent, only to start another story ten min. later.

I actually miss his stories

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
a reply to: Mianeye

...And just because your father did not benefit monetarily from his lie does not mean he didn't lie.

Some people just lie without having any perceivable motive or benefit.

cough - Brian Williams - cough...

Brian Williams did have perceivable benefit, as buffering his war stories made his credibility as a journalist and hence career trajectory be solidified.

a reply to: noeltrotsky

The possibility that Bob Lazar exaggerated his educational background does exist. Before he decided to go public, guys such as George Knapp would surely do background check. Because what he was going to reveal was so huge, any flaw of verifiable information would be devastating. George Knapp would understand it, Bob Lazar would understand it too. There must be a lot of idea exchanges before Bob Lazar faced cameras. Why he insisted on such claims, which would jerpadise not only his credibility but George Knapp's and would only cause negative effects? It seems to me that it does not make any sense.

If Bob Lazar is such a lier, why the government lied about his presence at Los Alamos? A contractor of Los Alamos still worked there. Both Bob Lazar and Los Alamos are liars? But why？

I am not saying Bob Lazar surely not lying about his educational background, but it does looks strange.

a reply to: Mianeye

What you are saying is a type of pathological liars who lie for no reason. This kind of people exist for sure. But there is huge difference between what you are referring to and what I am talking about. Pathological liars can lie about whatever they want in their life circle and in fact they do not care at all if people beilieve what they have said or not. But Bob Lazar was trying to go public to reveal something and intended to make people believe. Your father's attempt to boost himself in front of you is totally different from Bob Lazar's TV interview to reveal some top secrets.

Further in your example, the key information is true and what has been exaggerated is the role your father has played. Then your attitude towards your father depends on your objectives of acquiring those information.

a reply to: SoEpic

What I did not point out is that even if Bob Lazar lied about his educational background, there is no direct logical condition to get the conclusion that he lied about everything.

a reply to: Paperjacket

True, but it could be that Lazar took it to the next level, we see a lot of people speaking out to the public today, telling incredible stories that sounds convinceable, presenting some wake but believable evidence.

But as there is no way to proof it, they just hang there in the "good story section", to never get any further.

Bob Lazar's story is one of those.

a reply to: Mianeye

I like the point you make about lying. People do it for lots of reasons and some are just pathological about lying...meaning they lie simply because they are talking.

Around the Lazar situation the context is important. Lazar lying to get a job with a contractor is pretty understanding. You need a job and in the scientific field you are nobody without a degree. So he lied to get in the door.

Lazar had just got the promotion he asked specifically for after impressing higher ups at Los Alamos. Lazar had heard some very top secret stuff was going on there and wanted in. After getting busted for showing people secret flights from just off the base Lazar lost his job. Knapp has fair reason to accept Lazar actually went to S4 at area 51...it's not rock solid but it's reasonable. He took people at the exact times the flights would happen like he said and those people aren't cranks...they confirm Lazar took them and they saw something strange. One was a pilot who held certification on almost every plane the US had produced up to that point. He understood planes and the object he saw wasn't one.

If Lazar is lying then he fooled not only a highly respected investigative journalist who dedicated massive amounts of time to debunking him...but Lazar also fooled one of the most experienced pilots the US has ever had in it's entire history. Possible but not likely.

originally posted by: Mianeye
But as there is no way to proof it, they just hang there in the "good story section", to never get any further.

The concept of 'proof' is what these threads often devolve into and it detracts from the story...which is Lazar's claims. I will say that 'proof' comes in all colors and shapes. Even Courts of Law struggle with what is proof and what is not. Lot's of legal claims with no hard evidence, as in a lump of 115 in your hand, get accepted in Courts of Law everyday.

I won't discuss proof outside of the Lazar story and it's claims however. I'm sure others will try to devolve the thread like they always do.

Great OP! S & F

You cover some really good points and I appreciate the analysis. Very refreshing to read some clear thought.

I never met BL so my speculation is pretty flimsy. He could just be a tall tale teller. Everybody knows one. He could be a disinfo agent as the facts seem to fit that profile.

He could be telling the truth but if so, I am surprised he lived to tell the story. IDK.

S&F nice analysis.
About pathological liars, some have real problems in distinguishing reality and they have false memories. However in the case of Mianeye's dad it seems more about lying to prop up his status, which isn't exactly "no reasons" (or maybe one day you will discover he was not lying. In fact I'd say most people lie about their status when it doesn't suit what they would like other perceive about them, it isn't a pathology and it isn't at all without a reason.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
Only one point, as I'm less educated on this topic probably than you guys.

How do you know that Lazar didn't "expose" area-51 to deflect the public away from a much more real secret base elsewhere such as in some other state or location?

Sorry for the delay Q...

You're right, Lazar could have been dis-info'ing to attract attention to Area 51 and leave other bases in relative peace. I think when analyzing dis-info 'people' you really have to consider their 'body' of work. You rarely get a smoking gun to prove they are pumping out dis-info. However when you put all their 'theories' on a timeline over the years you tend to see a pattern that points to dis-info.

I don't see the body of work by Lazar to be dis-info. He really only came out with the one story then faded away on purpose. That can be a more sophisticated work by the govmint but who knows.

The movie Mirage Men is great to watch about dis-info agents. The best movie on the subject of dis-info in my opinion.