Bob Lazar is Credible and here is Proof

It would appear that Ufoology's foremost Ufoologist disagrees with regard to Lazar's credibility: http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sflazar.html

http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc61.htm

Here's another link that debunks the guy: http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/lazarmn.htm

Don't you think you're being just a little close-minded Starman? Not accepting the possibility that the claims you are reading are ficitious and concocted in the mind of a deranged person fit Occam's Razor far better than the alternative: that Lazar was a supersecret researcher who smuggled out a secret element...
 
SkinWalker said:
It would appear that Ufoology's foremost Ufoologist disagrees with regard to Lazar's credibility: http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sflazar.html

http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc61.htm

Here's another link that debunks the guy: http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/lazarmn.htm

Don't you think you're being just a little close-minded Starman? Not accepting the possibility that the claims you are reading are ficitious and concocted in the mind of a deranged person fit Occam's Razor far better than the alternative: that Lazar was a supersecret researcher who smuggled out a secret element...
Click to expand...

So if I understand you correctly, you believe the Ufoology and not Main Stream Science. Hmmmmm.
 
Bob Lazar stated that the Element 115 used as the fuel and gravity source in the “Sport Model” Flying Disc was stable. On February 2, 2004, scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, in collaboration with researchers from the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in Russia (JINR), announced that they discovered two new super-heavy elements, Element 113 and Element 115. The Isotope of Element 115, produced by bombarding an Americium-243 (95Am243) nucleus with a Calcium-48 (20Ca48) nucleus, rapidly decayed to Element 113. then continued to decay until a meta-stable isotope was obtained.
Click to expand...
Did I miss something? Bob Lazar claimed that 115 was stable, but the scientists created 115 and it "rapidly decayed to Element 113".

However, strange as it may seem Starman, the fact that someone said a surprising thing about some future development which later turns out to be true does not in fact gain him any credibility if it is clear that his level of knowledge of the subject is such that his prediction could be attributable to luck. Nothing he said about the properties of 115 actually evinced any real knowledge of the physics involved. Isaac Asimov once quoted a similar example: Immanuel Velikovsky claimed that because of his theory of how Venus and Earth nearly collided (and caused many Old Testament miracles on their way), Venus would turn out to be hotter than expected. About 15 years after his book (Worlds in Collision, 1950) was published it turned out that Venus was in fact hotter than expected - the hottest planet in the Solar System, in fact. But this did not add one iota of credibility to the fantastic claims of his book, which were totally unsupported by either any evidence at all, or our knowledge of the laws of motion and gravitation.

A Lazar debunker Dr David L. Morgan said something I think applies a lot around here:
want to take some time here to talk about scientific progress, because there is one common objection to my critique of Lazar’s scenario. People will often say “Modern science could be wrong. Newton was wrong! Lazar could be right!” Yes. That is correct. In fact, modern science almost certainly IS “wrong.” But the only real test of a theory in science is that it works. Newton’s Laws worked. They still do in most situations. Einstein’s theories are better – they are more accurate and they work in more situations. New theories will continue to come along that are more precise and more generally applicable than the older theories, and these new theories will be tested by experiments until they supplant the old ones. That is how science has progressed for the past 400 years.

So it is not enough to SAY that modern science is wrong. You have to demonstrate that you have something that is better. And that “better” theory needs to do everything that the old theory does, and then do more. And chances are that it won’t completely turn the old theory on it’s head – because we already know that the old theories work too well. It is not possible to create a new theory until you understand the old one well enough to present a coherent alternative. Calling current science “total nonsense” is nice rhetoric, and no doubt convincing to many non-scientists who feel alienated from science and look on scientists as a kind of modern priesthood of arcane knowledge. But science is a process – not a body of knowledge.
Click to expand...
If Lazar is one of these "current science is total nonsense" people, that is sufficient reason for dismissing him out of hand (alongside that Final Theory guy, a critique of whose book I have yet to complete for amazon.com, but I will).
 
If Lazar is one of these "current science is total nonsense" people,
Click to expand...
He is, but ironically throws as many pop-science buzzwords in as possible.
 
Silas said:
Did I miss something? Bob Lazar claimed that 115 was stable, but the scientists created 115 and it "rapidly decayed to Element 113".
Click to expand...

115 is stable when it is manufactured properly. If you can only fuse a few atoms of 115 together in a supercollider then you most likely will not achieve stability.
 
Regardless, the page is simply stupid.

1) It was provided as discs, but was then fused together? How? It would be easy to just fuse them in a way to make less waste.
2) The step about milling the cone is extra and simply stupid.

There is not an ounce of support on that page, and lpenty of things which are just plain wrong.
 
I'm sorry. I thought the whole spurious claim involving "element 115" was exactly the kind of thing we should expect a physicist to be able to comment on with authority. I agree that Friedman is a better physicist than investigator (his silly rants about UFOs and Roswell are evidence of this), but even cult members within the UFO community are skeptical about Lazar and have long considered him to be a nutjob.
 
SkinWalker said:
I'm sorry. I thought the whole spurious claim involving "element 115" was exactly the kind of thing we should expect a physicist to be able to comment on with authority. I agree that Friedman is a better physicist than investigator (his silly rants about UFOs and Roswell are evidence of this), but even cult members within the UFO community are skeptical about Lazar and have long considered him to be a nutjob.
Click to expand...

Have you seen the Lazar Tape? Many have not. Have you read the Gene Huff synopsis?

http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/synopsis.htm

I have to surmise that element 115 did not exist when Lazar was talking about it and still it is just becoming known. Lazar is telling the truth, some can not handle the truth so they try to dismiss his testimony. You can tell if someone is telling the truth just by their body language. Police use this technique every day. When I watched the Lazar Tape it was apparent he is telling the truth. I will ad that he is not perfect and it became easy to discredit him, that was the intent of the Government.
 
Ah... the government conspiracy again. Whenever something is proven incorrect (the Roswell crash assumption) or to be a liar (Bob Lazar), automatically this proof is considered to be the work of the government and part of a conspiracy.

In which case, we've nothing left to discuss, since you can always whip out the "Government Conspiracy Card."

<img src="http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3918&stc=1">

Congratulations! You just played the GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY CARD!
 
Last edited:
Starman, I like the way you got that Gene Huff synopsis from the Lazar debunking site! Gene Huff is evidently not an unbiased commentator, but (as stated on the homepage) "Lazar's friend and vocal supporter". It has to be said that the opinion of a Las Vegas real estate appraiser is not really going to cut it here, credibility-wise.

I have to surmise that element 115 did not exist when Lazar was talking about it and still it is just becoming known.
Click to expand...
What difference does that make? Why don't I theorise about the properties of element 120 (or Unbinullium as it will be called), then I'll call you in 5, 10, or 30 years when it gets synthesised and say "I told you so."

I thought you were saying that Bob Lazar had "gained credibility" because element 115 had been created and was found to be stable. I didn't realise that you thought that because he named element 115, and then element 115 was actually synthesised, that Lazar gained credibility because he somehow "knew" about an element which didn't exist yet. Newsflash, any element over 110 may or may not occur in nature, but it will likely have certain properties, based upon it's family and the known facts about electron shells and atomic nuclei. Bob Lazar's knowledge of those properties does not require the intervention of alien intelligence.
 
I was wrong! It's called Unbinillium.

I notice that the wording on the description of Ununpentium is identical to that mentioned in the gravitywarpdrive site.
 
Last edited:
SkinWalker said:
I agree that Friedman is a better physicist than investigator (his silly rants about UFOs and Roswell are evidence of this), but even cult members within the UFO community are skeptical about Lazar and have long considered him to be a nutjob.
Click to expand...

You are a freakin tool.

You're ignorance is only overshadowed by your arrogance.
 
Silas said:
Starman, I like the way you got that Gene Huff synopsis from the Lazar debunking site! Gene Huff is evidently not an unbiased commentator, but (as stated on the homepage) "Lazar's friend and vocal supporter". It has to be said that the opinion of a Las Vegas real estate appraiser is not really going to cut it here, credibility-wise.

What difference does that make?

I thought you were saying that Bob Lazar had "gained credibility" because element 115 had been created and was found to be stable. I didn't realise that you thought that because he named element 115, and then element 115 was actually synthesised, that Lazar gained credibility because he somehow "knew" about an element which didn't exist yet. Newsflash, any element over 110 may or may not occur in nature, but it will likely have certain properties, based upon it's family and the known facts about electron shells and atomic nuclei. Bob Lazar's knowledge of those properties does not require the intervention of alien intelligence.
Click to expand...

This is only one small part of his testimonial that is has entered from science theory to science fact.

You may hypothesize all day long about element 120 and its properties that is no evidence that it can even be synthesized or ever will be.

What lazar states has everything to do with the laws of physics that are correct.

This makes sense form a scientific point of view.

The reality is Lazar is telling the truth and not everyone can except the truth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top