Bob Lazar is Credible and here is Proof

Starman said:
The reality is Lazar is telling the truth and not everyone can except the truth.
So what you're saying is that because Lazar applied some high school chemistry and predicted the properties of a heavy element (something we did as a classroom assignment, as I recall), that means he's being truthful about every claim (or even most?) he's made to date?
 
SkinWalker said:
So what you're saying is that because Lazar applied some high school chemistry and predicted the properties of a heavy element (something we did as a classroom assignment, as I recall), that means he's being truthful about every claim (or even most?) he's made to date?

What I am saying is that Lazar is observed to be telling the truth. I understand why you can not conceive this. It is due to body language and that is something you probably are not familiar with.

Body language is a lie detector that everyone exposes every day and have little or no control over. Lazar's body language in his documentary the Lazar tape is proof that he is indeed genuine.

And to add the fact that his claims do obey the laws of physics correct me if I am wrong is just supportive evidence that he is telling the truth.

Because one can not comprehend that other intelligent life is visiting the earth. One will tend not to except the evidence when presented in the form of testimonials. I call it the hide your head in the sand and hope it goes away syndrome.

You can deny it all you want, the fact remains Robert Lazar is telling the truth.
 
Starman said:
What I am saying is that Lazar is observed to be telling the truth.

I never held that he never told the truth. What I'm saying is that he made a statement that was already believed to be true hypothetically. Lazar applied a bit of high school chemistry to a hypothetical element, which was eventually reproduced in the lab. No kidding. That doesn't in any way imply that there are aliens involved. You don't really think that do you?

I understand why you can not conceive this. It is due to body language and that is something you probably are not familiar with.

Starman said:
Body language is a lie detector that everyone exposes every day and have little or no control over. Lazar's body language in his documentary the Lazar tape is proof that he is indeed genuine.

The only thing that Lazar proves is that he's pathological in his delusions.

Starman said:
And to add the fact that his claims do obey the laws of physics correct me if I am wrong is just supportive evidence that he is telling the truth.

You're kidding right? Did you take chemistry? Ever? People have been talking about heavy elements for a while.

Starman said:
Because one can not comprehend that other intelligent life is visiting the earth. One will tend not to except the evidence when presented in the form of testimonials. I call it the hide your head in the sand and hope it goes away syndrome.

I'm more than willing to accept any "testimonial" from anyone as long as it is coroborated with testable, physical evidence. Anecdotal account is the worst kind of evidence. Even in a court of law. Otherwise there wouldn't be forensic teams and crime labs that test DNA and take fingerprints, etc. Believing that aliens are visiting Earth and believing that this is something you comprehend, in no way makes it true.

I'd love it if it were. I've a million questions to ask a totally alien being about how life evolved physically and culturally on his own world so that I can compare with ours... But there's no real evidence to suggest that it is so.

Starman said:
You can deny it all you want, the fact remains Robert Lazar is telling the truth.

I'm sure Lazar tells the truth quite often. It's difficult to lie all the time. He just tells very little truth with regard to his qualifications, background, education, professional credentials, alien spaceships, etc, etc...
 
SkinWalker said:
I never held that he never told the truth. What I'm saying is that he made a statement that was already believed to be true hypothetically. ...

Have you read the Gene Huff synopsis?
If not please take a few minutes and read it.

SkinWalker said:
I'd love it if it were. I've a million questions to ask a totally alien being about how life evolved physically and culturally on his own world so that I can compare with ours... But there's no real evidence to suggest that it is so.

I am with you on that one. My problem is that if the Government has this information and has made the decision that the population of the United States of America can not handle the truth, so they keep it a secret and that is something even you can imagine.

Well I think it is the scandal of all time and of all of mankind to keep it a secret from the people. As long as this remains a possibility I will do what little I can to help further the discovery of the truth. As I am sure you will do the same.
 
My problem is that if the Government has this information and has made the decision that the population of the United States of America can not handle the truth... I will do what little I can to help further the discovery of the truth.

You've been watching too many B grade movies.

Those who can't handle the truth speculate wildly about government conspiracy theories.
 
(Q) said:
My problem is that if the Government has this information and has made the decision that the population of the United States of America can not handle the truth... I will do what little I can to help further the discovery of the truth.

You've been watching too many B grade movies.

Those who can't handle the truth speculate wildly about government conspiracy theories.

Those who believe that government conspiracy's do not exist, are good little republicans who love George Bush.
 
Those who can't handle the truth speculate wildly about government conspiracy theories.

No, those that can't handle the truth, call the hard to believe truths "conspiracy theories" to make themselves feel safer through ignorance. Supressing important top secret information from the public (wanting to always have the edge - technological or otherwise - on others is common sense towards maintaining power) or trying to make a one world government (aka "take over the world" which is every leader's dream) is no conspiracy theory. To think those things aren't being done just flat out shows how simple-minded one is and lacks a view of reality.

Those actions above are just plain truth. It's only when trying to specify the who's who in it all is when it becomes a theory, yet far from a whacky idea. That's the usual propoganda that they like commoners to believe. Attack and focus on the minor details yet ignore the main part of the argument to either make others forget what was originally being talked about or have those minor details somehow prove the main part of the argument as false. If the glove don't fit, you must aquit. Yeah, okay, heh.

Well I think it is the scandal of all time and of all of mankind to keep it a secret from the people.

There's no secret about it. You shouldn't need someone else to tell you the sky is blue or the grass is green, unless you need it for your ego of proving other's wrong. Confirmation is for the weak. You won't have to wait much longer.

And back to the original quote above, truth is stranger than fiction so there's no such thing as "wild" speculation of conspiracy theories. Even the whackiest of conspiracy theories have nothing on the strangeness of the ongoings of reality.

- N
 
when you seek the answers of a question the objective should never be tied up with a particular bias. Please take a look at this article. I have several conflicting which prove each other wrong, and therefore ever fact should be presented in the post so as to point it.
Starman,
My humble request to you and every post member is to try and avoid a particular bias for discussion in a NEW POST, when subsequent replies come, you can then put your own views on the subject.The information presented should always be complete.That way we wont miss any facts and jump to conclusions, we have a responsibility to people who access this information.
Investigation of Bob Lazar's M.I.T. Claims
Glenn Campbell June 1993

Lazar's Statements
Bob Lazar claims to have degrees from MIT and Cal-Tech. He has also made public the names of two of his professors. Specifically, the following exchanges took place at a UFO conference (transcript, 120k) on May 1, 1993:

QUESTION: Bob, could you tell us about your education. I've heard a lot of different conflicting things; I'd like to hear from you.
LAZAR: That varies widely. As far as electronic technology, my degree there is from Cal-Tech and physics is from M.I.T.

QUESTION: Did you go to Pierce College?

LAZAR: Yeah, I did. Where did you hear that?

QUESTION: A friend that said something, somebody I don't even know. I just thought, it's something I want to ask, to clear my mind.

LAZAR: Yeah, I went to Pierce and Northridge and then... I'm terrible at dates. I don't remember what date I was at Pierce, probably like in seventy-six or something I was at Pierce and then seventy-seven or eight I went to Northridge just for a short time for some classes, then I was at Cal-Tech, and M.I.T. after that.


Later... [transcript]

QUESTION: ...What was the year of your graduation from M.I.T., and did you get a Ph.D.?
LAZAR: No, it was a Masters degree. The year. What was the year of graduation? Probably eighty two...


Later... [transcript]

QUESTION: Could you reveal some of your professors at M.I.T. and Cal-Tech?
LAZAR: Yeah, if you want. I don't have a list of them here. Dr. Duxler I think was one of them. And Hohsfield was another.

QUESTION: Hohsfield?

LAZAR: Hohsfield. H-O-H-S-F-I-E-L-D, or something along those lines.

QUESTION: Would he remember you?

LAZAR: Oh, yeah. Hohsfield I know will.

QUESTION: These are at M.I.T. or Cal-Tech?

LAZAR: Hohsfield was at M.I.T. Duxler was at Cal-Tech.


What follows is an attempt to verify the MIT claims using local directories housed at the MIT Institute Archives and national directories kept at other libraries.

Previous Inquiries
Both Stanton Friedman and George Knapp say they have contacted MIT by phone and have been told that MIT has no record of Robert Lazar. I have not repeated this inquiry myself. I assume that such inquiries are handled by computer and that computer records can be easily altered or deleted. Printed records, however, are much more difficult to obscure.

MIT Institute Archives
The following is based on examination of various printed directories housed at the MIT Institute Archives. This library is located on the MIT campus in Cambridge, Mass., Room 14N-118, and is open to anyone claiming to be a researcher. Annual student directories, faculty/staff phone directories, commencement lists and course catalogs dating back to the early days of MIT are available in open bookshelves in the main reading room. No volumes appeared to be missing, and none showed any obvious signs of tampering.
Could these directories have been falsified? It is conceivable that a government intelligence agency could re-create a modified document that looked just as old and authentic as the original, but any such action could create much larger problems. Most of these documents were originally produced in large quantities, and there are likely to be duplicate copies scattered around the country in unpredictable places. Tampering with one copy runs the risk of detection if any other copy of the document happens to turn up. While deliberate deception may be possible, this would imply a very complex and costly operation to neutralize all the potential inconsistencies. It may be possible to eliminate all printed records for a student, but it seems unlikely you could eliminate his professors.

National faculty directories were also consulted at the MIT Humanities Library and the Tufts University Wessell Library. Falsification of the these directories seems nearly impossible, since there are thousands of copies of these publications available at libraries around the country.


Lazar's MIT Credentials
There is no "Lazar, Robert S." listed in any MIT student directory between 1978 and 1990.
These soft bound books are published every academic year and given to all students and all academic departments. Certainly, many copies must still exist in alumni attics around the country. MIT student directories are printed on low quality newsprint, which turns brown with age. It would be difficult to replace individual pages in these directories without an obvious color difference.

In the copies of the student directory at the MIT Archives, there was no visible indication of tampering on any of the pages where Lazar ought to appear. The 1981-82 student directory was also carefully searched for obvious misspellings of Lazar--"Lezar," "Lazear," etc.--with no match found. The only student listed with the same last name in the 1981-82 directory was "Lazar, Howard S." He appears in four student directories beginning 1978-79, graduating in 1982 in Chemistry. Howard Lazar's picture also appears in the 1981 and 1982 undergraduate yearbooks: He is definitely not Robert Lazar.

There is no "Lazar, Robert S" listed in any MIT faculty/staff telephone directory between 1978 and 1990.

These annual phone directories were consulted on the assumption that, as a graduate or post graduate student, Lazar might be listed as a research assistant instead of as a student. The closest entries are several people by the name of "Lazarus," none of which is appropriate.

No "Lazar, Robert S" has been found in the MIT Degree List between 1979 and 1990.

These books are published twice a year for each commencement. They list each degree recipient alphabetically and by department. The book apparently includes all degrees issued by MIT, not just undergraduate. The closest match found in the alphabetical list was "Lazar, S. R." who was shown in the department list as "Steven Roy Lazar," graduating with a BS degree in Biology on June 1, 1981.

"Lazar, Robert S" is not listed in the 1989 MIT Alumni/ae Register.

This big hard cover book is published only occasionally. Since the current one has a copyright date of 1989, it was probably assembled in late 1988. It is conceivable that if Lazar's computer records were deleted in 1988, they also would also not show up in this book. There are several people in this book with the names Lazar--as well as Lazear, Lazarus, etc.--but none are a good match.


Professor Hohsfield
There is no listing for "Hohsfield" in the current 1992-93 faculty/staff telephone directory.
Obvious misspellings were also checked for--"Hostfield," "Hohlfeld," "Ostfield," etc.--with no match. (This directory was consulted not at the MIT Archives but at another randomly chosen site on campus.)

There is no listing for "Hohsfield" in annual MIT faculty/staff telephone directories, 1980 to 1987.

Obvious misspellings were also checked for. The closest match was a "Hohlfeld, Robert G." listed as a Research Associate in Earth and Planetary Sciences in 1981-82 and 1982-83. The home telephone number listed for this person is no longer valid, and there is no listing for him after 1982-83.

In the annual MIT course catalogs, 1980 to 1990, there is no "Hohsfield," or name resembling it, listed as a professor for a physics course or in the Physics Department faculty lists.

"Hohsfield" is not listed in the 1993 National Faculty Directory

This is a comprehensive listing of all college and university faculty members in the U.S., published by Gale Research. There is also no Hostfield, Hosfield or Hohlfeld

"Hohsfield" is not listed in American Men & Women of Science.

The name is not listed in all editions examined: 1976, 1979, 1982, 1986 and 1992-93. However, this absence may not be significant, since only a nominated subset of scientists and faculty members appear in this book.

"Hohsfield" is not listed in the 1988 Faculty Directory of Higher Education.


Professor Duxler
"Duxler" is listed in the 1993 National Faculty Directory.
There is only one entry for Duxler. The entry is, "Duxler, William. Dir. of Computing, Los Angeles Pierce College, 6201 Winnetka Ave., Woodland Hills CA 91371." Pierce College is one of the schools that Lazar says he attended, and it is the only one that has been publicly verified. (Stanton Friedman has confirmed that Lazar took classes there.) Unfortunately, Lazar said Duxler was at Cal-Tech.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lazar M.I.T. Investigation Follow-Up
Glenn Campbell August 1993

Journalistic Ethics
Since the above data could be seen as potentially damaging to Mr. Lazar, reasonable attempts were made to obtain his response. In keeping with accepted journalistic ethics, it was important that Lazar be made aware of the evidence and be given a chance to comment on it. It would be preferable that Lazar respond at length, but a "no comment" would also be sufficient to fulfill the requirements of ethics.
Unfortunately, Lazar is not easy to contact. His phone is unlisted and his address is not common knowledge. Lazar has made it clear that he does not like to deal with reporters or UFO enthusiasts, and most such inquiries appear to be handled by his friend, real estate appraiser Gene Huff.


Attempts
Immediately upon completion of the conference transcript and the MIT investigation report (both above), this reporter sent copies of both to Lazar at Gene Huff's address. There was no response for one month until Gene Huff wrote back advising this reporter to cease publication of the transcript.

We have a lot of commitments for movie, video, and literature projects and we've made certain agreements regarding marketing which you are unaware of. Your marketing plans conflict with ours. Please make this easy and take the transcript off your list of available items.

No mention was made of the MIT document.
This reporter wrote back, explaining his reasons for publishing the transcript and drawing attention to the MIT issue. This letter was sent both to Huff and to Lazar at his "unpublished" address. An excerpt:


Among the most interesting passages in the transcript are when people in the audience ask Bob about his educational credentials. Admitting that his memory for such things is poor, Bob replies with some dates and the names of two of his professors, one at MIT and one at CalTech. Since I happen to live near MIT and am familiar with the campus, I took it upon myself to look up the MIT professor and see if he remembered Bob. Unfortunately, upon arrival on campus, I could find no staff member of that name anywhere, and several hours spent in the Institute Archives seemed to indicate that no professor of that name had worked at MIT for at least the past 20 years. I also looked up Bob Lazar, as others had done before me, and found no listing in any official printed directory since the 70s. The latter discovery was not particularly distressing to me, because I recognize that government agencies have the technical capability to alter documents and delete computer records. The disappearance of a professor, however, would seem difficult to pull off, and I wondered if Bob had been mistaken on the name.
I wrote down all my MIT findings in a three-page document which I sent to Bob in the same envelope as the transcript. I expected a comment of some kind. Perhaps, he would correct the spelling of the professor's name, admit he was mistaken about the school or give me some other hint as to why I could not find the professor at MIT. Instead, what I got, a month later, was a nasty letter, not from Bob but from his spokesman, telling me to cease publication of the transcript and implying nasty repercussions if I didn't.

I cannot overemphasize how bad this looks. It is the liars who get evasive and belligerent and threaten to sue on unrelated grounds when you press them on a sensitive point. The people telling the truth aren't supposed to behave that way. Personally, I am not the sort who jumps to conclusions. I accept the possibility that a student's records could be deleted at a major university, especially one that has a lot of government contracts. I also find it plausible that a former student could be mistaken in remembering the names of his old professors; I myself cannot remember the names of mine. My credulity is strained, however, when the student's records don't exist, a professor does not exist and I get a belligerent response from the student's spokesman when I report these facts. I do not jump to conclusions. I try to let the data speak for itself, but as the data stands now, it is tempting to declare that Bob Lazar never obtained any degree from MIT.

To me, the issues of whether Bob went to MIT and whether he worked with alien craft are separate. Logically, I know that any answer to one question does not imply a conclusion to the other. Still, most people do not make such fine distinctions, and the MIT question, as long as it remains unresolved, is going to be a reoccurring problem for Bob. Matters are further complicated when Bob's de facto spokesman attempts to suppress a transcript which appears to contain some incriminating evidence in this regard. This conveys the appearance of a cover-up and virtually guarantees that this particular issue, relatively minor by itself, will always dominate any discussion of Bob Lazar in the future.

In my opinion, the MIT problem has to be dealt with directly. Belligerence and claims that the government is now eliminating MIT professors will not wash. People may not have the right to probe into Bob's private life, but degrees earned at a major educational institution are not private information. Proving a degree at MIT would help Bob's credibility 100%. Admitting no degree at MIT would certainly hurt, unless there was a good explanation, but the damage would not be as bad as leaving the question unanswered and letting someone else prove the fact.

I'm willing to go back to MIT if there is a hope of digging up better information. There are certainly countless student directories in private hands, and if Bob did go to MIT, they would provide a smoking gun. I am not interested in a wild goose chase, however, and unless there is some new input of information, my three-page document stands on its own.


Huff's reply was lengthy but shed no further light on the MIT question. The only passages mentioning MIT are as follows. (The names of third parties have been removed.)

...I know what you're thinking, it's our fault for not responding within your unstated time frame. You must remember, you are one of tens if not hundreds of people throughout the world who appeal to Bob for one reason or another. Since he never responds, it's literally my burden to respond to the worthy with my time and my expense. You see you're not the only martyr. This story has been around since 1989 for the public and you're not the first nor even the hundredth to hit us up for information or clarification, etc. To imply that Lazar's de facto spokesman is trying to suppress the transcript to hide something is quite insulting. I'm trying to stop the inadvertent spread of disinformation. You whine on and on about MIT. I never even mentioned it so you presumed I was trying to hide something. I am involved in trying to substantiate Bob's credentials from another direction. There are many people digging into the info on him from Los Alamos. After all if he worked there, they must have known his credentials when they hired him right? Anyway, some researchers just recently found out that Bob worked on beam weapons at Los Alamos and sent it to S------ F-------. Believe it or not these guys are anti-Lazar and inadvertently confirmed something that F------- didn't want to hear. He's been graciously praying that Bob is a fraud for some time, yet he remains friendly. I hope something comes of this "back engineering" of his credentials. Then people can feel comfortable and address the more important issues. So don't consider our lack of interest in your MIT search to be evasive. Others before you have done the same thing with no luck, and G----- K---- and I agree that the Los Alamos employment records are the key. Therefore we won't spend our time and energy going down that same dead end. We've been there.
I hope I've made clear that my opposition to the transcript was a sincere effort to keep the story straight, not to suppress anything. I used the term "my" instead of "our" because Bob wouldn't waste the time to respond to you and I don't want to hear more whining about me using "we". MIT is a dead end. Los Alamos is the key. I hope you can clearly see how you've used the transitive property of equality to came to your conclusions, except your variable about MIT was something you made up in your head and not based on anything I said. And correlating info on what I didn't say is how ufology got in it's present state. Too bad you've caused an adversarial situation, it may have been fun. If you have any remedies to the situation, please let me know. By the way I didn't worry about punctuation, etc. in this letter because your correspondence is always so perfect, I thought this would aggravate you. Just like answering these god damn letters aggravates me.


Regarding whether or not Lazar is aware of Huff's correspondence, Huff writes...

You seemed like someone with which I could communicate and educate so you could help us move forward but after talking with Bob this morning, I don't think that's possible. Bob and I thought it humorous that you included a copy of my letter in your letter just to make sure that Bob knew what the letter I sent you had said. He knew. He always knows.

Conclusion
From Huff's correspondence above, it can reasonably be inferred that Lazar's response to the MIT data is a deliberate "No Comment." Lazar himself prompted my pursuit by offering the name "Hohsfield" at the conference. He even spelled it out, presumably inviting others to check. I followed this lead by visiting MIT and trying to locate that professor. I assembled all the relevant data I could find from open MIT sources, with "negative" data predominating. I submitted the data to Mr. Lazar for his comment and made reasonable attempts to obtain a response. Although Lazar himself said nothing, his acting spokesman gave me an acknowledgment and a reply: "MIT is a dead end." According to the rules of fair journalism, I am now free to publish my findings.
There are no certainties in this world: No matter how long you investigate, new information is bound to come along to disrupt your assumptions. No investigation is ever really "complete"; the best we can do is collect data in one area until we reach a natural stopping point. This document does not "prove" anything about Lazar's education at MIT; instead, it can only lead us to a "working assumption." This is the best analysis we can come up with given our current imperfect knowledge. It could someday be disproven, but until it is, this assumption is what we must base our future actions upon.

Judging from the data collected here, it is a reasonable working assumption that Bob Lazar never earned any degree from MIT, in spite of his claims that he did. The notion that the government has somehow suppressed his academic records seems less and less plausible when all the implications are considered. Unlike Los Alamos Laboratories, where information is tightly controlled, M.I.T. is an open institution. Any student going there would make hundreds of indelible impressions--on the memories of others, in printed directories and in the files of dozens of disparate agencies. It wouldn't take much clandestine effort to remove a student's files from the registrar's office, but the entire budget of the CIA would seem insufficient to wipe out every trace of his existence. My own investigation was only superficial, and there are certainly many other potential documentation sources that could be pursued, but the effort does not seem worthwhile when the subject himself gives out false information.

I caution the reader against using this data to pass judgment on any of Lazar's other claims. There are a lot of reasons people can lie. They can do it to enhance their public prestige or promote a larger fraud, but there can also be more complex and less dishonorable reasons for lying, and these are not always obvious until explained. Following the example set by Lazar himself in his interviews, to be a serious researcher is to stay close to the data and not issue any speculations beyond what the data directly implies. To find the answer to anything, you don't need to speculate. What you must do, instead, is organize the information that is accessible, neutralize peripheral distractions and keep looking at the problem from different angles. Sooner or later, the data will fall into a natural structure, and the story will tell itself.


Addendum
In the original MIT Investigation document, I failed to include one additional relevant quote from the May 1 conference. This would eliminate one possible explanation for Lazar's absence in MIT directories. [transcript]

QUESTION: I hope you won't be offended by this question. I have to ask it to verify you're bona fide. Have you ever gone by any other name?
LAZAR: Have I ever gone by anything other name? No.

Q: You've been Bob Lazar from birth.

L: As far as I know.

Thank You.
If you have any additional information, you may want to post it objectively in your first post.Remember even FOX Mulder respected Scully's opinions and took them seriously, so as to speak. ;)
 
Last edited:
Interesting read. I have to agree with the statement of the author (Glen Campbell?) that Lazar's deception of his education do not necessarily mean he didn't work at Los Alamos or even Site 4/A-51. But it doesn't look good, eh? If he did work at either of these places, it obviously wouldn't have been in a capacity that would have required a graduate degree from MIT.
 
SkinWalker said:
Interesting read. I have to agree with the statement of the author (Glen Campbell?) that Lazar's deception of his education do not necessarily mean he didn't work at Los Alamos or even Site 4/A-51. But it doesn't look good, eh? If he did work at either of these places, it obviously wouldn't have been in a capacity that would have required a graduate degree from MIT.

I agree Bob Lazar did probably lie about his education. How many people lie about their education? Allot of them in my opinion.

To be fair and politically correct I would say that there is plenty of things that work against Bob Lazar. There is also plenty of things that work in his favor.

I would rely more on body language and lie detector tests to determine if the truth is being told. Nothing else really matters.
 
Except that when you deal with people who pathologically lie, neither body language nor mechanical detection is reliable. Polygraph isn't acceptable in most (if not all) courts of law as evidence for that very reason.
 
Last edited:
There is also plenty of things that work in his favor.

Name one.
 
SkinWalker said:
Except that when you deal with people who pathologically lie, neither body language or mechanical dection is reliable. Polygraph isn't acceptable in most (if not all) courts of law as evidence for that very reason.
All you have to do is believe that what you say is true. I can tell you that it isn't really that hard, but then.. I'm a law student. :D
 
Three things about Lazar's alleged W2:

1) He might very well have been employed at a government facility. Lots of people are. The need janitors, parkinglot attendents, copy machine repairmen.

2) If this is supposed to be his W2, the first thing that leaps to my attention is the moniker "Department of Naval Intelligence." As far as I know, and I don't think I'm wrong, Naval Intelligence is an Office within the Department of the Navy. ONI is not a department unto itself.

3) All Lazar would have needed is a blank W2 and a typewriter. Anyone willing to go to the lengths of inventing a fake education is surely willing to invent such a simple document to support the claim. I can't believe anyone would really accept such a claim unless they were attempting to justify their own belief systems to themselves.

But, please take note of my earnings here at SciForums :)
http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3969&stc=1
 
Yes, I did read it and wasn't impressed. I've no reason to want to consider Lazar to be credible and every reason to believe him incredible (Glen Campbell's and Stanton Friedman's individual assessments and investigations, for instance, as well as Lazar's inability to appropriately answer questions about his past). Moreover, Lazar wants others to accept his word not only when he's failed to keep it in other, related, instances, but also in light of the very fantastic and incredible claims that he makes.

I find that acceptance a fool's errand, particularly when his desire to deceive has been pathological with regard to his education. Such people rarely limit this sort of pathology to one facet of their life.

Bob's a liar and good at sucking in those that consider them his "friends." Huff was also unable to effectively answer Campbell's questions with regard to Lazar's education.

It'll take a lot more than the word of an undereducated physics/UFO enthusiast and a spurious W2 form to convince me that he has first-hand knowledge of an alien spacecraft.
 
Back
Top