Bob's Home Video

It has come to my attention that there is a large misconception out there that Bob Lazar did not videotape the tests of Alien Technology he and friends witnessed coming from the base known as Area 51, specifically from the direction of Papoose Lake, NOT the direction of the Groom Lake site which seems to be another large misconception.

Both are completely different locations and projects. Workers at one site have no knowledge of the work done at the other. In fact alleged former workers at Groom lake admit they didn't even know what went on in other buildings even at Groom Lake other than their own, let alone secret projects at other sites.

No one has free range to roam around to other buildings and sites to ask "Hey fellas, whatcha workin on there?"

So while former Groom Lake workers are indeed worthy of admiration and respect, do not confuse that with any inside knowledge of the S4 site and the project Bob Lazar worked for.

Another large misconception is that Bob was some kind of hero letting the public in on information they deserved to know.

Wrong.

He was a scared rat running for his life. He did it in a panic to protect himself.

Bob Lazar on Bob Lazar:




After he got caught taking friends out there he started looking for a new job. Employers started calling him back saying the places you said you worked and went to school say they have never heard of you. Bob quickly discovered that even the hospital where he was born no longer had any record of him.

He and his wife had both been receiving death threats by phone ever since he got caught, and finally they even shot out one of his tires while driving through Nevada.

At this point he panicked and realized why his background was disappearing, and so he came up with the desperate gamble to go public.

This was no hero giving you disclosure, this was a scared rat running for his life.

Here is Bob's home video clip as broadcast on the evening news in Nevada 1989:




It was further revealed that you could watch these tests from public BLM land.

Now after seeing the results of the investigation into his background, who could resist a dare like that to go see for yourself if this story was true? Of course it was a long shot, the odds stacked against it were huge.

But my sources said these tests were ongoing despite the leak by Lazar, and they had illegally increased the range of the security perimeter on test nights to compensate for the leak. Also that you had to be very careful to try and get a peek.

But what if against all odds, it DID turn out to be true? What then eh?

I have always been fascinated by Mr. Lazar. It was in fact his interviews and stories when I was about 10 years old that initially interested me in the UFO phenomenon. Through the years, attempt have been made to discredit him, and my interest started to slowly evaporate.

It wasnt until a few years back that I started to believe that, despite numerous attempts to discredit him, that Lazar is probably closer to fact than fiction.

He certainly is a hard pill to swallow, with facts about his background and details about his life that when researched seem to be total fabrications, but if he does indeed have credence and his story is believed, then it i that hard to believe that his history might simply be being erased?

I want to believe Lazar, I want to believe his stories and the projects that he worked on. Its just hard sometimes.

For clarification on what you are seeing in Bob's video, you first need to keep in mind what 1989 portable home VCR video camera's were capable of.

Take a look at another video also taken at Area 51 in 1989 on a clear Full Moon night with a zillion stars shining in the sky:




Notice that the Moon shows up fine but the stars do not? Anyone who took night footage of the place back then has hours of black footage like you just saw I can assure you. The majority of the time these craft are the same brightness as stars or even dimmer, and so do not show up on the film.

The only time the craft DO manage to appear on film is when they get extremely bright, much brighter than stars for whatever reason.

As you can hear in Bob's video, Gene is quite excited by how bright it is getting. Bob is quite apprehensive fearing it might blow up.

Must control myself....must control myself....think pleasant thought...puppies...ah puppies...OK

OK, the moon sets the gain of the CCD. Stars are not as bright as the moon, hence they don't show up since the moon is the dominate feature.

Most video cameras can't even records stars. You can easily see them with night vision, but not a simple CCD unless it is very sensitive. Check out
www.kolumbus.fi...

WIth Exview or HAAD CCD and large (fast) glass, you can see stars in the image. I've done this myself at the range. If you average for a second, you can see all the terrain. I shot this parked by Queen City Summit this November using 30 averages. I'm working on reducing the fixed pattern noise.



Let's get serious here. If this is all you have from Lazar, I have to pronounce it an epic failure. So he saw an landing light from a Janet. Big deal.



Been there, done that. Got a few T-shirts from the Little Alien as well.

On youtube, there is an interview with TD Barnes that dismisses Lazar as a person who has never been to the base. It is just the audio from when TD was on Coast to Coast with George Noary. TD tells it like it is. No aliens, nothing underground.

Originally posted by gariac
On youtube, there is an interview with TD Barnes that dismisses Lazar as a person who has never been to the base. It is just the audio from when TD was on Coast to Coast with George Noary. TD tells it like it is. No aliens, nothing underground.

edit on 2-1-2012 by gariac because: fixed link

So what we have is a case of 'he said, he said' here. It just depends on which one you want to believe.
If we are to believe either one, we have to first look at the projets and years that each claims to have have been there. Barnes is in his 70's and Lazar is in his 50's, one can postulate that the years on the base do not overlap and therefore what happened n the base while Barnes was there might very well be very very different from when Lazar was there.

We also have to look at their respective jobs. Barnes was a test pilot and Lazar was an engineer. This also lends itself to the idea that they would not have privy to the ame information. It is very possible for 2 people to work at the same location and have very limited knowledge as to each other jobs.

I am admitting now, have before and will many times again, that Barnes' story is much more believable than Lazar's, but there is just something about Lazar that make me want to believe him.

John Lear's corroboration of his claims lend believability to LAzar's stories, but then when you look at the rets of Lear' claims, and even his stories start t look like fiction.

Originally posted by gariac
Must control myself....must control myself....think pleasant thought...puppies...ah puppies...OK

I agree old chap, you really must learn to control yourself. I do realize however that most of your temper tantrum comes from my having exposed your disinformation about Lazar on your Glen Cambell thread. Get over it.

It's obvious from your myriad posts about Area 51 that you are obsessed with the subject and pride yourself as an expert on the subject. But sadly just like Glen, you arrived too late for the party. He was 4 years too late. When did you arrive? All you are left with is becoming familiar with the terrain and the layout of the base. Pretty boring stuff when the real party has already vacated the premises.

OK, the moon sets the gain of the CCD. Stars are not as bright as the moon, hence they don't show up since the moon is the dominate feature.

That's a bit misleading. The moon does not set the gain when you are not filming in that direction. Also when filming on clear nights with NO moon you still get no stars, as confirmed in your next sentence:

Most video cameras can't even records stars.

Right. Which is the exact point I was making in my original explanation to help folks understand what they are seeing in the video. Sheesh!

I have also used an 89 videocam at night out there with no moon and so am quite familiar with the reasons for stars not showing. The technical reason for stars not showing is not the salient point here, the explanation was provided for why you only see black until the white object appears. Some viewers with no experience might be wondering why if this is a video taken outdoors at night in the desert why am I seeing no stars?

That was the reason for my simple explanation and demonstration of same. Your overly elaborate rehash of the same was quite unnecessary. I'm sure our readers 'get it' but thanks just the same.

You can easily see them with night vision, but not a simple CCD unless it is very sensitive.

Oh no foolin? I'm sure none of us here were aware of that!!

WIth Exview or HAAD CCD and large (fast) glass, you can see stars in the image. I've done this myself at the range. If you average for a second, you can see all the terrain. I shot this parked by Queen City Summit this November using 30 averages. I'm working on reducing the fixed pattern noise.

That's all very interesting but has WHAT to do with videocam footage? (i.e. the subject at hand)

Let's get serious here. If this is all you have from Lazar, I have to pronounce it an epic failure. So he saw an landing light from a Janet. Big deal.

Now that's odd... that picture doesn't look anything like Bob's video. I pronounce your comparison photo an epic failure.

Been there, done that. Got a few T-shirts from the Little Alien as well.

Great. Perhaps then you could provide us with video of a Janet flight at night over Area 51 for comparison. Not a photo thanks. Preferably a videocam of near the same vintage if possible? Thanks.

On youtube, there is an interview with TD Barnes that dismisses Lazar as a person who has never been to the base. It is just the audio from when TD was on Coast to Coast with George Noary.

And that interview proves WHAT?... That TD did not have access or the clearance to have knowledge of the test program. Already explained in the OP.

Anyone with enough clearance to know EVERY project going on in EVERY building at Area 51 sure as hell is not going to be coming on camera to talk about the place. Get a grip!

Here, you'll love this one:




See? He's been 'out there' and there is nothing like that going on at all out there!


Now move along people, nothing to see here!

...And as to the question - 'is that all I've got'...

That remains to be seen, now doesn't it.

Keep your shorts on.

So far there has also been a convenient neglect of Gene Huff's description (in the video provided above) of some of the unusual movements of the craft. Doesn't sound like something a Janet flight is capable of to me.

Did we also forget all the other witnesses who confirmed this to George Knapp during his investigation in the same video provided above?

5 I believe was the number. Have any idea who they might be? I do.

Any idea on how many occasions they saw what? I do.

Are we going to call them ALL liars now?


How about all the other independent researchers who went out there after the leak and managed to see and film the tests themselves.

Are we going to call all of THEM liars now too?

Any idea how many did and who they are? And what movements they saw impossible for a Janet flight?


Stay tuned and don't imagine yourself to know everything. The emperor is wearing no clothes.

TD Barnes was an engineer at Groom Lake, not a pilot. He has provided enough evidence that he was at Groom Lake that only a fool would argue with that.

Lazar was clueless about what he videographed, or just knew it was a Janet and acted dumb.

Lazar is a disinformation agent. Glenn Campbell was a researcher, somewhat retired now. Glenn put Groom Lake on the map.

You brought up the lack of stars, not me. I understand how cameras work, and once you understand things, the mystery is gone.

I have watched Janets on their route over N2S2 prior to the turn to enter Groom airspace. It looks like a light hovering in the sky. Again, once you understand the science behind the observation, you don't need to believe fairy tales.

reply to post by A51Watcher

I am finding it fascinating how some blatantly incorrect information - known in the trade as disinfo - has resulted in you starting this thread. The Campbell on Lazar thread and also cosmic911's recent Roswell thread have really brought the lack of depth of awareness of this material among many ATS members into focus. All I would ask ALL members to do is try to keep your mind open to the possibility that some of what you have been led to believe are established facts might be quite the opposite.

To my mind nobody is better placed to author this thread than you. I won't say any more of course, that's down to you.

Even a nameless person who worked at A51 will not have a "Need to know..." regarding the whole base, all past operations there and all neighbouring compounds. Anyone who does know that much will surely not be at liberty to share the information with us anyway. Anyone who doesn't understand that has zero to no hope of getting to grips with any of this anyway.

Anyway, on behalf of those of us concerned with the whole truth, thanks for starting this thread. I might even take the liberty of throwing in a few links. Hopefully we won't end up scratching our heads again and I won't have to also throw in any of my spell out the "obvious" posts.

And I ask all readers to be as skeptical as possible. Otherwise, you will be fed like a mushroom.

Glenn did a great job debunking the so-called sightings over the range, which are generally weapons school training. If you never saw an illumination flare, you would think it is a light hovering over the range. If you never saw an AC-130 shooting a stream of rounds with tracers, you would think you were seeing a laser weapon. A Maverick missile, commonly shot over the range, has some mighty acceleration, much more than a jet. They take a sudden turn when close to the target. (I saw one from Tikaboo and monitored the launch on the scanner. Until it arced, I thought it was coming towards me.) Few people have witnessed jets using afterburners at night.

Knowledge is power. Don't believe the hype.

Originally posted by gariac

TD Barnes was an engineer at Groom Lake, not a pilot. He has provided enough evidence that he was at Groom Lake that only a fool would argue with that.

Already covered - 2 separate locations and projects. Groom workers had no knowledge of or access to the S4 site and vice- versa.

Lazar was clueless about what he videographed, or just knew it was a Janet and acted dumb.

Mere opinion on your part not supported by the evidence and witness testimony.

Lazar is a disinformation agent.

Mere opinion on your part not supported by the evidence and witness testimony.

Glenn Campbell was a researcher, somewhat retired now. Glenn put Groom Lake on the map.

Already covered. Glen openly admits he moved there because of Bob already putting Area 51 on the map 4 years beforehand.

You brought up the lack of stars, not me. I understand how cameras work, and once you understand things, the mystery is gone.

Again, already covered. Is there some question about who brought up the lack of stars? Of course it was me who brought it up and I already explained why I did so. Sheesh. Feigning lack of comprehension scores no sympathy points.

I have watched Janets on their route over N2S2 prior to the turn to enter Groom airspace. It looks like a light hovering in the sky.

ANYone who has spent time out there has seen the Janet flights. No trophy for achievement there.

Again, once you understand the science behind the observation, you don't need to believe fairy tales.

And because you saw a Janet flight, you think you have proof everyone else did?

That ignores everyone else's evidence and testimony. You seem to excel at that. Your entire post has once again ignored the points and question put to you in a line by line rebuttal, and instead moves on to new tangents as if you didn't hear the question or see the point.

Refusal to engage and answer, equals defeat in a debate.

Pretending you didn't hear or understand the question is a tactic transparent to all, and a sure sign that is obvious to all.

I feel like some day element 115 will prove lazar is for real.

reply to post by A51Watcher


You have a funny idea of what wins a debate. Try doing all that cut and paste quoting from your phone.

Groom workers have no knowledge of S-4 because it doesn't exist. Ever think of that possibility?

Video of a common occurrence over the range and claiming it to be a flying saucer qualifies as clueless. Believing this qualifies as evidence is in the same category. The video is hardly evidence, other than evidence we are dealing with very unsophisticated observers.

Testimony? I hadn't realized they were sworn in by a judge and testified with a threat of perjury should they lie. Ah wait, they weren't under oath. No, they just blabbed some blather to the press. The press reported it, but never confirmed any of the story.

I brought up the lack of stars just to show how little you understand regarding video. I didn't intend to bitch slap you, even if that was the final outcome. I guess you are a glutton for punishment.

Lazar spread disinformation. Glenn published the Desert Rat. Seriously, who put Groom on the map?. The bull# artist, or the researcher? My money is with the researcher, but feel free to goggle up the bull#.

I notice you don't mention your visits to the range? Are you old enough to drive?

reply to post by MajesticTwelve


Element 115 already exists. It just isn't stable. Livermore made it in a Russian cyclotron a few years ago.

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by A51Watcher

 

You have a funny idea of what wins a debate. Try doing all that cut and paste quoting from your phone.

Sorry your not equipped to debate. Come back when you are.

What a shame poor geriac is not equipped to debate.

Any of you out there who ARE equipped to debate and feel he has made ANY contributions worthy of discussion, step on up and I will be glad to debate with or explain it to you.

You can leave out the quite juvenile attempts he tried as he gets desperate tho.

How about you Cosmic911?

You seem to be one of the few honest skeptics able to debate in a intelligent and adult manner, and are 'equipped' to do so.

Care to take up any of the 'concerns' raised so far?


If not, if no one (of merit) objects, we will move on to some more (apparently) unknown facts about this case.

reply to post by A51Watcher


Again, that is your opinion. I have offered counterpoint for all your nonsense.

Further, you have done nothing to impress me that you have the slightest clue as to what happens over a test/bombing range like the NTTR. Many routine events look "interesting" if you are clueless to what is happening.

Quoting Arthur C Clarke:

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

People with brains use Occams razor. A light appears in the sky. It is over an airport. Do we assume it is some mysterious anti-gravity alien technology craft, or do we assume it is a freakin' plane coming in for a landing. Hey, it is an airport ya know. If you do a 32 landing (which requires an arc) or head north east in a direct flight, a light will appear over the range as seen from the ET highway. Most routes are not visible except from Tikaboo. I can't even being to count the number of landings I have witnessed at Groom. Easily over a hundred from TIkaboo. And you?

Do you take aspirin to sleep after your daily or twice daily intellectual bitch slapping?

reply to post by A51Watcher


I take it finding youtube videos is your idea of "equipped." I find your arguments as stupid as those in the Church of Dulce.