The successor of Roger Leir?

I am curious if there have been any true successors to the late Dr. Roger Leir? Dr. Leir was a podiatric surgeon who performed many surgeries removing perplexing objects from various individuals alleging ET involvement. Entering 'Roger Leir' into a search engine provides numerous results pertaining to his history of performing these surgeries, including documentaries and video footage archives that demonstrate his removal of the aforementioned objects.

A relatively short video overviewing Dr. Leir's surgical involvement and discussion of the material:
www.youtube.com...


Did Leir have colleagues or other professionals that succeeded his work?

a reply to: IcarusEffect


As a UFO abductee, I've never found a good enough reason to suppose that Dr. Leir was exactly as straightforward as we were supposed to assume. His affair with the Turkey UFO business was questionable. I'll not enlarge upon that general criticism.

That comment of my own questionable value, I'll add that my understanding of alien technology is that it is unlikely that mechanical gadgets are implanted in anybody by the ETs. Surely, they would use biological sensors virtually undetectable and not identifiable as ET equipment. So basically, the question is, did Leir EVER have any proof that miniature devices removed from abductees were unmistakably of non-human origin?

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: IcarusEffect


As a UFO abductee, I've never found a good enough reason to suppose that Dr. Leir was exactly as straightforward as we were supposed to assume. His affair with the Turkey UFO business was questionable. I'll not enlarge upon that general criticism.

That comment of my own questionable value, I'll add that my understanding of alien technology is that it is unlikely that mechanical gadgets are implanted in anybody by the ETs. Surely, they would use biological sensors virtually undetectable and not identifiable as ET equipment. So basically, the question is, did Leir EVER have any proof that miniature devices removed from abductees were unmistakably of non-human origin?

I read some of those metallurgy reports of his from a few of the implants removed and the materials had isotopic ratios not common to our solar system, so I would say yes, he showed the proof. But of course there are non-believers in anything ET no matter what proof there is. So each person has to decide for themselves if it's "good".

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
I read some of those metallurgy reports of his from a few of the implants removed and the materials had isotopic ratios not common to our solar system, so I would say yes, he showed the proof.

I don't think you know what proof is my friend. Using your definition of "proof", a couple of scientists published a paper saying "we discovered cold fusion" so you should believe in cold fusion too.

A claim is not "proof" until it's replicated or otherwise verified, so there is no proof of either one of those claims. If you think otherwise, provide the verification for either one.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed



Perhaps they were struck be a meteorite?
(Joke!)

Honestly, a piece of metal is not a sensor to be. If the supposedly honest scientific investigation of them only found metals not common to our solar system (a gigantic stretch in that we don't know all of the metals in our realm) then they were just that, metals and not sensors. I think it is only safe to assume--unless the labs lied and withheld info, that the power of their microscopes, and other investigations they done were only minimal, greatly inferior to sincerely detecting the innards of the "implants."

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
I read some of those metallurgy reports of his from a few of the implants removed and the materials had isotopic ratios not common to our solar system, so I would say yes, he showed the proof.

I don't think you know what proof is my friend. Using your definition of "proof", a couple of scientists published a paper saying "we discovered cold fusion" so you should believe in cold fusion too.

A claim is not "proof" until it's replicated or otherwise verified, so there is no proof of either one of those claims. If you think otherwise, provide the verification for either one.

Um, no. Since I have never seen any paper published about someone "discovering cold fusion" And we weren't discussing cold fusion either. And besides that bit of dissonance on your part, I would further add that Discovering something and being able to replicate it is quite another matter which you already know.

And what does what Dr. Leir's lab tests show have anything to do with replicating anything anyways? Either those lab results show the truth of what they found, or they are a total lie. Are you saying you think it was all fabricated? Any element found on earth can be tested to see if it matches known isotopes from our solar system, and you know that current science can verify those things. So please elaborate on what you mean about these so called metallic implants he removed, I'm curious what you really think about it. What I'm getting here is that you think they were all fabricated?

a reply to: Aliensun

"A bullet from the cosmos hit me in the head and its lodged in my brain" That's gotta hurt!

The one pattern that I see about anything at all period, related to these kinds of things, is blanket character assassination, ridicule, and ultimately, just attempts to say it isn't what it is because...... Which is par for the course with this subject as it has been since the military formed the policy to smash anything ET related as fast as possible using any and every means they can. Dr. Leir took his work quite seriously and even though he was involved in a few things that went south, I have seen most of it being part and par with the military's multi-million dollar annual debunking program which plants all kinds of stuff for unsuspecting people to entangle themselves up in so they can be discredited even faster than they were tripped up.

At the end of the day, each person who views any evidence has the choice to investigate and either believe it or not. But regardless of the choice they make, it doesn't make them illogical, or unintelligent, like those who do nothing but try to trash every single story and evidence that is presented, no matter how good or how bad it is, especially when related to UFO ET subjects

originally posted by: IcarusEffect
I am curious if there have been any true successors to the late Dr. Roger Leir? Dr. Leir was a podiatric surgeon who performed many surgeries removing perplexing objects from various individuals alleging ET involvement. Entering 'Roger Leir' into a search engine provides numerous results pertaining to his history of performing these surgeries, including documentaries and video footage archives that demonstrate his removal of the aforementioned objects.

A relatively short video overviewing Dr. Leir's surgical involvement and discussion of the material:
www.youtube.com...


Did Leir have colleagues or other professionals that succeeded his work?

You can't take away from Roger his right to be in the UFO pantheon but credit for his work cannot be blown out of proportion. We all know of his surgical work but nothing out of this world can be attributed to the debris that he removed from humans under the pretext that what he removed was planted by alleged aliens. It's the kind of debris that some of us carry through life after childhood falls. But since humans are mostly believers the theory of alien "surgery" has a ready audience.

I knew Rogelio (as Jose Escamilla called him) and enjoyed a nice dinner with him, Jose and other UFO "dignitaries" before the taping of a UFO show hosted by Dan Aykroyd.

From Wikipedia

Criticism[edit]
Skeptical investigator Joe Nickell said that the alleged implants appeared to be ordinary objects such as shards of glass or fragments of metal that become lodged in arms, hands, legs and feet due to accidental falls or barefoot walking. Nickell said that Leir's associate, Derrel Sims, supposedly refused to cooperate when asked to provide a forensic medical institute with specimens or photos for analysis.[3]

a reply to: klassless

There is always going to be ardent skepticism, irrespective of the nature or features of these alleged objects. Now, I'm personally not convinced that objects of "meteorite-like" constitution managed to nestle themselves in a benign fashion without yielding an inflammatory response or demonstrating any portal entry wound scarring by means of conventional scenarios. Some odds, I'd say.

According to the video I linked, Dr. Leir's first couple case samples were sent to Los Alamos national laboratories and New Mexico Tech under blind studies. I can't imagine that under such circumstances foul play could be conceived. The results spark intrigue to say the least.

"Skeptical investigator Joe Nickell said that the alleged implants appeared to be ordinary objects such as shards of glass or fragments of metal that become lodged in arms, hands, legs and feet due to accidental falls or barefoot walking."
I have read this before, and what perplexes me in particular is the case of the patient with the anomalous object embedded inside of his mandible. Now, if traumatic injury in this case is to be considered it is difficult to imagine that the individual would eschew medical treatment. The nature of such an injury in such a delicate area (the face) appears to demand medical attention. Furthermore, the lack of entry scar in this case as well as the material assimilating with the patient's neural tissue in a benign fashion is of notable interest.

I won't make any assertions as of yet, but I am not thoroughly convinced of the convenient explanations that attempt to dismiss all of these cases.

Are there any professionals that currently undertake this type of work? I do not care what anybody thinks of Leir's credibility, I simply seek to know there is anyone of his caliber or of reasonable character that still does these types of procedures.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
Um, no. Since I have never seen any paper published about someone "discovering cold fusion" And we weren't discussing cold fusion either. And besides that bit of dissonance on your part, I would further add that Discovering something and being able to replicate it is quite another matter which you already know.

We were discussing unverified claims and sorry if you never heard of cold fusion, I thought that case was so famous that everyone had heard of it, my mistake.

And what does what Dr. Leir's lab tests show have anything to do with replicating anything anyways?

Post them and we'll take a look, but I can already tell you a podiatrist isn't qualified to conduct nor interpret such tests so who did and what are their qualifications?

Either those lab results show the truth of what they found, or they are a total lie. Are you saying you think it was all fabricated?

Those aren't the only two options. It's possible to conduct a material analysis and misinterpret the results. In one case I read about a scientist lost his job over the incompetence of his claim that the material wasn't from Earth when other scientists jumped in and provided all kinds of examples of that material from Earth from manufacturing processes, it just didn't occur naturally on Earth. The scientist who wrote the analysis looked like an idiot because he didn't consider all the man-made isotopes on Earth produced by various manufacturing processes, and he got fired.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by cripmeister
All you guys do is talk, you never deliver. "Oh the evidence is supressed", "no one dares to touch it" bla bla bla. I call BS, doctor.

It may be struck-through, but it is true in this case. People like Leir depend on special pleading and a lack of transparency. Has the paper referenced in the program been submitted for peer-review? Nothing is accepted in science just because someone claims to have done a study and wrote a paper. It must be subjected to rigorous peer-review first.

That Leir and company hide behind special-pleading and excuses is telling.

Exactly.