Bob Lazar seems to confirm Zecharia Sitchin

Originally posted by Condemned0625
reply to post by LiberLegit

 

Goofball? Reading your post, I've come to the conclusion that you're worse. After all, your statements are merely opinions, not facts. You seem to think you know that max's material is wrong, so demonstrate that it is. After that, demonstrate that I'm a "goofball" (which you can't possibly do) and then prove that all currently accepted mainstream theories are absolute facts and that Lazar's is an absolute falsity (which you also cannot possibly do).

I've seen the fallacies in these arguments from the very beginning; People accusing Lazar of being a hoaxer and rejecting theories that contradict their theories when they can't even demonstrate their own as logical absolutes in the first place. Dishonesty is also quite abundant in this thread, as I've seen "rebuttals" from people that cannot even be proven without a doubt.

Opinion = Opinion, Fact = Fact, not Opinion = Fact nor vice versa. Very simple.

Alright cowboy, lets calm down a second here. I understand that currently accepted theories are just that, theories, but they make more sense then any of this stuff. Please don't fall back on some type of "scientists distort the information blahblahblah" or "we're being lied to" because that's typical amateur conspiracy fall-backs. No matter how many times outrageous theories are debunked and Bob Lazar is disproven, you run back and say "give me absolute facts." Well, we try to do that to, but you just blow it off and say it isn't enough or that it's all just theory. Do you even know what is real anymore? I am open to new information, and am in no way a skeptic or believer, I just go where the logical information takes me. From an objective standpoint, it looks like there is more evidence against your ideas then for it. Where is all of your evidence? It seems like you're just good at arguing and well...that's about it. No evidence or facts whatsoever, then bashing ones that are actually presented. Hey man, if you think you're right then that's awesome, I'd love for all this stuff to be true, but until you present some type of evidence I just can't get behind it you know? If there is some crazy interstellar annuaki rummaging around the multiverse then damn, that's awesome, but I can't believe it until it makes some kind of sense to me you know?

Originally posted by maxwellsdemon
reply to post by LiberLegit

 

The person who "discovered" the DNA structure saw that in a dream too. And that "dream" he had was proven to be the building blocks of carbon based life on earth. Francis Crick Nobel Prize Winner his name is forever immortilised.

Dreaming is the unconscious mind at work and is a very powerful tool. I would say it happens to a lot of people.

Apart from the fact that I have also had formal training in electronics & computer sciences etc. Hence that is why my fed/gov classified within the industrial as a systems engineer/scientist.

Please read the link I provided earlier, it may cause headaches though it is only 44 pages long, just skip the math and read the text. Below is short synopsis of reading;

COMPACT OBJECTS IN ASTROPHYSICS

Rapidly Rotating Neutron Stars
5 Gravitational Fields of Rapidly Rotating Compact Objects 201
5.1 The Line Element of Stationary and Axisymmetric Rotating Bodies . . . . . 202
5.1.1 Physical Interpretation of the Metric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
5.1.2 Geodetic and Lense–Thirring Precession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
5.1.3 On General 3+1 Split of Space–Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
5.2 Einstein's Field Equations for Rotating Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
5.3 Stellar Structure Equations in Isotropic Gauge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
5.3.1 The Isotropic Gauge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
5.3.2 Stellar Structure Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
5.3.3 Structure Equations for Rotating Stars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
5.3.4 Mechanical Equilibrium and Effective Potential . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
5.3.5 Stellar Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
5.4 The Slow–Rotation Approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
5.5 Numerical Integration of the Stellar Structure Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
5.5.1 Bonazzola et al. (BGSM, Lorene) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
5.5.2 Ansorg et al. (AKM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
5.5.3 Comparison of Numerical Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
5.5.4 Properties of Equlibrium Stellar Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
5.6 Towards Analytical Vacuum Solutions for Rotating Neutron Stars . . . . . . 229
5.6.1 Weyl–Papapetrou Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
5.6.2 Ernst Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
5.6.3 Manko's Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233

Once you can understand that, after taking some asparin you may find yourself "dreaming".

How often are people told to "sleep on it", when confronted with a difficult situation, or extended periods of study etc, the dreaming subconscious removes the "square box" confines of consciousness and controlled thought and allows our minds to expand.

I hope this helps you in the pursuit of truth.

HADES

Thanks for the reply and information. I'll proabably take a look and see if it makes any sense to me. I do agree with what you say about dreams to a degree. I've never heard about Francis Crick dreaming that, will definately check that out.

I believe Sitchin is correct in everything he has said. It just makes perfect sense. He has shown us the true history of mankind on the Earth, and of the Annunaki and their doings on the planet. The Sumarian texts explain the ET and hybrid influence and agendas.

Originally posted by tom502
I believe Sitchin is correct in everything he has said. It just makes perfect sense. He has shown us the true history of mankind on the Earth, and of the Annunaki and their doings on the planet. The Sumarian texts explain the ET and hybrid influence and agendas.

IDK man, doesn't that translation stuff feel like a bit of a stretch to you? It's so....David Icke...

reply to post by LiberLegit


No, I don't "blow it off" like you suggest and I have many more talents other than arguing. I recommend that you revise your statements and realize that you cannot possibly know what my true intentions are in these discussions. Why is that? Because you're not me, obviously.

Please don't fall back on some type of "scientists distort the information blahblahblah" or "we're being lied to" because that's typical amateur conspiracy fall-backs.

Did I ever say those things? No, I didn't. I have to admit how funny it is because when you accuse me of saying something like "They distort information" or "We're being lied to!", you're lying right there. Now I can say "I'm being lied to by LiberLegit" and I'll say it: You just lied.

Originally posted by Condemned0625
reply to post by LiberLegit

 

No, I don't "blow it off" like you suggest and I have many more talents other than arguing. I recommend that you revise your statements and realize that you cannot possibly know what my true intentions are in these discussions. Why is that? Because you're not me, obviously.

Please don't fall back on some type of "scientists distort the information blahblahblah" or "we're being lied to" because that's typical amateur conspiracy fall-backs.

Did I ever say those things? No, I didn't. I have to admit how funny it is because when you accuse me of saying something like "They distort information" or "We're being lied to!", you're lying right there. Now I can say "I'm being lied to by LiberLegit" and I'll say it: You just lied.

I never said those were your intentions, or that I had any idea what your intentions were. I'm sure you do have many other "talents," but for the purpose of this thread supplying evidence for your point-of-view isn't one of them. As for the second piece you quoted, yes I know you didn't say those things, I just wanted to point it out in case you did - because im used to hearing that type of response from a lot of people in that area. If you think that is underestimating or insulting, sorry. But at least you acknowledge you are good at arguing, it just happens to be in a post that is purely argumentative as well. haha. Notice how I responded to maxwelldemons post, I disagree with him, but he did supply me with some material which possibily gives himself credibility (holding my breath on that one) but im open to it. My advice to you is to calm down down a bit; annuaki space travel through multiverses, genetic mutations from extraterrestials, and Bob Lazar science is a lot for people to stomach. You can't just belittle people for not jumping on board with it whether correct or not, because quite frankly it all sounds RIDICULOUS. I'd drop the 'omg-maxwelldemons-is-right-everyone-stfu' mentality and contribute to the thread in some form of other than attacking disagree-ers. I think this stuff is very interesting, so prove to me it's true.

reply to post by LiberLegit

You can't just belittle people for not jumping on board with it whether correct or not, because quite frankly it all sounds RIDICULOUS.

I was belittling people? How so? Merely pointing out the fact that they can't disprove Lazar's claims does not seem like belittlement to me.

I'd drop the 'omg-maxwelldemons-is-right-everyone-stfu' mentality and contribute to the thread in some form of other than attacking disagree-ers.

Wow, what a belittling statement. Maybe you should calm down.

Originally posted by Condemned0625
reply to post by LiberLegit

 

You can't just belittle people for not jumping on board with it whether correct or not, because quite frankly it all sounds RIDICULOUS.

I was belittling people? How so? Merely pointing out the fact that they can't disprove Lazar's claims does not seem like belittlement to me.

I'd drop the 'omg-maxwelldemons-is-right-everyone-stfu' mentality and contribute to the thread in some form of other than attacking disagree-ers.

Wow, what a belittling statement. Maybe you should calm down.

It's one thing to ask for someone to disprove something, but an entirely different thing to dismiss credible evidence and insist on your own theories from the start. It's almost like you're in your own mindset, and won't entertain the completely logical views of some like buddhasystem. I mean #, it's pretty easy to point out you can't prove any of your own theories, but we won't get into that, because it's painfully obvious. All im saying is that at least we have some type of proof to offer up. I understand faith plays a huge role in stuff like this, believing what you can't touch or see, and I don't have a problem with that - a lot of things are open to interpretation. Look, you seem like a smart dude, but come onnnn. Lets be frank here, this stuff completely abandons any form of physics we have now, or any which is currently being discovered or explored. Almost like, lame metaphysics.

More importantly:
Did you read the short book maxwell posted a link to? Is that worth my time or no? If you have the link, please give me it. I'm interested, and would like to see if any of what you or him are talking about makes sense.

reply to post by LiberLegit

It's almost like you're in your own mindset, and won't entertain the completely logical views of some like buddhasystem.

Seems like you're in your own mindset as well. Isn't everyone? I have yet to even see you entertain the possibility that other physics models might be true. As for buddhasystem's views being "logical", that's your opinion.

I read some of his material and it's definitely worth my time. Maybe reading it yourself will keep you away from this thread and keep you from wasting more of my time with arguing. Go ahead, have at it, knock yourself out.

www.lsw.uni-heidelberg.de...

reply to post by Condemned0625


Don't be distracted and enjoy your continued research into this fascinating topic. I note that LiberLegit had nothing negative to say to Maxwellsdemon.

Now for the key point I'd like to add:

What follows is my two cents; my humble opinion. Hopefully it will be read as constructive criticism and an attempt to keep the peace on the thread. I am not looking for an argument, and would simply like for us all to be able to research a topic without the incessant, aggressive 'back and forth'. Where fault is evident, we should be able to raise the issue and request the necessary apology to be given our fellow members if one is required. I will always apologise for offence caused if called upon to do so (and often do so without being asked as a result of conscience).

LiberLegit - I would suggest there's a need for an apology to Condemned0625, in that you've been quite unquestionably sniping against him/her for simply voicing his/her opinion. You did try to insinuate certain character traits which he/she had in no way demonstrated (belittling others, having no talent, being naiive, being paranoid), so for such, at least, you should have said sorry, instead of continuing to bash out the same tone of post and squirm around the need for a proper apology.

Interesting that the qualification for your posts against 'Condemned0625' appears to have been that he/she had supported an excellent alternative theory; the person who actually constructed the theory was left alone as you haven't had chance to get to grips with the details.

It doesn't look good from where I'm sitting. Perhaps consider fully researching the material presented before lashing out at those who support it. Particularly applicable if you can be courteous to the scholar who wrote the material; it seems quite hypocritical to adopt the approach you did.


Fly

reply to post by LiberLegit


One more thing - shouldn't you be asking Maxwellsdemon to be 'proving it'..?? After all, he's the scholar that brought the material to the table. I'm confused as to why you're placing the need for proof at the door of Condemned 0625? Seems highly illogical to me. Almost as though you want someone who isn't as mathematically adept as Maxwellsdemon to make statements that you can undermine and refute, by doing so making it look as though you've refuted his work without actually needing to?

Go read the material then make your own judgment, then come back and ask any questions of Maxwellsdemon. Otherwise, your involvement in this thread is worse than pointless.

***** ***** ***** *****

Having read the remainder of your posts, you were certainly acting in an out-of-order manner towards Condemned0625 (I hadn't seen the 'stfu... ' part of your statement, or the post after that, before posting my last comment).

There's no question at all that he/ she deserves an apology after seeing the last couple of comments. It needs to be unreserved too, seeing as he/she has responded so mildly to you in all cases, despite provocation.

reply to post by FlyInTheOintment


Thankyou, I may have been testy in the past with budhdasystem, I was just trying to teach and provide facts instead of Wikipedia.

HardCore Facts wins the day, but also being able to manipulate them creates astonishing things.

Eg; HADES/HADRON Collector, hubble telescope, tesla, etc; without scientists who dream and our ancestor discovered fire and the wheel we'd still be swinging from the trees without some sort of "potential" within our minds that had been recognised via DNA/RNA via "space brothers & sisters".

Scientist are "always dreaming" of manipulating new processes and applications to further our knowledge, we only use at best 10% of our minds, imagine that we use the other 90% in a conscious manner.

I'm not a scholar, but nice to think that I have been called so without calling myself that, much appreciated.

I'm happy to learn and teach others, thats why I provide facts only that I'm allowed within the "square box".

This is a good discussion without the B/S, I know I privide heavy duty math/physics, I can't help that, I only read the formulae etc. after the dreams. just to prove I was actually correct. I just use the most basic of principles we have been taught in highschool and extrapolate.

So I apologise to everyone that I have hurt there feelings with facts and also apologise for "belittlement" of certain people. We are here to discuss & brainstorm.

The sum of the whole is greater than the parts and we create synergy.

When someone points out new data/facts/theories to me I will always endeavour to acknowledge their research and give them a pat on the back, because they have taught me something.

"Teach the teacher" process model, just because a "student" can understand and go beyond the teacher doesn't mean that neither can learn, understand and grow, that is a process of "SYNERGY".

I am here to learn, what I understand I will teach, I am just a student who 'listens", if I can understand what the "teacher" has said and go beyond what has been taught it should make the "teacher" proud of his student.

So, let's cut the B/S.

I will apoligise for everyone on this forum, we shall come to an understanding that even though we don't agree, we must provide our theory & fact and privide factual evidence to back up any claims we have instead of rhetorical comments to remove preconceived conceptions and take an objective approach as opposed to a "subjective" approach.

I come here to learn, so does everyone else.

One thing we have collectively learned today is that "together" we do AMAZING things, we look at the pro's and con's, we debate & argue, but we also learn. That's called discovery of our minds.

It's an amazing place.

HADES

Claims to have attended Cal State University, Northridge, "for a short time for some classes", then on to CalTech.(14)
"The Big T" is the student yearbook for CalTech. At the Millikan Library at CalTech, every page of every issue of "The Big T" from the year 1977 through 1982 was checked. There is no photo or mention of RL anywhere in any of the activities, highly improbable were he a student there. Checking by George Knapp (1) and Stanton Friedman with the administration revealed no records of RL's attendance. Although Good reports Friedman has confirmed RL's attendance at Cal State Northridge, Friedman says this is not correct and he has not made any inquiries to Cal State Northridge. (There was a Robert Lazar who graduated from Northridge in 1978 with a degree in Business Administration, but examination of the yearbook clearly indicates he's a different Lazar)(1) (15)

Lazar Timeline

Can one of the Lazar loyalists please explain to me why Lazar was not in the year book? I just need a logical explaination one point at a time. Personally I don't understand how or why he would be excluded from the year book. Has Bob himself ever explained how or why this happen?

Originally posted by FlyInTheOintment
reply to post by LiberLegit

 

One more thing - shouldn't you be asking Maxwellsdemon to be 'proving it'..?? After all, he's the scholar that brought the material to the table. I'm confused as to why you're placing the need for proof at the door of Condemned 0625? Seems highly illogical to me. Almost as though you want someone who isn't as mathematically adept as Maxwellsdemon to make statements that you can undermine and refute, by doing so making it look as though you've refuted his work without actually needing to?

Go read the material then make your own judgment, then come back and ask any questions of Maxwellsdemon. Otherwise, your involvement in this thread is worse than pointless.

***** ***** ***** *****

Having read the remainder of your posts, you were certainly acting in an out-of-order manner towards Condemned0625 (I hadn't seen the 'stfu... ' part of your statement, or the post after that, before posting my last comment).

There's no question at all that he/ she deserves an apology after seeing the last couple of comments. It needs to be unreserved too, seeing as he/she has responded so mildly to you in all cases, despite provocation.

Dude, get off your high horse. I have been checking out maxwelldemons material, but condemned seemed so sure about it that I thought he might offer up some evidence as well. But alas, he hasn't. I'm not focusing on anyone. And what are you talking about? wanting him to make statements that I can refute? Yes, that is exactly my intention. I scour the internet for people I can refute. hahaha. how dumb does THAT sound. Yes BuddhaSystem has made the most sense out of any of the postings here, apart from the hydrogen car debacle.

Maxwell, I read your (it is yours right?) paper. Very cool stuff. The experiment with the satellite containing the perfect spheres was interesting. If anyone else is trying to read this report, I suggest you check out this essay on the tachyon theory and its relation to space-time fabric first:

www.itsf.org...

Luckily, I read it before I delved into maxwell's link, definately helped a lot. I'm going to withold my opinion on the validity of this science and ask another question, what leads you guys to believe this is associated with the Annuaki - is this just an assumption of how they travel and its possibility? Or is there something i'm missing?

Oh btw, maxwell, I tried to find information on Crick dreaming up the structure of DNA or anything related and I couldn't find anything. He did have some theories on dreams, kind of unrelated to what you say about them though. Is this exclusive information or something?

reply to post by LiberLegit


Howdy LiberLegit.

I only remember this from a long time ago from the 80's, seems to have been rewritten, Circk was on '___' at the time and had "visions", an altered state, But doing further research I would say it was similar to "dreaming/altered" state. this was an example. Dreaming, meditation etc. are altered states of of the mind that are outside normal waking states.

blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?t=118599

My forte is systems & science, I wish i had written that paper previously alluded to. But I do understand the theories, noly after making my own then obviously I have to back them up in some form or manner.


"They" taught me that you even though you can't see it & you can't touch it, you can imagine it.

Just trying to educate people here so that collectively we can provide facts & solutions. That was my employment status, to analyse, extrapolate and solve. A spanner, a spoon, a keyboard and a theory etc. Won't say what I did in old job, Not allowed. But "they" let me research and understand. A good thing.

I wish it was my paper, I did say earlier I had a car accident & have lots of memories coming back, but also seems to have switched a light on metaphorically speaking, I have dreams, I see things applicable to M-Theory, I read & simplify & extrapolate.

I know about tachyons, amazing what we can do with them, however "they" won't hand the knowledge over so I have to backtrack my knowledge.

I'm not sure if it's Annauki, but I have "close encounters of the 3rd kind" fairly regularly. I don't know where the knowledge is coming from, I just use the term "dreaming", maybe thats a catalyst for an inherent ability I have and it seems to pertain to hyperspace in particular, all original.

My ancestral background has always had contact, our family just accepts that as a part of our lives.

Tachyon manipulation I've tried posting previously and there were "404 errors" and all information got scrubbed from not only the ATS, but also from the ENTIRE web within minutes.

So I have to play by the rules,

Tachyons are outsite "space-time", we can use them for worm holes / hyperspace, We can navigate anywhere we want to go without having to run into objects in space like planets, astoroid fields etc.

Simply because there is an "instantanious" relationship between the 2 tachyon points inherently denotes that there is nothing in between, so we can go from "here to there". Just a matter of navigation "stargate tech" I think is the closest analogy.

And to make it simpler, we just need 2 paired tachyons (both have the same unique value) and literally "lock on", as the tachyon has unique spin ratio values & electromagnetic properties.

So if we "lock on" to these values we can transmit anything from A to B, but then we get into MirrorMultiVerses, but that can be explained by the tri-values of quantum mechanics.

Spacetime is localised by gravity experienced by the oberserver, but we can manipulate that with Casimir principles. Sounds confusing but ZPE can also be tied into tachyons I think.

We just need a catalyst to manipulate a unified field. And say goodbye to carbon based power systems.


HADES

reply to post by maxwellsdemon


I can't find anything on the HADES project. Do you have a link? I want to know what it's about.

Originally posted by maxwellsdemon
reply to post by LiberLegit

 

Howdy LiberLegit.

I only remember this from a long time ago from the 80's, seems to have been rewritten, Circk was on '___' at the time and had "visions", an altered state, But doing further research I would say it was similar to "dreaming/altered" state. this was an example. Dreaming, meditation etc. are altered states of of the mind that are outside normal waking states.

blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?t=118599

My forte is systems & science, I wish i had written that paper previously alluded to. But I do understand the theories, noly after making my own then obviously I have to back them up in some form or manner.


"They" taught me that you even though you can't see it & you can't touch it, you can imagine it.

Just trying to educate people here so that collectively we can provide facts & solutions. That was my employment status, to analyse, extrapolate and solve. A spanner, a spoon, a keyboard and a theory etc. Won't say what I did in old job, Not allowed. But "they" let me research and understand. A good thing.

I wish it was my paper, I did say earlier I had a car accident & have lots of memories coming back, but also seems to have switched a light on metaphorically speaking, I have dreams, I see things applicable to M-Theory, I read & simplify & extrapolate.

I know about tachyons, amazing what we can do with them, however "they" won't hand the knowledge over so I have to backtrack my knowledge.

I'm not sure if it's Annauki, but I have "close encounters of the 3rd kind" fairly regularly. I don't know where the knowledge is coming from, I just use the term "dreaming", maybe thats a catalyst for an inherent ability I have and it seems to pertain to hyperspace in particular, all original.

My ancestral background has always had contact, our family just accepts that as a part of our lives.

Tachyon manipulation I've tried posting previously and there were "404 errors" and all information got scrubbed from not only the ATS, but also from the ENTIRE web within minutes.

So I have to play by the rules,

Tachyons are outsite "space-time", we can use them for worm holes / hyperspace, We can navigate anywhere we want to go without having to run into objects in space like planets, astoroid fields etc.

Simply because there is an "instantanious" relationship between the 2 tachyon points inherently denotes that there is nothing in between, so we can go from "here to there". Just a matter of navigation "stargate tech" I think is the closest analogy.

And to make it simpler, we just need 2 paired tachyons (both have the same unique value) and literally "lock on", as the tachyon has unique spin ratio values & electromagnetic properties.

So if we "lock on" to these values we can transmit anything from A to B, but then we get into MirrorMultiVerses, but that can be explained by the tri-values of quantum mechanics.

Spacetime is localised by gravity experienced by the oberserver, but we can manipulate that with Casimir principles. Sounds confusing but ZPE can also be tied into tachyons I think.

We just need a catalyst to manipulate a unified field. And say goodbye to carbon based power systems.


HADES

Interesting link about Crick. I can stand behind that type of stuff, maybe he already had the ideas for DNA but his "dream" or "trip" helped him expand his ideas.

As for your supposed close encounters, what are they like? What do they consist of? Grays, Reptiles, or what? Who are "they?" The government? Your previous employers? So many questions.

Aside from your interesting personal anecdotes about extra-terrestials and precarious previous "employers" do you think that you could somehow send me some information you have compiled on tachyon manipulation? That seems like a big deal, I mean, we can barely wrap our heads around the concept or existence of Tachyons let alone manipulating them. A theoretical particle that slows down as it attains energy and speeds up as it releases energy, very interesting. There isn't to much written about it, but it seems like the supposed particle can unlock the gate to time travel, but it isn't really time travel, it's more like instantaneous travel under the guise of time travel. Stargate possibilities. Now I sound a bit sensationalist, because for right now it is just an unproven particle.

reply to post by LiberLegit


If his employers have worked with tachyons and use tachyon-based technology, then it is a proven particle. The fact that government scientists (secret science) are so far ahead of mainstream scientists (hundreds of years) shows how much more they really know. I'm sure tachyons exist and I'm sure the element 115-antimatter propulsion system is real. If Max can't tell you certain things, then he just can't. I actually remember seeing an excerpt about tachyons in the past and it was removed very quickly, which means it was probably his like he says.

Originally posted by Condemned0625
reply to post by LiberLegit

 

If his employers have worked with tachyons and use tachyon-based technology, then it is a proven particle. The fact that government scientists (secret science) are so far ahead of mainstream scientists (hundreds of years) shows how much more they really know. I'm sure tachyons exist and I'm sure the element 115-antimatter propulsion system is real. If Max can't tell you certain things, then he just can't. I actually remember seeing an excerpt about tachyons in the past and it was removed very quickly, which means it was probably his like he says.

Assuming maxwell is being honest, then sure, a lot of this stuff may be real. But lack of evidence suggests otherwise. Nonetheless, this stuff does have some sound scientific reason. Encounters of the 3rd kind and dream equations i'll let go - that is all based on faith that someone is being truthful, and I can't make a conclusion on that just yet.

Lets not get to Phil Schneider about this whole thing, im sure the military has researched technology and theories years beyond our own understanding, but applying it is an entirely different story. German scientists employed by the Nazis are somewhat proof of your statement though, because the stuff THEY worked on is crazy to THIS DAY (years and years later.)

Do you believe that we have this technology and are currently using it? Are we using it for combat or to communicate with distant galaxies? Why would information on Tachyons be censored, because society isn't ready for it or it is information forbidden by TPTB? This is all so very interesting in a theoretical sense, mainly because none if it has been proven. I am at the point of being open to these concepts though because science is always changing.

What was that quote? "New ideas are ridiculed, violently opposed, and then commonly accepted." Something along those lines. The concept is oh-so-true.

Can one of the Lazar loyalists please explain to me why Lazar was not in the year book? I just need a logical explaination one point at a time. Personally I don't understand how or why he would be excluded from the year book. Has Bob himself ever explained how or why this happen?

I'm missing in my High School yearbook for a lot of the stuff I was in, just because I missed a day we were taking pics for certain groups. (and yes, I'm not only missing in the photo, but also the listing of said groups). So, it's not insane to think that a yearbook printer (or the organizing committee) isn't capable of making mistakes.

Still though, there are a LOT of holes in Lazar's story, just as there are equally some intriguing things he knew, that he shouldn't have known. It all comes down to an individual preference and gut feeling, as the facts alone are on both sides of the issue.

reply to post by LiberLegit


I don't see any reason for him to lie about it. What reason would there be? Of course things are kept in secret and of course the public is not actually ready for this kind of technology yet. Most people are too ignorant of what happens behind closed doors, so I actually agree with the government on the premise that the ignorant don't deserve to know.