Bob Lazar seems to confirm Zecharia Sitchin

reply to post by LDragonFire

Question 1 Bob says the aliens left in 1979. What happened in 79 to make them want to leave?

DULCE

Originally posted by buddhasystem

When I was talking about how proton collisions in nature differ from proton collisions in a lab, I was explaining how laboratory collisions are directed precisely towards the nuclei of other particles

Are you suggesting that each proton is shot directly into a nucleus, in a lab?

ok - i will take a stab at the correct answer :

apes answer is :

" in a particle acellerator - a stream of protons is accelearted through an apeture at a target that is pico meters in diameter - the number of protons " fired " [ millions ] an the target size ensure than thousands of collisions will occur "

PS - i have an A-level in physics , and studied selective physics topics as part of my further mechanical engineering studies

reply to post by buddhasystem

No, I am not suggesting that every proton is shot at a nucleus. You're one to assume.

Sometimes I call them annihilations, sometimes I don't. When nuclei are collided, they largely pass through each other anyways, which means there really is no annihilation taking place. Again, you assumed that I was labeling them only as annihilations just because I used that term instead of 'collision'.

Quark-gluon plasma can be contained with magnetism, but physicists usually study the fireball that is created after the collision, expanding under its own pressure and cooling while expanding. I understand that LHC physicists are not trying to contain quark-gluon plasma for extended periods of time, but rather study the results from the collisions. You can't keep it active like magnetically contained plasma because it is only the direct result of a collision and it cools down.

When I was talking about plasma being contained in magnetic fields, I was talking about plasma (ionized gas).

Are we done?

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by LDragonFire

 

DOH !

i requested that you think before replying - but you didnt

ok - time to spoon feed you

Q1 - why does lazar know this ?

Q2 can lazar answer the obvious ` follow on questions ` ?

ive been following bob lazar and this whole story since i first heard about it in 1998..and believe me i have seen and read so much about bob it feels like i know him..when i first saw the vhs tape that this youtube vid was ripped from,i couldnt help but think "holy sh*t,why is this guy not dead for blowing the ufo coverup!!" i want to believe bob so bad bc when you first hear his story it sounds amazing and somewhat plausible but after some fact checking with elements and having him contradict himself many times about first not seeing aliens at the base,to yeah he did see an alien,then to well he thought he might have seen an alien,,,if i saw an alien i would remember!! not be like.."well i think i did,no wait i did" and plus given his credit as a physicist he does know somewhat about what hes saying.my point is i think after it got out he wanted his story to be bigger than it was...

Originally posted by Condemned0625

No, I am not suggesting that every proton is shot at a nucleus. You're one to assume.

yes you were

let me quote you :

, I was explaining how laboratory collisions are directed precisely towards the nuclei of other particles

so tell me - now is a particle directed precisley at a target nuclie ?????????

the answer is - it isnt - the particles are targeted in a stream of millions of particles at at target mass which is a fraction of a mm across

thus thousands of accelerated particles collide with nuclie in the target mass

reply to post by DangerAllAround


He's still skeptical about what he saw. He's not sure whether to believe it was a real alien he saw or just a fake one. It could be that he's even in a state of denial or doesn't want to believe it at certain times and does at other times. People do that all the time. It happens to me. I end up saying something that contradicts myself because either I just made a simple error or I'm having problems deciphering a particular memory. It happens to just about everyone and I acknowledge it, so it does not ruin his credibility at all. People really don't have any justification for criticizing someone and their claims if they don't understand psychology or that particular person they're criticizing. Nobody can prove him wrong because nobody in mainstream science has access to a decent chunk of Ununpentium to conduct experiments with.

Originally posted by Condemned0625
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

No, I am not suggesting that every proton is shot at a nucleus. You're one to assume.

Then why did you say

I was explaining how laboratory collisions are directed precisely towards the nuclei of other particles

Sometimes I call them annihilations, sometimes I don't.

... and sometimes you call the what, apple martinis?

When nuclei are collided, they largely pass through each other anyways

In most cases they actually don't! What happens will hugely depend on the energy, but nuclei don't pass through each other. You made it up. You don't know the subject.

I was labeling them only as annihilations just because I used that term instead of 'collision'.

Apple martinis, I see.

Quark-gluon plasma can be contained with magnetism

No it cannot, for many reasons some of which I already listed.

Are we done?

Just about. There is only so much comic mileage that I can get from this.

reply to post by ignorant_ape


You've got to be kidding me. I know they are accelerated in groups of millions at a small target. I've read about that a long time ago. That doesn't negate the fact that they are being directed towards a target, artificially, by human efforts. If the same thing is happening in the air all around me, then I must be missing something that I would like to be explained. Is that the case?

reply to post by buddhasystem


Apple martinis, how cute. You're definitely not making me laugh.

So, nuclei that are accelerated to ultra-relativistic speeds and slammed into each other never pass through each other? Is that what you are suggesting, or are you suggesting they rarely pass through each other?

Bob worked at Sector 4 and was just back-engineering an E.T Spacecraft. He had very little knowledge about aliens. Also, if grays have altered DNA, it's just of the abductees. And Zecharia Sitchin is confirmed Reptilian( in league with Illuminati) by Conspiracy theorists like Arizona Wilder (She saw him at sacrificial rituals). So really what he said about Annunaki is not 100% Correct.

This is old news but for those who haven't seen it you need to read this link:

www.stantonfriedman.com...

Originally posted by Condemned0625
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Apple martinis, how cute. You're definitely not making me laugh.

So, nuclei that are accelerated to ultra-relativistic speeds and slammed into each other never pass through each other? Is that what you are suggesting, or are you suggesting they rarely pass through each other?

If you look up the "perfect liquid RHIC", you'll find things like:


If you listen and look at 0:38, you'll hear 'meltdown'. Meltdown leads to formation of "perfect liquid". That means that the nuclei don't pass through each other.

In a completely central collision, there is no way that a nucleus can pass through another nucleus and just go on as it was before. In a peripheral collision, the part non-interacted a sheared apart and keep flying along their trajectories, but these are the parts that were not part of the reaction. The central zone will still exhibit a modified state.


In low energy regime, the nuclei would most likely disintegrate.

I believe bob lazar. However, I dont see how we humans could have been modified 65 times since the 40's. I dont see it. We still look the same and are still getting sick. We've only become more greedy, egotistical and violent. Is this how the aliens have modified us?

reply to post by buddhasystem


Yes, but when I talked about them passing through each other, I meant as in 2 balls striking each other at high speeds and shattering/shearing upon impact, the fragments from each ball 'passing through' or past each other (not in the sense of a ghost passing through a wall). I've already seen that video and I know what it was demonstrating.

reply to post by buddhasystem


BASIC PHYSICS

This is a great quote, of undeniable ingnorance.

Your quote;

"The story when Lazar says that if "a proton plugs into the nucleus" (a silly term in itself)"

He is correct

This is a simplified version of "FUSION" to create a new element, Hence we had the Manahatten Project that created new elements during the research process.

The basic definition of "FUSION" is the amalgamation of 2 composite as a minimum of 2 differential quantums data defined either physically of hytpothetically.

If you are from the USA, I'm not surprised due to the education system.

Check your facts, read your history and understand basic physics. Eg; 1 + 1 = 2

Or conversely Bob could have said "a proton UN-plugs from the nucleus" = FISSION. Otherwise nuclear power station would not work.

If I am incorrect please explain simply, logically and mathematically why he is wrong??????


Happy Hunting

HADES

Originally posted by miamibombero
I believe bob lazar. However, I dont see how we humans could have been modified 65 times since the 40's. I dont see it. We still look the same and are still getting sick. We've only become more greedy, egotistical and violent. Is this how the aliens have modified us?

Modified 65 times ever since our first appearance, not since the 40s. He explained that. If it wasn't for the upgrades we received over the past few hundred thousand or perhaps few million years, we might not have survived or evolved as quickly as intended. That explains why apes are still so far behind in evolution. We were the dominant species among the apes, so I guess they chose us for the genetic enhancements.

reply to post by maxwellsdemon


I like the part where Bob talks about the 3 Gray spacecraft.
-- Sport Model -- Top Hat -- Jello Mold --
I wish he would put sketches of them on coffee cups and sell them on his website.
BTW, the Grays never left and apparently they were here before us.
The U.S. Government must have awkward conversations with them.
"You are violating our airspace."
Grays: "Your airspace??? We were here first."

Not to confirm or deny what is being said, I would like to point out that Element 115 has been discovered and created in a lab, however, since it decays almost instantly into another (until now) unknown element 113 which in turn only last a fraction over 1 second, before decaying into other known elements. I am new to ATS and I am not sure how to imbed all the information I will simply provide the URL.
www.radiochemistry.org...
Opinions are great, but they should never take the place of facts. Thats my 2 cents worth.

reply to post by Eurisko2012


Howdy,

I can't comment on the airspace violations; however I would suggest that it can be mutually shared. I'd be more worried about the euphonistic terminology employed by the US NIMBY's (not in my back yard) syndrome. It not the US's, it's not the "greys", it our's, all of us.

Here's the conundrum;

Eg; we go to Mars and and discover life, and the Martians said we invaded their "airspace" as they were there 1st.

A. Does the the US admit that they have been there before them, (impossible) mars is an anology
B. Or admit that the inhabitants are the original sovereign inhabitants
C. We just learn to get along and admit that life exist elswher and move along

Very intereting your comments are, from the left field and meaning between the mines.

Good call.

Hapy Hunting

HADES

Originally posted by maxwellsdemon
Your quote;

"The story when Lazar says that if "a proton plugs into the nucleus" (a silly term in itself)"

He is correct

This is a simplified version of "FUSION" to create a new element, Hence we had the Manahatten Project that created new elements during the research process.

a) I never heard the word "plugs into the nucleus" used in physics.
b) Manhattan project was about utilizing FISSION, not FUSION

The basic definition of "FUSION" is the amalgamation of 2 composite as a minimum of 2 differential quantums data defined either physically of hytpothetically.

What the heck is that supposed to mean? Stop using pseudo-scientific crap language.
And by the way, the plural of "quantum" is "quanta".