Bob's Home Video

Originally posted by gariac
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.

You need the right Isotope. Check it out.

www.gravitywarpdrive.com...

Livermore only created one with max 176 you apperently need 184.

reply to post by MajesticTwelve


(Turn on sarcasm machine.)

Yes, for good science, don't go to the national laboratories. They are full of highly educated scientists. Nope, go to an internet website on antigravity if you want the truth.

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by A51Watcher

 

I take it finding youtube videos is your idea of "equipped."

Wow that is amazing. Your posts indicate a severe case of A-D-D, so I cut back to a one line response with quote and you can't even manage to comprehend THAT.

You claimed that your poor little phone won't let you properly quote replies and respond to them.

Thus you are not properly equipped to debate. I responded by telling you to come back when you are properly equipped and COULD properly respond.

Yet you pretend to be so thick you could not even comprehend a simple one line response like that to your lame excuse why you can't respond to questions or points raised, that was quoted directly overhead. A simple 2 line post you can't even manage.

Look, nobody is THAT thick, so drop the pretense.

I was and still am, willing to take it from the top and go over the points one by one, one post at a time since your poor little phone can't handle any more than that. But what's the point? You pretend to be so thick you can't even handle that. You also pretend not to see that it is you that has been bitch slapped up one side and down the other on every point raised so far.

Now, if you truly are as thick as you pretend to be, I send my condolences to your family and sincerely apologize for having said anything.

reply to post by gariac


Look, you are SO not up to speed on the Lazar case, even I can do a better job of playing the skeptic than you.

Here, I'll help you out:

The standard explanation floated by skeptics is that Lazar and all the rest saw advanced military aircraft being tested out there.

That certainly sounds much more plausible than your Janet airlines nonsense.

A Janet flight could not pull off the maneuvers reported out there (by lots of other people besides Bob). Advanced military aircraft possibly could.

Also Janet flights land and take off from Groom. The other craft reported there did not.

Is your phone at least capable of google I hope? You really should look up some debunker sites and get up to speed on the halfway believable explanations. Yours so far are really lame.


No self respecting debunker would touch that Janet airlines nonsense with a ten foot pole!

Now, back to the topic at hand, viewers will notice that the craft suddenly makes a sharp jog to the side and Gene exclaims "No Way! Did you see that move it did!!"

All witnesses confirmed to George Knapp that the movement was indeed performed by the craft, not by someone moving the camera (which was obviously on a tripod).

(Boy those Boeing 737's in the Janet fleet sure have some neat moves huh?)

Well three more insulting posts full of nonsense. Have you considered moving out of your parents basement, getting a job, etc?

The freaking video is so shaky, who can tell what is moving. You put a lot of faith in such BS. Kathleen Ford lined the walls of the Little Aleinn with such BS photos with camera shake. Did you ever look at them? Oh wait, you never visited the area. You just dig up youtube nonsense and deem it evidence.

Clearly you are not competent to evaluate the video since you have no baseline for normal range activity. Glenn moved to the range. He hung out there enough to know what is routine and what isn't. And his conclusion was the place is just a military base to test classified projects. No space aliens. Zip nada.

Every year Google Earth puts up new imagery of S-4. Nothing seen. No tracks. Zip nada. I have looked at the area from the nearby hills. Have you done this? There is no S-4.

If you understood logic, the location of S-4 is terrible for privacy. it is easily viewed from the aircraft flying along route 95. They couldn't pick a worse location. But hey, don't let logic get in the way of your BS theories.

reply to post by gariac

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by MajesticTwelve

 

(Turn on sarcasm machine.)

Yes, for good science, don't go to the national laboratories. They are full of highly educated scientists. Nope, go to an internet website on antigravity if you want the truth.

I dont think you understand isotopes.

Example for hydrogen:
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by MajesticTwelve


I know what an isotope is. It is the source of the information I where I have my doubts.

BTW, what moron buys copies of patents? Patents have been online for free for well over a decade.

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

Great advice guys. I'd be especially skeptical of members making nonsense claims such as...

Originally posted by gariac
Glen Campbell [not Bob Lazar!] is the guy that put Area 51 on the map.

"OK Pimander, so give Gariac a break, it's just an honest mistake," I hear members cry. I really could have more sympathy for this howler, were it not for the fact that the quote above is taken from Geriac's own thread called "Glenn Campbell on Bob Lazar"! Why does that matter? In Campbell's own words...

Even if false, the Lazar story has had real effects, not all of them bad. For one thing he made Area 51 the most popular secret base in the world.
SOURCE: www.aliensonearth.com...

So there we have it. Campbell himself agrees that it was indeed Bob Lazar who put Area 51 "on the map".

Geriac, you could have admitted, in the spirit of honest debate, to being wrong....

Originally posted by gariac
Glenn did a great job debunking the so-called sightings over the range, which are generally weapons school training.

To members reading this, it might sound as though it all makes sense. Well it doesn't I'm afraid. This is more nonsense, designed to make you believe that nobody ever saw anything of significance relevant to the possibility of non-conventional, possibly ET back engineered (or whatever), craft.

You see the trouble with these claims to have debunked it is that the observations used were made years after the Lazar footage was filmed in 1989. Over to Campbell again...

My idle-handed colleagues and I have been researching Lazar's claims since 1992, but I wasn't there when Lazar first made those claims... www.thewhyfiles.net...

and

I first came to the outskirts of the base in October 1992. I was interested in UFOs at the time, and the "Black Mailbox" was supposed to be a place you could see them on a scheduled basis. I quickly dispelled these stories. glenn-campbell.com...

In case any readers do not see the obvious here, I'll point it out...

Would the SECRET test flights still be taking place three or more years later in 1992? If there were really secret test flights, in 1989, of the aforementioned technology and Lazar broke the story on the news would said tests continue for three years in full view of the public?
NO, OBVIOUSLY NOT!!!

Therefore can any observations made by Campbell, Geriac or any other Johnny-come-lately possibly have any bearing whatsoever on the original footage?
NO, OBVIOUSLY NOT!!!

So all this blathering on about Janet flights and having a 1992/93 baseline of activity at the base are irrelevant. This case is just not that cut and dried.

Originally posted by gariac
Knowledge is power. Don't believe the hype.

Continued below...

Originally posted by gariac
Did you ever look at them? Oh wait, you never visited the area [meaning Area 51, of course). You just dig up youtube nonsense and deem it evidence.

This is the biggest joke of all. In spite of the fact that in your own thread it was clearly stated, you seem completely oblivious to the fact that you have been debating with someone who did actually go to Nevada to see for themself, in 1989 when the story broke! They also found that what was witnessed by five people on three (not in fact two as stated in the news report) separate occasions, was in fact visible on the correct day and time just like Lazar said it would be. Not years later like some Johnny-come-lately fresh out of their parents basement pretending to debunk something long after the dust had settled.

Try taking a look at one of the links in A51Watchers signature and some of the threads he has authored. The clues are there. Are you aware of this and are just trolling a member? Or are you just being wilfully ignorant? Or hoping members just assume you know what you are talking about? He also filmed what he saw. I've seen the film.

Oh, the obvious... That means somebody can corroborate what the five original witnesses said about the test flights taking place when Bob Lazar said they would. Isn't that significant?

Now, another argument you seem to think holds water is that the camera moved and the craft didn't. Are you really saying that all 5 witnesses lied to George Knapp and said they saw the same thing? Are you also claiming that A51Watcher is also lying? How far do you want to stretch this piece of string?

The witnesses didn't know what they were looking at? They were just seeing planes going in to land and got over-excited did they? One of the 1989 witnesses was an experienced pilot. Being the expert here, you know that, of course....

As a disclaimer, I can't vouch for Lazar's claims about anything regarding S4 or Area51. I can't vouch for his credentials. I can't say I have all the answers. However, I don't think it is as cut and dried as it's made out to be...

I just thought I'd add a clip from George Knapp. Just in case nobody has seen it....

Originally posted by gariac
Knowledge is power. Don't believe the hype.

reply to post by Pimander


('Uh oh... he WHAT??')






I must say I really had a hard time typing all these replies keeping a straight face.
Well I guess the cat's really out of the bag NOW!!

Oh, wait a minute that's right, in this case, the cat was never IN the bag!

As you say, not only did I clearly state as much in his thread, the link to that film has been in my signature for months, AND 15 inches from your face with each and every post I make!

HOW could you miss that?? Yet another - You have GOT to be kidding me - moment.

Obviously many here have been enjoying him make a fool of himself, because I have spoken to many of them who are quite aware of what links are in my signature and so far have not said anything.

Shame on ALL of you, you're as bad as ME!

Originally posted by Pimander


I just thought I'd add a clip from George Knapp. Just in case nobody has seen it....

"They either were mistaken or LYING"

OOOOPS! BUSTED!





So what do you mean, in case nobody has seen it.

It has been shown to be 'Assume Ignorance' about this case several times in several threads around here recently.

George also found several current Los Alamos Labs employees who confirmed Bob worked there.

Now how was Bob allowed to operate the controls of that behemoth multi- million dollar particle accelerator you saw, if he never worked anywhere he said or went to school anywhere he said?


Oh, and for the 'skeptics' who point to his lack of yearbook picture as if they are Dick Tracy and have discovered the smoking gun, guess what, I'm not in my yearbook either.

Guess that proves I didn't go there also right?

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by MajesticTwelve

 

I know what an isotope is. It is the source of the information I where I have my doubts.

BTW, what moron buys copies of patents? Patents have been online for free for well over a decade.

Then i am sure you know about the island of stability which has been theorized a long time by scientists.
Why is it so hard to believe it is at element 115?

reply to post by A51Watcher


Thanks for getting the thread up and going.

I think your threads are fascinating and this one does not let me down. In retrospect of Bob Lazar, the man has never made or taken any money for his story. He got his tire shot out, and his past history deleted by the very people who get paid by our tax dollars. I have been trying to access his web page, but all it says is that it Reopening soon! I believe him and I feel like if others weren't bound to contract, they would speak out as well.

Originally posted by A51Watcher
Oh, and for the 'skeptics' who point to his lack of yearbook picture as if they are Dick Tracy and have discovered the smoking gun, guess what, I'm not in my yearbook either.

Guess that proves I didn't go there also right?

I never thought about that before. I think I only appeared in one official College picture during all my years of study. If that picture was removed from the archive....

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.

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

There is obviously a possibility that you are correct.. however, there is just as much or more evidence that you are incorrect.

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.

Videos aren't evidence now?
I guess you are right, I mean this isn't a court of law.. where eyewitness testimony and video evidence mean life or death.

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.

Wait.. I thought we weren't in a court of law... so you decide the weight of evidence based on what? your mood?

No consistency with your observattions and assesment of evidence...two rules of discovery, two sets of guidelines for proof...
Very unprofessional for someone who fanices themselves an expert on this topic.
Sounds as if you have an agenda.

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.

You really assume we don't know how a 30 year old VHS camera works?
Really?
you think way too much of yourself.
Did you realize some of us are old enough to have owned and used those cameras back in the 80's?
Do you really assume that we are all kids or idiots?
Really?
Realllllly?

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?

All I see is anecdotal rebuttals.
Nothing of substance from you.
Can you link us to any new evidence or fresh links?
The same old "he said-she said" argument is tired.....and stale.

What else is there left to explain away? We know Bob saw a Janet landing. I explained this multiple times. You just refuse to accept reality. You like the taste of bull. I explained the moon and lack of stars. You refuse to accept the truth. You enjoy fairy tales.

You do realize Bob claims to have a piece of 115 he smuggled out of S-4. Funny how this bit of physical evidence never materialized.

Further, I have prove my bona fides as an observer of the range. You? We aren't sure you ever investigated the range by yourself.

It is your right to believe total crap. Just don't expect everyone else to be so gullible.

Originally posted by gariac
What else is there left to explain away? We know Bob saw a Janet landing.

How do we know that then? Where you there? Did you visit AT THE TIME and film this "Janet flight" to prove you are right? Of course you didn't.

Did you interview to the witnesses and the (to my knowledge at least 3) corroborating witnesses who visited there AT THE TIME and also saw the craft? Of course you didn't.

Why didn't you? Because you are a Johnny come lately. Like me, you weren't there. You don't know whether you're right, it's as simple as that.

It's your right to pretend you know what you are talking about when you obviously don't. The fact that you may have visited the area around Groom Lake means absolutely nothing to this case. Diddly. Squat. You only harm your credibility by pretending it matters. It might be significant to A51 research generally but is utterly irrelevant to this material. If you are capable of it, you would do yourself a big favour if you could be honest and admit it.

Some people just don't know when they're beaten. I didn't set out to bitch-slap you...