Bob's Home Video

Click here for more information.

While we are at it, what ever happened to the sample of 115 Lazar claimed to have? Did the dog it? DId he lose it during one of his moves? Or do we just forget the parts of the Lazar BS that aren't relevant to your argument.

Once again, when push comes to shove, none of these UFO types every comes up with physical evidence. Isn't that odd. Just crappy photographs, shaky video, and tall stories.

Since you guys like youtube, I found this video of Lazar believers:
www.youtube.com...

reply to post by gariac

As I already said, I don't necessarily believe everything about this case. I do believe that you are being completely dishonest by pretending your visits to the Nevada desert, YEARS AFTER THE EVENTare relevant. You also keep changing the subject to steer attention away from the fact that it is YOU who has been utterly humiliated here not me.

Also, the presence of advanced craft do not necessarily mean aliens. However, you suppose that is the case - so in your tiny narrow little world, because you believe there is no such thing as aliens,you also wrongly assume that there can't possibly have been any advanced non-conventional craft there. It's called cognitive dissonance. The fact that you weren't there though means you CANNOT POSSIBLY KNOW whether there were any advance craft. I don't have to go there to know that.

Message to other members: Is this guy really as thick as he's coming across or is this just because he is incapable of admitting he's wrong?




ETA: I wonder how many more times you will try to change the subject without admitting you are wrong. It takes a bigger man to admit it you know. You're just making yourself look like an idiot here.

What happened to the sample of 115?

Simple. Don't you know? Now why doesn't that surprise me? You claim to know everything about the case.

How many samples were there? How did he get them? -

Oh that's right, you were not there and could not possibly know. Nor could anyone who was not there.


But you've already been done in by ignoring all points and rebuttals put to you by everyone. The list is about 2 pages worth by now. I doubt you could dig your hole any deeper, but I am sure you will give it a good try.



The emperor is still wearing no clothes.

reply to post by Pimander


Time for your daily beatdown I see.

Say they launched an Atlas rocket in the 60s at KSC. I wasn't there. Now say they launched an Atlas rocket in the 70s and I was there. Does that mean I have no idea what the launch looked like in the 60s? Hardly.

So Bob sees a Janet land one year and I see it later. It is still a freakin' airplane. Can't you comprehend that. This really isn't complicated, well at least for most people. Just attempt to think about this.

Regarding witnesses, again you fail and fail miserably to understand the notion of a baseline. Do you realize at a trial, there are witnesses and expert witnesses? A witness may see something, but the expert witness has the knowledge to interpret what is seen.

Eyewitness testimony is terrible. To get convictions that stick, you need physical evidence.

Bob has failed to produce his physical evidence and thus has failed.

reply to post by A51Watcher


He showed one to George Knapp. If it was real 115, he could of had it brought to a lab for analysis.

You fail once again. (Slap slap slap).

Originally posted by gariac
Regarding witnesses, again you fail and fail miserably to understand the notion of a baseline.

This is becoming incredibly tedious. There's no way you could be this slow. :shk:

I don't fail to see that at all. But you don't have a baseline for when the event happened in 1989. You weren't there then. You also didn't witness anything in 1989. You weren't there until years later. You're trying to pretend to be oblivious to that fact which is obvious to everyone who has read this thread but you.

You are basically being totally dishonest in a pathetic attempt to make it appear that you are not wrong. The trouble is you are.

Campbell DID NOT put A51 on the map. as Campbell himself says, Lazar did.

You CANNOT POSSIBLY KNOW what was in the skies there years before you were there. Neither can Campbell, as he quite rightly admitted - it's called being honest.

You are also ignoring the fact that art least 7 (in fact at least 9 I think) other people including a pilot say that what they saw was not a conventional craft. And don't pretend you think witness testimony is irrelevant cos that means yours on this thread is.

You will lose the respect of members if you can't admit you were wrong. When I am wrong I hold up my hands and change my position. It's called intellectual honesty. Why can't you manage it? Shame on you.



ETA: As for trying to present me as some YouTube researcher, forget it. Some members on this site do original research. I am one of them. As such an expert you might have been aware of that but I doubt you are. What I'm not is a disciple of Campbell without the wits to represent his views. One thing you need to do is get some real facts then debate with them. You may look slightly less foolish

reply to post by gariac
A reminder of the real beatdown. A Pimander special.

Originally posted by Pimander

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 Pimander

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.

You still haven't successfully rebutted a single point I made. Why? Because you are wrong.

I'd try debating with someone on your level buddy. You don't stand a chance against me. Face up to the reality.

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by A51Watcher

 

He showed one to George Knapp. If it was real 115, he could of had it brought to a lab for analysis.

Wrong. It was 3 pieces.

Now how did he get them?



Slapping yourself looks rather odd.

I seriously want to believe in Bob Lazar.
The thing is, he is still alive 20 years later, and for comparison, Schneider has supposedly been killed about a year after what he revealed.
But again, I'm only 15, so I certainly don't have a proper point of view.

reply to post by Pimander


George Knapp didn't say he saw three pieces, just one.

But you missed the entire point of why I brought up the sample of element 115, that is he never produced it for analysis. It was the one bit of irrefutable proof of his story. Epic fail.

You're looking a bit ragged, so no slap for you today.

reply to post by gariac


Incorrect. It was 3.

You still don't know how he got them. Your favorite debunker pages don't have that?


That's what happens when your only source of information is half baked theories by ignorants who were not there.

I have my own source of information. I was there. You weren't.

End of story.

reply to post by A51Watcher


Insults me all you want. Your opinion of me isn't relevant to anything. (Oh boy, some loon on ATS dissed me.)

You still haven't answered why Lazar never delivered the element 115 as proof.

Clearly if Lazar had such evidence, he would have shown it. Belief in Bob Lazar is like belief in the tooth fairy. You are free to believe in whatever nonsense you want. However, you fail to make any remotely logical argument for your beliefs, so excuse me while I refuse to drink the koolaid.

(Slap slap slap slap)

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by A51Watcher

 

You still haven't answered why Lazar never delivered the element 115 as proof.

Oh, so YOU'RE the one wanting answers now?




Sorry to remind you yet again, you have about 2 pages worth of unanswered questions from various members, that will be dealt with by you before we move on to any further attempts at misdirection.

reply to post by A51Watcher


OK, I assume I have checkmated you at this point. You have no answer for the 115. BTW, who cares is you were there, or if there are three pieces or one piece. The key is Bob Lazar failed to provide ANY PIECES of 115.

www.urbandictionary.com...

reply to post by gariac


No it is you who pretends to misunderstand once again.

It is you who will be answering questions already put to you before we move on to any further attempts at misdirection.

Until then your place is in the corner on that stool and the pointy hat that goes with it until you familiarize yourself with common standards of debate.

You are required to defend rebuttals to your postulations, not ignore them and move on to something else.

Until then it is you who will be ignored.

Originally posted by MajesticTwelve
I feel like some day element 115 will prove lazar is for real.

In my opinion, it already has..

You see, when he first talked about element 115, and the media and critics all laughed at the idea, it was still 2 or 3 years before scientists in Darmstadt Germany would actually discover element 115, and when they did, it was only a short isotope of it.. And still the scientific community scoffed Lazar's element 115... but then only like a year ago, nuclear scientists have found that element 115 and others, do in fact have islands of stability, but only with the element having the "right" number of protons.. Unfortunately, they say they cannot create any of the higher isotopes of these super heavies, because they have no fast way of adding protons.. but the math tells them it is a for sure bet.

Coming from me I know this is all hearsay, and much if it I have read about only because I am very interested in materials sciences...

Back to the point, Many things Bob talked about years ago,have been subsequently proven accurate, In my opinion...