View Full Version : Bob Lazar is Credible and here is Proof


Starman
02-28-05, 10:40 AM
You can try to discredit Bob Lazar all you want, now it appears he is telling the truth. Immagine that.

http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/Element_115.htm

(Q)
02-28-05, 11:06 AM
Immagine that.

Yes, he has.

SkinWalker
02-28-05, 11:11 AM
It would appear that Ufoology's foremost Ufoologist disagrees with regard to Lazar's credibility: http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sflazar.html

http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc61.htm

Here's another link that debunks the guy: http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/lazarmn.htm

Don't you think you're being just a little close-minded Starman? Not accepting the possibility that the claims you are reading are ficitious and concocted in the mind of a deranged person fit Occam's Razor far better than the alternative: that Lazar was a supersecret researcher who smuggled out a secret element...

Starman
02-28-05, 11:36 AM
It would appear that Ufoology's foremost Ufoologist disagrees with regard to Lazar's credibility: http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sflazar.html

http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc61.htm

Here's another link that debunks the guy: http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/lazarmn.htm

Don't you think you're being just a little close-minded Starman? Not accepting the possibility that the claims you are reading are ficitious and concocted in the mind of a deranged person fit Occam's Razor far better than the alternative: that Lazar was a supersecret researcher who smuggled out a secret element...

So if I understand you correctly, you believe the Ufoology and not Main Stream Science. Hmmmmm.

SkinWalker
02-28-05, 11:46 AM
Stanton Friedman is after all a phsyicist.

Silas
02-28-05, 11:47 AM
Bob Lazar stated that the Element 115 used as the fuel and gravity source in the “Sport Model” Flying Disc was stable. On February 2, 2004, scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, in collaboration with researchers from the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in Russia (JINR), announced that they discovered two new super-heavy elements, Element 113 and Element 115. The Isotope of Element 115, produced by bombarding an Americium-243 (95Am243) nucleus with a Calcium-48 (20Ca48) nucleus, rapidly decayed to Element 113. then continued to decay until a meta-stable isotope was obtained.Did I miss something? Bob Lazar claimed that 115 was stable, but the scientists created 115 and it "rapidly decayed to Element 113".

However, strange as it may seem Starman, the fact that someone said a surprising thing about some future development which later turns out to be true does not in fact gain him any credibility if it is clear that his level of knowledge of the subject is such that his prediction could be attributable to luck. Nothing he said about the properties of 115 actually evinced any real knowledge of the physics involved. Isaac Asimov once quoted a similar example: Immanuel Velikovsky claimed that because of his theory of how Venus and Earth nearly collided (and caused many Old Testament miracles on their way), Venus would turn out to be hotter than expected. About 15 years after his book (Worlds in Collision, 1950) was published it turned out that Venus was in fact hotter than expected - the hottest planet in the Solar System, in fact. But this did not add one iota of credibility to the fantastic claims of his book, which were totally unsupported by either any evidence at all, or our knowledge of the laws of motion and gravitation.

A Lazar debunker (http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/critiq.htm) Dr David L. Morgan said something I think applies a lot around here:
want to take some time here to talk about scientific progress, because there is one common objection to my critique of Lazar’s scenario. People will often say “Modern science could be wrong. Newton was wrong! Lazar could be right!” Yes. That is correct. In fact, modern science almost certainly IS “wrong.” But the only real test of a theory in science is that it works. Newton’s Laws worked. They still do in most situations. Einstein’s theories are better – they are more accurate and they work in more situations. New theories will continue to come along that are more precise and more generally applicable than the older theories, and these new theories will be tested by experiments until they supplant the old ones. That is how science has progressed for the past 400 years.

So it is not enough to SAY that modern science is wrong. You have to demonstrate that you have something that is better. And that “better” theory needs to do everything that the old theory does, and then do more. And chances are that it won’t completely turn the old theory on it’s head – because we already know that the old theories work too well. It is not possible to create a new theory until you understand the old one well enough to present a coherent alternative. Calling current science “total nonsense” is nice rhetoric, and no doubt convincing to many non-scientists who feel alienated from science and look on scientists as a kind of modern priesthood of arcane knowledge. But science is a process – not a body of knowledge.If Lazar is one of these "current science is total nonsense" people, that is sufficient reason for dismissing him out of hand (alongside that Final Theory guy, a critique of whose book I have yet to complete for amazon.com, but I will).

Persol
02-28-05, 05:06 PM
If Lazar is one of these "current science is total nonsense" people, He is, but ironically throws as many pop-science buzzwords in as possible.

Starman
02-28-05, 06:55 PM
Did I miss something? Bob Lazar claimed that 115 was stable, but the scientists created 115 and it "rapidly decayed to Element 113".


115 is stable when it is manufactured properly. If you can only fuse a few atoms of 115 together in a supercollider then you most likely will not achieve stability.

Persol
02-28-05, 07:08 PM
Regardless, the page is simply stupid.

1) It was provided as discs, but was then fused together? How? It would be easy to just fuse them in a way to make less waste.
2) The step about milling the cone is extra and simply stupid.

There is not an ounce of support on that page, and lpenty of things which are just plain wrong.

Starman
02-28-05, 10:32 PM
Stanton Friedman is after all a phsyicist.

Stanton Friedman is a better physicist, than he is an investigator.

SkinWalker
02-28-05, 10:45 PM
I'm sorry. I thought the whole spurious claim involving "element 115" was exactly the kind of thing we should expect a physicist to be able to comment on with authority. I agree that Friedman is a better physicist than investigator (his silly rants about UFOs and Roswell are evidence of this), but even cult members within the UFO community are skeptical about Lazar and have long considered him to be a nutjob.

Starman
02-28-05, 11:07 PM
I'm sorry. I thought the whole spurious claim involving "element 115" was exactly the kind of thing we should expect a physicist to be able to comment on with authority. I agree that Friedman is a better physicist than investigator (his silly rants about UFOs and Roswell are evidence of this), but even cult members within the UFO community are skeptical about Lazar and have long considered him to be a nutjob.

Have you seen the Lazar Tape? Many have not. Have you read the Gene Huff synopsis?

http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/synopsis.htm

I have to surmise that element 115 did not exist when Lazar was talking about it and still it is just becoming known. Lazar is telling the truth, some can not handle the truth so they try to dismiss his testimony. You can tell if someone is telling the truth just by their body language. Police use this technique every day. When I watched the Lazar Tape it was apparent he is telling the truth. I will ad that he is not perfect and it became easy to discredit him, that was the intent of the Government.

SkinWalker
02-28-05, 11:24 PM
Ah... the government conspiracy again. Whenever something is proven incorrect (the Roswell crash assumption) or to be a liar (Bob Lazar), automatically this proof is considered to be the work of the government and part of a conspiracy.

In which case, we've nothing left to discuss, since you can always whip out the "Government Conspiracy Card."

<img src="http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3918&stc=1">

Congratulations! You just played the GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY CARD!

Silas
03-01-05, 04:48 AM
Starman, I like the way you got that Gene Huff synopsis from the Lazar debunking site! Gene Huff is evidently not an unbiased commentator, but (as stated on the homepage) "Lazar's friend and vocal supporter". It has to be said that the opinion of a Las Vegas real estate appraiser is not really going to cut it here, credibility-wise.


I have to surmise that element 115 did not exist when Lazar was talking about it and still it is just becoming known. What difference does that make? Why don't I theorise about the properties of element 120 (or Unbinullium as it will be called), then I'll call you in 5, 10, or 30 years when it gets synthesised and say "I told you so."

I thought you were saying that Bob Lazar had "gained credibility" because element 115 had been created and was found to be stable. I didn't realise that you thought that because he named element 115, and then element 115 was actually synthesised, that Lazar gained credibility because he somehow "knew" about an element which didn't exist yet. Newsflash, any element over 110 may or may not occur in nature, but it will likely have certain properties, based upon it's family and the known facts about electron shells and atomic nuclei. Bob Lazar's knowledge of those properties does not require the intervention of alien intelligence.

Silas
03-01-05, 04:52 AM
I was wrong! It's called Unbinillium (http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Ubn/key.html).

I notice that the wording on the description of Ununpentium (http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Uup/key.html) is identical to that mentioned in the gravitywarpdrive site.

VRob
03-01-05, 08:59 AM
I agree that Friedman is a better physicist than investigator (his silly rants about UFOs and Roswell are evidence of this), but even cult members within the UFO community are skeptical about Lazar and have long considered him to be a nutjob.

You are a freakin tool.

You're ignorance is only overshadowed by your arrogance.

SkinWalker
03-01-05, 10:23 AM
You are a freakin tool.

You're ignorance is only overshadowed by your arrogance.

Prove it.

VRob
03-01-05, 10:27 AM
Prove it.

Just did,

Go check out the ABC news thread.

SkinWalker
03-01-05, 10:33 AM
I meant for you to prove my ignorance, not your own.

Starman
03-01-05, 09:02 PM
Starman, I like the way you got that Gene Huff synopsis from the Lazar debunking site! Gene Huff is evidently not an unbiased commentator, but (as stated on the homepage) "Lazar's friend and vocal supporter". It has to be said that the opinion of a Las Vegas real estate appraiser is not really going to cut it here, credibility-wise.

What difference does that make?

I thought you were saying that Bob Lazar had "gained credibility" because element 115 had been created and was found to be stable. I didn't realise that you thought that because he named element 115, and then element 115 was actually synthesised, that Lazar gained credibility because he somehow "knew" about an element which didn't exist yet. Newsflash, any element over 110 may or may not occur in nature, but it will likely have certain properties, based upon it's family and the known facts about electron shells and atomic nuclei. Bob Lazar's knowledge of those properties does not require the intervention of alien intelligence.

This is only one small part of his testimonial that is has entered from science theory to science fact.

You may hypothesize all day long about element 120 and its properties that is no evidence that it can even be synthesized or ever will be.

What lazar states has everything to do with the laws of physics that are correct.

This makes sense form a scientific point of view.

The reality is Lazar is telling the truth and not everyone can except the truth.

SkinWalker
03-01-05, 10:52 PM
The reality is Lazar is telling the truth and not everyone can except the truth.So what you're saying is that because Lazar applied some high school chemistry and predicted the properties of a heavy element (something we did as a classroom assignment, as I recall), that means he's being truthful about every claim (or even most?) he's made to date?

Starman
03-01-05, 11:26 PM
So what you're saying is that because Lazar applied some high school chemistry and predicted the properties of a heavy element (something we did as a classroom assignment, as I recall), that means he's being truthful about every claim (or even most?) he's made to date?

What I am saying is that Lazar is observed to be telling the truth. I understand why you can not conceive this. It is due to body language and that is something you probably are not familiar with.

Body language is a lie detector that everyone exposes every day and have little or no control over. Lazar's body language in his documentary the Lazar tape is proof that he is indeed genuine.

And to add the fact that his claims do obey the laws of physics correct me if I am wrong is just supportive evidence that he is telling the truth.

Because one can not comprehend that other intelligent life is visiting the earth. One will tend not to except the evidence when presented in the form of testimonials. I call it the hide your head in the sand and hope it goes away syndrome.

You can deny it all you want, the fact remains Robert Lazar is telling the truth.

SkinWalker
03-02-05, 12:06 AM
What I am saying is that Lazar is observed to be telling the truth.

I never held that he never told the truth. What I'm saying is that he made a statement that was already believed to be true hypothetically. Lazar applied a bit of high school chemistry to a hypothetical element, which was eventually reproduced in the lab. No kidding. That doesn't in any way imply that there are aliens involved. You don't really think that do you?

I understand why you can not conceive this. It is due to body language and that is something you probably are not familiar with.


Body language is a lie detector that everyone exposes every day and have little or no control over. Lazar's body language in his documentary the Lazar tape is proof that he is indeed genuine.

The only thing that Lazar proves is that he's pathological in his delusions.


And to add the fact that his claims do obey the laws of physics correct me if I am wrong is just supportive evidence that he is telling the truth.

You're kidding right? Did you take chemistry? Ever? People have been talking about heavy elements for a while.


Because one can not comprehend that other intelligent life is visiting the earth. One will tend not to except the evidence when presented in the form of testimonials. I call it the hide your head in the sand and hope it goes away syndrome.

I'm more than willing to accept any "testimonial" from anyone as long as it is coroborated with testable, physical evidence. Anecdotal account is the worst kind of evidence. Even in a court of law. Otherwise there wouldn't be forensic teams and crime labs that test DNA and take fingerprints, etc. Believing that aliens are visiting Earth and believing that this is something you comprehend, in no way makes it true.

I'd love it if it were. I've a million questions to ask a totally alien being about how life evolved physically and culturally on his own world so that I can compare with ours... But there's no real evidence to suggest that it is so.


You can deny it all you want, the fact remains Robert Lazar is telling the truth.

I'm sure Lazar tells the truth quite often. It's difficult to lie all the time. He just tells very little truth with regard to his qualifications, background, education, professional credentials, alien spaceships, etc, etc...

Starman
03-03-05, 10:58 AM
I never held that he never told the truth. What I'm saying is that he made a statement that was already believed to be true hypothetically. ...

Have you read the Gene Huff synopsis?
If not please take a few minutes and read it.


I'd love it if it were. I've a million questions to ask a totally alien being about how life evolved physically and culturally on his own world so that I can compare with ours... But there's no real evidence to suggest that it is so.

I am with you on that one. My problem is that if the Government has this information and has made the decision that the population of the United States of America can not handle the truth, so they keep it a secret and that is something even you can imagine.

Well I think it is the scandal of all time and of all of mankind to keep it a secret from the people. As long as this remains a possibility I will do what little I can to help further the discovery of the truth. As I am sure you will do the same.

(Q)
03-04-05, 10:10 AM
My problem is that if the Government has this information and has made the decision that the population of the United States of America can not handle the truth... I will do what little I can to help further the discovery of the truth.

You've been watching too many B grade movies.

Those who can't handle the truth speculate wildly about government conspiracy theories.

Starman
03-04-05, 12:56 PM
My problem is that if the Government has this information and has made the decision that the population of the United States of America can not handle the truth... I will do what little I can to help further the discovery of the truth.

You've been watching too many B grade movies.

Those who can't handle the truth speculate wildly about government conspiracy theories.

Those who believe that government conspiracy's do not exist, are good little republicans who love George Bush.

SkinWalker
03-04-05, 01:24 PM
Post hoc ergo propter hoc, eh?

Neildo
03-04-05, 10:57 PM
Those who can't handle the truth speculate wildly about government conspiracy theories.

No, those that can't handle the truth, call the hard to believe truths "conspiracy theories" to make themselves feel safer through ignorance. Supressing important top secret information from the public (wanting to always have the edge - technological or otherwise - on others is common sense towards maintaining power) or trying to make a one world government (aka "take over the world" which is every leader's dream) is no conspiracy theory. To think those things aren't being done just flat out shows how simple-minded one is and lacks a view of reality.

Those actions above are just plain truth. It's only when trying to specify the who's who in it all is when it becomes a theory, yet far from a whacky idea. That's the usual propoganda that they like commoners to believe. Attack and focus on the minor details yet ignore the main part of the argument to either make others forget what was originally being talked about or have those minor details somehow prove the main part of the argument as false. If the glove don't fit, you must aquit. Yeah, okay, heh.


Well I think it is the scandal of all time and of all of mankind to keep it a secret from the people.

There's no secret about it. You shouldn't need someone else to tell you the sky is blue or the grass is green, unless you need it for your ego of proving other's wrong. Confirmation is for the weak. You won't have to wait much longer.

And back to the original quote above, truth is stranger than fiction so there's no such thing as "wild" speculation of conspiracy theories. Even the whackiest of conspiracy theories have nothing on the strangeness of the ongoings of reality.

- N

Rick
03-04-05, 11:13 PM
when you seek the answers of a question the objective should never be tied up with a particular bias. Please take a look at this article. I have several conflicting which prove each other wrong, and therefore ever fact should be presented in the post so as to point it.
Starman,
My humble request to you and every post member is to try and avoid a particular bias for discussion in a NEW POST, when subsequent replies come, you can then put your own views on the subject.The information presented should always be complete.That way we wont miss any facts and jump to conclusions, we have a responsibility to people who access this information.

Investigation of Bob Lazar's M.I.T. Claims
Glenn Campbell June 1993

Lazar's Statements
Bob Lazar claims to have degrees from MIT and Cal-Tech. He has also made public the names of two of his professors. Specifically, the following exchanges took place at a UFO conference (transcript, 120k) on May 1, 1993:

QUESTION: Bob, could you tell us about your education. I've heard a lot of different conflicting things; I'd like to hear from you.
LAZAR: That varies widely. As far as electronic technology, my degree there is from Cal-Tech and physics is from M.I.T.

QUESTION: Did you go to Pierce College?

LAZAR: Yeah, I did. Where did you hear that?

QUESTION: A friend that said something, somebody I don't even know. I just thought, it's something I want to ask, to clear my mind.

LAZAR: Yeah, I went to Pierce and Northridge and then... I'm terrible at dates. I don't remember what date I was at Pierce, probably like in seventy-six or something I was at Pierce and then seventy-seven or eight I went to Northridge just for a short time for some classes, then I was at Cal-Tech, and M.I.T. after that.


Later... [transcript]

QUESTION: ...What was the year of your graduation from M.I.T., and did you get a Ph.D.?
LAZAR: No, it was a Masters degree. The year. What was the year of graduation? Probably eighty two...


Later... [transcript]

QUESTION: Could you reveal some of your professors at M.I.T. and Cal-Tech?
LAZAR: Yeah, if you want. I don't have a list of them here. Dr. Duxler I think was one of them. And Hohsfield was another.

QUESTION: Hohsfield?

LAZAR: Hohsfield. H-O-H-S-F-I-E-L-D, or something along those lines.

QUESTION: Would he remember you?

LAZAR: Oh, yeah. Hohsfield I know will.

QUESTION: These are at M.I.T. or Cal-Tech?

LAZAR: Hohsfield was at M.I.T. Duxler was at Cal-Tech.


What follows is an attempt to verify the MIT claims using local directories housed at the MIT Institute Archives and national directories kept at other libraries.

Previous Inquiries
Both Stanton Friedman and George Knapp say they have contacted MIT by phone and have been told that MIT has no record of Robert Lazar. I have not repeated this inquiry myself. I assume that such inquiries are handled by computer and that computer records can be easily altered or deleted. Printed records, however, are much more difficult to obscure.

MIT Institute Archives
The following is based on examination of various printed directories housed at the MIT Institute Archives. This library is located on the MIT campus in Cambridge, Mass., Room 14N-118, and is open to anyone claiming to be a researcher. Annual student directories, faculty/staff phone directories, commencement lists and course catalogs dating back to the early days of MIT are available in open bookshelves in the main reading room. No volumes appeared to be missing, and none showed any obvious signs of tampering.
Could these directories have been falsified? It is conceivable that a government intelligence agency could re-create a modified document that looked just as old and authentic as the original, but any such action could create much larger problems. Most of these documents were originally produced in large quantities, and there are likely to be duplicate copies scattered around the country in unpredictable places. Tampering with one copy runs the risk of detection if any other copy of the document happens to turn up. While deliberate deception may be possible, this would imply a very complex and costly operation to neutralize all the potential inconsistencies. It may be possible to eliminate all printed records for a student, but it seems unlikely you could eliminate his professors.

National faculty directories were also consulted at the MIT Humanities Library and the Tufts University Wessell Library. Falsification of the these directories seems nearly impossible, since there are thousands of copies of these publications available at libraries around the country.


Lazar's MIT Credentials
There is no "Lazar, Robert S." listed in any MIT student directory between 1978 and 1990.
These soft bound books are published every academic year and given to all students and all academic departments. Certainly, many copies must still exist in alumni attics around the country. MIT student directories are printed on low quality newsprint, which turns brown with age. It would be difficult to replace individual pages in these directories without an obvious color difference.

In the copies of the student directory at the MIT Archives, there was no visible indication of tampering on any of the pages where Lazar ought to appear. The 1981-82 student directory was also carefully searched for obvious misspellings of Lazar--"Lezar," "Lazear," etc.--with no match found. The only student listed with the same last name in the 1981-82 directory was "Lazar, Howard S." He appears in four student directories beginning 1978-79, graduating in 1982 in Chemistry. Howard Lazar's picture also appears in the 1981 and 1982 undergraduate yearbooks: He is definitely not Robert Lazar.

There is no "Lazar, Robert S" listed in any MIT faculty/staff telephone directory between 1978 and 1990.

These annual phone directories were consulted on the assumption that, as a graduate or post graduate student, Lazar might be listed as a research assistant instead of as a student. The closest entries are several people by the name of "Lazarus," none of which is appropriate.

No "Lazar, Robert S" has been found in the MIT Degree List between 1979 and 1990.

These books are published twice a year for each commencement. They list each degree recipient alphabetically and by department. The book apparently includes all degrees issued by MIT, not just undergraduate. The closest match found in the alphabetical list was "Lazar, S. R." who was shown in the department list as "Steven Roy Lazar," graduating with a BS degree in Biology on June 1, 1981.

"Lazar, Robert S" is not listed in the 1989 MIT Alumni/ae Register.

This big hard cover book is published only occasionally. Since the current one has a copyright date of 1989, it was probably assembled in late 1988. It is conceivable that if Lazar's computer records were deleted in 1988, they also would also not show up in this book. There are several people in this book with the names Lazar--as well as Lazear, Lazarus, etc.--but none are a good match.


Professor Hohsfield
There is no listing for "Hohsfield" in the current 1992-93 faculty/staff telephone directory.
Obvious misspellings were also checked for--"Hostfield," "Hohlfeld," "Ostfield," etc.--with no match. (This directory was consulted not at the MIT Archives but at another randomly chosen site on campus.)

There is no listing for "Hohsfield" in annual MIT faculty/staff telephone directories, 1980 to 1987.

Obvious misspellings were also checked for. The closest match was a "Hohlfeld, Robert G." listed as a Research Associate in Earth and Planetary Sciences in 1981-82 and 1982-83. The home telephone number listed for this person is no longer valid, and there is no listing for him after 1982-83.

In the annual MIT course catalogs, 1980 to 1990, there is no "Hohsfield," or name resembling it, listed as a professor for a physics course or in the Physics Department faculty lists.

"Hohsfield" is not listed in the 1993 National Faculty Directory

This is a comprehensive listing of all college and university faculty members in the U.S., published by Gale Research. There is also no Hostfield, Hosfield or Hohlfeld

"Hohsfield" is not listed in American Men & Women of Science.

The name is not listed in all editions examined: 1976, 1979, 1982, 1986 and 1992-93. However, this absence may not be significant, since only a nominated subset of scientists and faculty members appear in this book.

"Hohsfield" is not listed in the 1988 Faculty Directory of Higher Education.


Professor Duxler
"Duxler" is listed in the 1993 National Faculty Directory.
There is only one entry for Duxler. The entry is, "Duxler, William. Dir. of Computing, Los Angeles Pierce College, 6201 Winnetka Ave., Woodland Hills CA 91371." Pierce College is one of the schools that Lazar says he attended, and it is the only one that has been publicly verified. (Stanton Friedman has confirmed that Lazar took classes there.) Unfortunately, Lazar said Duxler was at Cal-Tech.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lazar M.I.T. Investigation Follow-Up
Glenn Campbell August 1993

Journalistic Ethics
Since the above data could be seen as potentially damaging to Mr. Lazar, reasonable attempts were made to obtain his response. In keeping with accepted journalistic ethics, it was important that Lazar be made aware of the evidence and be given a chance to comment on it. It would be preferable that Lazar respond at length, but a "no comment" would also be sufficient to fulfill the requirements of ethics.
Unfortunately, Lazar is not easy to contact. His phone is unlisted and his address is not common knowledge. Lazar has made it clear that he does not like to deal with reporters or UFO enthusiasts, and most such inquiries appear to be handled by his friend, real estate appraiser Gene Huff.


Attempts
Immediately upon completion of the conference transcript and the MIT investigation report (both above), this reporter sent copies of both to Lazar at Gene Huff's address. There was no response for one month until Gene Huff wrote back advising this reporter to cease publication of the transcript.

We have a lot of commitments for movie, video, and literature projects and we've made certain agreements regarding marketing which you are unaware of. Your marketing plans conflict with ours. Please make this easy and take the transcript off your list of available items.

No mention was made of the MIT document.
This reporter wrote back, explaining his reasons for publishing the transcript and drawing attention to the MIT issue. This letter was sent both to Huff and to Lazar at his "unpublished" address. An excerpt:


Among the most interesting passages in the transcript are when people in the audience ask Bob about his educational credentials. Admitting that his memory for such things is poor, Bob replies with some dates and the names of two of his professors, one at MIT and one at CalTech. Since I happen to live near MIT and am familiar with the campus, I took it upon myself to look up the MIT professor and see if he remembered Bob. Unfortunately, upon arrival on campus, I could find no staff member of that name anywhere, and several hours spent in the Institute Archives seemed to indicate that no professor of that name had worked at MIT for at least the past 20 years. I also looked up Bob Lazar, as others had done before me, and found no listing in any official printed directory since the 70s. The latter discovery was not particularly distressing to me, because I recognize that government agencies have the technical capability to alter documents and delete computer records. The disappearance of a professor, however, would seem difficult to pull off, and I wondered if Bob had been mistaken on the name.
I wrote down all my MIT findings in a three-page document which I sent to Bob in the same envelope as the transcript. I expected a comment of some kind. Perhaps, he would correct the spelling of the professor's name, admit he was mistaken about the school or give me some other hint as to why I could not find the professor at MIT. Instead, what I got, a month later, was a nasty letter, not from Bob but from his spokesman, telling me to cease publication of the transcript and implying nasty repercussions if I didn't.

I cannot overemphasize how bad this looks. It is the liars who get evasive and belligerent and threaten to sue on unrelated grounds when you press them on a sensitive point. The people telling the truth aren't supposed to behave that way. Personally, I am not the sort who jumps to conclusions. I accept the possibility that a student's records could be deleted at a major university, especially one that has a lot of government contracts. I also find it plausible that a former student could be mistaken in remembering the names of his old professors; I myself cannot remember the names of mine. My credulity is strained, however, when the student's records don't exist, a professor does not exist and I get a belligerent response from the student's spokesman when I report these facts. I do not jump to conclusions. I try to let the data speak for itself, but as the data stands now, it is tempting to declare that Bob Lazar never obtained any degree from MIT.

To me, the issues of whether Bob went to MIT and whether he worked with alien craft are separate. Logically, I know that any answer to one question does not imply a conclusion to the other. Still, most people do not make such fine distinctions, and the MIT question, as long as it remains unresolved, is going to be a reoccurring problem for Bob. Matters are further complicated when Bob's de facto spokesman attempts to suppress a transcript which appears to contain some incriminating evidence in this regard. This conveys the appearance of a cover-up and virtually guarantees that this particular issue, relatively minor by itself, will always dominate any discussion of Bob Lazar in the future.

In my opinion, the MIT problem has to be dealt with directly. Belligerence and claims that the government is now eliminating MIT professors will not wash. People may not have the right to probe into Bob's private life, but degrees earned at a major educational institution are not private information. Proving a degree at MIT would help Bob's credibility 100%. Admitting no degree at MIT would certainly hurt, unless there was a good explanation, but the damage would not be as bad as leaving the question unanswered and letting someone else prove the fact.

I'm willing to go back to MIT if there is a hope of digging up better information. There are certainly countless student directories in private hands, and if Bob did go to MIT, they would provide a smoking gun. I am not interested in a wild goose chase, however, and unless there is some new input of information, my three-page document stands on its own.


Huff's reply was lengthy but shed no further light on the MIT question. The only passages mentioning MIT are as follows. (The names of third parties have been removed.)

...I know what you're thinking, it's our fault for not responding within your unstated time frame. You must remember, you are one of tens if not hundreds of people throughout the world who appeal to Bob for one reason or another. Since he never responds, it's literally my burden to respond to the worthy with my time and my expense. You see you're not the only martyr. This story has been around since 1989 for the public and you're not the first nor even the hundredth to hit us up for information or clarification, etc. To imply that Lazar's de facto spokesman is trying to suppress the transcript to hide something is quite insulting. I'm trying to stop the inadvertent spread of disinformation. You whine on and on about MIT. I never even mentioned it so you presumed I was trying to hide something. I am involved in trying to substantiate Bob's credentials from another direction. There are many people digging into the info on him from Los Alamos. After all if he worked there, they must have known his credentials when they hired him right? Anyway, some researchers just recently found out that Bob worked on beam weapons at Los Alamos and sent it to S------ F-------. Believe it or not these guys are anti-Lazar and inadvertently confirmed something that F------- didn't want to hear. He's been graciously praying that Bob is a fraud for some time, yet he remains friendly. I hope something comes of this "back engineering" of his credentials. Then people can feel comfortable and address the more important issues. So don't consider our lack of interest in your MIT search to be evasive. Others before you have done the same thing with no luck, and G----- K---- and I agree that the Los Alamos employment records are the key. Therefore we won't spend our time and energy going down that same dead end. We've been there.
I hope I've made clear that my opposition to the transcript was a sincere effort to keep the story straight, not to suppress anything. I used the term "my" instead of "our" because Bob wouldn't waste the time to respond to you and I don't want to hear more whining about me using "we". MIT is a dead end. Los Alamos is the key. I hope you can clearly see how you've used the transitive property of equality to came to your conclusions, except your variable about MIT was something you made up in your head and not based on anything I said. And correlating info on what I didn't say is how ufology got in it's present state. Too bad you've caused an adversarial situation, it may have been fun. If you have any remedies to the situation, please let me know. By the way I didn't worry about punctuation, etc. in this letter because your correspondence is always so perfect, I thought this would aggravate you. Just like answering these god damn letters aggravates me.


Regarding whether or not Lazar is aware of Huff's correspondence, Huff writes...

You seemed like someone with which I could communicate and educate so you could help us move forward but after talking with Bob this morning, I don't think that's possible. Bob and I thought it humorous that you included a copy of my letter in your letter just to make sure that Bob knew what the letter I sent you had said. He knew. He always knows.

Conclusion
From Huff's correspondence above, it can reasonably be inferred that Lazar's response to the MIT data is a deliberate "No Comment." Lazar himself prompted my pursuit by offering the name "Hohsfield" at the conference. He even spelled it out, presumably inviting others to check. I followed this lead by visiting MIT and trying to locate that professor. I assembled all the relevant data I could find from open MIT sources, with "negative" data predominating. I submitted the data to Mr. Lazar for his comment and made reasonable attempts to obtain a response. Although Lazar himself said nothing, his acting spokesman gave me an acknowledgment and a reply: "MIT is a dead end." According to the rules of fair journalism, I am now free to publish my findings.
There are no certainties in this world: No matter how long you investigate, new information is bound to come along to disrupt your assumptions. No investigation is ever really "complete"; the best we can do is collect data in one area until we reach a natural stopping point. This document does not "prove" anything about Lazar's education at MIT; instead, it can only lead us to a "working assumption." This is the best analysis we can come up with given our current imperfect knowledge. It could someday be disproven, but until it is, this assumption is what we must base our future actions upon.

Judging from the data collected here, it is a reasonable working assumption that Bob Lazar never earned any degree from MIT, in spite of his claims that he did. The notion that the government has somehow suppressed his academic records seems less and less plausible when all the implications are considered. Unlike Los Alamos Laboratories, where information is tightly controlled, M.I.T. is an open institution. Any student going there would make hundreds of indelible impressions--on the memories of others, in printed directories and in the files of dozens of disparate agencies. It wouldn't take much clandestine effort to remove a student's files from the registrar's office, but the entire budget of the CIA would seem insufficient to wipe out every trace of his existence. My own investigation was only superficial, and there are certainly many other potential documentation sources that could be pursued, but the effort does not seem worthwhile when the subject himself gives out false information.

I caution the reader against using this data to pass judgment on any of Lazar's other claims. There are a lot of reasons people can lie. They can do it to enhance their public prestige or promote a larger fraud, but there can also be more complex and less dishonorable reasons for lying, and these are not always obvious until explained. Following the example set by Lazar himself in his interviews, to be a serious researcher is to stay close to the data and not issue any speculations beyond what the data directly implies. To find the answer to anything, you don't need to speculate. What you must do, instead, is organize the information that is accessible, neutralize peripheral distractions and keep looking at the problem from different angles. Sooner or later, the data will fall into a natural structure, and the story will tell itself.


Addendum
In the original MIT Investigation document, I failed to include one additional relevant quote from the May 1 conference. This would eliminate one possible explanation for Lazar's absence in MIT directories. [transcript]

QUESTION: I hope you won't be offended by this question. I have to ask it to verify you're bona fide. Have you ever gone by any other name?
LAZAR: Have I ever gone by anything other name? No.

Q: You've been Bob Lazar from birth.

L: As far as I know.


Thank You.
If you have any additional information, you may want to post it objectively in your first post.Remember even FOX Mulder respected Scully's opinions and took them seriously, so as to speak. ;)

Rick
03-04-05, 11:15 PM
But i have a second opinion on this matter : Starman get in touch with me.

SkinWalker
03-04-05, 11:46 PM
Interesting read. I have to agree with the statement of the author (Glen Campbell?) that Lazar's deception of his education do not necessarily mean he didn't work at Los Alamos or even Site 4/A-51. But it doesn't look good, eh? If he did work at either of these places, it obviously wouldn't have been in a capacity that would have required a graduate degree from MIT.

Starman
03-05-05, 12:16 AM
Interesting read. I have to agree with the statement of the author (Glen Campbell?) that Lazar's deception of his education do not necessarily mean he didn't work at Los Alamos or even Site 4/A-51. But it doesn't look good, eh? If he did work at either of these places, it obviously wouldn't have been in a capacity that would have required a graduate degree from MIT.

I agree Bob Lazar did probably lie about his education. How many people lie about their education? Allot of them in my opinion.

To be fair and politically correct I would say that there is plenty of things that work against Bob Lazar. There is also plenty of things that work in his favor.

I would rely more on body language and lie detector tests to determine if the truth is being told. Nothing else really matters.

SkinWalker
03-05-05, 12:32 AM
Except that when you deal with people who pathologically lie, neither body language nor mechanical detection is reliable. Polygraph isn't acceptable in most (if not all) courts of law as evidence for that very reason.

(Q)
03-05-05, 12:44 PM
There is also plenty of things that work in his favor.

Name one.

Avatar
03-05-05, 12:55 PM
Except that when you deal with people who pathologically lie, neither body language or mechanical dection is reliable. Polygraph isn't acceptable in most (if not all) courts of law as evidence for that very reason.
All you have to do is believe that what you say is true. I can tell you that it isn't really that hard, but then.. I'm a law student. :D

Starman
03-05-05, 02:07 PM
There is also plenty of things that work in his favor.

Name one.

W2's from his employment at Los Alamos, and EG&G.

SkinWalker
03-06-05, 01:24 AM
Three things about Lazar's alleged W2:

1) He might very well have been employed at a government facility. Lots of people are. The need janitors, parkinglot attendents, copy machine repairmen.

2) If this is supposed to be his W2 (http://www.swa-home.de/W2.jpg), the first thing that leaps to my attention is the moniker "Department of Naval Intelligence." As far as I know, and I don't think I'm wrong, Naval Intelligence is an Office within the Department of the Navy. ONI is not a department unto itself.

3) All Lazar would have needed is a blank W2 and a typewriter. Anyone willing to go to the lengths of inventing a fake education is surely willing to invent such a simple document to support the claim. I can't believe anyone would really accept such a claim unless they were attempting to justify their own belief systems to themselves.

But, please take note of my earnings here at SciForums :)
http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3969&stc=1

Starman
03-07-05, 09:53 AM
Three things about Lazar's alleged W2:


Any evdience can be manufactured.

Do you have any evidence that Bob Lazars W2's are not genuine?

I ask again have you read the Gene Huff synopsis?

http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/synopsis.htm

SkinWalker
03-07-05, 11:38 AM
Yes, I did read it and wasn't impressed. I've no reason to want to consider Lazar to be credible and every reason to believe him incredible (Glen Campbell's and Stanton Friedman's individual assessments and investigations, for instance, as well as Lazar's inability to appropriately answer questions about his past). Moreover, Lazar wants others to accept his word not only when he's failed to keep it in other, related, instances, but also in light of the very fantastic and incredible claims that he makes.

I find that acceptance a fool's errand, particularly when his desire to deceive has been pathological with regard to his education. Such people rarely limit this sort of pathology to one facet of their life.

Bob's a liar and good at sucking in those that consider them his "friends." Huff was also unable to effectively answer Campbell's questions with regard to Lazar's education.

It'll take a lot more than the word of an undereducated physics/UFO enthusiast and a spurious W2 form to convince me that he has first-hand knowledge of an alien spacecraft.

Squeak22
03-07-05, 01:38 PM
But, please take note of my earnings here at SciForums :)
http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3969&stc=1

Skin, you grossly underpaid your taxes, that's a hell of a big check to send to uncle sam. :p

SkinWalker
03-07-05, 01:47 PM
The guy from Survivor helped me file :cool:

phlogistician
03-08-05, 07:15 AM
Bob 'Rocket Car' Lazar a fraud? A media hungry ex brothel owner not to be trusted? What do we think, ... hmmmmmm.

BTW, Lazar guessing the properties of an element? I don't think so, I think his work was done for him by the Russian genius, Mendeleev, who is responsible for the modern periodic table arrangement, by grouping elements by properties, and who predicted the existence of various as yet undiscovered elements.

Squeak22
03-08-05, 11:00 AM
That was Skin's point. This is all laid out for anyone to do, based on stuff that's taught in advanced high school chemistry courses.

Starman
03-11-05, 08:59 AM
That was Skin's point. This is all laid out for anyone to do, based on stuff that's taught in advanced high school chemistry courses.

When was the existence of Area S4 taught in school? I missed that one.

He never owned a brothel he associated with the Girls at a brothel and did a security set up with cameras for them. He is a single Guy looking for a good time. If any of you would not do the same if invited, then you might question your own manhood.

How about what he knows about Gravity. Not event main stream science knows what he explains in his video. Explain that.

phlogistician
03-11-05, 09:16 AM
He never owned a brothel he associated with the Girls at a brothel and did a security set up with cameras for them. He is a single Guy looking for a good time. If any of you would not do the same if invited, then you might question your own manhood.

I never needed to hang out with hookers to have a good time. As far as I heard the string of events, Lazaar and his wife were both investors in said brothel.

Do you really think his Honda Civic had a working jet engine in it, btw? ;-)

Starman
03-11-05, 09:38 AM
I never needed to hang out with hookers to have a good time. As far as I heard the string of events, Lazaar and his wife were both investors in said brothel.

Do you really think his Honda Civic had a working jet engine in it, btw? ;-)

I do not know if the second one he built actually worked, However I do know that the first one he built did.

It was fuelled by Natural Gas this was a better fuel than Jet A because is was already compressed and did not require the compression apparatus in standard jet engines for atomization. This would pollute less than Jet A also.

Avatar
03-11-05, 09:40 AM
*gasps* then this man for surely has had alien help
http://www.moller.com/skycar/

(Q)
03-11-05, 10:02 AM
Not event main stream science knows what he explains in his video. Explain that.

That's an easy one to explain - Lazar simply has no idea what he's talking about.

Silas
03-11-05, 12:13 PM
Why does that skycar thing look like a Star Wars pod racer.....?

SkinWalker
03-11-05, 12:32 PM
I saw that and several other concept aircraft in Popular Science while sitting at the barber shop the other day. The one that was fascinating was the Yugoslavian guy with the big fan sitting under a composite aircraft powered with a Mazda turbo-charged rotary engine.

<img src="http://i.timeinc.net/popsci/images/aviation/avi0105attila_485x385.jpg">
<img src="http://www.amvaircraft.com/51-400.jpg">

Starman
03-14-05, 07:30 AM
Not event main stream science knows what he explains in his video. Explain that.

That's an easy one to explain - Lazar simply has no idea what he's talking about.

Have you seen the Lazar Tape?

Starman
03-14-05, 07:31 AM
*gasps* then this man for surely has had alien help
http://www.moller.com/skycar/

Lazar never made any claims of having Alien help. :)