• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Bob Lazar's Drawing of Area 51 S-4 Hangers


The Starman

Paranormal Maven
In a 2015 interview with George Knapp, Bob Lazar makes a drawing of the S-4 facility doors.

The doors Bob Lazar described and drew were not in the middle of the hangar wall, they were up in the far corner in a straight line.


Is it even possible to see through that many doors in this described angle (check the photo and video as well) and observe what it is inside, in every different hangar bay ?

I think it is impossible. No human eye can see straight through those small doors and clearly see what is inside each hangar (there were 9 hangars). Even if he saw the edge of the first object, all others should be in parallelly and not visible.


Transcript (in video watch from 12:56 until 14:32)

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=807&v=RL05VXrQTkk

View attachment 33674



    • Interviewer - When you are inside can you see all the hangar doors, all the nine of them or whatever it is that from outside ?
    • B.L. - What do you mean ?
    • Interviewer - If you are inside looking at in one hangar, can you see all the way down see all of them see more or is they're seperated ?
    • B.L. - There is inside each hangar bay. there is...you know if there is a big doot that goes to outside inside of the sides...i guess i could use the whiteboard... (looks at it)....there is..h what a hell (goes to the board)
Bob Lazar scribbles on the board and at the same time explains, what he is drawing (experienced in Area-51)




    • B.L. - Ok this is going to be a tough one...okay so...
    • B.L. - Is that making any sense ? (jokes) there is a... the doors here ...where this is.... you know papoose like the main doors here roll up, however inside there are regular doors and on one ocasion these doors were all open and when i came in into the ...came in though here first...well i think the first time they showed me... well there is the craft in there.
df6598b3433cfcb073b030895cceaf63.jpg






    • B.L. - These doors were yeah...these doors were all open and you can see that there were different craft in each so those are the doors i'm talking about.


      5cd810de50ad1a73f283087011dd7431.jpg

      A view through some aligned doors. (special thanks to Mick West)
 
Last edited:
Agree Professor Stanton Friedman is the real deal. Remember , thousands of people are working all over the World in all sorts of programs for academia and private companies. Also on Mr Lazar video with excellent new reporter Mr Knapp the descriptive situation awareness in detail and the "22 others" who have not come forward yet and would any be in the current UFO disclosure movement?
 
Last edited:
Bob Lazar has two master degrees. Thing is, you can not prove that.

  • A Bachelors Degree in Physics and Electronic Technology from Pacifica University in 1978.
  • A Masters Degree in Physics from MIT (Thesis: Magnetohydrodynamics) in 1982.
  • A Masters Degree in either Electronics or Electronic Technology from CalTech in 1985.
It is known, that Bol Lazar has a small busisness United Nuclear , Scientific Equipment & Supplies. I wonder if patent is enough to work with this equipment or a certain education is also needed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was wrong (my imagination included). It is possible to see other objects, even though they are placed in parallel.

di-LDS50T.jpg


Still his story has inconsistency. In this 2015 inerview, he was saying "the main doors here roll up, however inside there are "regular doors" and on one ocasion these doors were all open and when i came in into the ..." Now as i see in 2012 picture, it's clearly written "sliding doors". Also, he draw them in different shapes.

di-YKGDX4.jpg


di-RJGWJ1.jpg

Picture, S4 (2012)
 
Last edited:
Bob Lazar has two master degrees. Thing is, you can not prove that ...
The thing is, we have a scientist ( Friedman ) who we know has legit credentials who doesn't think Lazar's science adds up. Here's a bit on the "island of stability". They have already determined 115, 116, 117, and 118 are all unstable. Apart from that, his logic during his description on the workings of the gravity projector isn't coherent. If it works as he says it does, when the unit is turned on, the attractive force should seem to come from some distance away from the projector so as to draw things closer to it. But there should be no repulsive force emitted by the unit itself. There's a distinct difference between being pushed away and being pulled away.

The same sort of thing would apply to lifting the craft. Rather than pointing the projectors down to push away from the Earth, they should be projecting a divot in spacetime above the craft drawing the craft upward toward it. It's little things like these that you don't need a science degree to tell are inconsistent. Also, simply telling the same story over and over again is no guarantee that they're being truthful: Who Can't Keep their Stories Straight: A Cue to Deception?

On a recent Paracast episode, @Decker made the point that according to George Knapp, Lazar passed a trivia test that only people who had actually worked at the Area 51 facility should know. This is interesting, but if Knapp could find that stuff out, so could Lazar, especially if he did actually manage to land a job at Los Alamos, because then he'd be rubbing elbows with others who might have had connections or were also interviewed by Knapp, and who could have told Lazar what to expect from an interview with him. Bottom line: We don't know Lazar's answers are true because we don't have the evidence. It's pure hearsay and the best con-artists are the most believable ones.

Tunnel at Los Alamos

 
Last edited:
The thing is, we have a scientist ( Friedman ) who we know has legit credentials who doesn't think Lazar's science adds up. Here's a bit on the "island of stability". They have already determined 115, 116, 117, and 118 are all unstable. Apart from that, his logic during his description on the workings of the gravity projector isn't coherent. If it works as he says it does, when the unit is turned on, the attractive force should seem to come from some distance away from the projector so as to draw things closer to it. But there should be no repulsive force emitted by the unit itself. There's a distinct difference between being pushed away and being pulled away.

The same sort of thing would apply to lifting the craft. Rather than pointing the projectors down to push away from the Earth, they should be projecting a divot in spacetime above the craft drawing the craft upward toward it. It's little things like these that you don't need a science degree to tell are inconsistent. Also, simply telling the same story over and over again is no guarantee that they're being truthful: Who Can't Keep their Stories Straight: A Cue to Deception?

On a recent Paracast episode, @Decker made the point that according to George Knapp, Lazar passed a trivia test that only people who had actually worked at the Area 51 facility should know. This is interesting, but if Knapp could find that stuff out, so could Lazar, especially if he did actually manage to land a job at Los Alamos, because then he'd be rubbing elbows with others who might have had connections or were also interviewed by Knapp, and who could have told Lazar what to expect from an interview with him. Bottom line: We don't know Lazar's answers are true because we don't have the evidence. It's pure hearsay and the best con-artists are the most believable ones.
In a first place, there is no element 115 , as Bob Lazar describes (at least in science knowledge). Second of all Friedman has nuclear science degree, but that does not mean he is capable to qualify in other branches of science.

I've listened to Dr.Krangle interview. What do we know about him? is he a legit Dr ? did he really worked in Los Alamos ?
 
Last edited:
In a first place, there is no element 115 , as Bob Lazar describes (at least in science knowledge). Second of all Friedman has nuclear science degree, but that does not mean he is capable to qualify in other branches of science. I've listened to Dr.Krangle interview. What do we know about him? is he a legit Dr ? did he really worked in Los Alamos ?
I don't know anything more about Krangle than what's in the interview. On the issue of credentials, my view is that because UFO propulsion appears to work on some very outside the box principles, that thinking the only people qualified to figure it out are people who have been trained with inside the box thinking. The perfect illustration is the story that because they couldn't figure out the propulsion unit, they strapped a couple of jet motors to one, which not surprisingly didn't work. Whatever it is, it's beyond rocket science. Academic credentials are about as relevant as those of a witch doctor in neuroscience lab. Any decent ufologist probably knows more about what they're working on than someone with a degree and nothing else.
 
I don't know anything more about Krangle than what's in the interview. On the issue of credentials, my view is that because UFO propulsion appears to work on some very outside the box principles, that thinking the only people qualified to figure it out are people who have been trained with inside the box thinking. The perfect illustration is the story that because they couldn't figure out the propulsion unit, they strapped a couple of jet motors to one, which not surprisingly didn't work. Whatever it is, it's beyond rocket science. Academic credentials are about as relevant as those of a witch doctor in neuroscience lab. Any decent ufologist probably knows more about what they're working on than someone with a degree and nothing else.
This is a faith power, not evidence - Wishful thinking - Wikipedia
 
That can work both ways. "While acknowledging that forensic science is often invaluable in successfully prosecuting the guilty and exonerating the innocent, the Committee also found that imprecise or exaggerated expert testimony has contributed to the admission of erroneous or misleading evidence." Misplaced Faith In Expert Witnesses?
The sample does not fit into the frame. Jumping from the topic is just absurd.
 
The sample does not fit into the frame. Jumping from the topic is just absurd.
Maybe we're both looking at the topic differently. My comment was in the context of having faith in credentials when those credentials may be entirely irrelevant to the problem, while at the same time ignoring those with direct experience in the field. The principle can be applied to any subject. It speaks to the problem of academic elitism at the expense of progress.
 
Last edited:
Maybe we're both looking at the topic differently. My comment was in the context of having faith in credentials when those credentials may be entirely irrelevant to the problem, while at the same time ignoring those with direct experience in the field. The principle can be applied to any subject. It speaks to the problem of academic elitism at the expense of progress.
I missunderstood your point. I agree on this.
 
Interesting above debate about the topic of academia and with current commotion ongiong -debates the crediblity of third of academic papers being peer reviewed! (so the missing qualifications of the eyewitness can't be ignored). Going on discussion years ago with academics who feared using the telephones and did the old fashion pencil communication its not out of the books of possiblities Mr Lazar has some kept classified not for mainstream searching.
 
(so the missing qualifications of the eyewitness can't be ignored). Going on discussion years ago with academics who feared using the telephones and did the old fashion pencil communication its not out of the books of possiblities Mr Lazar has some kept classified not for mainstream searching.
From where, are you pulling this out ?

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


S-4 Papoose Lake Facility DEBUNKED! Nothing there!


 
Last edited:
I'm not a believer in Lazar's claims either, but Jeremy's counterpoint is rather weak, and certainly doesn't "prove" to my satisfaction that Lazar is lying any more than Lazar's claims prove he's not. He is involved with some pretty interesting stuff of his own though: Sciencey Stuff
He did show the place where Bob Lazar allegedly have worked ?

Rather keep a open mind on the reporter Mr Knapp and Mr Lazar as said before not all the information of there meetings and his connections have come to ligh.
I don't see why anyone should be "open minded" for Bob Lazar's story. It has many flaws.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top