• SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+! For a low subscription fee, you will receive access to an ad-free version of The Paracast, the exclusive After The Paracast podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, plus show transcripts, the new Paracast+ Video Channel, Classic Episodes and Special Features categories! We now offer lifetime memberships! You can subscribe via this direct link:
    https://www.theparacast.com/plus/

    The Official Paracast Store is back! Check out our latest lineup of customized stuff at: The Official Paracast Store!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Bob Lazar Hypothesis


Greers Meeting Planner

Paranormal Adept
I think I have the best Bob Lazar theory yet and need to share it, as its making a lot of sense to me.

Here goes....

My hypothesis is that the US military has developed a propulsion system that is paradigm changing in the sense that it does not rely on the usual chemical reactions/newtons third law. Or to put it simply, that Bob is telling the truth about the features of the propulsion device he came into contact with.

Once the military had developed this technology, they would want to deploy it and make it operational, however a risk exists with making this decision, if the aircraft was to fail (or be brought down) in enemy territory, the enemy could get their hands on the new technology and the paradigm changing advantage lost.

Before they deploy the technology they conduct a risk assessment to see if this technology ended up in the hands of engineers of a foreign government, how quickly would they be able to understand it and back engineer, it if at all. How long would it be until the advantage gained had been lost and is it worth deploying or holding back for a future conflict to gain tactical advantage .... etc

How could you do this risk assessment? You got get some well qualified engineering people in from your own country and show the device to them and see if they can make sense of it and back engineer it. This technology is unacknowledged special access etc so you cannot tell the people involved with the study its real origin and development history, so you concoct a cover story of a crashed alien device that you just cant understand. You fashion a small ufo type craft and put some small seats in it to make the cover story credible, and if the story ever got out it would be this fantastical tail of alien crash landings and not one of genuine military breakthrough technology that the government is keeping to themselves.

This hypothesis on Bob would make sense of some of the key arguments on both sides of the 'Is Bob a fake or not?' argument because Bob would be telling something he believed was the truth. For example, he passed the lie detector test, which he would if he genuinely thought that was what he was working on was alien. He may have also known the test flight program and it explains why they may be able to test fly it or understand it all (as it was never alien in the first place). It explains element 115, as it could have been part of the military technology breakthrough.

Considering all of the available evidence on the Lazar case, that is the best theory I can think of that best describes what is most likely to have happened and there are no aliens required. Just good old compartmentalized security, counter intelligence tactics and breakthrough military technology. The exciting part is that it would mean the technology is real.
 

Greers Meeting Planner

Paranormal Adept
So... in summary Bob was just part of a risk assessment on deploying the US governments paradigm changing military technology and its fantastical cover story. Simple, makes sense...

Over to you lot to bust my theory
 

Paco

Paranormal Novice
Of course, you know for a fact that everything else is B.S. ..... Show your FACTUAL evidence that everything is B.S., not just claim it is with no evidence --> but you can't & you won't .... You will reply (if you reply) with B.S. of your own .... Let's test my prediction
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
Of course, you know for a fact that everything else is B.S. ..... Show your FACTUAL evidence that everything is B.S., not just claim it is with no evidence --> but you can't & you won't .... You will reply (if you reply) with B.S. of your own .... Let's test my prediction
How "FACTUAL" can we really get with anything? We can't even prove to someone else that we're self aware. We can't prove that existence isn't a simulation. Therefore maybe nothing is "FACTUAL" other than pure logic. All we can do is our best to come up with what seems the most reasonable.

Personally I tend to think that Lazar actually had most of the experiences more or less the way he's describes them, but that his assumptions about those experiences may not correspond with what they actually were. In other words I think it's more reasonable for the more fantastical aspects of his story to have been staged as part of some psi-ops plan to leak disinformation, than it is for them to have been actual scientifically valid projects involving alien or alien-like technology.

This is similar to the theory @Greers Meeting Planner proposes, but without any actual alien or alien-like technology. That being said, it's only a matter of time before someone does figure that technology out ( if they haven't already ), so at least GMP's theory is plausible, even if it's not necessarily "the best". But then again the word "best" is often very subjective. What do we really mean by that?
 
Last edited:

Paco

Paranormal Novice
I hear what you're saying & it has merit, but I have done quite a bit of scientific research (that's my background) into the Lazar claims & it has legs; I do not say this lightly. I have deeply & thoroughly investigated the limited 'numbers' he's stated over the years & every single one has checked-out scientifically. What is missing, what is the key, is a sample of Element 115 (Moscovium). In the absence of this Physical evidence, nothing can be confirmed beyond reasonable doubt. What annoys me is that people summarily dismiss his claims as B.S. without supplying 'why' they're B.S. This is a ridiculous approach & does not help anyone interested in such things; it's just noise by genetically regressive bacteria.

I disagree with your view, but I respect it, it may indeed be correct. At least you have the common sense & public respect to provide the logic for your conclusions.

Download this file, it may change your mind (?): QE 1.0.xlsx
 

Deckland

Skilled Investigator
Of course, you know for a fact that everything else is B.S. ..... Show your FACTUAL evidence that everything is B.S., not just claim it is with no evidence --> but you can't & you won't .... You will reply (if you reply) with B.S. of your own .... Let's test my prediction
I don't need to present evidence because I'm not making extraordinary claims. It's not my job to prove Bob Lazar DIDN'T work at Area 51. It's Bob Lazar's job to prove HE DID. That's how evidence works.
  • Claims he has a degree from MIT but MIT has no record of him being enrolled, he can't name a single student he attended with, he has no paper copy of his transcript or diploma, and the only professor whose name he can remember says he was never teaching at MIT during the years claimed.
  • Claims he has a sample of "Element 115" but can't actually produce it.
etc. etc. Bob Lazar is a proven liar. It's extraordinary people still put any faith at all in him. There's a sucker born every minute, I guess.
 
Last edited:

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
I hear what you're saying & it has merit, but I have done quite a bit of scientific research (that's my background) into the Lazar claims & it has legs; I do not say this lightly. I have deeply & thoroughly investigated the limited 'numbers' he's stated over the years & every single one has checked-out scientifically. What is missing, what is the key, is a sample of Element 115 (Moscovium). In the absence of this Physical evidence, nothing can be confirmed beyond reasonable doubt. What annoys me is that people summarily dismiss his claims as B.S. without supplying 'why' they're B.S. This is a ridiculous approach & does not help anyone interested in such things; it's just noise by genetically regressive bacteria.

I disagree with your view, but I respect it, it may indeed be correct. At least you have the common sense & public respect to provide the logic for your conclusions.

Download this file, it may change your mind (?): QE 1.0.xlsx
Well. Stanton Friedman is an actual Nuclear Physicist, and he doesn't think Lazar's science holds up. As far as the math goes: Math is a way of describing ideas, however ideas don't always correspond to reality. What's needed is to apply the math to real-world testing. Then we can say it has merit. Otherwise it's about as useful as abstract art. So I don't rely on math alone as evidence for the reality of claims.

Personally, I'm not even sure that any of our science applies to gravitational propulsion because our best physicists still haven't figured out with certainty exactly what gravity is. They're attempting to integrate it with particle physics, but even if some particle is found with absolute certainty ( the Higgs Boson claim aside ), we still have no idea how such a particle is imparted with the property of gravitation. Then there's the spacetime explanation, which doesn't really explain anything either. It's just another model. Another analogy.

One thing is certain, and that is that the world's best scientists have been trying to figure it out in major known facilities with tools ( e.g. supercolliders ) that are well beyond what they have out at Area 51. If they haven't figured it out, I really don't think anybody else has either, which means that if UFO propulsion is antigravitic, nobody really knows how it actually works ( yet ).

I'm onside with those who surmise it's some sort of "antigravity" or perhaps more accurately, synthetic or generated gravity. But I came up with that idea when I was 7 years old. I'm 60 now. Where are all the flying cars? If it was that easy, it's my opinion that we'd see undeniable evidence of it in commercial and military applications by now.

BTW I'd like to know more about your own scientific research if you don't mind sharing. What sort of stuff have you worked on?
 
Last edited:

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
... Bob Lazar is a proven liar ...
What lies have been "proven" ( specifically ) and with what evidence? The absence of proof regarding his credentials or employment isn't proof that he's lying. Neither is it proof of a conspiracy to cover-up his credentials or employment, and being either misled or mistaken, isn't the same as lying either. There's no "proof" one way or the other when it comes to Lazar's contentious claims ( IMO ).
 
Last edited:

Paco

Paranormal Novice
Well. Stanton Friedman is an actual Nuclear Physicist, and he doesn't think Lazar's science holds up. As far as the math goes: Math is a way of describing ideas, however ideas don't always correspond to reality. What's needed is to apply the math to real-world testing. Then we can say it has merit. Otherwise it's about as useful as abstract art. So I don't rely on math alone as evidence for the reality of claims.

Personally, I'm not even sure that any of our science applies to gravitational propulsion because our best physicists still haven't figured out with certainty exactly what gravity is. They're attempting to integrate it with particle physics, but even if some particle is found with absolute certainty ( the Higgs Boson claim aside ), we still have no idea how such a particle is imparted with the property of gravitation. Then there's the spacetime explanation, which doesn't really explain anything either. It's just another model. Another analogy.

One thing is certain, and that is that the world's best scientists have been trying to figure it out in major known facilities with tools ( e.g. supercolliders ) that are well beyond what they have out at Area 51. If they haven't figured it out, I really don't think anybody else has either, which means that if UFO propulsion is antigravitic, nobody really knows how it actually works ( yet ).

I'm onside with those who surmise it's some sort of "antigravity" or perhaps more accurately, synthetic or generated gravity. But I came up with that idea when I was 7 years old. I'm 60 now. Where are all the flying cars? If it was that easy, it's my opinion that we'd see undeniable evidence of it in commercial and military applications by now.

BTW I'd like to know more about your own scientific research if you don't mind sharing. What sort of stuff have you worked on?
I have been in contact with Stanton Friedman & I can assure you, he is a scientist in title only. There is absolutely nothing scientific about his approach at all. In fact, he's laughable in this respect. He relies SOLELY on human testimony & 'ink on paper documents' (both of these are worthless). People lie, mislead & simply don't know but act as if they do; all documents, including government documents, can be falsified, so they can't be trusted either. The only thing that can be trusted is a mathematical argument which can be peer reviewed & replicated by whomever invests the effort to understand it. It's the same thing as running an experiment yourself.

Only 1,500 years ago, the greatest minds of our species thought the world was totally flat, is it ? .... This speaks volumes about human perception & human testimony; this is why we rely so heavily upon mathematical argument & physical evidence nowadays. A legal standard of proof (documents & testimony) simply are not good enough.

Regarding Math ----> The same math that predicts many experimentally verified results, also predicts Lazar's claims. This is tangible evidence. If not, it's incredibly coincidental.

Regarding science applying --> I disagree with you. It is precisely the reasons you outline that it hasn't been 'figured out'. If you look hard enough & move away from standard doctrine, you'll find that many people have found pieces of the answer. It won't enter mainstream science for a long time (that's the nature of scientific progression; small steps). Believe it or not, but scientists are political game players too & they advance their own careers & ideas, not radical ideas from others. History is littered with examples of this (Copernicus being an obvious one).

Regarding 'AntiGravity' ----> If you look deeply enough, you'll find that the Microwave Frequency Range Lazar states for the Moscovium, means that it would be very easy to develop jamming technology to counter the propulsion system. How comfortable would you feel 'flying a car' that could be brought down by hitting it with a specific jamming frequency which cannot be engineered-out because it's a natural property of the Moscovium. This interference frequency would not occur very often in nature, so it's safe to fly places, just not around silly people.

In my opinion, it's this jamming vulnerability that has prevented alien visitors from showing themselves more aggressively. Think about it, if 'a government' had contact with them, their presence could be controlled under threat of jamming their propulsion frequency & no possible countermeasure exists because you'd be exploiting a natural property of the material used in the propulsion system. This would make it commercially dangerous & militarily worthless.

Lazar claims this frequency to be in the Microwave Range. I have seen & validated calculations of 11.44 (GHz); exactly Microwave spectrum. This is a very easy frequency to produce & if you do it powerfully enough, you can jam any system using it for propulsion. It is a VERY BIG vulnerability if you're not super welcome somewhere.

I've worked for 23 years on fundamental physics problems, so everything I say here, I say with mathematical certainty. Fact, by the way, that has been experimentally verified. So when I say that Lazar's claims has legs, I can almost prove it; but the recipient needs to invest time to understand the mathematical & physical principles behind what I say.
 

Paco

Paranormal Novice
I don't need to present evidence because I'm not making extraordinary claims. It's not my job to prove Bob Lazar DIDN'T work at Area 51. It's Bob Lazar's job to prove HE DID. That's how evidence works.
  • Claims he has a degree from MIT but MIT has no record of him being enrolled, he can't name a single student he attended with, he has no paper copy of his transcript or diploma, and the only professor whose name he can remember says he was never teaching at MIT during the years claimed.
  • Claims he has a sample of "Element 115" but can't actually produce it.
etc. etc. Bob Lazar is a proven liar. It's extraordinary people still put any faith at all in him. There's a sucker born every minute, I guess.
There is an arm chair scientist born every minute I guess .... I'm also guessing that you're one of them. No years of research & learning scientific principles, jut two minute opinions & summary evaluations. Thank GOD you don't fly airplanes or manufacture life critical equipment. Whatever you do for a living, it doesn't require years of commitment & learning. Why would you need it ? You can arrive at conclusions in a heartbeat just because it 'feels like the right answer'.

If you have not watched the latest Lazar documentary, I suggest you watch it. The FBI raided his office during filming immediately after a conversation about Moscovium (115). It happened, I've verified it for myself; why do you think this happened ? .... Parking tickets ?
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
I have been in contact with Stanton Friedman & I can assure you, he is a scientist in title only.
So you don't believe Friedman actually worked at Westinghouse on the nuclear propulsion project?
There is absolutely nothing scientific about his approach at all. In fact, he's laughable in this respect.
From what I can tell, he is an actual nuclear physicst who actually worked on nuclear rocket projects. I think that's pretty cool. Far from laughable.
He relies SOLELY on human testimony & 'ink on paper documents' (both of these are worthless). People lie, mislead & simply don't know but act as if they do; all documents, including government documents, can be falsified, so they can't be trusted either.
I'm pretty sure Friedman agrees that the properties of Element 115 ( particularly its rate of decay ) would make it virtually impossible to use the way Lazar describes. But I suppose that if we invoke some unknown alien supertechnology, then maybe that might fit. Of course then we might as well invoke alien supertechnology to explain everything. It's not really an answer. All I'm prepared to believe is that they do it somehow. Beyond that I dunno.
The only thing that can be trusted is a mathematical argument which can be peer reviewed & replicated by whomever invests the effort to understand it. It's the same thing as running an experiment yourself.
Math is an abstract representation of an idea. Therefore a mathematical "argument" that can't be tested in the real world is of no practical value. Consequently it's not the same as "running an experiment yourself" at all; at least not until real world experiments prove the reliability of the theory over time. Then mathematical simulations that are most likely going to reflect real world outcomes can be developed. Unfortunately some mathematicians have their heads so far into the math that they've lost touch with this truth.
Only 1,500 years ago, the greatest minds of our species thought the world was totally flat, is it ? ....
And a few hundred years before that, the Greeks figured out The Earth is a sphere. The whole "Flat Earth" thing is a particular quirk of relious dogma. I imagine plenty of people, particularly navigators, figured the Earth is spherical regardless of whatever decree the institutions of the time in their location had to say.
This speaks volumes about human perception & human testimony; this is why we rely so heavily upon mathematical argument & physical evidence nowadays. A legal standard of proof (documents & testimony) simply are not good enough.
Math is certainly a powerful tool, and I would agree that it should serve as evidence in as of itself after it has been proven. But not before.
Regarding Math ----> The same math that predicts many experimentally verified results, also predicts Lazar's claims. This is tangible evidence. If not, it's incredibly coincidental.
I'm sure that science has known for quite a while where the holes are in the periodic table, and that theoretically, some substance or another should go in those places. That makes them an effective McGuffin to bamboozle the public and scientists alike. So it may not be coincidental at all. It may have been part of the disinformation. Wouldn't it be ironic if what started as disinformation turned out to bear actual fruit?
Regarding science applying --> I disagree with you. It is precisely the reasons you outline that it hasn't been 'figured out'. If you look hard enough & move away from standard doctrine, you'll find that many people have found pieces of the answer. It won't enter mainstream science for a long time (that's the nature of scientific progression; small steps). Believe it or not, but scientists are political game players too & they advance their own careers & ideas, not radical ideas from others. History is littered with examples of this (Copernicus being an obvious one).
Not sure what you're disagreeing with there, but I agree with what you just said, so logically there's some miscommunication happening someplace.
Regarding 'AntiGravity' ----> If you look deeply enough, you'll find that the Microwave Frequency Range Lazar states for the Moscovium, means that it would be very easy to develop jamming technology to counter the propulsion system. How comfortable would you feel 'flying a car' that could be brought down by hitting it with a specific jamming frequency which cannot be engineered-out because it's a natural property of the Moscovium. This interference frequency would not occur very often in nature, so it's safe to fly places, just not around silly people.

In my opinion, it's this jamming vulnerability that has prevented alien visitors from showing themselves more aggressively. Think about it, if 'a government' had contact with them, their presence could be controlled under threat of jamming their propulsion frequency & no possible countermeasure exists because you'd be exploiting a natural property of the material used in the propulsion system. This would make it commercially dangerous & militarily worthless.

Lazar claims this frequency to be in the Microwave Range. I have seen & validated calculations of 11.44 (GHz); exactly Microwave spectrum. This is a very easy frequency to produce & if you do it powerfully enough, you can jam any system using it for propulsion. It is a VERY BIG vulnerability if you're not super welcome somewhere.

I've worked for 23 years on fundamental physics problems, so everything I say here, I say with mathematical certainty. Fact, by the way, that has been experimentally verified. So when I say that Lazar's claims has legs, I can almost prove it; but the recipient needs to invest time to understand the mathematical & physical principles behind what I say.
Well it sounds like you've studied it all more than I have. So maybe there's more to it than I give it credit for. I guess we'll only know for sure when they can actually show us a working craft that uses the technology that can be verified by independent scientists. In the meantime I remain unconvinced.

Another reason I find the theory and mechanics behind this sort of antigravity drive insufficient are the reports of really small UFOs that appear to operate on the same principles ( whatever they are ), and it doesn't look like the sort of designs Lazar describes can be effectively miniaturized to that degree. But maybe. Again. I dunno. All I know is that they ( the aliens ) do it somehow, and unless we actually take the subject seriously enough to put real thought like this into the problem, we'll probably never figure it out.

On the flipside, I like to imagine that the mystery is actually a lot simpler and that we're overthinking it, and that some tinkerer in his garage is going to stumble upon it accidentally while doing something totally unrelated.
 
Last edited:

Deckland

Skilled Investigator
What lies have been "proven" ( specifically ) and with what evidence? The absence of proof regarding his credentials or employment isn't proof that he's lying.
Ummmm ... yes it is.

If Lazar appeared in a courtroom and testified, under oath, that he had received a degree from MIT he could be prosecuted (and would almost certainly be convicted) of perjury.
 

Deckland

Skilled Investigator
There is an arm chair scientist born every minute I guess .... I'm also guessing that you're one of them. No years of research & learning scientific principles, jut two minute opinions & summary evaluations. Thank GOD you don't fly airplanes or manufacture life critical equipment. Whatever you do for a living, it doesn't require years of commitment & learning. Why would you need it ? You can arrive at conclusions in a heartbeat just because it 'feels like the right answer'.
Haha. I've had multiple peer-reviewed articles published but I'm going to stop there. I don't need to play "whose sausage is bigger" with you because, by the simple fact you believe Bob Lazar, you clearly have absolutely zero scientific exposure or experience.

If you have not watched the latest Lazar documentary, I suggest you watch it. The FBI raided his office during filming immediately after a conversation about Moscovium (115). It happened, I've verified it for myself; why do you think this happened ? .... Parking tickets ?
If you are of the opinion this is scientific "proof" that Lazar has access to flying saucers you really need to repeat 10th grade science.

First, nothing- and I mean nothing - that appears in a UFO "documentary" is proof of anything. (Frankly, if you knew anything about documentaries generally, you'd know that applies to even more reputable fields of inquiry.) A UFO "documentary" is an entertainment film. (Yes, I saw the Bob Lazar docu-entertainment movie.)

Second, correlation does not prove causation. If, indeed, the "FBI" actually raided Lazar and this wasn't part of the script of the docu-entertainment movie, Occam's Razar would suggest it was for any of the 200 areas other than "stolen ET technology" the FBI routinely handles: bank fraud, credit card fraud, bond default, bankruptcy fraud, interstate gambling, obscene phone calls, exploitation of children, interstate transportation of obscene material, Federal Tort Claims Act fraud, perjury, violation of the False Entries in Records of Interstate Carriers Act, intestate gambling activities, etc.

Need I remind everyone Bob Lazar has an existing criminal record involving prostitution. This isn't an Eagle Scout who "woe is me - why are the police possibly investigating him?"
 
Last edited by a moderator:

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
Unfortunately I can't reply to you as my response generated an error of "not allowed" on Paracast.

Like my deconstruction of the Witkowski evidence, I guess this is another thing I'll have to host off-site since it's too hot for Paracast:


If anyone who hasn't had their access restricted from Paracast due to questioning the almighty "2011 investigators" wants to post on my behalf, though, the response is pasted in Pastebin, above.
That's weird. Maybe it's some sort of bug in the new upgrade. I certainly haven't added any restrictions to your profile, and don't see anything offensive in your pastebin post, so I pulled it in and posted for you.
 

Paco

Paranormal Novice
So you don't believe Friedman actually worked at Westinghouse on the nuclear propulsion project?

From what I can tell, he is an actual nuclear physicst who actually worked on nuclear rocket projects. I think that's pretty cool. Far from laughable.

I'm pretty sure Friedman agrees that the properties of Element 115 ( particularly its rate of decay ) would make it virtually impossible to use the way Lazar describes. But I suppose that if we invoke some unknown alien supertechnology, then maybe that might fit. Of course then we might as well invoke alien supertechnology to explain everything. It's not really an answer. All I'm prepared to believe is that they do it somehow. Beyond that I dunno.

Math is an abstract representation of an idea. Therefore a mathematical "argument" that can't be tested in the real world is of no practical value. Consequently it's not the same as "running an experiment yourself" at all; at least not until real world experiments prove the reliability of the theory over time. Then mathematical simulations that are most likely going to reflect real world outcomes can be developed. Unfortunately some mathematicians have their heads so far into the math that they've lost touch with this truth.

And a few hundred years before that, the Greeks figured out The Earth is a sphere. The whole "Flat Earth" thing is a particular quirk of relious dogma. I imagine plenty of people, particularly navigators, figured the Earth is spherical regardless of whatever decree the institutions of the time in their location had to say.

Math is certainly a powerful tool, and I would agree that it should serve as evidence in as of itself after it has been proven. But not before.

I'm sure that science has known for quite a while where the holes are in the periodic table, and that theoretically, some substance or another should go in those places. That makes them an effective McGuffin to bamboozle the public and scientists alike. So it may not be coincidental at all. It may have been part of the disinformation. Wouldn't it be ironic if what started as disinformation turned out to bear actual fruit?

Not sure what you're disagreeing with there, but I agree with what you just said, so logically there's some miscommunication happening someplace.

Well it sounds like you've studied it all more than I have. So maybe there's more to it than I give it credit for. I guess we'll only know for sure when they can actually show us a working craft that uses the technology that can be verified by independent scientists. In the meantime I remain unconvinced.

Another reason I find the theory and mechanics behind this sort of antigravity drive insufficient are the reports of really small UFOs that appear to operate on the same principles ( whatever they are ), and it doesn't look like the sort of designs Lazar describes can be effectively miniaturized to that degree. But maybe. Again. I dunno. All I know is that they ( the aliens ) do it somehow, and unless we actually take the subject seriously enough to put real thought like this into the problem, we'll probably never figure it out.

On the flipside, I like to imagine that the mystery is actually a lot simpler and that we're overthinking it, and that some tinkerer in his garage is going to stumble upon it accidentally while doing something totally unrelated.
I don't know if Friedman has worked on Nuclear Propulsion projects, nor do I care; he's a rib-tickler IMO. My interest is solely the science behind Lazar's claims. He is the ONLY Martian talker I believe. Stanton Friedman is no scientist by any metric. His 'Betty & Barney Hill abduction case' conclusion is a prime example; torn to pieces by Carl Sagan no less. Employment by any authority is no measure of credibility. I have worked with many people from some enormously large global organizations, & some of them, I would not employ to make me a coffee. Friedman could be a classic example of an employee that simply hid in a large organization & produced very little. So again, name dropping large organizations is meaningless. If he were a wonder-kid at Westinghouse, he would have stayed there.

Moscovium ----> Just to be very clear because the internet is full of people whom simply do not understand science. Element 115 has been produced in an unstable form. It cost millions of USD to produce 27 atoms & is highly unstable (as you have pointed out). However, I can tell you point blank, with total & complete certainty that a stable form (an isotope) of 115 CANNOT, I repeat, CANNOT be ruled out; this is factual science. Basing opinions on the validity of Lazar's claims because of specific isotopic instability is childish. Bottom line: the 115 Lazar talks about is NOT the 115 Friedman might reference as evidence of lies; they are completely different animals.

You wrote:
"Math is an abstract representation of an idea. Therefore a mathematical "argument" that can't be tested in the real world is of no practical value. Consequently it's not the same as "running an experiment yourself" at all; at least not until real world experiments prove the reliability of the theory over time."

It is the same as running an experiment yourself; most definitely it is. Let's imagine that a media report came out about 115 being tested by a reputable lab, saying that it's true / real. Even then, YOU PERSONALLY are unable to verify this, it is simply 'ink on a page' & is meaningless to the wider public. The only way that YOU PERSONALLY can verify claims is by doing the math yourself. This is the code I live by. I do not trust the words of any human, not even my mother. Not because my mother wishes to deceive me, but because people make genuine mistakes. I have learned (I'm 51 now) that the ONLY way to know for certain is to check for yourself. I do not believe that people try to deceive me, but I do believe that their priorities are not my priorities & they will short-cut to a conclusion because it's easier so that they can move on to THEIR priorities.

The mathematical arguments I refer to, & will always & only refer to, have been tested in the real world & are beyond question. For example: the same equation yielding the size of a Proton to 15 decimal places, is the same equation predicting the size of a stable Moscovium atom. This same equation is then used to predict the 11.44(GHz) I talked about previously, & it also predicts the 7.46(Hz) claim that Lazar references as the Gravity-B-Wave. In addition to this, the SAME equation also predicts the size of the Neutron, Electron, all Quarks, all Neutrino's etc. In the case of the Proton, the prediction is experimentally verified to amazing precision. In the case of the Neutron, it is experimentally verified to less precision, but agrees precisely with other calculations via different methods. In point of fact, the ONLY particle which has been measured confidently with respect to size, is the Proton because it's the easiest. All other particles have not been physically measured well (if at all) because of the very costly technical challenges which need to be overcome to achieve this.

If Particle-Physics is not enough evidence, howzabout Cosmology ? ..... The same equation that does the above, also predicts the Hubble Constant & Expansion, The Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (Temperature), Cosmological Inflation, the size of the Universe consistent with anomalies such as the Methuselah Star, the size of the Milky Way Galaxy & its Total Mass .... So tell me, what do you think is the correlation between this equation & all the experimentally verified results I list above ? ..... Luck, good fortune, coincidence ? .... As I have already stated, the evidence, REAL EVIDENCE, for much of what Lazar claims already exists, but people just want to use & express words rather than delve into the math & logic to convince themselves. Words are easy, they come naturally & we are genetically programmed for that over our evolutionary lifetime. Science however, is not genetically instilled, it must be learned over years of sacrifice & dedication. Most people do not wish to do this, it's easier to grab their i-Phone & Snap Chat or Instagram or whatever.

Here is something you probably do not know ----> all of human science does NOT know the true nature of a Photon. The most fundamental question in science is "what is a Photon ?", yet Physicists apply religious conviction to the concept. It is stated as being Mass-Less (0kg), yet no evidence of 'absolute zero' anything has ever been experimentally observed. The two limits in nature that cannot physically exist are absolute zero & infinity; yet our science & math relies heavily upon these religious beliefs. The Photon MUST possess mass & it is precisely this property, exactly this property, that produces the equation I reference above.

Non-Lazar designs ----> I have no opinion, nor do I care. My only interest is to test Lazar's claims. I have done this & I can state with almost complete certainty that the science behind ALL of his claims is valid & mathematically viable.
 

Paco

Paranormal Novice
Ummmm ... yes it is.

If Lazar appeared in a courtroom and testified, under oath, that he had received a degree from MIT he could be prosecuted (and would almost certainly be convicted) of perjury.
You are totally wrong. You need to investigate more. You've just shown your true colors & have verified my accusations of not investing time into the detail of what you're talking about. This is precisely what DID actually happen. He testified under oath that he had these qualifications & he knew the penalties for lying; yet he stuck to his guns (see what George Knapp has to say about this). The court could not find evidence of his claims, but concluded that 'something fishy' was going on behind the scenes (with respect to records: it appeared like erasures had taken place) & they let him go on this specific point, but they did end-up charging him with pandering.

As I have stated previously, you need to do your homework. Laziness will make you look like a fool. This is not my doing, this is your doing. If you want to continue embarrassing yourself here, it's on your head; not the people that point it out. If you wish, I can continue ripping new orifices for you; particularly around scientific claims.
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
I don't know if Friedman has worked on Nuclear Propulsion projects, nor do I care; he's a rib-tickler IMO. My interest is solely the science behind Lazar's claims. He is the ONLY Martian talker I believe. Stanton Friedman is no scientist by any metric ...
Friedman's claims about being a nuclear physicist who worked on actual nuclear propulsion appear to be legitimate and relevant to the discussion. If you don't think so, and prefer to hand wave it because it doesn't agree with your views, then your objectivity is clouded, and that detracts from your credibility. Otherwise you make some interesting and valid points. Maybe those who are actually working on it will make some kind of breakthrough. If they do, by all means let us know.
 

Deckland

Skilled Investigator
You are totally wrong. You need to investigate more. You've just shown your true colors & have verified my accusations of not investing time into the detail of what you're talking about. This is precisely what DID actually happen. He testified under oath that he had these qualifications & he knew the penalties for lying; yet he stuck to his guns (see what George Knapp has to say about this). The court could not find evidence of his claims, but concluded that 'something fishy' was going on behind the scenes (with respect to records: it appeared like erasures had taken place) & they let him go on this specific point, but they did end-up charging him with pandering.
Calm down.

He swore an affidavit to his probation officer (he was on probation for giving scholarships to the women of Las Vegas to learn human anatomy ... specifically, his) he had the degrees. He didn't testify in open court in a case where the question was of material importance.

A P.O. is not going to involve a DA to prosecute a perjury case against someone when it has no impact on public safety. If he was prohibited from accessing firearms and falsely swore he didn't have any he'd certainly be prosecuted. If he just randomly swears he has a degree from MIT and was a flying saucer mechanic, or that he's the Queen of England, or that he's a time traveler from the Year 3300, no on is going to waste time prosecuting him. The criminal justice system sees people like that every day. They don't, as a general rule, prosecute nutters for acting nutty, only if their nuttiness impacts public safety.

The court could not find evidence of his claims, but concluded that 'something fishy' was going on behind the scenes
Source?

(And I mean a real source, not trutheagle.gun.)
 

Top