No. 4809Anonymous 6th July 2019 Saturday 1:31 am4809Bob Lazar: Area 51 & Flying Saucers (2018)
I am about as sceptical as they come but there is elements to his story that makes it more convincing than most.
The film it self is made by the usual conspiratorial innuendo crowd in their style.
Essentially he is a man who in the 80s claimed to have worked reverse engineering parts of an alien space craft.
But he completely doesnt match the usual profile of people at the centre of these things. He doesn't seem like he wants the attention. And that's part of what makes it interesting.
He has certainly at least been telling the truth about things that weren't public, he is the person who first introduced Area 51 into the public consciousness and described a security device they used there that later it was revealed Lockheed used at their skunkworks as well.
Also there has apparently been weird cover ups about his past he claims to have degrees from Caltech and MIT and have worked Los Alamos National Lab all of which all have apparently denied having any record of it. But later it was found out there was an article written about Los Alamos National Lab where he was in the picture. This all seems a bit odd because one would assume there was at least a professor who would remember him but it is brushed over a bit in the documentary.
If any of what is said to be verified in the documentary is actually true there is definitely more going on then there usually is with these sorts of claims but it is hard to tell what, when the people telling his story want to believe these things too much and sensationalize what they have.
The American defence establishment deliberately cultivates UFO conspiracies, because it provides them with a very useful supply of disinformation.
Area 51 is a real military site, more properly known as Edwards Air Force Base. We don't know what the site is currently used for, but historically it was used as the test base for the most secret aircraft development projects including the U-2, A-12 and F-117 reconnaissance aircraft. You can't really hide a supersonic aircraft, but you can muddy the waters by spinning a load of yarns about flying saucers and feeding tit-bits of nonsense to vocal lunatics. Information gleaned from sightings of your super-secret spy aircraft will be lost in a tidal wave of nonsense, hugely reducing the usefulness of that information to foreign adversaries.
This chap may genuinely have information on alien activity, he may have gone bonkers in his old age, or he may be knowingly telling porkies. If you run a top-secret military research establishment, it would be very convenient if some of your ex-employees said that they spent their days dismantling flying saucers.
>If you run a top-secret military research establishment, it would be very convenient if some of your ex-employees said that they spent their days dismantling flying saucers.
The fun conspiracy angle here is that would be convenient even if, or especially if, he's actually telling the truth. The majority of people aren't going to believe it either way.
>>4811 This is, not coincidentally, how North Korea frustrates information flow. They don't confirm or deny either way, so with no way to reliably corroborate any given story you can't figure out what's true.
I feel the same way about the Kennedy assassination, or 9/11 conspiracy theories. The more people obsess over irrelevant details, the less time and attention they have to focus on genuine security issues. It also seems to follow on from disenfranchisement, a lack of political awareness and activism. The more remote and pervasive power structures seem, the more cultish groups that pop up. The U.S. is notorious for this stuff precisely because they're extremely powerful and have basically written off large swathes of the population.
>This chap may genuinely have information on alien activity, he may have gone bonkers in his old age, or he may be knowingly telling porkies. If you run a top-secret military research establishment, it would be very convenient if some of your ex-employees said that they spent their days dismantling flying saucers.
Sure. What is so interesting in this particular case is that this person doesn't seem like they can easily be dismissed off hand. The fact that he brought new evidence into the open about what are verifiable real cover ups makes it so interesting even if that evidence is circumstantial to his ultimate claim.
I watch these kinds of documentaries on some level to laugh at the crazies and their weird beliefs, and use that as a way to assess my own critical thinking skills so I dont fall into the same traps. But here I found something more compelling that leaves me unable to form a judgement. I can't rule out the possibility that he is telling the truth.
>I can't rule out the possibility that he is telling the truth.
Nor can I, though the realities of the distances and mechanics involved in space travel would suggest it's still almost impossible* that we've had any contact with aliens - and that if a craft capable of the sorts of speeds or traversals needed to reach us (near light speed, or wormhole fuckery) then the technology harvested from such a craft would be so incredibly advanced that it would be impossible to sit on and would be immediately evident, when say, the US army started teleporting their tanks etc.
>though the realities of the distances and mechanics involved in space travel would suggest it's still almost impossible that we've had any contact with aliens
It doesn't suggest anything of the sort. It is just difficult for us with our current level of technology and energy efficency.
A hundred years ago you'd be talking about how machines carring 500 people at 10 km up at around the speed of sound was almost impossible yet that is what is happening right now.
>then the technology harvested from such a craft would be so incredibly advanced that it would be impossible to sit on and would be immediately evident, when say, the US army started teleporting their tanks etc.
What makes you think we would be capible of understanding it that well and replicating it? One of the things that is said in the docummenary is that the technology seems to be dependant on a stable isotope of Moscovium to run since we don't have that, and Moscovium was only created in a lab 15 years after he was making these claims it wouldn't be absurd to presume that they wouldn't be able to make use of it even if they wanted to. It isn't a question of sitting on it.
It is of course very easy to shit on and question any of the ideas here, that's why I posted it in /boo/ and not /lab/ but you aren't doing a good job of it.
>It doesn't suggest anything of the sort. It is just difficult for us with our current level of technology and energy efficency.
>A hundred years ago you'd be talking about how machines carring 500 people at 10 km up at around the speed of sound was almost impossible yet that is what is happening right now.
I know where you're coming from, but even Da Vinci had a blueprint for a helicopter - we have known for a long time that flight was possible, we just didn't know how we were going to do it.
Space travel is a bit different, in that we know the distances are so mind bendingly vast that physics is the limiting factor, not engineering.
It's not impossible, it's just a micron away from being impossible. Unless - if this lad is telling the truth, the implication could well be that there's alien life in this solar system.
>It is of course very easy to shit on and question any of the ideas here, that's why I posted it in /boo/ and not /lab/ but you aren't doing a good job of it.
Don't do that, mate. Don't have a teary because someone is more sceptical than you.
