From netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!netnews Sat May 6 19:01:20 1995
Xref: netcom.com alt.conspiracy.area51:1211
From: Gufon@ix.netcom.com (Gene Huff)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: THE LAZAR FLAWS - Discoverer of 115
Date: 4 May 1995 14:49:49 GMT
In <tmahoodD8163w.1oI@netcom.com> tmahood@netcom.com (Tom Mahood) writes:
>Per Lazar, none of the others at S-4 or any of the very brilliant minds at Los Alamos were able to figure out just what this stuff was despite having the material for at least a number of years.
-No, per Mahood, per Lazar, that's how it's now being distorted. The people at S4 had the 115 for a couple of years, not the people at Los Alamos. Los Alamos had been involved much more recently. You're trying to conveniently oversimplify things way too much here. There were numerous problems in compartmentalizing information enough to use Los Alamos' facilities without allowing many to know what was going on at S4. They had to have research done by separate entities at Los Alamos and then correlate that research at S4. Bob is on the record as having stated that S4 did not possess all of the proper equipment required to back engineer the discs at S4, enter Los Alamos. He also said that S4 did not employ all of the world's most brilliant minds for numerous reasons. He didn't "discover" the 115, he helped correlate other's research and was the first one to come to a conclusion. He did not state that even the people at S4 had been working everyday trying to identify this fuel, with no success. There were many facets to the project at S4 and who knows what their priorities were. No one knows how long the specific effort of identifying the fuel had been going on. Bob was simply of the opinion that this is one of the first things that should have been done. For whatever reason, this is not what transpired.-
>According to the best atomic theory of today, some isotopes of element 114 MIGHT be stable and perhaps even non-radioactive. That same theory indicates 115 would be considerably less stable and likely to be >radioactive. If anything, the existance of a material such as Lazar describes, disregarding the gravitational effects, is MUCH more likely as 114.
-Please! And exactly what theory is that and how conclusively accurate is it? Anyone who has even read a little about physics knows that physicists will change their theories instantly when confronted with some empirical evidence that reflects otherwise. If Bob Lazar and others at Los Alamos and S4 saw some of this evidence, would they not be in a better position to judge than someone forced to theorize with mathematical models? If you're truly familiar with what has to be surmised, concluded, and not proven in atomic theory, you would have never made that statement.-
>
-1a. Mahood has run out of criticisms, as weak as they've been thus far, and due to URS has now resorted to grasping at straws.-
>
>4. Lazar had his mind manipulated in some manner by unknown parties and false memories have been implanted.
>
-There it is. You've finally bottomed out at the mind control basement. I have a feeling this is the prelude to your final summary.-
Back to The Bob Lazar Corner