Debunking Bob Lazar's drawing of S-4 hangers

Starman

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

T
he 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.

df6598b3433cfcb073b030895cceaf63.jpg

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.


upload_2018-7-8_0-29-59.gif
Transcript (in video watch from 12:56 until 14:32)

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

upload_2018-7-8_0-29-59.gif




  • A view through some aligned doors. (special thanks to Mick West)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

deirdre

Senior Member
this pic was posted in 2012 (before your interview). It was supposedly drawn by Lazar and the original source link is attached to the post.
labdraw.jpg
photo link with date

upload_2018-7-7_20-18-39.png
the handwriting says "sliding door"

I'm not sure his inability to draw a side perspective (2015 interview) accurately is really proof of anything. he does put his little spaceship way in the back of the hangar as well.
 

Starman

New Member
this pic was posted in 2012 (before your interview). It was supposedly drawn by Lazar and the original source link is attached to the post.
Are we certain, this drawing belongs to Bob Lazar ?

I think this picture is not full, look at the left side where it ends. Any possibility to find it full ? (i already searched)

View attachment 33679
the handwriting says "sliding door"
That is a discrepancy in his storytelling. 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 ..."

I'm not sure his inability to draw a side perspective (2015 interview) accurately is really proof of anything. he does put his little spaceship way in the back of the hangar as well.
He is telling about 9 hangars, all "regular doors" in his latest drawing are lined up. Why anyone wants to put these objects in front of the doorways and block the passage ? they can simply move them closer to "the main doors".



If we are talking about (picture you've posted). The other object, which is barely seen, totally covers any visibility. But if they are really flat and low objects, you can see threw (honestly, i don't think this is the case). Anyway it is hard hypothetically to suggest how those objects looks like in 2-dimensional drawing.
 

deirdre

Senior Member
Are we certain, this drawing belongs to Bob Lazar ?
I couldn't find anything on "jfi.net" in the Wayback Machine.


JFI apparently means "Jon Farhat, Inc".

the sketches do show up on "boblazar.com" in year 2000 https://web.archive.org/web/19991117142140/http://www.boblazar.com:80/protected/sketches.htm

although that websites appears to be owned by Jon Farhat as well.

It does seem Jon and Bob are 'business partners' of some sort. I'm very unfamiliar with Lazars story though, Im sure you can find more info on the relationship between Lazar and Farhat.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I think the exact alignment of the doors and line of sight is a bit of a moot point, since they both come from his claimed recollection. If he recalls being able to see through several doors, then that's how he recalls seeing the doors. It's not difficult to arrange a line of sight so you can see stuff.

Metabunk 2018-07-08 09-45-21.jpg

More of an issue is that he also recalls seeing exotic craft in each hanger. That's what's really lacking evidence.
 

Starman

New Member
I couldn't find anything on "jfi.net" in the Wayback Machine.
JFI apparently means "Jon Farhat, Inc".
the sketches do show up on "boblazar.com" in year 2000 https://web.archive.org/web/19991117142140/http://www.boblazar.com:80/protected/sketches.htm
although that websites appears to be owned by Jon Farhat as well.
It does seem Jon and Bob are 'business partners' of some sort. I'm very unfamiliar with Lazars story though, Im sure you can find more info on the relationship between Lazar and Farhat.
Anyway, i think that is the case. It is Bob's drawing. I looked in other handwritings of him. I'm not a graphologist, but some letters looks very simillar or almost identical compared to handwritings in 2012 and 1990's pictures.





I think the exact alignment of the doors and line of sight is a bit of a moot point, since they both come from his claimed recollection. If he recalls being able to see through several doors, then that's how he recalls seeing the doors. It's not difficult to arrange a line of sight so you can see stuff.

View attachment 33683

More of an issue is that he also recalls seeing exotic craft in each hanger. That's what's really lacking evidence.
First of all, i don't think 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.




Picture, S4 (2012)

Another thing, if you want to see all objects in all of those hangars. They should be at least not the same size (flying saucers). Otherwise, they gonna cover each other, just like you see in the picture.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Another thing, if you want to see all objects in all of those hangars. They should be at least not the same size (flying saucers). Otherwise, they gonna cover each other, just like you see in the picture.
Not True
Metabunk 2018-07-09 03-07-25.jpg
 

LDavid47

New Member
Just to play devils advocate. Does he say he only saw in the hangars open on one specific occasion . Or could he have seen them open multiple times and been walking around to look in each one?

Edit: I just listened to the section you highlighted and more. And it really does sound like a well fabricated story. When he says "ppl say I don't sound like a scientist.. that's because I want everyone to understand." it's as if he's covering all his tracks, Bc he obviously does not sound like a military scientist... as far as being able to see at that angle: he made several remarks to being there multiple times.. the whole thing sounds made up though, so the optics of being able to see are probably irrelevant
 
Last edited:

Starman

New Member
Just to play devils advocate. Does he say he only saw in the hangars open on one specific occasion . Or could he have seen them open multiple times and been walking around to look in each one?
He clearly said :
  • 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.
 

LDavid47

New Member
He clearly said :
  • 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.
Yeah I hadn't listened to it when I first wrote that. It likely never happened though..
 

Starman

New Member
Yeah I hadn't listened to it when I first wrote that. It likely never happened though..
I don't wanna go too much in the story. He has extraordinary claims with no evidence to back it up. I'm really a fan of ufo/aliens stuff. Read many articles, watched many videos, read couple of books. Always looking for errors and Bol Lazar has them.
 

LDavid47

New Member
I don't wanna go too much in the story. He has extraordinary claims with no evidence to back it up. I'm really a fan of ufo/aliens stuff. Read many articles, watched many videos, read couple of books. Always looking for errors and Bol Lazar has them.
Same w me big UFO fan though it is tough to find real evidence. A couple of red flags with the above Bob Lazar video for me where him claiming to have worked in the military but he repeatedly used "civilian" language. He said things like: "everyone had a buddy to work with" "we got an overview of the materials and projects." In my opinion Nobody in the military would refer to a partner as a buddy or a briefing as an overview. Those were just 2 examples off the top of my head
 

Starman

New Member
Same w me big UFO fan though it is tough to find real evidence. A couple of red flags with the above Bob Lazar video for me where him claiming to have worked in the military but he repeatedly used "civilian" language. He said things like: "everyone had a buddy to work with" "we got an overview of the materials and projects." In my opinion Nobody in the military would refer to a partner as a buddy or a briefing as an overview. Those were just 2 examples off the top of my head
If he worked with simple people (not from army), i find it legit.
 

Matthew Huber

New Member
If he worked with simple people (not from army), i find it legit.
I spent a decade in the military and the word buddy is used more often than you would think. The Army has battle buddys. The Air Force uses the buddy system in an attempt to stop sexual assault. When working around classified material I always had a "buddy" presumably to stop any attempts to steal info. Im not sure what you mean by simple people

Same w me big UFO fan though it is tough to find real evidence. A couple of red flags with the above Bob Lazar video for me where him claiming to have worked in the military but he repeatedly used "civilian" language. He said things like: "everyone had a buddy to work with" "we got an overview of the materials and projects." In my opinion Nobody in the military would refer to a partner as a buddy or a briefing as an overview. Those were just 2 examples off the top of my head
A briefing and an overview are two different things. I was in the miltary, and used the words overview and buddy at least once a day. Your point has no validity
 

Attachments

Last edited by a moderator:

Aaron Jackson

New Member
Hello,

I just created an account on this site to reply to this post. I don't know much about bunkers and their structures, but I know that Bob Lazar is lying.

Lazar claimed that he was working with a Special Access Program (receives special funding from the government) that reverse engineers alien technology. At a minimum, the facility that would be working on this classified technology would be a level IV facility, which means that the physical security would make the area very secure from a multitude of different attacks. Area 51 is a Level V facility and has standoff distance, gates, sensors, and other advanced anti-terrorism technology to detect and thwart an attack by adversaries. Bob's facility doesn't have this.

On the outside of the S4 facility, Lazar didn't allude to any gates, standoff distance, or other defense mechanisms. Also, the area would be heavily trafficked by military vehicles, and the surrounding area would be very industrialized. Satellite images (look at Google Earth historical data) from the time period don't show any evidence of a base there. Further, environmental data gathered by the State of Nevada (search Google for: "Papoose Lake" site:.gov ) that actually showed photos of the area, showed that it was completely deserted with no sign of any remnants of a hanger. Also, the area is a part of the Test Range, where they would drop bombs.

The government doesn't usually drop bombs on its own facilities. So I call Lazar's claims BS. Do you really think there would be no patrols, gates or security near a top secret research base? Every bunker America has is heavily fortified.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
gtoffo Needs Debunking: "UFO crash" near Rio de Janeiro UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 17
Code-Beta Needs Debunking: CE-5, humans initiating UFO sightings UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 8
Mick West Debunking Correlations Between 5G deployments and Coronavirus Coronavirus COVID-19 14
Pumpernickel Need Debunking: Foucault's Pendulum debunked through Mach's principle (the Earth is a static object in the center of the Universe) Science and Pseudoscience 13
Mick West TFTRH #34 - Stian Arnesen: Debunking, Censorship, 9/11, and UFOs Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 0
H Need Debunking: Hernando County platforms from more than 10 miles Flat Earth 9
Bill Statler Needs debunking: "Magnetic water" for treating diabetes Health and Quackery 8
Mick West TFTRH #14: Rory – Flat Earth Debunking and Spiritual Journeys Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 6
Qulaey Two problems need help debunking and debating tips? please. Flat Earth 5
Scaramanga The Easy And Logical Debunking Of UFO 'Size' UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 1
Mendel MediaWise #IsThisLegit program Practical Debunking 1
brad fuller Does the inverse-square law apply to the flat-earth debunking tool chest? Flat Earth 4
mudr0 Need Debunking: Video claiming zigzaggin objects and movement prove EVA filmed in pool General Discussion 33
vooke Need debunking: Writings in the sky Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 11
Mick West Debunking 9/11 Microsphere Myths 9/11 0
Mick West Debunking Guidelines for: "Convex Earth - The Documentary" Flat Earth 0
T Debunking needed – anomalous mp3 recording distortion UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 12
Mick West Here's to the "Debunker"! Practical Debunking 1
ConfusedHominid Need Debunking (Claim): Metabunk Curve Calculator Does Not Calculate for Angular Size Flat Earth 13
Mick West NY Times: In Italian Schools, Reading, Writing and Recognizing Fake News Practical Debunking 60
Mick West Debunking: A Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Efficacy of Messages Countering Misinformation Practical Debunking 5
Rory Where online is debunking most effective? Practical Debunking 14
Whitebeard Martymer 81 Practical Debunking 4
N Neeson's anti-debunking thoughts Site Feedback & News 15
Mick West Fireproof Cabbage, Burning Snow, Flat Earth - Are Some Things too Silly to Debunk? Practical Debunking 7
Mick West Burying the Debunk: How Fake News about "Pyramids" in Antarctica Creates False Balance UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 2
Mick West Debunking911.com offline - How to Preserve Good Debunking Sites? 9/11 3
Sam Hill Debunking "That's not a Space Station, it's an airplane" Flat Earth 1
Mick West When Absence of Evidence is Evidence of Absence in Conspiracy Theories Practical Debunking 35
Rogerpenna Debunking Flat Earth with the Southern Hemisphere Flat Earth 11
Leifer Polite video interviewing/debunking Practical Debunking 8
Veronica! Any resources for debunking a 'cold case' UFO sighting? Practical Debunking 7
M Flat Earth theory simple debunking by the moon's appearance Flat Earth 48
mrfintoil Study: When Debunking Scientific Myths Fails (and When It Does Not) Practical Debunking 3
deirdre study on how to 'sway people' Practical Debunking 0
Leifer Pseudo debunking, trickery, product promos Health and Quackery 10
MikeG College Course on Conspiracies Practical Debunking 89
Leifer Harriet Hall, on debunking methods Practical Debunking 2
keefe Debunking guide Practical Debunking 3
Critical Thinker Why we debunk and who do we reach. Practical Debunking 2
G Needs debunking: Video of a solar eclipse is fake because we cannot see the moon covering the sun Flat Earth 5
Trigger Hippie Russian Troll Houses Practical Debunking 24
Mick West Finding the Original Source in a World of Aggregators, Shares, and Reposts Practical Debunking 32
David Ridlen Earth curvature refraction experiments - debunking flat/concave Earth Flat Earth 344
Mackdog Google to start debunking General Discussion 21
SabreSaint Need Debunking: CERN To Recreate Big Bang Science and Pseudoscience 26
Mick West Charlie Hebdo Conspiracy Theories - Ignore or Address? Conspiracy Theories 255
Pete Tar Vox article on Debunking, avoiding The Backfire Effect Practical Debunking 0
O More on debunking "no persistent contrails" Contrails and Chemtrails 12
D How do you think about debunking? General Discussion 29
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top