BOB LAZAR

The uncomfortable possibility of truth

by Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell

PART I

It’s time to shake things up, press the red button and initiate the launch sequence. Keeping it real just came back in style, and Ufology is due for a proper makeover.

I used to believe that Bob Lazar's story was a fabrication. Oddly enough I also know that Bob used to think flying saucers designed and built by a non-human intelligences, and being back-engineered by a faction of the United States Military, was a concoction of human imagination.

It’s funny how information can dramatically alter opinion.

Change can happen slowly or it can happen in an instant, but the common denominator is information. Without NEW information, theories and ideas can’t be tested in either direction. A considerable body of evidence about Bob Lazar has surfaced in the past 25 years, but somehow, nearly all of it has escaped the notice of Ufology's "cop on the beat.”

I recently read Stanton Friedman’s MUFON journal entry for April 2015 and was deeply disappointed. I had hoped that after a quarter of a century, the conversation would have elevated from its past status of synthesized analogies regarding Bob Lazar and his testimony, to something more relevant, or at least contemporary. Instead, the same allegorical and erroneous third-hand arguments that ignore the bulk of evidence in support of Bob’s claims, sadly permeated the discourse. I’m not surprised at sleight-of-hand tactics used to obscure the truth. I expect the mirage-men treatment from the governing agencies who want to confuse or distort the organized attempt to understand the UFO phenomenon, but I am greatly disillusioned to see one of the idols of Ufology employ the same kind of scurrilous tactics that he has long condemned.

Ufology owes a debt of gratitude to Mr. Friedman. His decades of work have earned our respect, but his long tenure does not give him the right to pull the same kind of close-minded dirty tricks as the "noisy negativists" he has so often criticized. Sadly, that is exactly what he has done regarding Bob Lazar. And to a lesser degree, to me. When Stan makes broad and unsupported allegations such as "Bob Lazar is a con-man and a fraud”, he should back it up with direct and conclusive evidence. It’s one thing to declare that you don't believe someone. It is quite another to attack a man’s character in the most bitter and personal terms.

Stan continues to act as judge, jury and executioner regarding all things Lazar. Yet he has never met Lazar. And now we know, after his own admission at the 2015 International UFO Congress, that Stan has, “never even had an in-depth conversation with Lazar.” For me, that was an important moment. A revealing moment. It underscores the sad but relevant fact that Stan is relying on the deceptive practices that once served Phil Klass so well, dismissing a case and denigrating an individual based on Stan's own perception of his status as Ufology's ultimate authority.

As George Knapp has warned us, “We can’t be selective in the Lazar case. We need to look at the whole picture, all the evidence. We can’t discard a truth simply because it does not fit nicely into our own theories. I see people do this all the time, and it’s sad."

Regarding Stan’s personal attacks against me, I will simply suggest that anyone who is interested can view the debate from the 2015 International UFO Congress for themselves, and clearly witness the multitude of unambiguous and specific reasons that I presented regarding why I call Lazar a “scientist.” You will also see that I clearly define what I believe to be important in the Lazar case. Stan does not have a response to any of this material. Instead, he repeats the same mantra over and over, unswayed by any evidence counter to his philosophies.

In last month’s MUFON journal, Stan claimed that I offered no “proof” that Bob Lazar is a scientist. Stan even wrote that I reasoned, "Bob had to be a scientist, he had a security clearance.” This is deceptive and false, plain and simple. I made no such statement and he knows it. Whether Bob had security clearances or not (although all evidence points to the fact that he did), he is, was, and always will be a scientist doing actual scientific work. He’s actively running his scientific consulting and supplies business, United Nuclear, and working on projects that I specifically mentioned in the debate… you know… my “proof.” I mentioned some of Bob’s current scientific contracts including painting specialized isotopes of iridium on ants for detection purposes, and designing neodymium rare-earth magnetic cleansing systems for the ball-bearing housings of Naval hovercraft, etc. Stan’s claim was atrociously misleading. But again, all of this is to distract you away from the bigger and more important questions. Did Lazar work at Los Alamos? And did Lazar participate in attempting to back-engineer spacecraft originating from off-world? I don’t think arguing semantics regarding the definition of the word “scientist” is going to get us any closer to solving that one.

Stan also claimed that I was “Pro-Lazar.” This is another ambiguation technique that educated readers are not going to accept. Ufology is not a popularity contest and it's not about choosing sides. It’s about following the evidence. The reason I discuss Bob’s claims without a blind dismissal is because I have decided to hear every side to the story, and generate an informed opinion on the case. I would suggest that Stan does the same but it is clear that no amount of information could ever change his opinion on Lazar. If Lazar showed up in a flying saucer and offered to give Stan a ride from New Brunswick to S-4, I doubt it would make a dent in his iron-clad, lock-boxed opinion.

Lastly, Stan claimed that I "provided no evidence that Bob was a scientist other than (my) belief in Bob.” More than 1,000 people were in the audience at the UFO Congress and know this statement to be false. The video recordings from that day are proof enough for anyone who cares to take a look. But wouldn’t it be great if we had something more to go off of?

So let’s shift gears and try to elevate the conversation.

Something we know to be true, is that still, 25 years after George Knapp introduced him to the world, Bob Lazar remains a crucial and controversial figure in the field of Ufology.

Nobody can deny that Bob Lazar is responsible for making Area 51 a household name. That alone renders him quite significant. But his importance could extend vastly further.

His testimony regarding his work back-engineering alien propulsion systems, if true, provides substantial evidence that Earth has been engaged by advanced off-world intelligences and that the United States Government has actively covered up this monumental fact. That’s a big deal.

But Bob’s claims have been exceedingly difficult to validate.

Neither Los Alamos National Laboratory nor Nellis Air Force Base have been willing to confirm he ever worked at either location. In such a situation, skepticism is not only healthy; it’s required. And I myself at times did not believe Bob’s story.

But today, I no longer have the luxury of disbelief, not only because I have looked at parts of Lazar's background that are forbidden territory for Stan's mind but also because of new information that is coming to light.

Over the years, a significant number of high-ranking and credentialed members of the scientific and military communities have privately substantiated Bob’s claims for me “off the record.” To protect them and their positions, these confidential admissions could not be shared publicly or contribute to the conversation.

But recently I met a physicist who has been an engineering consultant to Los Alamos National Laboratory on and off for over thirty years, a scientist with a doctorate from MIT who agreed to go “on the record” with me and address the question of whether Bob Lazar is a scientist or not.

I look forward to discussing this topic, and many more regarding my work, on-air and “ON THE RECORD" on Coast to Coast AM this coming June. Tune in. And before that date, I ask that you ponder one seemingly outlandish and possibly disturbing question…

What if Bob Lazar is telling us the truth?

Weaponize your curiosity,

Jeremy
—
Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell
Creator, Extraordinary Beliefs

BOB LAZAR

LATEST & GREATEST

WHAT'S YOUR STORY?

Corbell would like to hear from you...