Misplaced Pages

Talk:Bob Lazar: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 05:37, 29 July 2023 edit2603:8080:1cf0:7d40:3918:2cc6:2fe4:3652 (talk) →Why is this article protected when there is so much disinformation contained in it?: ReplyTags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit iOS app edit← Previous edit Latest revision as of 15:51, 21 November 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,292,082 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Bob Lazar/Archive 4) (bot 
(117 intermediate revisions by 47 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkheader|bot=lowercase sigmabot III|age=60|units=days}} {{talkheader}}
{{contentious topics/talk notice|ps}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=1|1=
{{WikiProject Biography {{WikiProject banner shell|blp=1|class=B|listas=Lazar, Bob|
{{WikiProject Biography}}
|living=yes
{{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=Mid}}
|class=B
{{WikiProject Paranormal|importance=Low}}
|listas=Lazar, Bob}}
{{WikiProject Skepticism|class=B|importance=Mid}} {{WikiProject Florida|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Paranormal|class=B|importance=Low}} {{WikiProject Miami|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Business|importance=Mid}}
}} }}
{{annual readership}} {{annual readership}}
Line 12: Line 13:
| algo = old(60d) | algo = old(60d)
| archive = Talk:Bob Lazar/Archive %(counter)d | archive = Talk:Bob Lazar/Archive %(counter)d
| counter = 3 | counter = 4
| maxarchivesize = 100K | maxarchivesize = 100K
| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
Line 20: Line 21:
<!-- Template:Setup auto archiving --> <!-- Template:Setup auto archiving -->


== Lazar is not a conspiracy theory, stop misleading people ==
== Pandering charge ==


What I understand this was, he installed a computer network or computers in a brothel, not that he was involved with prostitution directly. ] (]) 08:34, 13 February 2023 (UTC) Its quite clear what the man talked about is true and what is happening in the sky and it is out there ] (]) 10:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
: If you, or any other editor, has any ] to support the claim that {{tq|Its quite clear what the man talked about is true}}, then please present them here. There's ]. ] (]) 15:34, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
::Bob is telling the truth 100%. The government has now come forward and said that they have been working on and retrieving alien technology and bodies both living and dead from crash and donation sites (donation sites being sites where there were "crashes" without a body or a survivor leading officials to speculate they sent us that craft for some reason) ] (]) 16:00, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
:::Perhaps you did not read the post immediately above yours. I will paraphrase it here: If you, or any other editor, has ''any'' reliable sources to support the claim that {{tq|Bob is telling the truth 100%}}, then please present those sources here. ] to learn about reliable sources. ] (]) 20:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
::::a 1982 phonebook from the lab lists Lazar right there among the other scientists and technicians ] (]) 15:20, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
::::: Even if a phonebook was a reliable source for anything, what exactly would it tell us beyond Lazar being listed in a phonebook? ] (]) 16:46, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::: Our article explains: {{tq|Inquiry into Lazar's position at Los Alamos revealed his role to have been a technician for a contractor firm, and that he worked neither as a physicist or for the lab directly}} The cited sources mention the telephone directory entry showing he worked as a tech (not as a scientist, as he claims) and for a subcontractor (not Los Alamos, as he claims). ] (]) 17:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::: And there's the answer(s) to my question. Thanks LL. ] (]) 19:42, 30 October 2024 (UTC)


== Biased source(s)… ==
:that was all a lie the government set that up, if he didn't worked at groom lake in a facility called A-4,how would he had know when they were doing test flight,,pendejo ] (]) 10:39, 21 April 2023 (UTC)


The first reference used on this page does not meet Misplaced Pages’s standards for reliable sources. Ken Layne’s article is opinionated, unserious, and speculative, lacking the objectivity required for a neutral citation….
More importantly, why is his criminal record in his quick bio (whatever you call that grey box) when he isn't notable for being a criminal? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 06:26, 18 June 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


Secondly, the description of Bob Lazar as a ‘conspiracy theorist’ is biased and does not accurately reflect his role within the UFO community. A more appropriate and neutral term would be ‘controversial figure in UFOlogy.’
== Be a skeptic but respect facts ==


Next, there is a repetitive pattern in the page editor’s comments suggesting an openness to any ‘reliable source’, which contrasts starkly with the current use of sources that themselves are not unbiased.
Bob Lazar studied at MIT los alamos, whatever your beliefe on UFOs, if you are Skeptical or pro believer, please do not change the truth. Bob lazar is a scientist, certified, there’s evidence, typing that he is a self-proclaimed scientist goes beyond false news. That’s why wikipedia shouldn’t allow kids as editors. ] (]) 21:36, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
: {{tq|Bob lazar is a scientist, certified, there’s evidence}} In that case, please go ahead and add that evidenced (i.e., reliably sourced) content. I look forward to reading that evidence, because although I have been surrounded by scientists for several decades, I had no idea that one could be "certified" in that career. <small>(although I know more than a couple who ''should'' be certified)</small> ] (]) 18:40, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
::JoJo Anthrax, if there is no such thing as certification of scientists, then what makes Mr Lazar any more "self-proclaimed" of a physicist than anyone else? Perhaps say "a self-proclaimed college graduate," if that's the bit of evidence you see missing, here. How many Misplaced Pages articles have required proof of a scientist's education? Further, anyone with an Associate's Degree in any science is, by definition, a scientist. Do we call Steve Jobs a "self-proclaimed inventor" since he never finished college? The answer to that is obvious; so is your attempt to defend the biased language in this article. I visited this page because I am a professor of public speaking and a student gave a speech about Lazar. I teach my students that Misplaced Pages is not the one-sided, biased, inaccurate place it was a decade ago. Sadly, this article disproves my claim about Wikipedian accuracy while serving to prove Lazar's claims more than disprove them. --Aristotle's Granddaughter ] (]) 21:02, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
:::You need to strike your accusation of defamation. See ] which is a blockable offense and you also need to log into your account. Its fine to debate content as long as that content is supported by sources but you cannot make disparaging comments about other editors. Also, not sure JoJo Anthrax is a Mr. (no gender declared that I can tell). ] (]) 21:13, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
::::I made the specific revisions you suggested. However, in the interest of ethos, to anyone who believes the tone JoJo Anthrax has used reflects a bias, I invite you to visit his talk page and observe the breadth of topics on which he publishes as an expert. ] (]) 21:18, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
:::::Based on the statements, JoJo Anthrax is asking for sources to support your position which are required per ]. And yes, Misplaced Pages does require reliable sources to support someone has a degree or is otherwise considered a subject matter expert, as described by reliable sources. Unsourced claims can be removed and should be removed for ]. ] (]) 21:30, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
::::::Not my position--I haven't stated one. JoJo made the assertion that there is no such thing as a certification process for scientists. In fact, we (Americans) grant degrees at a number of institutions. Lazar has, like Thomas Edison, claimed he has one. I do not believe that the article about Thomas Edison offers a notarized statement confirming his education. Lazar has stated what education he received, and, according to my student who gave an excellent speech, Lazar has provided copies of his diploma. What is the threshold of oppositional evidence to a primary source that would require more secondary support? ] (]) 21:35, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
:::::::PS: What is the threshold for "reliability" when using it to evaluate secondary sources? For example, would it be appropriate to cite one of the recent biographies of him and report his side of the story by citing those elements of documentary journalism? I know the answers to these already, but I'm not going to waste time fixing this article only to have a self-proclaimed middle schooler change them back. ] (]) 21:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
::::::::Read ]. For example a self-published book would generally be considered unreliable but a book from a reputable publisher with editorial oversight and a history of fact checking is generally considered reliable. I used the term "generally" because it depends on the source ''and'' the content it is supporting. For example, the New York Times is generally considered a reliable source but it ''may not be'' a reliable source for certain content. Context matters which is why a source first has to provided so it can be analyzed to determine if it is reliable given the content. So far, you have provided nothing but words. With that, I am stepping out of this discussion because, honestly, I am completely disinterested in this topic and only commented because I saw your disparaging comment but that has been sufficiently rectified. Although I will say, once again, you do need to long into your account. ] (]) 22:11, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::Thanks for the advice, S0091, but I do not have a wikipedia account. You may verify my credentials with my ip address. ] (]) 12:47, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
:::::::{{tq|according to my student who gave an excellent speech}} I suggest, ], that you read ] to learn why your student's speech is not a reliable source. As for {{tq|self-proclaimed middle schooler}}, I suggest that you also read ]. ] (]) 02:04, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
::::::::Thanks for the advice, JoJo. I would not cite a student speech, obviously. I came here to confirm things from my student's speech, particularly whether Lazar had in fact passed several lie detector tests from impartial examiners as part of a published documentary film. I do not believe "self-proclaimed middle schooler" is any more of a personal attack than "self-proclaimed physicist," and it relies on information you asserted, which I'm sure was not intended as an attack, when you confirmed that this page was trolled by a middle-schooler. If you have evidence that the aforementioned middle schooler has, in fact, graduated, for example, I'd be glad to tell you if the evidence is good enough. Please not that I use "trolled" in the sense of one who stands by a bridge and won't let anyone past out of indignant self-importance; I could be wrong. ] (]) 12:52, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::PS: I'll come back if I can find any sources that show both sides of this issue. I appreciate that it seems you folks here would accept evidence from published sources, such as the 1989 media coverage of his claims that I vaguely recall. I'll do research. Please be 1% more civil with those that are here to contribute and preserve knowledge, and please have a nice day. ] (]) 12:56, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::: {{tq| I do not believe "self-proclaimed middle schooler" is any more of a personal attack than "self-proclaimed physicist,"}} The difference is that one is a ], the other is article text containing a summary of what cited ] say about the article subject. If you cannot understand the difference, then you ]. I hope you'll read the links to Misplaced Pages editorial policies I left on your User Talk page. ] (]) 17:31, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::::Lucky, I was summarizing JoJo's post. JoJo's exact words were, "Yes, a middle schooler protected this page." Are you quite sure JOJO was not directing that comment at a specific editor? I have no idea if JoJo meant you, JoJo themself(s), or someone else, just that it was offered as an excuse here in the talk page for the biased tone of the actual article, without identifying the editor who protected the page. Further, I do not have a user talk page since I am not a registered user; I'm an anonymous editor. If you post something to your user page that you would like me to review or comment on, please let me know here. Finally, I take your question of my competence as a personal attack, as I have already established my credibility as a rheterician, and encourage you to review this link: ] ] (]) 20:40, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
::::::::::::PS: Using an "If...then" construction won't shield you here. I already stated that I do not see a difference, so your use of "If you cannot understand the difference" does nothing to insulate you from the fact that you directly questioned my credibility as a competent editor. ] (]) 20:51, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
::::::::::::Hi IP, yes you do have talk page as everyone does regardless if they are registered or not, see ] and again, you keep addressing JoJo as a "he" but I not have seen anything the states JoJo's gender. This suggests you do either do not read comments or disregard them. ] (]) 20:51, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::::::I noticed my typo and rectified it prior to your post. I apologize profusely to all males on the planet for my potential error. ] (]) 20:54, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
:"MIT Los Alamos" is not a school; MIT is a school in Massachusetts, while Los Alamos is a laboratory facility operated by the US government in Los Alamos, New Mexico. Bob Lazar claims to have a masters in physics from MIT, earned in 1982. However, a search of the MIT Libraries returns no record of any thesis paper submitted between 1/1/1981 and 12/31/1982 by a Robert Lazar. He is notably absent from all alumni association records, does not appear in the 1982 yearbook, and has not produced a shred of evidence to corroborate his claim. A masters program is an intense 2 years of study - one does not simply forget any identifiable detail about it.
:Instead, it appears that Lazar is claiming the work of an actual MIT student as his own: Robert Seth Granetz, who *did* earn his masters in 1982 at MIT, and did write his thesis on magnetohydrodynamics. "Study of resistive MHD instabilities in Alcator C" Granetz, Robert Seth.; Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Physics. c1982
:Granetz is in fact the Principal Research Scientist for the Plasma Science and Fusion Center at MIT today. The two men share a first name and middle initial, and it's not unreasonable to suggest Lazar padded his credentials by cribbing them from someone else. Perhaps most telling, some of the concepts and "alien" tech Lazar has described are not dissimilar to a layman's description of the tokamak plasma reactors Ganetz works with; many of Lazar's assertions about how alien tech functions read like a poorly summarized version of Ganetz' thesis.
:In summary. Bob Lazar is not a scientist; he's just adopted an actual scientist's bona fides as his own, and managed to sound convincing to people who are ready to believe. ] (]) 09:11, 25 June 2023 (UTC)


This inconsistency undermines the credibility of the article. ] (]) 01:37, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
== Request for addition of information ==


:See footnote "d". The first sentence is summarizing cited content in the body of the article. If this is contentious, we could duplicate footnote d in the first sentence. If he's widely described as a "conspiracy theorist", wikipedia policy (including ]) is to say "conspiracy theorist". ] (]) 08:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Forgive my MLA citations. If one of you kind editors could assist me in the conversion to WP style, I would be forever in your debt.
:Indeed, the whole article smells strongly biased. If the reader comes here after watching interviews of the subject (e.g. Joe Rogan), they will believe Bob's side of the story rather than this article. Many of the people used as a source in this article have questionable reputation themselves. On the other hand, a highly respected US Navy pilot, Commander David Fravor, after meeting Bob, when interviewed by Joe Rogan, said that Bob Lazar is a normal guy, not crazy at all. All in all this article seems quite far from being objective. ] (]) 08:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
::Joe Rogan has been roundly criticised for promoting and enabling conspiracy theories. ] even confronted Rogan on camera over this. ] (]) 21:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
:::I believe I mentioned Joe Rogan only as one example of many interviews by many different people. That being said, everyone can watch The Joe Rogan Experience podcast episodes themselves. When recorded episodes are publicly available, they become the most reliable source, therefore you shouldn't use some random person and their personal opinions as a source, as they can be strongly biased.
:::Analogous to, you should always use a book as the source directly, rather than a person who has read the book. This is the standard procedure for Misplaced Pages articles - a book or scientific journal is referenced as a source directly, not via some person who has read it (because biased opinions, PsyOps etc). ] (]) 05:05, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
::::Incorrect. Misplaced Pages, like most encyclopedia, is a tertiary source and generally relies on ] sources. Please see ] ] ] 05:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
:::::In order to prevent further misunderstanding, I feel I should more carefully explain what I mean.
:::::The Misplaced Pages guidelines for the use of primary, secondary and tetriary sources. Secondary sources should be used only as interpretation of primary sources. It should go without saying, unless the secondary source is a scientific study about the primary source, it's prone to biased, sometimes meaningless opinions, and carefulness should be applied, especially if the primary source is closer to a scientific study. I will give an example of what I mean by that in practice, at the end of this reply.
:::::The link you provided to SECONDARY has PRIMARY right on top of it and states:
:::::''A primary source may be used on Misplaced Pages only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source''
:::::This corresponds to, whatever is actually said in a book, journal or any media source, without interpreting it further. It continues:
:::::''but without further, specialized knowledge. For example, an article about a musician may cite discographies and track listings published by the record label, and an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source.''
:::::The common understanding of this guideline is that primary sources are used, as an example, to say The Album has 12 tracks, they have such and such names and track lengths. Secondary sources could be credible critics giving their opinion about those tracks. Secondary sources should not be used to say things like, The Album has only 6 tracks because I don't consider the other 6 music.
:::::Again,
:::::''an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source.''
:::::Articles about The Joe Rogan Experience episodes #1315, #1347, or #1361 can cite what was being said in these episodes, as facts, as in, it's a fact this was said, and such references are considered PRIMARY sources by Misplaced Pages guidelines. SECONDARY sources can then be referenced to further elaborate the reader about what was said, e.g. whether the scientific community considers what was said facts or not. Are you with me so far?
:::::Now, if we refer to e.g. what Cmdr. David Fravor said about Bob Lazar in The Joe Rogan Experience episode #1361 (citing the actual content of the episode), it should be considered a fact that David Fravor said this and it should be considered legitimate use of a PRIMARY source. How e.g. Brian Dunning interprets what Cmdr. David Fravor says in the episode, is a legitimate use of a SECONDARY source and should be used only to comment the PRIMARY source. Then it's up to the Misplaced Pages reader to decide, if they rather believe the PRIMARY source Cmdr. David Fravor, a highly respected US Navy pilot... or a SECONDARY source giving his opinion about the podcast in general, e.g. Brian Dunning, who according to tetriary source Misplaced Pages, makes a living as a professional skeptic (possibly a biased opinion without scientific study to back it up), and who has been charged of wire fraud, pleaded guilty to said wire fraud, and went to prison for it.
:::::Personally, I consider it somewhat suspicious if Misplaced Pages articles use random secondary sources as logical fallacies against primary sources that are referenced correctly. Especially if the whole article seems biased in similar fashion. Just to be clear, saying that Joe Rogan is a conspiracy theorist and therefore every guest he has on his podcast, is by default not a credible source, is a logical fallacy. ] (]) 07:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
::::::What is written above by the 88 IP is nonsense. When writing about ] as well as ]s, we are required to rely on the ''highest quality'' reliable independent sources. Since Joe Rogan makes money by allowing kooks and cranks to rant and rave on his show without pushback, for clickbait profit motives, then anything that appears on that sensationalist show is not appropriate for inclusion on Misplaced Pages, except for something uncontroversial that somebody said about themself. ] (]) 07:16, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
:::::::So for example Neil DeGrasse Tyson (episode #1347 I already mentioned to see if you're even paying attention) is a "kook and crank" who raved on without pushback? If I understood you correctly, you are saying that if you don't personally like the content of some episodes, then anything that appears on that show, is not appropriate to use as a source on Misplaced Pages, even though the PRIMARY source guidelines specifically state you can cite ANY publicly available book, journal and other media. How is that not a logical fallacy and a very biased opinion?
:::::::Have you ever looked through the Joe Rogan podcast episode list? The podcast has had guests from all around the spectrum, including people such as Eric Weinstein, Brian Greene, Dr Phil, Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, Robert Kennedy Jr, Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, Anthony Bourdain, and many others you would otherwise never question in any other context. Are you seriously suggesting that we cannot cite any of them so as long they said it in The Joe Rogan Experience show?
:::::::If we write an article about Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, we cannot cite Rickson Gracie or Royce Gracie, only because they said it in the Joe Rogan podcast?
:::::::Seriously? ] (]) 07:47, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
::::::::{{tq|So for example Neil DeGrasse Tyson is a "kook and crank" who raved on without pushback?}} That is a non sequitur. The fact that Rogan invites kooks and cranks does not mean that everybody he invites is a kook and crank. This is very simple logic. To call a source "reliable" means that you can rely on it. Sometimes inviting serious people and sometimes inviting kooks and cranks means that Rogan is not reliable. Also very simple logic. --] (]) 08:00, 8 July 2024 (UTC)


== Lack of neutral tone- ==
Lazar is identified as a "physicist" in ''Newsweek'', therefore this declaration of his profession is not self-proclaimed, because ''Newsweek'' proclaimed it after confirmation common of professional journalism:


The short summary in the beginning, at the end of the day, is the part of the article where most people get their information- while the claims listed by the author do have substance, the harsh tone panders to skeptics in a way which may violate the ethics of unbiased writing. It is true that he has no hard evidence for alien life, however there are reputable citations towards some of his claims. Take for example his performance on polygraph tests, his support from George Knapp, and the Los Alamos article and phone directory. While it is true that none of these are hard evidence proving all his claims; to proclaim Bob Lazar as having no evidence or sources while pandering to evidence showing the contrary makes the reader unable to create their own opinion. ] (]) 20:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
O’Donnell, Paul, and Lucy Howard. “Model Aliens.” ''Newsweek'', vol. 124, no. 14, Oct. 1994, p. 6
:] tests are unreliable, and ] is gullible. --] (]) 20:33, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
::I agree, this article reads as one sided and is overly negative. I was quite shocked as I don’t think I’ve seen article such as this on wiki before- needs more balance. ] (]) 22:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
:::I invite you to read the many previous sections of this Talk page, wherein it has been explained many, many times that Misplaced Pages content is derived solely from reliable, secondary sources. Them's the rules. ] (]) 01:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)


== Smear job ==
Also, please add the following where you see fit:


this was nothing but a smear job. I agree with the comment above that there has never been an article like this on Misplaced Pages, and if Misplaced Pages wants to continue on asking people for money they really need to give this some serious thought ] (]) 08:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
According to Vinay Menon of the Toronto ''Star'', despite the views of skeptics, "nothing Lazar said has ever been disproven."
: I invite you to read the many previous sections of this Talk page, wherein it has been explained many, many times that Misplaced Pages content is derived solely from reliable, secondary sources. ] (]) 13:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
:@]
:Well-put. For example, Lazar never claimed to have earned a master's degree from MIT (yet this article, absent any sources, states that he does). Bob had been very clear that he attended a few courses at MIT, but that his degree is from Cal-Tech.
:And to characterize the man as a conspiracy theorist is laughable. He's a whistleblower who alleges to have worked on clandestine programs. Whether or not that part of his story is even entirely accurate makes him no less of a whistleblower... and one who quite clearly dislikes conspiracy theories, based on both his statements on the matter itself, and his general deference to science.
:But predominantly he's spent his career after that constructing alpha radiation detection equipment, which is how United Nuclear made its name... and donating all proceeds from interviews to the science programs at his local high schools.
::] 6:23 PM EDT, 27 September 2024
:] (]) 22:24, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
::: I invite you to read the many previous sections of this Talk page, wherein it has been explained many, many times that Misplaced Pages content is derived solely from reliable, secondary sources. If you have ''any'' reliable, secondary sources that support your claims, then go ahead and add that sourced content to the article. ] (]) 13:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
::: On Misplaced Pages we go by ] rather than do ]. In this case ] is cited for Lazar's MIT claims. ] (]) 15:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)


== Aiding a prostitution ring ==
Menon, Vinay. “Time for NASA to Take Bob Lazar Seriously.” Toronto ''Star ''(Canada), 27 Oct. 2022. ] (]) 22:12, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
--Aristotle's Granddaughter (working from home) <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 22:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


He sold some computers to a brothel, lol. ] (]) 04:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
: That Newsweek "piece" is hardly a reliable, journalistic source for supporting Lazar's claims about himself. Coming in at a whopping 107 words total (I may have miscounted by one or two), it is essentially a tongue-in-cheek advertisement for model UFOs made by the Testor company. is a link. Regarding Vinay Menon, he is an "Entertainment Columnist," and although others might disagree, to me that makes his reliability suspect. The claim that "nothing Lazar said has ever been disproven" cements that assessment. ] (]) 22:58, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
::JoJo, thanks for the feedback. I honestly have no agenda here, so if it turns out there's not more reliable information, I'll accept your assessment. I'm a person of reason. --AG ] (]) 23:10, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

There is already a cluster of sources in the article to support the fact that Lazar has been dubbed a "physicist", so the ''Newsweek'' bit could perhaps be added there. There is greater sourcing for the idea that "physicist" is a self-declared title. There's also the issue of his claimed MIT physics degree being a big ol' lie (yeah, ], sure)... ] (]) 12:33, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

:Lazar is likely claiming the degree and thesis of Robert S. Granetz as his own. Granetz is the Principal Research Scientist for the Plasma Science and Fusion Center at MIT; he earned his Masters in Physics at MIT in 1982, and his thesis, "Study of resistive MHD instabilities in Alcator C" was in magnetohydrodynamics ] (]) 09:14, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

== Why is this article protected when there is so much disinformation contained in it? ==

Really, this article is an embarrassment and is the reason why so many people view Misplaced Pages as no different than CNN or Fox News -- entertainment, not factual reporting.

Lazar IS a scientist, not a "self proclaimed" one. He went to MIT at Los Alamos. The copious amount of slanderous adjectives in describing Lazar - "conspiracy theorist", "self proclaimed scientist", etc etc etc.

https://thewebmatrix.net/disclosure/lazarinbook.jpg

https://external-preview.redd.it/x1u9zRa0feMLuoUK0LJhKtjRTWJhXe6c9A0yqS2woHc.jpg?auto=webp&s=9ec38da2d83f00fb8f36bab01ef095f2812a4d1e ] (]) 23:18, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

:] hi bob ] (]) 02:24, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
:Seriously. This is the most negative biographical entry I've ever seen on Misplaced Pages. It reads like a hit piece. Only validates that's he's the target of discrediting efforts. I wonder why…? ] (]) 05:37, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

: A Reddit posting and . Not ]. ] (])

== Highly opinionated and far from neutral ==

It is completely insane the way that this wikipedia entry is written. The notion of him being a conspiracy theorist has even less support than his own claims whether one is a skeptic or not. This article draws significant conclusions about his education and employment history that aren't supported (in an editorialized way). You don't need to give support to his claims or defend them -- but surely this is blatant abuse and misinformation.

The article directly refers to mainstream media as if that classification (also undefined) has any implication on the validity of the claims being made. ] (]) 03:27, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
: Misplaced Pages isn’t Reddit or the comment section of a Youtube video. It has editorial policies (which you can read about at ]) that dictate how encyclopedic content is presented. ] (]) 12:49, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 15 July 2023 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Bob Lazar|answered=yes}}
In the public appearances section, his interview with Joe Rogan from 2019 needs to be added. The video can be found here: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=joe+rogan+bob+lazar+episode&mid=9CE145BEFBCD42E267FB9CE145BEFBCD42E267FB ] (]) 17:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
: It is already included in that section. ] (]) 18:11, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 18 July 2023 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Bob Lazar|answered=yes}}
Request for removal of a name in the section about Bob Lazars criminal convictions. At the very end, it is mentioned, Jeremy Corbell, among others, concur with the assertion of doubt over Bob's claims(due to criminal convictions). There is no information to verify this. As a matter of fact, quite the contrary. I think Jeremy's name ought to be removed from this portion to ensure the pages credibility. ] (]) 22:04, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

'''Not done'''. In that section, the second of the cited sources includes the following: "Corbell brings up and describes the various challenges to Lazar’s authenticity and character, including a lack of proof as to his education and his various criminal activities." ] (]) 22:23, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

:The way it is implied is clearly misleading. Jeremy has not casted any doubt. You know and I know it. ] (]) 18:10, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
:: There is nothing misleading about "Corbell brings up and describes the various challenges to Lazar’s authenticity and character, including a lack of proof as to his education and his various criminal activities." As for what you or I "know," I suggest that you read this: ]. ] (]) 18:17, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:51, 21 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bob Lazar article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 2 months 
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to pseudoscience and fringe science, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconBiography
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
WikiProject iconSkepticism Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconParanormal Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconFlorida Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMiami Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Miami, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the Miami metropolitan area on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.MiamiWikipedia:WikiProject MiamiTemplate:WikiProject MiamiMiami
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconBusiness Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lazar is not a conspiracy theory, stop misleading people

Its quite clear what the man talked about is true and what is happening in the sky and it is out there 105.235.246.101 (talk) 10:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

If you, or any other editor, has any reliable sources to support the claim that Its quite clear what the man talked about is true, then please present them here. There's no rush. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 15:34, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Bob is telling the truth 100%. The government has now come forward and said that they have been working on and retrieving alien technology and bodies both living and dead from crash and donation sites (donation sites being sites where there were "crashes" without a body or a survivor leading officials to speculate they sent us that craft for some reason) 2605:59C8:410:6710:7627:5764:4A1A:1E1D (talk) 16:00, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps you did not read the post immediately above yours. I will paraphrase it here: If you, or any other editor, has any reliable sources to support the claim that Bob is telling the truth 100%, then please present those sources here. Click here to learn about reliable sources. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 20:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
a 1982 phonebook from the lab lists Lazar right there among the other scientists and technicians 2A02:8070:6188:2B60:D9CC:AF67:FA7A:A943 (talk) 15:20, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Even if a phonebook was a reliable source for anything, what exactly would it tell us beyond Lazar being listed in a phonebook? JoJo Anthrax (talk) 16:46, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Our article explains: Inquiry into Lazar's position at Los Alamos revealed his role to have been a technician for a contractor firm, and that he worked neither as a physicist or for the lab directly The cited sources mention the telephone directory entry showing he worked as a tech (not as a scientist, as he claims) and for a subcontractor (not Los Alamos, as he claims). - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
And there's the answer(s) to my question. Thanks LL. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 19:42, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Biased source(s)…

The first reference used on this page does not meet Misplaced Pages’s standards for reliable sources. Ken Layne’s article is opinionated, unserious, and speculative, lacking the objectivity required for a neutral citation….

Secondly, the description of Bob Lazar as a ‘conspiracy theorist’ is biased and does not accurately reflect his role within the UFO community. A more appropriate and neutral term would be ‘controversial figure in UFOlogy.’

Next, there is a repetitive pattern in the page editor’s comments suggesting an openness to any ‘reliable source’, which contrasts starkly with the current use of sources that themselves are not unbiased.

This inconsistency undermines the credibility of the article. 104.153.228.17 (talk) 01:37, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

See footnote "d". The first sentence is summarizing cited content in the body of the article. If this is contentious, we could duplicate footnote d in the first sentence. If he's widely described as a "conspiracy theorist", wikipedia policy (including WP:NPOV) is to say "conspiracy theorist". Rjjiii (ii) (talk) 08:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Indeed, the whole article smells strongly biased. If the reader comes here after watching interviews of the subject (e.g. Joe Rogan), they will believe Bob's side of the story rather than this article. Many of the people used as a source in this article have questionable reputation themselves. On the other hand, a highly respected US Navy pilot, Commander David Fravor, after meeting Bob, when interviewed by Joe Rogan, said that Bob Lazar is a normal guy, not crazy at all. All in all this article seems quite far from being objective. 88.112.43.242 (talk) 08:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Joe Rogan has been roundly criticised for promoting and enabling conspiracy theories. Brian Dunning even confronted Rogan on camera over this. Gene Stanley1 (talk) 21:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
I believe I mentioned Joe Rogan only as one example of many interviews by many different people. That being said, everyone can watch The Joe Rogan Experience podcast episodes themselves. When recorded episodes are publicly available, they become the most reliable source, therefore you shouldn't use some random person and their personal opinions as a source, as they can be strongly biased.
Analogous to, you should always use a book as the source directly, rather than a person who has read the book. This is the standard procedure for Misplaced Pages articles - a book or scientific journal is referenced as a source directly, not via some person who has read it (because biased opinions, PsyOps etc). 88.112.43.242 (talk) 05:05, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Incorrect. Misplaced Pages, like most encyclopedia, is a tertiary source and generally relies on WP:SECONDARY sources. Please see WP:YESPOV EvergreenFir (talk) 05:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
In order to prevent further misunderstanding, I feel I should more carefully explain what I mean.
The Misplaced Pages guidelines for the use of primary, secondary and tetriary sources. Secondary sources should be used only as interpretation of primary sources. It should go without saying, unless the secondary source is a scientific study about the primary source, it's prone to biased, sometimes meaningless opinions, and carefulness should be applied, especially if the primary source is closer to a scientific study. I will give an example of what I mean by that in practice, at the end of this reply.
The link you provided to SECONDARY has PRIMARY right on top of it and states:
A primary source may be used on Misplaced Pages only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source
This corresponds to, whatever is actually said in a book, journal or any media source, without interpreting it further. It continues:
but without further, specialized knowledge. For example, an article about a musician may cite discographies and track listings published by the record label, and an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source.
The common understanding of this guideline is that primary sources are used, as an example, to say The Album has 12 tracks, they have such and such names and track lengths. Secondary sources could be credible critics giving their opinion about those tracks. Secondary sources should not be used to say things like, The Album has only 6 tracks because I don't consider the other 6 music.
Again,
an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source.
Articles about The Joe Rogan Experience episodes #1315, #1347, or #1361 can cite what was being said in these episodes, as facts, as in, it's a fact this was said, and such references are considered PRIMARY sources by Misplaced Pages guidelines. SECONDARY sources can then be referenced to further elaborate the reader about what was said, e.g. whether the scientific community considers what was said facts or not. Are you with me so far?
Now, if we refer to e.g. what Cmdr. David Fravor said about Bob Lazar in The Joe Rogan Experience episode #1361 (citing the actual content of the episode), it should be considered a fact that David Fravor said this and it should be considered legitimate use of a PRIMARY source. How e.g. Brian Dunning interprets what Cmdr. David Fravor says in the episode, is a legitimate use of a SECONDARY source and should be used only to comment the PRIMARY source. Then it's up to the Misplaced Pages reader to decide, if they rather believe the PRIMARY source Cmdr. David Fravor, a highly respected US Navy pilot... or a SECONDARY source giving his opinion about the podcast in general, e.g. Brian Dunning, who according to tetriary source Misplaced Pages, makes a living as a professional skeptic (possibly a biased opinion without scientific study to back it up), and who has been charged of wire fraud, pleaded guilty to said wire fraud, and went to prison for it.
Personally, I consider it somewhat suspicious if Misplaced Pages articles use random secondary sources as logical fallacies against primary sources that are referenced correctly. Especially if the whole article seems biased in similar fashion. Just to be clear, saying that Joe Rogan is a conspiracy theorist and therefore every guest he has on his podcast, is by default not a credible source, is a logical fallacy. 88.112.43.242 (talk) 07:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
What is written above by the 88 IP is nonsense. When writing about fringe topics as well as WP:BLPs, we are required to rely on the highest quality reliable independent sources. Since Joe Rogan makes money by allowing kooks and cranks to rant and rave on his show without pushback, for clickbait profit motives, then anything that appears on that sensationalist show is not appropriate for inclusion on Misplaced Pages, except for something uncontroversial that somebody said about themself. Cullen328 (talk) 07:16, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
So for example Neil DeGrasse Tyson (episode #1347 I already mentioned to see if you're even paying attention) is a "kook and crank" who raved on without pushback? If I understood you correctly, you are saying that if you don't personally like the content of some episodes, then anything that appears on that show, is not appropriate to use as a source on Misplaced Pages, even though the PRIMARY source guidelines specifically state you can cite ANY publicly available book, journal and other media. How is that not a logical fallacy and a very biased opinion?
Have you ever looked through the Joe Rogan podcast episode list? The podcast has had guests from all around the spectrum, including people such as Eric Weinstein, Brian Greene, Dr Phil, Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, Robert Kennedy Jr, Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, Anthony Bourdain, and many others you would otherwise never question in any other context. Are you seriously suggesting that we cannot cite any of them so as long they said it in The Joe Rogan Experience show?
If we write an article about Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, we cannot cite Rickson Gracie or Royce Gracie, only because they said it in the Joe Rogan podcast?
Seriously? 88.112.43.242 (talk) 07:47, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
So for example Neil DeGrasse Tyson is a "kook and crank" who raved on without pushback? That is a non sequitur. The fact that Rogan invites kooks and cranks does not mean that everybody he invites is a kook and crank. This is very simple logic. To call a source "reliable" means that you can rely on it. Sometimes inviting serious people and sometimes inviting kooks and cranks means that Rogan is not reliable. Also very simple logic. --Hob Gadling (talk) 08:00, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Lack of neutral tone-

The short summary in the beginning, at the end of the day, is the part of the article where most people get their information- while the claims listed by the author do have substance, the harsh tone panders to skeptics in a way which may violate the ethics of unbiased writing. It is true that he has no hard evidence for alien life, however there are reputable citations towards some of his claims. Take for example his performance on polygraph tests, his support from George Knapp, and the Los Alamos article and phone directory. While it is true that none of these are hard evidence proving all his claims; to proclaim Bob Lazar as having no evidence or sources while pandering to evidence showing the contrary makes the reader unable to create their own opinion. 70.16.252.41 (talk) 20:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Polygraph tests are unreliable, and George Knapp (television journalist) is gullible. --Hob Gadling (talk) 20:33, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
I agree, this article reads as one sided and is overly negative. I was quite shocked as I don’t think I’ve seen article such as this on wiki before- needs more balance. 90.206.232.85 (talk) 22:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
I invite you to read the many previous sections of this Talk page, wherein it has been explained many, many times that Misplaced Pages content is derived solely from reliable, secondary sources. Them's the rules. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 01:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Smear job

this was nothing but a smear job. I agree with the comment above that there has never been an article like this on Misplaced Pages, and if Misplaced Pages wants to continue on asking people for money they really need to give this some serious thought 2603:7080:6DF0:6E70:512C:677A:EAB7:F52C (talk) 08:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I invite you to read the many previous sections of this Talk page, wherein it has been explained many, many times that Misplaced Pages content is derived solely from reliable, secondary sources. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 13:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
@2603:7080:6DF0:6E70:512C:677A:EAB7:F52C
Well-put. For example, Lazar never claimed to have earned a master's degree from MIT (yet this article, absent any sources, states that he does). Bob had been very clear that he attended a few courses at MIT, but that his degree is from Cal-Tech.
And to characterize the man as a conspiracy theorist is laughable. He's a whistleblower who alleges to have worked on clandestine programs. Whether or not that part of his story is even entirely accurate makes him no less of a whistleblower... and one who quite clearly dislikes conspiracy theories, based on both his statements on the matter itself, and his general deference to science.
But predominantly he's spent his career after that constructing alpha radiation detection equipment, which is how United Nuclear made its name... and donating all proceeds from interviews to the science programs at his local high schools.
Psychonaut25 6:23 PM EDT, 27 September 2024
Psychonaut25 (talk) 22:24, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
I invite you to read the many previous sections of this Talk page, wherein it has been explained many, many times that Misplaced Pages content is derived solely from reliable, secondary sources. If you have any reliable, secondary sources that support your claims, then go ahead and add that sourced content to the article. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 13:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
On Misplaced Pages we go by secondary reliable sources rather than do original research. In this case Stanton Friedman is cited for Lazar's MIT claims. - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Aiding a prostitution ring

He sold some computers to a brothel, lol. 57.135.233.22 (talk) 04:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Categories: