GOTTA LOVE JOHN LEAR , at least 50/50

[thepainterdoug]

Hey all. I have a 50/50 take on John Lear. I just can't seem to believe he's the total phony so many say he is, and then I have a hard time understanding how he makes such outlandish claims ? To call him names, call him stupid and such, just doesn't quite explain it. I remember Gordon Duff from Veterans today once saying about himself that, 30% of all he tells is complete B.S, otherwise, he would be dead by now. Perhaps this applies to John Lear is as well. One of Johns recent posts below


John Lear
16 hrs ·
A few words about the NASA/Chinese
Chang 4 scam.
No Chang 4 went to the moon. No Chang 4 landed and parked on the farside.
But NASA and the Chinese have been faking stuff for years and they have gotten a little better at it but they still miss the details.
Their scam started downhill when they used a black sky for the daytime photo of Chang 4. We know the moon daytime color is saffron-yellow. We know this from Howard Menger who was a guest of that civilization that lives on the moon. They pick up hundreds of scientists, salesmen, workmen, professors and take them to the moon for a 2 week tour. They have been doing this for a very long time.
Guests are shown the technology, the cities, the industry and everything else on the moon. They are taken for train ride that lasts many hours and tours the cities and the deserts.
They have a celebration dinner before they return to Earth and they are free to tell their friends or anybody else about their experience. Most don't for fear of ridicule.
Howard Menger went to the moon in 1956 for 2 weeks and when he came back wrote a book about his experience called, “From Outer Space to You”. This book is still available from Amazon and Lulu. He also was a lunar authority for the Pentagon.
Howard passed away a couple of years ago but before he did I emailed 6 different swatches of saffron yellow and asked him to mark the one closest to the color of the lunar sky. He put an X on the one closest and those swatches are posted on thelivingmoon.com.
The Chinese allegedly put a lunar lander Chang 4 on the farside of the moon on January 3 of this year. It would have been high noon on the farside and the ground should have been very bright. But the photo shows a darker ground shade in the distance. The sky should have been saffron yellow but it is black. On some photos there appear to be stars in the sky which would be impossible. The fake lunar photos from the fake Apollo missions should also have been saffron yellow but they are black.
Chang 4 allegedly landed near the Von Karmon crater just north of the crater Poincare where we found a spaceport NASA neglected to airbrush out. The lunar photo of Poincare with the spaceport can be found in the NASA publication 'The Moon As Viewed By Lunar Orbiter, NASA SP-200 Page 27 top photo. I have attached a diagram of the farside of the moon and noted the Von Karmon and Poincare location. Also photos of the spaceport in Poincare.
I have also attached a few Chang 4 photos with my comments and an obviously composited photo of the Earth and the moon. I say 'composited' because the Earth does not have the same phase of illumination as the moon.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by thepainterdoug (here)
I remember Gordon Duff from Veterans today once saying about himself that, 30% of all he tells is complete B.S, otherwise, he would be dead by now. Perhaps this applies to John Lear is as well.

Project Camelot witness 'Henry Deacon' (real name Arthur Neumann) told me personally that John's information was about 80% accurate. (And I'd agree.)

[Denise/Dizi]

I have had my own contact experiences, and I have spoken to John personally.. I couldn't validate that ALL of the things that he says are indeed facts because I do not know details on many of those things, . But I can tell you, the things I have talked to him about? He already knew, and I know this because he ADDED ADDITIONAL facts into our conversations, that I had never told him...Things that I absolutely knew to be true.. I can say that John DOES INDEED speak SOME truth.. How Much? I could never know, but he does indeed know some things that only contactee's, or friends of contactee's would know.

[eagle0027]

Very high on the list John is of all people on this planet that i would luv to talk with for hours or days.
I do not believe everything he has said but.....he's a guy with an incredibly diverse perspective...and has lived such an interesting life.
Hats off to him.

[chris_walker]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by thepainterdoug (here)
I remember Gordon Duff from Veterans today once saying about himself that, 30% of all he tells is complete B.S, otherwise, he would be dead by now. Perhaps this applies to John Lear is as well.

Project Camelot witness 'Henry Deacon' (real name Arthur Neumann) told me personally that John's information was about 80% accurate. (And I'd agree.)

That's actually excellent of you consider that people's recollection of even the past day's events are never 100% accurate.

I've always enjoyed John Lear's talks and he seems to stick to the story once it's told which is uncharacteristic of telling falsehoods.

The whole soul trap on the moon is most fascinating and others like John Lash and Wes Penre amongst have similar theories based on different research.

[thepainterdoug]

thanks all. interesting to see that those of you who responded believe as I do, that John is fascinating and tells some truths. But why just some truth? Truthful people are usually, well truthful. you can bank on it.

do you think its purposeful misdirection ?, or John is just misinformed in some cases?

His affidavit on 9/11 how planes did not, and could not of hit those buildings is really putting his arse on the line. all pretty amazing.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by thepainterdoug (here)
Do you think it's purposeful misdirection? Or John is just misinformed in some cases?

I don't think he's being purposefully misleading. I think in the 20% he's wrong (according to Henry Deacon), he's just plain wrong.

[HaveBlue]

To be fair John Lear states very clearly what he believes and why he believes it as opposed to what he knows for sure. Usually because he chooses to trust what someone else such as Lou Baldin tell him.
Other things he tells us because he knows it to be true. What he knows is because he was there and he has personal experience.

I believe him to be an honest man. He is getting forgetful in his old age and things like confusing Mike McConnell with Clark McClelland and quoting 'Mike McClelland' are things we who have heard the same stories told to different radio shows over many years will pick up on and forgive him for.

Surely, to my mind things like that are honest mistakes. He has put out very little new news in recent years because he stays home and all of his old contacts have died. He does not embellish his old stories in the retelling, even though he misquotes the odd name etc...

He is so patient with everybody, except recently with Kerry C, of which I thought was deserved. (John is as sick of the Mark Richards rubbish as the rest of us, and Kerrys journalistic suicidal proclaimations/intuitions? of her superior knowledge on everything)

I know if I was him I'd be telling these internet radio show people to listen to my old stuff on the web because everything I know has all been said. He is more generous with his time than I would be myself.

But I still listen to any new John Lear stuff that pops up just in case. I note he was not going to be very impressed with Jeremy Corbells doco on Bob Lazar. The long awaited doco by Jeremy on John himself has never materialized, but for 15 mins or so of a teaser.

The main thing I love about John is that he is not on an ego trip and is not self promoting. Miles Johnston gets the best out of John because they go back a way and Miles has a sense of humour that John appreciates. Other interviewers of John are more like pests and rather cringeworthy to bear.

Why John tolerates anyone except people such as Miles is remarkable as he is in rather severe pain from his plane crash as a 17 y/o and all his other health issues is a huge credit to him. Some of those interviews he does are hard work for him. He wants us who are interested to know at least what he knows and believes for our benefit. I don't think he just loves the sound of his own voice or is lonely for people to talk to in any way.

It is only a matter of time before we get the news of his passing, he thought it funny that Stan Friedman had died and said he never liked him etc... which was candid and honest of him. Talking like he didn't care about the camera being there! Gallows humour rather than cruelty, but it is amusing to see and hear who doesn't like who in ufology.

John must be about the last of the old school, I can't think of anyone else around his age left. Grant Cameron is one, but he doesn't look that old to me. Maybe he is? I'm sure going to miss them both when they're gone. At least Richard Dolan is not very old! One day soon he is about all we'll have left.

[thepainterdoug]

Well said Have Blue/ John's facebook is the site I most frequently visit. its always fascinating regardless of if you can make sense or believe most of it. I look at peoples motives. they are usually pretty simple to figure out regarding the theme and variation of us humans.
but I don't see the motive for John's lying, when the truth would do just as good. Yes, someday not too far off, he will pass, and regardless of opinion, he truly is the last of this old guard. Grant Cameron is a good friend and he is taking steps to protect what he knows, should he ever be marginalized . I don't know Richard Dolan personally but he is certainly at the forefront of all thats happening. Many would say regarding John Lear why not soon make a full disclosure deathbed confession and just spill it all out? Well its not John or other whistleblowers that would bear the brunt, but their families, grandchildren and so on. Who would risk that? Just my opinion