While his claims have been met with skepticism and scrutiny, some arguments have been put forth in support of the idea that he may be telling the truth. Here are a few reasons often cited by those who believe in Lazar's account.

Bob Lazar has maintained a consistent narrative about his alleged experiences since he first came forward in the late 1980s. Despite facing significant criticism and personal attacks, his core claims have remained largely unchanged over the years. This consistency lends some credibility to his account, as fabrication or deceit would likely result in contradictions or discrepancies over time.

Lazar has demonstrated a detailed understanding of advanced scientific concepts and technologies, particularly in the field of propulsion systems. He claimed to have worked on a flying saucer-like craft powered by an antimatter reactor and explained its operation in intricate detail. Supporters argue that his knowledge appears beyond what an average person could fabricate or acquire without substantial expertise.

Disclosure of classified information: Lazar provided specific details about his alleged work at S-4, including the layout of the facility, the interior of the craft he worked on, and the propulsion system. Some argue that this level of detail suggests he had access to classified information or had direct experience with the technology he described.

While Lazar's claims have faced challenges in terms of corroborating evidence, there have been a few elements that some consider supportive. For instance, he mentioned the presence of hand scanners at the facility, which were not widely known at the time but were later confirmed to exist. Additionally, some people have come forward claiming to have witnessed unusual phenomena in the vicinity of Area 51, potentially lending credence to Lazar's assertions.

Reputation and personal risk: Bob Lazar's decision to go public with his claims brought considerable personal and professional risks. He faced scrutiny, government harassment, and loss of credibility in mainstream circles. Supporters argue that it is unlikely someone would willingly subject themselves to such consequences if they were knowingly lying or fabricating a story.

It is important to note that the above points are not definitive proof of the veracity of Bob Lazar's claims. They are simply arguments put forth by some individuals who find his story compelling. The scientific and intelligence communities have largely dismissed Lazar's claims, citing inconsistencies, lack of substantial evidence, and his questionable background.