Author Billy Meier - Michael Horn  (Read 198650 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #30 on: June 22, 2015, 01:05:37 PM »
"And, in case no one has noticed, nobody here - or ANYWHERE else - has put forward any evidence even remotely comparable to Meier's. In fact, nobody else has put forward ANY evidence of anything to substantiate the existence of, and contact with, extraterrestrials. And that includes ALL the liars who claim to be contactees.

"Yet such claims drive the UFO industry, the (very big) business that relies on gullible people believing fantasies..."

So, anyone but you who claims to have information about the existence of extraterrestrials is a fraud who doesn't have evidence and is just part of the lucrative "UFO industry" that relies on duping the gullible for fun and profit.  You, on the other hand have irrefutable evidence that people should automatically accept that on faith just because you say it's true.  Isn't that pretty much the definition of gullibility?  And if the money you make from your efforts doesn't make you part of the same UFO industry you deride, what industry are you in then?

And, if you have a minute, please explain what is going on in this photo and those that are similar to it.  I try not to be gullible, and unless the ETs are harvesting our pine cones, it sure looks like somebody just stuck a model in the tree.  I sincerely want to believe, but pictures like that make it difficult.  Thank you.


Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #31 on: June 22, 2015, 01:17:15 PM »
Anyone who claims ANYTHING and can't substantiate it - while not necessarily part of the UFO "industry" - is making factually irrelevant claims. For instance, I'm secretly married to Jennifer Lawrence. I think you get the idea.

Your other point is certainly as worthy of response as is your following up on the information provided. Here is an expert, independent authentication of the WCUFO:

http://www.tjresearch.info/Zahi_WCUFO%20Investigation.pdf

WHile it was done by an expert that part is…irrelevance because he has also provided the protocols used, meaning that anyone can duplicate the testing in accordance with something not mentioned here: the scientific method.

Further, here is a test that anyone can do on their computer in less than five minutes:

http://theyflyblog.com/2014/06/15/billy-meier-ufo-case-prove/

It also means that one will have to debunk…themselves if they disagree with their own results.

Hopefully - though unlikely - the scrutiny applied to the Meier case, which is fine with me, will be applied to ALL other so-called UFO cases, contacts, abductions, hybrid-babies, etc. That would, of course, end all discussion of those topics…and we can't have that, can we?

Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #32 on: June 22, 2015, 01:18:34 PM »
P.S. Absolutely NOTHING in the Meier case involves faith, belief, etc.


Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #33 on: June 22, 2015, 02:29:09 PM »
P.S. Absolutely NOTHING in the Meier case involves faith, belief, etc.

accept the belief that he isn't lying and faking photos which he has done

Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #34 on: June 22, 2015, 02:33:24 PM »
Any actual evidence that Billy Meier has ever faked his UFO photos needs to be submitted. The discussion is about the WCUFO photos and video, falsely claimed by proven liar John Razimus to be hoaxed.

I have linked to the necessary analysis, etc.

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #35 on: June 22, 2015, 02:49:23 PM »
I spent an hour looking at the links you provided and at some sites that offer dissenting opinions, and it seems that there are a number of people with excellent credentials who don't believe Mr. Meier.  Since the dissenters used their real names and didn't hide behind aliases like Mr. Zahi, I'm going to side with them (and yes, I'm also hiding behind an alias on this site because I'm not a public figure and the internet being what it is, I'd rather not have millions of strangers knowing who I am and where I live).  As for other claims of extraterrestrial contact never being subjected to intense scrutiny, I'm pretty sure that's not true.  The debunking of the recent so-called Roswell slides is a case in point. I don't have time to debate the fine points of this at length, so I'm just going to agree to disagree here.  As far as the UFO industry is concerned, it's a very big pie and it seems like there are enough slices to go around, so there really isn't a need to denigrate your competition, because you seem a pretty big portion.  Someday I hope to see evidence of extraterrestrial presence that is irrefutable and universally accepted by the scientific community.  Until then, I have to remain a skeptic because I haven't been convinced yet.

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #36 on: June 22, 2015, 03:04:15 PM »


It was a good idea to log in today.

Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #37 on: June 22, 2015, 03:08:45 PM »
Of course you neglected to name these "experts" and to pay attention to what was CLEARLY stated:

"While it was done by an expert that part is…irrelevance because he has also provided the protocols used,  meaning that anyone can duplicate the testing in accordance with something not mentioned here: the scientific method."

Please note:
"My colleagues and I may have made breakthroughs in our understanding of possibilities and ways for traveling faster than light from Billy Meier's accounts of his encounters with the Plejarens...If what this Meier is saying is just a hoax, he's being cued by some very knowledgeable scientists. I've only discussed this Meier case with scientists who are fairly open-minded about interstellar flight, but I'll tell you, the majority of them think it's credible and agree at least with part, or sometimes all, of the things talked about by the Plejarens."

David Froning

(Note that the topic of zero-point field energy (http://www.integrityresearchinstitute.org/Froning-quantumvacuum.pdf), etc., is indeed one of award-winning (http://www.integrityresearchinstitute.org/COFE4Review.htm) physicist and aeronautical and aerospace engineer David Froning's specialized areas of interest and expertise.) In fact, people like Michael Malin (http://theyfly.com/Scientific_Experts.html), NASA aerospace engineer (http://prweb.com/releases/2014/05/prweb11867883.htm), Matthew Wieczkiewicz, and Kenneth Smith, the Director of Operations at Orbital Launch System Group (Ret) endorse Meier's singular authenticity.

You're being "pretty sure" about othr cases is equivalent to my saying I'm pretty sure you're a thief and embezzler. Where's the evidence?

Bottom line, it's probably wise of you to remain anonymous since such embarrassingly shoddy "research" is the reason why your posting on internet forums is the extent of your "expertise". This is what I expect from skeptics and debunkers of course. And it makes one wonder why, since even this person claims to want to know the truth, etc., there's such ignorant, hateful, resentment filled idiocy in the face of what is really the best evidence.

No further statements, reeking of incompetence, unspecified "experts", lack of research, logic and basic thinking skills will be repsonded to further. As usual, this turns into a classic situation of "pearls before…"

Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #38 on: June 22, 2015, 03:12:48 PM »
Of course you neglected to name these "experts" and to pay attention to what was CLEARLY stated:

"While it was done by an expert that part is…irrelevance because he has also provided the protocols used,  meaning that anyone can duplicate the testing in accordance with something not mentioned here: the scientific method."

Please note:
"My colleagues and I may have made breakthroughs in our understanding of possibilities and ways for traveling faster than light from Billy Meier's accounts of his encounters with the Plejarens...If what this Meier is saying is just a hoax, he's being cued by some very knowledgeable scientists. I've only discussed this Meier case with scientists who are fairly open-minded about interstellar flight, but I'll tell you, the majority of them think it's credible and agree at least with part, or sometimes all, of the things talked about by the Plejarens."

David Froning

(Note that the topic of zero-point field energy (http://www.integrityresearchinstitute.org/Froning-quantumvacuum.pdf), etc., is indeed one of award-winning (http://www.integrityresearchinstitute.org/COFE4Review.htm) physicist and aeronautical and aerospace engineer David Froning's specialized areas of interest and expertise.) In fact, people like Michael Malin (http://theyfly.com/Scientific_Experts.html), NASA aerospace engineer (http://prweb.com/releases/2014/05/prweb11867883.htm), Matthew Wieczkiewicz, and Kenneth Smith, the Director of Operations at Orbital Launch System Group (Ret) endorse Meier's singular authenticity.

You're being "pretty sure" about othr cases is equivalent to my saying I'm pretty sure you're a thief and embezzler. Where's the evidence?

Bottom line, it's probably wise of you to remain anonymous since such embarrassingly shoddy "research" is the reason why your posting on internet forums is the extent of your "expertise". This is what I expect from skeptics and debunkers of course. And it makes one wonder why, since even this person claims to want to know the truth, etc., there's such ignorant, hateful, resentment filled idiocy in the face of what is really the best evidence.

No further statements, reeking of incompetence, unspecified "experts", lack of research, logic and basic thinking skills will be repsonded to further. As usual, this turns into a classic situation of "pearls before…"

If you wanted to debate with people who aren't anonymous why did you come to an online forum?

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #39 on: June 22, 2015, 03:13:45 PM »
I guess I can't speak from a position of authority because I only looked at a tiny bit of the Meier material before discounting it, but it seems pretty clear Meier was a guy into trick photography who got carried away.  Books on darkroom techniques and such were common back in the day.  Authenticating the film means nothing; there is no reason to suspect the film itself was manipulated or altered. 

Throwing a trashcan lid into the air and taking a few shots until you get a good one, or supporting it in a way invisible to the camera doesn't require any film manipulation.  I say trashcan lid not because I was told to, but because the first time I saw the images (without ever having heard them described) it was immediately apparent that was what it was.  The characteristic ridges around the rim, for one thing, are immediately identifiable as being of the old style aluminum trashcan lids.  And then the whole thing is covered with a bad silver or gold spray paint job.  Everything we manufacture today looks more sophisticated than this thing.  Why are the ET's so into 1970s Art Deco?

I looked at the proof demonstrated in the last post, which claims photo enhancement shows the UFO is over a road.  The enhanced image shows something but there is no telling whether it is a road or a piece of crumpled paper.  It is very indistinct.  Either way it doesn't matter.  All you would need is to light the model on a dark night and use a fast film to make the rest of the image look black.  Whatever is in the background, I have no idea what it is or how far away it is.

I've just looked at a film and the object 'suspended over the tree' is clearly being dangled from a thread and moving around like a bob on a pendulum.  The ETs were demonstrating pendulum motion?  Doesn't that seem rather convenient?  Listen, I can think of a few ways to do this.  You dangle a tiny model a few inches or feet in front of the camera and manipulate it with threads hanging from your hands; as an example, one hand is above, and one is pulling another thread from the side.  The lack of perspective makes it look like it's off in the distance over the tree.  The film quality is bad so it doesn't have to be in sharp focus;

OR you project the background film onto a screen and manipulate the model in front of the screen; OR you take separate 8mm movies, project them both onto a screen simultaneously and film that, so that you can make the UFO appear and disappear at will; OR you use some unspecified darkroom technique to combine both negatives into one film, with the UFO having been filmed against a black background.

And if, not being an expert, I'm all washed up on that...

Why do the ETs have such a poor understanding of science?  I waded through a few pages of the Billy Meier text one time.  It was so voluminous I didn't make a long study of it but I do remember one claim.  Billy Meier had developed a sore arm.  He frequently wore an armband radio on that arm while working outside.  He told the ETs that he thought it was radio waves from the armband radio which were causing his problem, so he stopped wearing it.  Well, the ETs spent what I recall as several pages of text congratulating him on his genius and telling him all about how he was correct.  It was a very nauseating, self-aggrandizing read.   More to the point, AM or FM radios neither create radio waves nor attract them.  The radio waves are always there, radio or no radio.  Why do the representatives of a species who has mastered interstellar space travel not know this?

Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #40 on: June 22, 2015, 03:29:26 PM »
Of course you neglected to name these "experts" and to pay attention to what was CLEARLY stated:

"While it was done by an expert that part is…irrelevance because he has also provided the protocols used,  meaning that anyone can duplicate the testing in accordance with something not mentioned here: the scientific method."

Please note:
"My colleagues and I may have made breakthroughs in our understanding of possibilities and ways for traveling faster than light from Billy Meier's accounts of his encounters with the Plejarens...If what this Meier is saying is just a hoax, he's being cued by some very knowledgeable scientists. I've only discussed this Meier case with scientists who are fairly open-minded about interstellar flight, but I'll tell you, the majority of them think it's credible and agree at least with part, or sometimes all, of the things talked about by the Plejarens."

David Froning

(Note that the topic of zero-point field energy (http://www.integrityresearchinstitute.org/Froning-quantumvacuum.pdf), etc., is indeed one of award-winning (http://www.integrityresearchinstitute.org/COFE4Review.htm) physicist and aeronautical and aerospace engineer David Froning's specialized areas of interest and expertise.) In fact, people like Michael Malin (http://theyfly.com/Scientific_Experts.html), NASA aerospace engineer (http://prweb.com/releases/2014/05/prweb11867883.htm), Matthew Wieczkiewicz, and Kenneth Smith, the Director of Operations at Orbital Launch System Group (Ret) endorse Meier's singular authenticity.

You're being "pretty sure" about othr cases is equivalent to my saying I'm pretty sure you're a thief and embezzler. Where's the evidence?

Bottom line, it's probably wise of you to remain anonymous since such embarrassingly shoddy "research" is the reason why your posting on internet forums is the extent of your "expertise". This is what I expect from skeptics and debunkers of course. And it makes one wonder why, since even this person claims to want to know the truth, etc., there's such ignorant, hateful, resentment filled idiocy in the face of what is really the best evidence.

No further statements, reeking of incompetence, unspecified "experts", lack of research, logic and basic thinking skills will be repsonded to further. As usual, this turns into a classic situation of "pearls before…"

First, I don't claim any special "expertise."

Second, what's wrong with being skeptical, because skepticism keeps one from being gullible, a trait you obviously deplore.

Third, here's a link with the names of the "experts" you requested. If they're wrong or not credible, I'm sure you will explain why in your calm, patient manner --http://www.billymeieruforesearch.com/investigation-of-others/.

Fourth, I'm glad I didn't say anything about the dirty knife.



Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #41 on: June 22, 2015, 03:39:34 PM »
The reason I came to this forum was to publicly refute the lies and defamation from John Razimus, who's been spewing this stuff close to ten years.

Quite obviously it wasn't to engage in discussion with people who are simply to cowardly - and unqualified - to discuss the evidence. This is demonstrated by all of the inept and incorrect comments regarding Meier's evidence, which is the most scrutinized and tested in the entire field.

John Razimus has effectively run away, as expected, and now that I've put the information here for any interested persons to actually research and investigate, I've accomplished what I set out to do.

As for those so-called "investigators":

http://www.theyfly.com/Top_Skeptic_Fixed.htm

http://theyfly.com/Skeptics_Caught.htm

http://theyfly.com/PDF/RandiRetractsClaim.pdf



I'm now withdrawing from this forum and any actually serious questions can be emailed to me.
 

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #42 on: June 22, 2015, 03:39:47 PM »

 useless gibberish from the know-nothing

Michael Horn

John B. Wells -

George Noory -

   Axis of weasels.

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #43 on: June 22, 2015, 03:55:35 PM »
He's rather a touchy chap, isn't he?

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #44 on: June 22, 2015, 03:56:38 PM »
He's rather a touchy chap, isn't he?

  Like his name, he blows.

Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #45 on: June 22, 2015, 03:56:46 PM »
The reason I came to this forum was to publicly refute the lies and defamation from John Razimus, who's been spewing this stuff close to ten years.

Quite obviously it wasn't to engage in discussion with people who are simply to cowardly - and unqualified - to discuss the evidence. This is demonstrated by all of the inept and incorrect comments regarding Meier's evidence, which is the most scrutinized and tested in the entire field.

John Razimus has effectively run away, as expected, and now that I've put the information here for any interested persons to actually research and investigate, I've accomplished what I set out to do.

As for those so-called "investigators":

http://www.theyfly.com/Top_Skeptic_Fixed.htm

http://theyfly.com/Skeptics_Caught.htm

http://theyfly.com/PDF/RandiRetractsClaim.pdf



I'm now withdrawing from this forum and any actually serious questions can be emailed to me.

Thanks for your participation!  Have a nice day.

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #46 on: June 22, 2015, 04:02:02 PM »

Any actual evidence that Billy Meier has ever faked his UFO photos needs to be submitted.


i guess my biggest problem with the meier case is that the UFOs just don't look authentic to me.  hell, here's a guy who shows you how to make the "wedding cake" UFO over the weekend in your garage:


billymeierufocase.com/howtomakewcufo.html


michael, i'm watching your video here:





at about three minutes in, you're split screened with a meier video to the left, and in this video, the craft keeps disappearing and reappearing... but each time it happens, i can clearly see an edit in the film.  it's such an obvious splice.  i can't imagine how you don't see that.  in other meier videos where UFOs hover, they swing like a pendulum, as if suspended on a cable. 


here are meier's pleadians, named "asket" and "nera".



only problem is, they're actually singers from the fucking DEAN MARTIN SHOW!  FUCKING FUCK!








michael, how you don't see what i see baffles me.  how you are offended at the notion of people questioning meier's credibility i'm equally baffled by.  if even ONE piece of his evidence is demonstrated to be inauthentic, it's ALL inauthentic.  checkmate, bud.


i've read a little about meier, and i get the impression he's something of a religious figure with groupies hanging out/living on his property.  that, to me, sounds like the makings of a cult, and i hope we don't one day end up reading about you lying dead in a bed wearing fresh new sneakers awaiting a space taxi.

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #47 on: June 22, 2015, 04:04:49 PM »
Obviously Dean Martin is a pleadian.

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #48 on: June 22, 2015, 04:05:55 PM »
Why are the ET's so into 1970s Art Deco?


heh heh

Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #49 on: June 22, 2015, 04:11:03 PM »

Quite obviously it wasn't to engage in discussion with people who are simply to cowardly - and unqualified - to discuss the evidence.


but michael... qualifications aren't required in order to look at an object and remark what it appears to be.  for many, some of the the meier UFOs look to be a trash can lid.  that's just an observation people make.  it looks like what it looks like.  if i were more qualified, would i instead see a giraffe head?

Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #50 on: June 22, 2015, 04:17:46 PM »
I'm now withdrawing from this forum and any actually serious questions can be emailed to me.


i think you've grown so accustomed to surrounding yourself with meier cult believers and sycophants that you have grown incapable of interacting with regular people who are naturally going to doubt your extraordinary claims.  i'm surprised you find this resistance to be unexpected.


i accept your offer.  come on my podcast.  you'll be treated with respect, but you'll also be challenged bit by bit on the evidence.

Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #51 on: June 22, 2015, 04:36:22 PM »

i think you've grown so accustomed to surrounding yourself with meier cult believers and sycophants that you have grown incapable of interacting with regular people who are naturally going to doubt your extraordinary claims.  i'm surprised you find this resistance to be unexpected.


i accept your offer.  come on my podcast.  you'll be treated with respect, but you'll also be challenged bit by bit on the evidence.

This thread turned into a juicy little nugget! Thanks!

Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #52 on: June 22, 2015, 04:38:27 PM »
I'm now withdrawing from this forum and any actually serious questions can be emailed to me.
99% chance that's a lie.

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #53 on: June 22, 2015, 04:46:05 PM »
What amuses me about Meier is just the seeming hordes of representatives and bullshit artists coming out evoking his name. Like someone else pointed out, just in C2Cs time there been 57 shows involving probably three or four dozen different guests using the Meier name and story. And that's just programs with Meier as a heavy plot line, not someone just citing him.

The story is such obvious bullshit. From the hilarious photography to his ex-wife calling him a lunatic to his frauds being exposed again and again. My personal favorite was his taking pictures of "aliens" which was later proven to be photos he'd taken of a TV show on his television.

But I admire it in a way. Meier is a beacon for insane people and all the lunacy that's come from him has been extremely entertaining. Before the internet, it was much easier to hoax people and build a following. But the fact that his legacy endures today is amazing.

I give Michael Horn credit though. He was one of the more lucid Meier representatives. I wonder what became of the music he was trying to shill in between Meier arguments with Art?

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #54 on: June 22, 2015, 04:48:58 PM »

i guess my biggest problem with the meier case is that the UFOs just don't look authentic to me.  hell, here's a guy who shows you how to make the "wedding cake" UFO over the weekend in your garage:


billymeierufocase.com/howtomakewcufo.html


michael, i'm watching your video here:





at about three minutes in, you're split screened with a meier video to the left, and in this video, the craft keeps disappearing and reappearing... but each time it happens, i can clearly see an edit in the film.  it's such an obvious splice.  i can't imagine how you don't see that.  in other meier videos where UFOs hover, they swing like a pendulum, as if suspended on a cable. 


here are meier's pleadians, named "asket" and "nera".



only problem is, they're actually singers from the fucking DEAN MARTIN SHOW!  FUCKING FUCK!








michael, how you don't see what i see baffles me.  how you are offended at the notion of people questioning meier's credibility i'm equally baffled by.  if even ONE piece of his evidence is demonstrated to be inauthentic, it's ALL inauthentic.  checkmate, bud.


i've read a little about meier, and i get the impression he's something of a religious figure with groupies hanging out/living on his property.  that, to me, sounds like the makings of a cult, and i hope we don't one day end up reading about you lying dead in a bed wearing fresh new sneakers awaiting a space taxi.

Don't forget the dinosaur photo!


Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #55 on: June 22, 2015, 04:59:26 PM »
Don't forget the dinosaur photo!


well pound my ass and call me ulysses.  i had no idea of this one.  michael, this is the specific evidence that needs addressing.

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #56 on: June 22, 2015, 05:16:56 PM »

well pound my ass and call me ulysses.  i had no idea of this one.  michael, this is the specific evidence that needs addressing.

Coaster had posted that one earlier...yup, some people still think you can cure cancer with Chiropractics too!

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #57 on: June 22, 2015, 05:30:01 PM »
MV,

I accept your offer to be interviewed on your podcast, of course.

And of course once that's set, all the "experts" here are free to question and challenge.

BTW, people really need to stop pretending to be researchers if all they do is quote imbecile skeptics:

www.theyfly.com/Asket_&_Nera.htm

http://www.rhalzahi.com/docs/pendulum-EN.pdf

And, since it's implied that everyone here is smarter and more qualified than these experts, one more time…you're not:

"My colleagues and I may have made breakthroughs in our understanding of possibilities and ways for traveling faster than light from Billy Meier's accounts of his encounters with the Plejarens...If what this Meier is saying is just a hoax, he's being cued by some very knowledgeable scientists. I've only discussed this Meier case with scientists who are fairly open-minded about interstellar flight, but I'll tell you, the majority of them think it's credible and agree at least with part, or sometimes all, of the things talked about by the Plejarens."

David Froning

(Note that the topic of zero-point field energy (http://www.integrityresearchinstitute.org/Froning-quantumvacuum.pdf), etc., is indeed one of award-winning (http://www.integrityresearchinstitute.org/COFE4Review.htm) physicist and aeronautical and aerospace engineer David Froning's specialized areas of interest and expertise.) In fact, people like Michael Malin (http://theyfly.com/Scientific_Experts.html), NASA aerospace engineer (http://prweb.com/releases/2014/05/prweb11867883.htm), Matthew Wieczkiewicz, and Kenneth Smith, the Director of Operations at Orbital Launch System Group (Ret) endorse Meier's singular authenticity.

Further, let's exercise a little logic. By yours, if one piece of Meier's evidecne is authentic then it's all authentic.

Please contact me privately re scheduling the interview. Maybe this is the opportunity for Razimus to debate me, it's up to you.

All questions and challenges accepted.



Re: Billy Meier
« Reply #58 on: June 22, 2015, 05:39:40 PM »

I'm now withdrawing from this forum and any actually serious questions can be emailed to me.
99% chance that's a lie.
Called it. He just can't resist.


And since he can't, tell us Michael, since you've been toting the David Froning quote for years, where our breakthroughs in FTL travel are and why they're not plastered not over all the scientific journals, but popular magazines (Popular Mechanics? Aviation Weekly?) or the 6:00 news or anything else?

Re: Billy Meiers
« Reply #59 on: June 22, 2015, 06:00:00 PM »
Further, let's exercise a little logic. By yours, if one piece of Meier's evidecne is authentic then it's all authentic.