Billy Meier

A

Anonymous

Guest
#1
Billy Meier's photos: some clarification

Since Alan Friswell (in his article “Faking It…”) has recounted some of the details of my encounters and correspondence with Vaughn Rees, CFI-West, James Randi, Michael Shermer, etc. regarding Billy Meier’s photographic evidence, I would like to add a few things for clarity and accuracy. Actually, I initiated a meeting with Vaughn Rees at his office, at CFI-West in Los Angeles, where I showed him Meier’s photographic and film evidence and issued the challenge to him to duplicate one photo and one film subsequent to his calling Meier’s evidence “easily duplicated hoaxes”. Though the skeptics have long accused Meier of a hoax, duplicating the photo and film wasn’t something that Rees initiated on his own and he probably regrets having ever accepted the challenge. (More of the details are available at http://www.theyfly.com.)

In fairness to CFI-West, they finally did (after more than three years) come up with six photos of a small UFO model and attempted to claim that they had “duplicated the effect” of Meier’s photos, something that I quickly reminded them was neither the nature of the challenge nor actually much of an accomplishment since the same could be said for any sci-fi movie in which a spaceship or UFO is seen flying around (though that gave the benefit of the doubt to CFI-West as they have never submitted any film, as Mr. Rees had promised).

During my appearance on the Coast to Coast radio show with host Art Bell (March 7 – 8, 2004), Rees called in to again assert that he had duplicated the effect of Meier’s photos, to which Bell responded by asking Rees if he was going to submit his photos to the same standards of testing that Meier’s had been. When Rees firmly declined, Bell dismissed him from the show, along with any credibility the skeptics could have hoped to have. And, subsequent to Rees’ dissembling, James Randi retracted his claim that the Meier case is a hoax. Of course, no payment to Meier (in any form or denominations) has been forthcoming.

I think that Alan should consider having his photos analyzed according to the same standards as Meier’s, if for no other reason than to help clarify the difference between duplicating an “effect” and duplicating the genuine article. There is a free document at my site that covers some of the parameters of the testing, which were quite precise and effective in distinguishing between models (as the investigators had models made and photographed them for comparison) and the far larger objects in Meier’s photos and films. The full protocols can be made available to Alan should he wish to participate in the exercise. While it’s clear from his article that he’s not claiming that he photographed the same kind and size of objects that Meier did, it would put to rest any doubts in the minds of those who might view his attempt as effectively equaling Meier’s photos.

Another thing that might interest readers is the series of photos, taken by Meier, of a UFO circling a tree. The following is quoted from research by James Deardorff (http://www.tjresearch.info):

“In Meier's photo series below, taken on 9 July 1975 between the communities of Fuchsbüel and Hofhalden, near Wetzikon, Switzerland, the beamship, as it is called, posed for him on all sides of the tree. In this series, 11 photos of which have survived, there are several indicators that force the skeptic to conclude that the beamship was an actual craft at a considerable distance from the camera. First, in the left-hand photo, one sees that the tree on the right is in poor focus because it is just a few meters away. The UFO and the tree adjacent to it are in very good focus, being many meters away. Consistent with this, Wendelle Stevens found that the focus setting on Meier's camera, with which he took his pictures in 1975 and 1976, was stuck just one notch short of infinity; thus he could not take clear close-up shots, but objects at distances of some 30-300 meters were in very good focus.

Equally important is the fact that one may take these photos, including the one best showing the tree's trunk (the 2nd one from the left), to experts in forestry and ask them to identify the kind of tree. Those with any knowledge of fir trees in western Germany, Switzerland and elsewhere will probably inform you that it is an abies alba, i.e., a European silver fir, or at the least, a mature conifer. It is no potted "baby" tree and no model tree. If you look closely at the trunk you will see two protuberances where limbs had once grown before being shed or pruned off. These facts can be determined from these photos even though the ones displayed here are much-handled copies of copies. In the first four of these photos, counting from the left, three or four nearly square "portholes" can be discerned, regularly spaced around an upper circumference of the craft.

Since the craft posed on all sides of the tree, and cannot have been a small model if the tree was a mature fir, the evidence pointing towards the tree's maturity deserves more analysis. Therefore much more is discussed, shown and analyzed about it here, with the inescapable conclusion being that this UFO or IFO was real—a beamship.”

In addition to this series, Meier has taken numerous photos and films of UFOs next to, behind and above other objects of known size, something that Alan didn’t do, of course. So did photos like the famous photo number 174, where the UFO obviously couldn’t have been a suspended model. Deardorff covers all of this quite nicely at http://www.tjresearch.info/hasenbol.htm.

And Deardorff also provides compelling explanations for why the so-called (and truly otherworldly looking) “Wedding Cake” UFO is indeed another authentic craft and not a model, as some skeptics have tried to assert. The fact that there is a clear, daytime video of this ship (approximately 14’ in diameter), hovering in front of a tree, that Meier zooms 400’- 500’ across an open field to focus on, further leaves the skeptics chewing on their shoes. This video is on the DVD “The Meier Contacts – The Key To Our Future Survival”.

While the UFOs photographed next to objects of known size were determined to be quite large, the problem with the “hung ‘em on a string” theory is that the investigators in the case found that there was rarely even the slightest possibility that such a hoaxing method could have been employed by Meier since so many of his photos, including the multiple UFOs and sequence shots, were taken in areas where there were not only no supporting objects or structures but the terrain made such things impossible, even assuming that accomplices could have existed. Steep hillsides and large valleys virtually eliminated any chance that Meier’s UFOs were anything but the full-sized objects that the testing revealed them to be.

It might be helpful for Alan and any of the people who still think that Meier hoaxed the photos, to actually visit the area and see for themselves how enormously challenging such an undertaking would have been for a one-armed man with no resources or accomplices to even attempt such a grand deception. It’s one thing to visit a hardware store and to assemble one’s models, and theories, in relative comfort and quite another to trudge about, in the remote regions Meier traversed even during the harsh Swiss winters, and to come back with rolls of perfectly clear UFO photos (often with up to four craft in them).

I also need to point out that Alan’s comment that much of what Meier was told by the Plejaren is “fairly predictable stuff”, it is absolutely anything but that. As a matter of fact, I have documented literally dozens of very specific, prophetically accurate scientific and world event-related bits of information given to, and published by, Meier anywhere from a few weeks to a few decades before “official” discovery or occurrence. Actually, there are hundreds of such items, spanning the last 53 years, with a remarkable absence of erroneous information. This constitutes what I refer to as the higher standard of proof, especially as the information is in copyrighted books and/or unalterable documents published before the events in question occurred. Research can be done by any interested party to determine if (as I claim) Meier and the Plejaren are the most accurate source of prophetically accurate information in all of history. New confirmation of prophetic information continues to occur and I post updates in my free online newsletter at http://www.theyfly.com.

Alan is quite right in pointing out that no accomplices have ever come forward but he probably didn’t know that several movie Hollywood studios offered Meier deals on his life story, including Universal, which offered him $1,000,000 and the full use of their special effects department to recreate his photos and films. Meier turned down all the film offers and noted that he had no use for special effects, explaining that to make his films, “I take the camera and when the ship comes…I press the button.”

As far as the “religious significance” that Alan attributes to Meier’s photo album, the very idea is antithetical to everything that Meier personally stands for. If there is one thing that is repeatedly emphasized in the information it is the need for humanity to break free of cultic religious belief systems, which are viewed as nothing less than enslaving and illogical. The Plejaren are particularly vocal about this throughout the Contact Reports (the verbatim transcripts of Meier’s conversations with them), clarifying that a part of their own mission is to help rectify the damage done by their own distant forefathers many of whom, they say, were the gods of our distant past.

There’s been some mention of the sound recordings and the skeptics’ absolute avoidance of any attempt to duplicate them, despite their being freely available to anyone at my website. The following, from “Light Years” by Gary Kinder, may shed some light on why the skeptics won’t touch the sounds:

Steve Ambrose, sound engineer for Stevie Wonder and inventor of the Micro Monitor, a radio set complete with speaker that fits inside Wonder's ear, analyzed the Meier sound recordings. "The sound recording's got some surprising things in it," he told me. "How would you duplicate it? I'm not just talking about how to duplicate it audio-wise, but how do you show those various things on a spectrum analyzer and on the 'scope that it was doing? It's one thing to make something that sounds like it, it's another thing to make something that sounds like it and has those consistent and random oscillations in it. The sound of the spacecraft," he added, "was a single sound source recording that had an amazing frequency response. If it is a hoax I'd like to meet the guy that did it, because he could probably make a lot of money in special effects."

I must say that, overall, I think Alan actually did a fair job in his article, especially when you consider how few people have ever troubled themselves to attempt to duplicate any of Meier’s evidence.

It must also be noted that Meier was taking UFO pictures as early as 1964, when he was in India. During his travels in the 1950s and 1960s, he was also rubbing shoulders with many people who were, or who soon would be, important players on the world’s stage. These included King Hussein of Jordan, Indira Ghandi and even Saddam Hussein, among many others. It was during these times that Meier was also studying most of the world’s major religions, all of this at the encouragement of the Plejaren as part of the preparation for his mission later in life.

It was while Meier was in India that the first of the (documented) 21 attempts on his life took place. When one reads about the Talmud of Jmmanuel, which Meier co-discovered in 1963, a better understanding of the depth and controversial aspects of the case will become apparent, as will some of the motivations behind the attempts on his life. (Again, a thorough reading of Deardorff’s site will be most informative.)

When considering the case in its totality one has to conclude that Meier either possesses above-genius level abilities in photography, filmmaking, video making, model making, special effects, computer/digital effects, sound recording and engineering, metallurgy, electronics, astronomy, environmental sciences, physics, astrophysics, mathematics, clairvoyance, mass hypnosis, etc. or that the simpler answer is the correct one, i.e. that he is a genuine contactee.

For those who wish to respond with pure skepticism and/or derision, please do some real, qualified research first and then specify what you base your conclusions on. During the past 26 years that I’ve researched the case, I think that I’ve heard and probably answered almost all challenges. I do welcome any interest in the case and, for those who need to hear it again, there is a ton of free stuff on my website so you don’t need to buy anything to learn quite a bit about the case. If you want any of the products, I’m delighted of course simply because it helps me to continue my work.
If, as I claim, that the Meier case is the only scientifically proven, still ongoing (more than 63 years) UFO-ET contact case, then surely it is the most important story in all of human history.

Lastly, I will be out of my office until June 17th so, should there be any questions, please allow me some time to respond after my return from lecturing.

Michael Horn
Authorized American Media Representative
The Billy Meier Contacts
www.theyfly.com

[Emp edit: Fiixng links so they work.]
 

HopoUK

Junior Acolyte
Joined
May 29, 2005
Messages
57
Likes
0
Points
22
#2
Michael, looking at the video footage on the website you provided us, it does look like the object is being spun around on the end of a thin wire. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a sceptic regarding UFO's ( I've had an experience myself that led me to believe ), but I am sceptical about Meier's footage.

Granted, you don't see the wire, but the motion of the object leads most viewers to come to a similar conclusion. And just because Mr Rees hasn't provided his own "FAKE" as he promised, doesn't mean that anyone else cannot fake it. Someone out there should probably be able to produce a fake that looks exactly like Mr Meier's footage.

Don't challenge me though. I wouldn't know where to start! :)

All I can say is that I would love to be proved wrong about this, but I cannot see that happening. And I'm sure others will be along to make their own comments on this story.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#3
The Most Important Story

Hi Hopo,

I certainly understand the impression so here's the text that's below the film clip:

From page 9 of the accompanying Photographic Analysis document, regarding the film clips seen above, "In the 18 March sequence Meier filmed the spacecraft circling a large tree in front of a farmhouse. The sky was overcast with a low ceiling, and occasionally light snowflakes fell. The motion of the spacecraft looks suspiciously like it is tethered from above as it appears to circle the tree and then to swing back and forth over the tree, except that on three occasions the spacecraft changes its motion abruptly with no change in the tilt of the vertical axis of the ship. If it was in fact tethered, one would expect the vertical axis to tilt as the tether point above was moved. In another measurement it was found that the tilt angle of the vertical axis in one oscillation sequence was sufficient that the axis crossed within the frame and would have put the tether point within the picture. No tether point source was revealed, in one of the final oscillation sequences the object appeared to pass directly over the top of the tree, and it is clearly seen that the tree was swept over in the direction of the spacecraft, or appeared to follow the spacecraft as it passed. Clearly no model could have produced this effect. When we revisited the scene we found that the tree had died and was cut down."

There are actually eight different film segments (and one video) that are more than startling. read the comments by special effects expert Wally Gentleman in the article titled "Scientific Experts' Comments On Meier's Evidence". I recently gave the films to another FX guy who is already very impressed having only watched once.

It is said that part of the agenda in the case was to deliberately cause controversy with such things where people would say that it had to be suspended. But when you read the photo analysis and other parts of the investigate material you see that there simply were no models involved.

Take your time and check out as much info as you wish. And if I don't get back to you right away I will once I return from my trip.

Best and thanks for writing.

MH
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
11,051
Likes
3,294
Points
234
#4
I've renamed the title to give an idea as to it's content.
 

rynner2

Great Old One
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
55,452
Likes
8,844
Points
284
Location
Under the moon
#5
Fascinating stuff, and I have book-marked the website. I shall have to update my knowledge of Billy Meier.

But the niggling thought remains, why do the Plejaren have to work with just one (or maybe a few) contactee(s)?

No matter how irrefutably good the pictures are, arch-skeptics will never be convinced until one of these things lands on the lawn of the White House, in the full glare of international publicity!

Although even that may not be enough - enemies of the US would probably denounce it as some evil plot, so there would have to be mass landings all over the world.

Are they actually afraid of us, of our power and stupidity in wielding it?
What size are the Plejarans themselves? Some of these craft seem very small - or are they just remote controlled drones?
 

DrPaulLee

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Aug 7, 2002
Messages
855
Likes
204
Points
74
#7
What about the expose in "The Unexplained" magazine in the early 1980s, when an enhancement of one of Meier's photos show that the "UFO" has a vertical line - a piece of thread? - above the saucer?
 

AMPHIARAUS

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
494
Likes
5
Points
49
#8
Re: The Most Important Story

Michael812 said:
Hi Hopo,
If it was in fact tethered, one would expect the vertical axis to tilt as the tether point above was moved.
MH
Only if rotation around the tether caused sufficient centrifugal force to overcome external effects.
If a lightweight model was suspended via a single point at the top (as you might expect) and swung around slowly, breezes and sharp changes of direction would result in the changes of axis seen.

If that footage was real then someone went to a lot of trouble to make it look fake. :roll:
 

chockfullahate

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Oct 29, 2001
Messages
418
Likes
3
Points
49
#9
where be these dinosaur photos? on a google search i saw a mention of him being at the crucifixion too...
 

HopoUK

Junior Acolyte
Joined
May 29, 2005
Messages
57
Likes
0
Points
22
#11
Hmm, well pointed out AMPH! Meier's photo of the Pteranodon is definitely taken from the painting. It doesn't do Meier's reputation any good when you compare the pictures!

It seems that most people cannot believe this the more you look into Meier's claims.

Here's the link to a website that has the painting. Just scroll down to the bottom of the page to find it.
http://home.online.no/~sastrom/Dokumenter/dinotest.htm
 

Timble2

Imaginary Person
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Messages
5,620
Likes
738
Points
194
#13
That video clip of the saucer flying round the tree really does look someone swinging a model UFO around a bush. It's convenient or inconvenient, depending on your point of view, that the tree has been cut down.

Obviously the Pleiadeans have have advanced stealth technology that makes their Beamships look like the special effects from '60's episode of Doctor Who.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#14
Whoever faked it couldn't even be bothered to make it l ook anything near realistic. It's just a disc on string blowing in the breeze!
Notice how the belief bolsterer has a site SELLING DVDs of it! Hmmmm...enough motives there! It always comes down to cash doesn't it!
And what country is it again...?! lol! :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#15
Regarding all of the comments and concerns about Meier's photos and films, you might read the documents at www.theyfly.com that pertain to the investigation, photographic testing, etc.

Legitimate as the concerns are, no one here has exactly invented the wheel. Please consider that Meier took over 1,200 photos, some with up to four craft, various sequence shots, 8 films, a video, etc. NONE of which have been duplicated to this day. And there has long been concern that some photos were tampered with. Since there have been 21 documented assassination attempts on Meier's life, that people were tampering with his evidence is not hard to believe, especially since he sent ALL his photos out for development.

The newest physical evidence (hand prints into the finish of the car hood) await competent scientific examination and testing.

But be that as it may, I have always hedged my bets on the "higher standard of proof", i.e. the abundant, specific, prophetically accurate scientific and world evnet-related information spanning some 54 years.

This case was indeed intended to provoke controversy - and thinking - so it's no surprise that the usual knee-jerk criticisms surface. If the case is true, it is undeniably the most important story in all of human history. What remains to be seen is how many people will actually research, examine and, of course, THINK well enough to make a clear and credible assessment of the case and its meaning to them.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#16
Oh gee, I forgot to respond to the idiotic "he's only in it for the money" comment. Well, genius, my site, newsletter, radio interviews, etc. are all FREE and there's enough there to provoke thinking if your prejudices aren't too severe.

I've researched the case, on my own dime, for over 26 years and ALL my work and representation is also FREE. The only way I make the dredded buck is in speaking fees or product sales. But since you obviously have escaped participating in the exchange of money for goods and services you wouldn't understand it.

It's unfortunate that truth can slap someone across the face and all they get is a red mark. And we wonder why so-called ETs don't make contact with our race of shallow, non-thinking know-it-alls.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#17
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHARRRR!!!!

We couldn't prove that Michael Jackson is a paedophile, so I doubt if those pathetic faked UFO pics could stand up to a child's scrutiny.
There....I've spoken my mind too!
 

TheQuixote

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Sep 25, 2003
Messages
3,296
Likes
21
Points
69
#18
Now, now, if we could resume and carry on further into the discussion with a little more civility from all sides of the fence it would be appreciated. :)




Okay, I'm not particularly that au fait with Billy Meier but I have just had a very, very brief and quick look at some of the photos and the drawings of the humanoid-in-appearance *aliens* and of some of the various other MB's discussing Meier on the web.

Bear with me for my lack of knowledge on the subject but one question I did see posted on another MB, to paraphrase, are the contemporary *Greys* or the squat, almond-eyed aliens, a different species of alien to those that he has contact with?

Which leads me to my question, does Meier posit that we being visited by only one race of ET and/or the other sightings and experiences of such *Greys* by various people are perhaps mistaken or erroneous? Or are they all of the same ilk? Like I say my search was very brief so I apologise if this question is answered in any of the links already provided.

Michael812 said:
And there has long been concern that some photos were tampered with. Since there have been 21 documented assassination attempts on Meier's life, that people were tampering with his evidence is not hard to believe, especially since he sent ALL his photos out for development.
Again, this may have been covered in links already posted but I'm sincerely curious as to the assassination attempts and also the reasons behind them.

21 also seems a high number of failures on the part of the persons who wish to *silence*[?] Meier. What is the speculation on who is meant to be behind these attempts? Is it thought to be the Government/Military etc.? I'm not wishing any harm to befall Meier but I'm astounded at the amount of bungled attempts on his life and how he has managed to survive such a high number of attacks or plots against him.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#19
Thanks for your questions and the gentle nudge towards civility. I don't mind at all updating you on some of this.

Regarding the so-called Greys, this is indeed another species and may well be android beings created by another race. There I went and confused the issue but let me go on to say that the Plejaren (human) extraterrestrials aren't the only ones who have visited the planet. Meier has also seen and met with other races but he and the Plejaren state that most (not all) of the UFOs seen are terrestrial craft, not ET.

As far as the assassination attempts go, Meier had a certain amount of help and protection but ultimately he has to be careful and protect himself. There were some individuals who were identified as religious fanatics and, it is said, there were also members of intelligence units from various governments.

The reasons for the attempts by those parties are not limited to the UFO/ET factor but also to the information in the case which is threatening to certain religious and political parties, interests, agendas, etc.

It seems hard to believe that there could be so many foiled attempts and that the first miss wasn't sufficient incentive for a "career change" but Meier is a very remarkable person, to say the least.

Hope I've shed a little more light on this for you.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#20
21 also seems a high number of failures on the part of the persons who wish to *silence*[?] Meier. What is the speculation on who is meant to be behind these attempts? Is it thought to be the Government/Military etc.? I'm not wishing any harm to befall Meier but I'm astounded at the amount of bungled attempts on his life and how he has managed to survive such a high number of attacks or plots against him.
They must be using a particularly incompetent assassination bureau.
I can just picture it;

Dan the Van: It's no good; you have got to go after Billy Meier again.
Paul: Oh, dear.
Barry: Oh, dear, oh dear.
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
11,051
Likes
3,294
Points
234
#21
Eburacum45 said:
They must be using a particularly incompetent assassination bureau.
I can just picture it;

Dan the Van: It's no good; you have got to go after Billy Meier again.
Paul: Oh, dear.
Barry: Oh, dear, oh dear.
:rofl:

(chucks hubcap) To me! To you!

Sorry. Anyway: the greys-as-androids hypothesis - why is it supposed they may be androids? Have the Plejaren mentioned that they are, or does Mr Meier have some evidence to support this for himself?
 

BuckeyeJones

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
339
Likes
7
Points
34
#22
After viewing the comparison pictures, made in California I can say this with out a doubt and I will not debate this statement.

My God the Swiss countryside is so much more beautiful than California!
(hope I made someone smile)

For the record I always thought Ed Walters pictures looked more "authentic" than Billy's.
Peace
=^..^=217
 

Jerry_B

Antediluvian
Joined
Apr 15, 2002
Messages
8,063
Likes
36
Points
129
#23
Michael812 said:
Regarding all of the comments and concerns about Meier's photos and films, you might read the documents at www.theyfly.com that pertain to the investigation, photographic testing, etc.
But what about the dinosaur photos? There doesn't seem to be any mention of them. Have they been subject to the same scrutiny?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#24
What irritates me in these cases, is the fact that someone is stating them as irrefutable. There's no evidence at all to indicate any truth in the matter so why say it is fact? It's ok for Billy to say this as it is first hand anecdote, but for someone else who believes this to talk about it as though it is, is meaningless bias. They should be stating it as their belief only.
All this talk about androids and visitors as though it was being read from some scientific paper is just wrong.
The assasination attempts is a pile of crap I believe ( ;) ) for blatantly obvious reasons...and stinks of conspiracy theory. If someone were that desperate to get rid of Billy, they'd do it without failure no matter how much "protection" he had. Besides...wouldn't the "Aliens" want to protect him? Afterall, they spent so much time and trouble giving him so much 'evidence'. Speaking of which....why didn't they just give him some hard evidence? It's all contradictory, which is often the case with fakers. You can see all the excuses and convenient little reasons popping up when confronted by scrutiny. Much is the "The governments and scientists want to cover it all up so they can exploit the technology" bullshit when questions arise such as, "Why if they are real...hasn't the scientific community found out and done something about it?" Rather like the ghost excuse of "They only appear to people who are sensitive and believe".
I agree that the Gulf Breeze photos were more realistic attempts at faking UFOs and aliens. Ed Walters did this with more passion and knowhow.
Regarding the fact that Billy faked all this with only one arm....he was also a hotdog/burger seller too. Ever tried doing that with one hand? :lol:
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Messages
19,434
Likes
74
Points
129
#25
You say you've done analysis of the pictures - I am curious what the results were on this one:

www.billymeier.com/images/foto-829.jpeg

I'm sure with computer modelling would shed a lot more light on it but if it is the size it is purported to be (i.e. if it is hovering over the van) then a large portion of it would be in the trees behind (which are undisturbed) and if it isn't then it is a smaller object photographed much closer to the camera.

All information on this is gratefully received.
 

Human_84

Somewhat human
Joined
Mar 30, 2005
Messages
1,299
Likes
73
Points
64
#26
Emps,

I remember looking at that one as a pre-teen in awe since I didnt know any better. Any UFO photo was real to me back then, afterall why would someone fake a UFO picture? I guess people get bored, check out the last FT magazine cover. Thats a classic tho emperor, good post.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#27
I'll try to answer the points raised, do feel free to press if I miss something. First, I don't put any importance on the dinosaur photos as it's impossible to prove that they are real. This goes also for a couple of other pictures of alleged ETs, and some shots in space.

But let's look at it this way. If one of Meier's UFO photos are real then the case certainly warrants serious attention. And, since he took over 1,200 photos, if one is real of a particular type of craft it should be (and actually was) easy to determine if other shots of the same craft are authentic.

Now for those people who've really troubled themselves to investigate the case and read the information regarding the photo analysis, the sound analysis and the analysis of the metal alloy samples (HARD PHYSICAL EVIDENCE) by IBM scientist Marcel Vogel (holder of 32 patents) it should be clear that the physical evidence was well examined and concluded to be authentic by various credentialed experts. And before attacking this please trouble yourself to read the FREE documentation at my site www.theyfly.com.

Also consider that the top international professional skeptics (and even Mr. Friswell) have been unable to duplicate the photos and films, taken in the 1970s before the availability of home computers, etc. Why? If this is such an obvious hoax why hasn't it been duplicated, why hasn't it been revealed, why haven't collaborators come forward or been discovered in the last 30 years?

Why did several movie studios offer Meier film deals, including Universal, which offered him $1,000,000 and full use of their special effects department? Why did he turn them down? Why did he say that he didn't need their special effects because, "...I take my camera and when the ship comes I push the button"?

Not only did the man who did special effects for Kubrick's film "2001" support the authenticity of the Meier photographic evidence, I took the photos and films to an Academy Award-winning special effects company in L.A. and asked if these were models. Answer: No. Could they duplicate Meier's films? Answer: IF they could, THEY would have to use CGI.

At this point it's necessary for people who say, "well, they LOOK fake to me!" to either duplicate them, prove that they were hoaxed, or drop the issue. Of course, they could take an easier challenge and simply duplicate the sound recordings of the UFO that are available for free download from my site. Or they could organize a scientific examination of the newest physical evidence, the hand prints imbedded in the car in Switzerland.

But now that the controversial photos and films have your attention, why not get on with reading some of the higher standard of proof, i.e. the already proven prophetically accurate information?

Although I should mention that if you're still hung up on the films, there are actually eight segments, one with THREE UFOs, one with a UFO hovering ABOVE Meier's head, one where a UFO moves from center screen a half-mile away and then goes BEHIND a hill before coming back to center screen, etc.

It's understandable, and even frustrating, that there are bits of "plausible deniability" (see the information at www.tjresearch.info) throughout the Meier case. It's explained that these "escape hatches" are there for people for whom overwhelming proof of the authenticity of the case, with all of the implications that would have, would simply be too much to bear. Before dismissing that rather considerate possibility, re-read some of your own criticisms and derisive dismissals of the case.

As far as the assassination attempts are concerned, I have spoken to witnesses to 12 of them, including the lead military investigator in the case. While people might be disappointed in the lack of accuracy, or in the apparent protection given to Meier, why not ask yourselves what kind of a man would keep on going under such conditions, especially when not only is there no financial incentive, etc. but when your fellow humans express disappointment and even contempt for your continued existence.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#28
Sorry. I've looked on your site and although I clicked under the link "Evidence"...I saw none. I couldn't find anything about the alloys etc either. I think until the analysis is out on the handprints, noone can say anything either way.
The audio clip however, was a beautiful piece of Korg synth' with lots of reverb and flange. (It leaves a signiture which is unique and is present here).If you listen to the band GonG (1966 to present) you'll hear lots of the same sounds as this.
As for that pic over the vehicle....due to the obvious distance of the UFO, I would say it is little more than a foot or so wide. I've lightened the pic and you can clearly see it is in front of the tree and there's no shading over the van at all, nor on the ground. Also, because it is close, the suspending thread would be visible...hence the top portion of the UFO is off frame.
NOW..if there's a pic showing different, I'll change my mind.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Messages
19,434
Likes
74
Points
129
#29
Michael812 said:
I'll try to answer the points raised, do feel free to press if I miss something. First, I don't put any importance on the dinosaur photos as it's impossible to prove that they are real. This goes also for a couple of other pictures of alleged ETs, and some shots in space.

But let's look at it this way. If one of Meier's UFO photos are real then the case certainly warrants serious attention. And, since he took over 1,200 photos, if one is real of a particular type of craft it should be (and actually was) easy to determine if other shots of the same craft are authentic.
This is a fascinating insight into how we deal with evidence in different ways.

I would suggest:

1. You need to consider all his output not just a carefully selected subset.

2. That if he has faked one picture why should we accept any of them? All you people with credentials can say is that they can't prove they were fakes.

With that in mind I'll drop this link in (you may have to scroll down - its a third of the way down):

http://razimus.com/4.html#story97

Michael812 said:
Also consider that the top international professional skeptics (and even Mr. Friswell) have been unable to duplicate the photos and films, taken in the 1970s before the availability of home computers, etc. Why? If this is such an obvious hoax why hasn't it been duplicated, why hasn't it been revealed, why haven't collaborators come forward or been discovered in the last 30 years?
The whole point of the FT article was to show that they can be duplicated not be skeptics but by enquiring minds looking to move the debate on. The bottom line is they can be faked and faked easily.

I am really curious to hear the reaction of the skeptics who utterly failed to do this - were they trying too hard??
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#30
While reasoned progress is mighty slow in this part of the galaxy, there may still be cause for guarded optimism.

If you go to the Articles link and then to Michael's Documents you will find these items, among others:

Scientific Experts' Comments On Meier's Evidence

Analysis of Meier's UFO Photographs

Report On UFO Sound Recordings

For some more scholarly info on the UFO pictures go to:
http://www.tjresearch.info/ufology.htm

For some more specific info on the "Wedding Cake" UFO photos, including the one you have interest in, go to:

http://www.tjresearch.info/Wedcake.htm

Now there is also a 45 minute videotape of Marcel Vogel's analysis of metal alloy samples. And careful examination of the sound recording analysis reveals that the sounds were recorded outdoors, on a cassette machine, in front of 15 witnesses (including an undercover cop), have 24 frequencies in the audible range and 8 in the inaudible range (only discernable with spectrum analyzer and oscilloscope) and the sound source was unknown (and irreproducible) to the three sound studios that examined it, including the one at the Groton Naval Undersea Laboratories, which has the largest sound bank on record. Of course, if you can get your guitar out and plug it into a synth and duplicate the sounds we'll all be rightly impressed. So far none of my friends in the sound engineering biz have been able to do it.

So do have a go at it all and feel free to get back to me.

And regarding Emperor's recent post, your logic is backwards. Since when did the presence of authenticity get nullified by either debatable or even false evidence? In this, the real world, things aren't always as tidy as one might like.

If I place in your hand a proven, genuine article and then also one that is from the same source that isn't genuine, do you dismiss the genuine article? If so, you're a candidate for the plausible deniability premise postulated by Deardorff.

And in the whole body (1,200) of Meier's photos there are a mere handful of questionable authenticity, some of which may indeed have been tampered with by others who had easy access to them. But what then do you do with Vogel's analysis, with the sound analysis, with Froning's comments and all the rest?

How do you explain Meier's publication, in unalterable documents and copyrighted books, of events prior to their occurrence?

Obviously, if there are real ETs involved here, they could simply show themselves in a most unambiguous fashion...and blow a few billion people into psychosis in the process. That we're not ready for this yet is also evidenced by the piecemeal and, pardon me, rather shallow level of thinking that is evident...though not at all unique to our exchange here.
 
Top