Not meaning to open old wounds but those wounds may never heal. You probably wondered why I was reviving a subject that for all intents and purspose
is a done deal. I would agree with you except that since the early 1980s Meier has never left my consciousness.
The Setup (trust me it'll get better):
Since I had been into UFOs from 1958 anything new immediately caught my eyes and in the early 1980s, aside from my becoming a lunar anomaly
"specialist", my interest in UFOs was renewed by the release of a coffee-table book with large, colorful, and sharp closeup images of UFOs. The first
book was "UFO... Contact from the Pleiades, Volume 1" from Wendelle Stevens and Lee Elders (Genesis III Pub.) followed by Volume 2. I acquired them
and constantly pored over the photos being overwhelmed. Since I was at that time working temporarily at NBC in Burbank, CA., I brought the book to
Pat Sajak (Wheel Of Fortune) who at the time was a weatherman and I thought he would find the book's contents interesting enough to mention and show a
few photos. He only humored me with a friendly smile that told me he wasn't going to bother.) We were all left wondering about Meier and whether the
UFOs in his photos were real. They looked sooo good!
Then in the 1990s a few things happened - the Internet arrived and so did WebTV and I bought a copy of BEAMSHIP "THE MOVIE FOOTAGE" - UFO heaven! I
joined all of the UFO forums and "Billy" Meier was almost the main topic on all of them and the arrival of investigative research into UFO hoaxes.
Meier was soon denounced and the proof was in his hoaxed photos which were nicely trounced by Kal K. Korff in his book "Spaceships of the Pleiades,
1995". However, only his photos were explained and I kept waiting for a similar treatment of his film footage but no one took it on and my insistent
requests were ignored.
I see some attempts but in my opinion they fall short of the mark although a couple of websites offer a decent treatment. As one website points out a
fair expose is not possible until Meier allows his film footage to be given a high definition treatment. And the DVDs that are available have the VHS
video as the source material which will not produce the superior results achieved with the Zapruder film of the JFK assassination. Each of that
film's frames was reproduced as a 4"x5" still and the resulting quality was high for an 8mm film. The Meier film could benefit from equal
What I cannot do is show you the film because the quality would not allow for a critical look-see and there are many videos on YouTube in various
quality settings but they're still not as good as even my copy of the VHS tape.
So, let's cut to the chase.
1. The Beamship swinging back 'n' forth and around that tall "pine" tree. Critics agree that Meier must be holding a pole with a model attached to a
My differing opinion: The scene really starts out in a wide shot, not the closeup that's usually presented. The wide shot establishes that
the tree is indeed a tall one in the distance. Meier would need a super crane to suspend a super large model over that tree. Moving the
craft like a pendulum would require more energy that can be applied by any of us and, of course, either slowing it or making it come to a
stop would be nearly impossible to achieve. Then there is the top of the tree being shown blowing when the craft zooms close to it. I
could continue but go ahead and watch the video and try to explain what's going on and if you think a pole is really used. Or any of the
scenes where a pole is claimed to have been used
2. The Beamship dematerializing and materializing:
We see the Beamship hovering and dipping up and down gently as if riding invisible waves (the first UFO I saw through binoculars
behaved the same way!). Then it disappears and a few moments later it appears. Critics say the film is edited by pausing or stopping
the camera, removing the Beamship and continuing to shoot empty space. Then the camera is paused or stopped and the Beamship
My differing opinion: None. But if you have a good, clear (albeit VHS or DVD from the VHS video) copy, notice that before the Beamship
dematerializes there is a ground effect where the area below the Beamship darlems. Before the Beamship materializes there is the
same ground effect. How and why if the footage is fake did Meier incorporate the ground effect?
3. The Beamship is seen at the top of the frame, dematerializes and appears at the bottom just over a hill. It starts to slowly rise. There
is a question as to whether the Beamship materialized behind or in front of the hill. A high definition analysis might provide the
answer. In the VHS video it looks to me as if the Beamship materialized over the hill.
My differing opinion. I played the tape a million times in slow motion and frame-by-frame and no one mentions what one really sees.
When the Beamship materializes above the hill it doesn't do so all at once. It actually materializes slowly!
Those are the only 3 circumstances I'll mention although there are more. But the above 3 are the more interesting ones. I hope that before you get
involved in this thread that you try to find the best copy of the footage to concentrate on the above. Frankly, I don't know of any website that has
as good a copy as the original VHS video. I don't know if Meier will ever be convinced to allow his film(s) to be given the same treatment the
Zapruder was given but boy I'd love to donate to such a project.
What do you think? Try to stick in your replies to what I've written and don't rehash the still photos I'm too aware of some of the evidential
evidence. Support your opinion with evidence, not just words.
edit on 8-7-2014 by Uggielicious because: (no reason given)