Eduard Albert "Billy" Meier: Are his films hoaxes also? Look and decide.

originally posted by: MissVocalcord

originally posted by: idusmartias
This frame shows that the pole/string is not feasible. The craft moves around in the distance while the foreground branches can be seen affected by the wind.

Again an assumption; if it is a model of a few centimeter/inches this can be done very easily with a string. This is simple forced perspective. Also the jumps the UFO makes are again clear film cuts ( you see the branches moving and suddenly they stop when the UFO 'jumps').

These are interesting frames. The craft is seen hovering, then disappearing and reappearing on the same spot. What I haven't seen mentioned or analyzed is that each time the craft disappears or reappears there is a ground effect where the foreground darkens for a fraction of a second

Again you see the complete scenere moving/jumping around as the UFO does it jumps; again clearly film editing:

When you view the video and use frame-by-frame and have patience the craft will appear not as a whole, complete craft but will be seen materializing. This materializing is visible even in the low quality YouTube videos.

Please keep in mind that there has been a lof of conversion going on; The original are real films, then their are copies from that film on video, and also in translating it to a youtube video it sometimes fills in frames resulting in a sort of 'fading' effect. Here you can see leaves doing exactly this "materializing":

I am impressed by the time and effort you expended in supplying your reply for which I thank you. However, your comments are still your personal opinions just like my OP also contains my personal opinions. I did not at any time endorse Meier's films as being authentic. I simply implied that they look good enough to be questioned as opposed to being accepted willy nilly.

While you do point out what seem to you to be photographic, or film, inconsistencies I do not know you so I can't say or agree that you are an expert. Experts in various countries from different nationalities and shown to be experts have analyzed the films and did not mention the inconsistencies you specify. In another reply, I include a list of the experts that have gone on record pro-authenticity and they outnumber your opinions.

Lastly, there are Meier's original films having superior contrast and sharpness compared to the inferior quality that resulted from the Japanese crew filming Meier's films projected on to a sheet fastned unevenly to a wall. As I've stated, the video quality would have been higher if Meier's films had been transferred directly using professional studio video equipment. I just bought "The Meier Chronicles" dvd set and the movie footage is not better than my VHS tape dub from the original vhs tape that was sold.

This forum gets better when its members do what you did instead of offering a detail-less reply. Again, thanks .

originally posted by: idusmartias
I am impressed by the time and effort you expended in supplying your reply for which I thank you.

Most of it is so obvious it doesn't take much time, and the fact that I've looked into this a few years ago also helps
And yes of course all of these are my personal opinions and after looking into it I've made up my mind; It's blatently fake.

Experts in various countries from different nationalities and shown to be experts have analyzed the films and did not mention the inconsistencies you specify.

I don't mind how many experts have looked at it and what their opinion is; If I see clouds jumping around (or full sceneries for that matter) where somebody claims it is one continous shot I know he has to come up with a good story:

www.youtube.com...

At the top of each frame you see a clear indication of slicing of the film throughout all sequences (also the ones not including any UFO), none of the experts have noticed this???

www.youtube.com...

You have to believe the rest of Billy Meier's stories to not mark the films as fake. Again give me any proof of the existence of the tree from the pendulum ufo outside Meiers world. The tree really only exists in that film. And it has happened with different trees from his photo's too; tree's which never existed in a real place but only in Meiers photo's.

Also don't you think it is funny that in every sequence with a UFO the UFO moves or makes jumps, except for one; yes indeed the one where Billy Meier himself is in the picture...

originally posted by: idusmartias

There are way more than one YouTube video featuring Meier's films. I had to shop around to find the best video to grab what I thought was the best frame for contrast and sharpness.

I don't understand why you can't just post a link to that video then

originally posted by: idusmartias
I did not at any time endorse Meier's films as being authentic. I simply implied that they look good enough to be questioned as opposed to being accepted willy nilly.

Ermm you said "By including screen grabs, they indicate that I consider the videos legit until someone with superior knowledge shows me I have been fooled."

You might want to make sure your book doesn't have inconsistencies like this in it.

a reply to: idusmartias

The appeal to authority is kind of silly in this situation and you shouldn't need a degreed physicist or somebody in that position to point out the obvious. The simple visual processing skills in our brains should tell you something is wrong just looking at the film. And it does for most people.

I'm not going to go through the trouble of posting animated gifs to make my case. The actions of the objects wobbling is so obviously from it hanging on fishing line, string, or whatever and being affected by the wind that it's laughable. At one point you see the pole, or whatever, quickly move the object to another spot to the right and the model stopping and it reacting to that movement by it quickly wobbling. Transferring that energy of the quick movement to the wobble HERE  You can even see the object lift and jerk a little as it begins to move to the right like someone is lifting a large pole in order to move it. Why does this need to be explained?

It looks like forced perspective when swinging around the tree. It also looks like the objects are more on the same plane and focus as the foreground sticks and leaves and not with the mid or background. Meaning of course, it's probably being filmed close to the camera.

There's no way you can watch these films from a completely skeptical, unbiased view and demand proof they're not real. That's reversed thinking. As always, it's up to Meier to prove his extraordinary claim, not up to anyone to prove he's not lying. Plus, he's been shown to be a liar in this subject and thought he could get away with it, he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt.

originally posted by: MissVocalcord
In this video you can see something moving around in the lower left corner
www.youtube.com... (around 1.18) which seems like a head and an arm pulling a string.

In this particular instance, imo, it does seem as so, to your point of view……



Lower left corner…..Perhaps a Framing Edited Oooops by Billy?



At a slower speed ….It appears as if it’s a partially closed hand in its left to right movement (if facing the craft (model?), house and trees), let’s say, like grasping something…..versus an full five fingers open hand wave for example, in a greetings gesture, let’s say, to a craft in the distance…. Imo. Also, the top of a head appears to show as well..



Freezed frame…..

originally posted by: idusmartias
I do have doubts about everything. I said read my thread with an open mind and questioln everything. I didn't offer absolute evidence that Meier's photos and videos are authentic. I have questions that no one is available to ask hence my thread with what looks to be, in my opinion, a subject with questions.

Until someone can explain with 100% certainty how Meier could have hoaxed his films, doubts will remain.

I remain in agreement (for now) with ….

originally posted by: Spacespider
I think with the Meier case, I think a few of those are real and when the hype stopped he missed all the attention so he started to make fake props and made up stories.

👽🛸☕️🍩

originally posted by: idusmartias
"Models of some of the spacecraft seen in his photo's were found in his house. In one video of an alleged flying saucer, the spacecraft can clearly be seen to be swinging pendulum style as if it were suspended by a wire. The photograph of an alleged Pleiadian alien was discovered to be a photocopy of a model taken from a Sears Catalog. Under close scrutiny, all of Billy Meier's alleged evidence has been shown to be false."

idusmartias: Again, crap! This is not objective criticism. In the documentary linked above in a reply, you see an individual carrying models that he/they are going to give Meier, as an honor. "as if it were" doesn't buy it, be specific and sure. This thread is NOT about photos but about films.

I was specific, and pointed out specifically the 3 seconds showing the arc formed by the "UFO" from 20 seconds to 23 seconds exactly "as if it were suspended by a wire". I posted a link to the video, which as far as I can tell is one you claim is real and not fake, and I posted a composite image showing the arc, the same kind of arc a model would form. Here it is again in case you missed it, do you see the arc or don't you? Did you watch the video?
Rediscovered reel of Super8 film footage shot by Eduard "Billy" Meier in 1975 (original 2.8K scan)

Composite image from 20s to 23 s showing the arc "as if it were suspended by a wire"

It's not just those three seconds, it looks like a model on a wire throughout but I just picked three seconds where it was obvious as an example.

As Ectoplasm said, it's not like Meier gets the benefit of the doubt as a known hoaxer. Even you admit some of his stuff is fake, right? So why would you set the bar so high when you can see the UFO moving as if it's attached by a string? Yes that does cut it in Meiers case as a known hoaxer, if not in all cases of UFO videos.

If you had as much expertise in photography as you claim to have, you wouldn't be asking me to show the string, since you would already recognize the quality and resolution of the video is too poor for it to show up, especially if using some transparent fishing line attached to the model, and the 8mm format doesn't have that much resolution to begin with.

originally posted by: idusmartias
Experts in various countries from different nationalities and shown to be experts have analyzed the films and did not mention the inconsistencies you specify. In another reply, I include a list of the experts that have gone on record pro-authenticity and they outnumber your opinions.

Which experts?
In another reply, you made this post about experts commenting on photos, it doesn't say videos, this one:

originally posted by: idusmartias
a reply to: idusmartias

Jim Oberg replied to this thread and included info on Gordon Cooper who had opinions about Meier, faulty as they were. It's a great reply and you should go to page 3 and read it. While there, you'll find a link to a blog where 8 experts talk positively about some (not all) of Meier's photos being authentic. The 8 experts make this forum experts, especially Arbitrageur, seem like close-mind amateurs, at least about Meier.

There are photos which even you will admit are hoaxes, right? So if the proven hoax photos are the photos the so-called "experts" are endorsing, it says more to degrade the qualifications of alleged expertise than it does to certify anything Meier made. But the link you referred to doesn't provide the specifics of exactly which photos the people were looking at, so that we can't point to any particular photo the experts validated, can we? And this thread is about videos anyway, so your post about the photos isn't really even on the topic of videos here.

Regarding the films, I don't see why any rational person wouldn't agree with with MissVocalcord in showing this example and saying "I don't mind how many experts have looked at it and what their opinion is; If I see clouds jumping around (or full sceneries for that matter) where somebody claims it is one continous shot..."
www.abovetopsecret.com...


We really don't need experts to assess the clouds jumping, do we? Or to tell us the tree in Meier's film wasn't there when the Japanese film crew went to the same spot? And as Ectoplasm says the films just look so obviously fake with the model-on-a-string motions, that I haven't seen any experts endorse or explain away:

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
a reply to: idusmartias

The appeal to authority is kind of silly in this situation and you shouldn't need a degreed physicist or somebody in that position to point out the obvious. The simple visual processing skills in our brains should tell you something is wrong just looking at the film. And it does for most people.

originally posted by: MissVocalcord
Because when the Japanese TV-crew was there there was no tree:

youtu.be... (around 8:20 into that clip)

Owners and other people in the area claiming there was never a tree:
www.youtube.com... ( around 5.09 )

So the tree doesn't exist at that time in that place; only in this video from Meier. So he is caught red handed again and then he starts to make up stories to try and keep his story straight.

Yes, there is no expert opinion that can cancel Meier being caught lying. Stories about the tree being moved don't explain "Owners and other people in the area claiming there was never a tree". And we know Meier hoaxed stuff so it's not exactly "he said versus she said" when one party has a proven deficiency of credibility as Meier has.

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
In this particular instance, imo, it does seem as so, to your point of view……

In addition to the lower left issues pointed out, again I point out it's behaving like a model on a string where you can see not only the arc in motion, but during the arc, the orientation of the top tilts as a model on a string would tilt.

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
I remain in agreement with ….

"I think with the Meier case, I think a few of those are real and when the hype stopped he missed all the attention so he started to make fake props and made up stories."

So which film exactly do you think was not hoaxed? Please post the youtube link and if needed, the time index refrences for the relevant segment. Apparently the OP idusmartias has failed to do that for some reason, despite repeated requests.

a reply to: Arbitrageur
“Film, Vid”….is not mentioned by me nor in concurrence with the re-posted reference to SpaceSpider’s reply.

SpaceSpider’s reply was in reference to the films presented…. whereas my thoughts was more in reference to photos in general within the 4 volume set of books previously referenced and posted in which a few which have a real look to them, but can’t be proven either way…..much like a lot of craft Still photographs in the world of UFOLOGY.

It’s ok for me to be on the fence, right? It’s my opinion after all, which does not need to be accepted. And that’s ok for me.

👽🛸👍🏼🍹

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: Arbitrageur
“Film, Vid”….is not mentioned by me nor in concurrence with the re-posted reference to SpaceSpider’s reply.

SpaceSpider’s reply was in reference to the films presented….

Which of course is the topic of this thread which mentions "Are his films hoaxes also?" in the title.

whereas my thoughts was more in reference to photos….

It’s ok for me to be on the fence, right? It’s my opinion after all, which does not need to be accepted. And that’s ok for me.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but for future reference, if you make a post like that in a thread which says "Are his films hoaxes also?" in the title, if you don't specify what you're talking about, I hope you can see why one might assume you're posting on the topic of films. Thanks for clarifying that you weren't. I won't even ask to see the photos, since they don't seem to be the topic of this thread, as far as I can tell.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Dude, we’ve gone down this road before on tangenting off topic….at least mine was about the same person of the topic and not going somewhere off to lala land.

I’ll say what I want to say…. You don’t have to read it…..you don’t have to reply to what I post.

Your not the forum king 🤴 😆

It’s okay to ignore me 🍻

👽🛸🍺😉

a reply to: idusmartias

From the beginning of written history we have learned that humans engage in fooling humans via art, writing, photography and, now, videography.

This thread highlights a human who has been accused of fooling others with his photos, videos and his writing. There's evidence of hoaxing photos and some claim also his 8mm films. I started this thread not to contest the validity of his photos but of his films. They could have been faked, but I see some details in his films that make me wonder. I don't endorse anything he says although it has been shown that he seems to know certain things, validated by experts although I can't validate those experts as it doesn't matter to me if Meier was proven right. I don't want to go to that extent.

On YouTube there is a man, Phil Langdon, who has devoted a hell of a lot of time and energy producing what has to be the best ever effort to prove that Meier's films were hoaxed. I have seen his videos which no one replying to this thread has mentioned to back up their claims of hoax, which surprises me because if you're interested in claiming Meier hoaxed his films the videos should be enough to rely on as evidence.

But supplying convincing evidence does not prove that Meier hoaxed his films. For one simple reason: logistics. Phil shows how he believes Meier hoaxed his films and I think that Phil even did it with one arm. But for Meier to have accomplished what Phil did, you have to imagine a one-arm man carrying all that was needed from the alleged models, string/wire, short and long poles, etc. Meier could have but duplicating something doesn't necessarily mean that the original was done as Phil did. We don't know.

In Phil's excellent efforts, I found one activity that I can question which doesn't necessarily mean all of his activity can't be accepted as being the answers. I can't give you the link in his 9 videos 'cause I didn't think of writing down the info. But I'll describe it by referring to the image that I used in my OP. Find the following comment and the 4 images under it is what I mean:
"These are interesting frames. The craft is seen hovering, then disappearing and reappearing on the same spot. What I haven't seen mentioned or analyzed is that each time the craft disappears or reappears there is a ground effect where the foreground darkens for a fraction of a second. The YouTube video that I used for the frames was low in quality."

In Phil's attempt of the above scenes, he fails miserably. His effort at creating the above effect doesn't come close to duplicating the darkening of the foreground as he "blinks" the scene, unrealistically. You have to see Phil's video to understand why I give that effort a failing grade.

A lot of comments have been added to this thread and I could spend some time finding all of the questionable ones so I'll use just one from a member, Arbitrageur, to show how he should know better than to speak in generalities instead of supplying evidence to prove his point: "as if it were suspended by a wire". "As it were..." is just empty talk. Instead, he should have shown a wire.

I'll end this now by giving you the link to Phil's YouTube where you'll find his 9 videos with his exposure of how Meier coulad have hoaxed his films.

Phil Langdon
UFO BUST! Episode 1/9 Debunking Billy Meier's First Contact
www.youtube.com...

Some of Phil's videos have this name: Statystyczny Polak: Great series. I'm not the owner. Just reuploading.

Here you'll find all 9 of Phil's videos and my hat's off to him for the task he performed. But, keep in mind they're excellent duplications.

Uploads from Phil Langdon
90 videos
www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: idusmartias
But supplying convincing evidence does not prove that Meier hoaxed his films.

This is just silly; you're simply saying you are not going to accept any evidence which proves Meier to be a fraud.

For one simple reason: logistics.

Now you are really grasping onto straws. A few wires and a small scale model are no problem to drive around. Why don't you comment on the very obvious movement of clouds which are a clear indication of fakery:

These are interesting frames. The craft is seen hovering, then disappearing and reappearing on the same spot. What I haven't seen mentioned or analyzed is that each time the craft disappears or reappears there is a ground effect where the foreground darkens for a fraction of a second. The YouTube video that I used for the frames was low in quality

It doesn't darken, the first frame after a cut is brighter; This effect is most likely an due to the camera's exposure control, it can be seen in other shots too where there is no UFO involved:

youtu.be... ( 4:54 mark )

So again more proof of fakery by Billy Meier, why are you so desperately trying to keep believing it is real?

An observation…….

Going forward in frames and then backwards in the same frames…….having to loop them while creating a gif for posting….. it appears that the saucer is moving simultaneously, as the hand on the arm (bottom left corner) moves (gif looped) left to right.



Additionally……if I was hoaxing this back in his day……and even this day, using models…. I would not use wire or string……I’d be using transparent fishing line with the appropriate lb tensile strength just enough to support a given weighted model, and given even lesser of a chance of seeing the fishing line showing up in the filming/recording.

👽🛸☕️🍩

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
Going forward in frames and then backwards in the same frames…….having to loop them while creating a gif for posting….. it appears that the saucer is moving simultaneously, as the hand on the arm (bottom left corner) moves (gif looped) left to right.

I'm not sure if I agree with this observation.
I much more have the impression the string attached to the side of the UFO* is entangled in the tree; hence the sudden change in movement of the UFO and the top of the tree moving.
Right after it happens you see Billy Meier trying to untangle the wire from the tree again:

*(it hangs from a string and there is a second string to pull it sideways; that is also why it never starts moving into the back but always to the side/forward)

I would like to hear Bob Lazars opinion on these videos. The sport model was the smallest craft that he was allowed to see and the others were larger.

a reply to: idusmartias

You're either purposefully doing this for some reason or showing your complete lack of basic visual skills that we all have as humans. I find that part hard to believe. I can understand how some might misinterpet the go fast videos etc with the parallax views and your mind tricking you. But these videos blatantly show objects on fishing line or wire. Every video.

Is it that you want the phenomenon to be real so bad that you're willing to forgo simple common sense observations?



That shows he was fooling around with models and/or forced perspective. That tree is not there in the Japanese film. MissVocalcord pointed it out and maybe this comparison has been done before, but it's proof enough for me to show he set up and fabricated the scene with models.

I never focused on this case years ago because it was so obviously fake to me.

Looking at the full frame video , what are these craft hanging on a string from exactly ?

originally posted by: bluemooone2

Looking at the full frame video , what are these craft hanging on a string from exactly ?

Oops, you doubted now the thread "experts" are going to jump on you for not seeing the "obvious" which they are fortunate to see but not show. None of the "experts" have taken any frame and enhanced the frame to show the wires/cables/filaments, nothing just unqualified comments. I'm ignoring them and the thread will close.

The enhanced photos that I've seen show what the poster claims are visible evidence of wires but what one sees look more like scratches. I've done a lot of searches for the photos I did see years ago but I could not find any. I had a photo of such in my ufo folder but reformatting my pc somehow caused the folder to be deleted.

(deleted history from colleges and universities, theory)

(updated to billy meier)


towardsdatascience.com...
thephotographersgallery.org.uk... pdf

You are viewing a global map, the UFO is standing above the position of the USA, across from that position is ASIA, and there is not bushes/trees there in that space.

Human Life, its dirth charge, is explosive, lethal, not explosive, but lethal in terms of the earth's field charge to human life if that is disbursed...............1 billion lives in asia is a tremendous pull in the human dirth charge. (those removed genetic lines tribes, will die exceedingly because those arguments don't apply to them, its naturally lethal, and there is naturally no affinity..............where as with the half tribe of manasseh, did not also list manasseh in the book of the revelation? then now you can understand, one to 2 billion lives need to die this will largely take place in asia, and the middle east (that cesspool bible belt locations from jerusalem to india, and to asia).

There is a campaign and cover up, that is huge in asia, and this is evident in billy meier account.

thousands of years ago with atlantis, the lack of earth's 19.5 degree association like jupiter eye, uranus eye, neptune eye, and other in our solar system...............this was the place of atlantis on earth, this energy signature perhaps had some viable use, it wouldn't be any aliens, but pyramid builders could freely use that...............but today with the human dirth charge and for many thousands of years with humanity, this argument could be seen in various place shortly before death and the end of the civilization, this charge human dirth absorbs, is instanteously lethal to human life in the right circumstances this mean.

we may not have to do anything to see 1 to 2 billion die to allievate humanities understanding in the unified field, and also in the human dirth charge and also eugenics.............everything will be resolved soon. (when god resolves the son of man, then god resolves the controversy of the pyramid builders, "

REVELATION 11:13 And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven.

There really isn't a statement in the gospel like the "ites" (like from joshua 12:8), where god has a long standing argument (in the gospel) with angels and that argument is terminated for earth in the events of the revelation, and those angels are taken back to heaven, that may be with some persons, and argument like that for the pyramid builders left in or on earth, (dead or alive in this generation)...............perhaps there is, perhaps there is not, this is a controversy that can only be resolved when god takes his actions.

originally posted by: idusmartias

originally posted by: bluemooone2

Looking at the full frame video , what are these craft hanging on a string from exactly ?

Oops, you doubted now the thread "experts" are going to jump on you for not seeing the "obvious" which they are fortunate to see but not show. None of the "experts" have taken any frame and enhanced the frame to show the wires/cables/filaments, nothing just unqualified comments. I'm ignoring them and the thread will close.

The enhanced photos that I've seen show what the poster claims are visible evidence of wires but what one sees look more like scratches. I've done a lot of searches for the photos I did see years ago but I could not find any. I had a photo of such in my ufo folder but reformatting my pc somehow caused the folder to be deleted.

Look how difficult it is to see monofilament line even with a modern digital camera HERE. He's hanging Lego models to look like they're flying for his display. This is viewing it from only 10 feet of distance. At times you can see the line when you have a dark contrasting black background. But you normally can't. Meier's films were from the 70s with a lower quality recording and were being filmed from larger distances. Of course it's possible fishing line or wire is going disappear. Even with modern cameras it does. Did an "expert" tell me that? No, just simple and basic common sense did. So again, the appeal to authority is a poor argument here.

Watch the model HERE You can see it's hanging from the center and wobbling and moving around as he touches it. An off balanced movement. When it's moved from its center of gravity, it has a reaction that any larger object hanging on a wire/string would have. Did an "expert" tell me that? No, just simple and common sense did.

Like I said earlier, I can understand the go fast videos being confusing and needing to be explained for those who can't perceive or imagine things in 3D space. But Meiers videos are so in-your-face obvious.