Actually I agree with dropping the whole confrontational/accusatory thing. And let me say that I occasionally do let what I call lazy and
irresponsibele comments get to me, especially when I'm REALLY tied up with other stuff and want to put some info forward ona forum like this but
still get some comments from previous posters that just dragges the issue down. Okay, if I let that get to me, my fault and let's see if we can move
it on. I'm going to respond to a couple of key things here so I'll insert my comments.
Um. So you're asserting that it's lazy not to spend $29, shipping included, to get a "legal standard proof" for "the most important story in all
of human history." I'm curious. How do you set a price for "the most important story in all of human history"? If it was the greatest story of all
time and the proof unquestionably rose to a "legal standard", is there a price tag on such a thing?
MH: The info was/is posted for free on my site. The document from 1987 with mention of the Paris situation has been on my site since early 2003. The
1981 document is in a book that I first read in 1986, that I have an electronic copy of (no, I wouldn't submit that as proof for obvious reasons) and
that other people still own.
If the story sold itself, would you even need to get it out via a DVD? Wouldn't the news media be the appropriate avenue? Are they lazy and ignorant,
too, for not making this the subject of the nightly news? Quite simply, if the proof was that good then the story would have a little more
MH: Wild, unsubstantiated nad absolutely incorrect assumptions. I've lectured on the case for about 18 and approached almost every media outlet
possible. Only recently are they beginning to pay attention and yes, they're lazy and they let the question itself ("If this is true, why haven't I
heard about it before?") stop them. Trust me, this is my experience. There is one radio host, Dennis Prager, who won't allow the subject to be
discussed and I've sent him info for 9 years. If you think I'm incorrect, try doing what I'm doing and see how well received you'll be. And, I
think that a story that spans 63 years, first covered in the press in India in 1964, that has 120+ witnesses, including a formeer UN diplomat and 15
witnesses who took and passed lie detector tests, with 55 years of prophetically accurate info and 1,200 clear daytime photos...a story wih
Part of the problem with the Meier story, quite clearly and unfortunately, appears to be the messenger.
MH: No, it's more like the 21 people who'v etried to kill him...and the countless numbers wh drawincomplete conclusions.
But a bigger problem is that the only proof that ties the photographs to the assertion of extra terrestrial beings is Mr. Meier's writings.
MH: No, Marcel Vogel's analysis of the metal samples and the sound analysis by Naval Undersea Labs, both of which refer to unknown technologies
(these are scientific analyses by EXPERTS) contradict your conclusion...as do the details of the photographic analysis. And this is where you make
more assertions that are simply incorrect.
Yes, it has merit in some instances. But the writings also have their problems. There is factually incorrect information in the books. That
information is consistent with what was believed to be true by scientists of the era in which Meier's writings were made. It bears against Meier's
credibility to assert that aliens gave him incorrect information.
MH: If ONE of Meier's photos, video and film are of objects of unknonw, non-terrestrial origina and technology then we have something, don't we. The
tests showed many were, not just one. And the tests of Meier's evidence showed no hoaxing. So, if some very rarified and previously unavailable info
is shown to be unique to Meier - and we have LOTS of it - and let's say you find a couple that are incorrect, does that invalidate the accurate info,
such as the Jupiter/Io, Venus, Saturn, planets beyond Pluto, earthquake/oil, genetic engineering, wars in Iraq, WTC, etc., etc., etc.? Or might it be
possible that the info called incorrect may not be and that access to the same info, when it may have been known to some other people in certain
circles, was absolutely not avaialble to Meier except in the manner he said that he obtained it. Those are reasonable queestions...when one
understands the scope of the case.
Also, there is no proof that Billy Meier wrote certain papers when he said he did. He claims to have written the 115th paper on October 19, 1978 and
given it to Wendell Stevens on March 9, 1979. Stevens book was not published until 1982. Thus, we know that the paper was written in 1982, but do not
know that it was written in 1978, unless we take Meier's word for it, or 1979 if we take Stevens word for it. We don't. Their word is not proof. The
1982 date has been proven. Thus we take the 1982 date as fact, although if other evidence comes up, the earlier dates may become fact at that time.
MH: All documents written by Meier were/are signed off on by other people. Okay, you don't want to take anyone's word, don't but sufficient
evidence exists for information published prior to occurrence...again the Paris info (and lots of other info) is irrefutably in evidence prior to
occurrence - as you now KNOW, without having to buy anything.
Much of what Meier said the aliens told him was published in early 1979. Some of what he published was published by scientific journals with incorrect
facts. Evidence of similar errors is evidence of copying (call a copyright lawyer and ask him).
MH: No, it's not, it's only evidence of incorrect facts..if they're indeed incorrect. As far as the info that Ike claims is incorrect, as I recall
there's some possible disagreement on that. Some of it may not yet be proven one way or the other.
Since Meier's work contains errors that match errors of published works of the relevant era, there is evidence that Meier copied these facts and/or
extrapolated based on known facts.
MH: Taking your argument, then we'd have to conclude that Meier's accurate info, such as all that I already mentioned, would confirm his and its
authenticity, wouldn't it?
Based on this evidence, Meier's case still has controversial evidence, some of which tend to suggest that Meier's story is true (the photos), some
of which is indeterminate in probative value (the sound -- it's just a sound with an unidentified origina),
MH: Not at all, three sound studios and 4 or 5 experts were involved in the analysis, you should put hteir finding s to the test. you can see some of
it on the movie "contact".
and some of which goes against Meier's credibility (factually incorrect writing that cannot be conclusively proven as to the date of which it was
MH: The amount of info of debatable accuracy is miniscule compared to that which is clearly accurate and published prior to events.
Ok.. there you have a juries perspective. I know there are the "predictions", but I think there's equal evidence on both sides of the coin there
So... at best, you must see why some do not believe that Meier's claim has been "proven". In such an instance, proof would have to be based on
unquestionable evidence of immense clarity. We do not have that here. It's not that there's no evidence. Just that there's not enough.
MH: Preponderance of proof is, in this case, overwhelming. To not be aware of that is to not truly know the case. And your heavy reliance on ike is a
giveaway that it's your main ammunition. As I've pointed out to other folks, you either have to credit Meier with being an above genius level master
of varous areas of expertise such as : anthropology, archeology and archeological dating, astrophysics, atmospheric physics, biology, botany,
chemistry, clairvoyance, cosmogony, cosmology, cryptobiology, digital effects, electronics, electrodynamics, epistemology, etymology, exobiology,
filmmaking, genetics and genetic engineering, geology, geopolitics, history, linguistics, medicine, mass hypnosis, metallurgy, meteorology, model
making, oceanography, paleontology, particle physics, photography, planetary physics, psychology, religion, seismology, sound recording and
engineering, special effects, taxonomy, tectonics, videography, vulcanology and zoology, etc.
...or a genuine contactee. I suggest that you read my article in my July Newsletter "A Puzzle Where All of the Pieces Have to Fit". And I also ask
you to contemplate this not so remote possibility, if all of the research and investigation by experts and others before me,a nd all of my own work as
well, is shown to be true, what will all of your (and the other people's arguments) have amounted to? You will, in my opinion, have to answer
that...probably just as soon as you put the pieces together.
And, as for the question that may be on your mind as to what would I do if I found out the case was a hoax and Meier a fraud, as I say in another one
of my articles...I'd be first in line to want to know HOW he did it. I'm sure the Swiss military and scientists from IBM, USGS, NASA, NUL,
McDonnell-Douglas and others who authenticated Meier's evidence, would too.
And regarding my being the one selling the DVD, I'd suggest that you'd benefit from seeing it instead of just having an allergic reaction to the
Back at ya...!