It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Billy Meier called the New Nostradamus!?!?

page: 27
0
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:
jpl

posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Hi MannyP4...

Cayce's readings indicated lots of "red meat" was bad for a person.
However, Cayce himself loved the stuff !! Big yummy steak & all that...

As stated previously, we are all "human".
Perhaps, you do stuff that's bad for you also?
Maybe not, but it's just the idea of all this i'm trying to share.

There's often a difference, between what we "say" and what we "do".
It's called being human... and NO MATTER WHAT or "where" we come from, all that reincarnational stuff and all that... we are all still only human, no matter... all the same.

There is No shame in this, but still... something at least some of us are trying to "work past" or evolve beyond etc.
Recognizing our own selves for what we really are, is a REALLY good step towards positive evolution... as this is a step towards "reality" and absolute truth.

All this is probably out of topic for this thread... unless of course i try injecting that at least some of the ets are very aware of all this, in all sorts of ways, and ALSO wrt themselves !!


To understand this, wrt the et perspectives, is perhaps a small step towards understanding at least SOME of the et contact info we have received. I'm NOT just talking about the Plejaren info here... as there are others as well.

I'd further mention, that there is absolutely NOBODY among us that is "worthy" enough to "pray to"... but someone on this forum would then most properly mention to keep religion "out" of all this !!


As always, Just a few thoughts... for whatever these are worth.
Kindest regards,
JP




posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 12:10 AM
link   
So because Billys mom was pregnant He appeared? What if she had a miscarriage or a stillborn? No I would think they would prefer a literal interpretation. It just doesn't stand to reason that they would pin there hopes on a probable pregnancy. How many other women in the world got pregnant in '36?
If conceived in '36 he wouldn't actually appear to the outside world till '37. When you see a pregnant woman do you say to yourself "hey there goes __(insert favorite Godhead)."
My read is they meant a living breathing being.
I could be wrong though.


jpl

posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 12:24 AM
link   
Hi Longhaircowboy...

One must always look at "who" is saying stuff... to get this within perspective. Halaliel in this case... i doubt if he/it ever was incarnated on earth. Within HIS/it's perspective, a pregnancy is just as good as the birth itself. Trends... influences... what is to come through time and what is in our minds is just as "real" as what WE think as "real". Kind of intellectual & dry really...

Only a different perspective is all...
(poor slob probably never had a gallon of wine & a cigarette or whatever just sitting around a campfire... enjoying being "primitive" & all that !!)

Mind you, these are ALSO thoughts from my own mind!!

I figure this forum might be cool after all... as y'all have your own points of views on things, and are "honest" ones !!
Don't seem influenced by "other stuff"... !!


later,
JP



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Hello JPL:

I understand what you are saying and I know very well that we are all humans no matter what - - this is my point exactly. Unlike Meier none of us had contact with "extraterrestrial" starting at the age of 5, wrote "Basic Rules of Man" at age 14 and so on . . . So what I am asking is what went wrong with all those teaching - - as it's very contradicting for someone that supposedly is high in spiritualism and also it was posted before "he had a lot of "Outlaws" events? Now he is even a smoker? What went wrong?

Maybe I don't know how to express it in better words but in my point of view I see much contradiction in someone saying this:

Meier : "If reason is not enough developed in a person he cannot grasp reasonable explanations. What one can do is to appeal to reason. Drugs are damaging the consciousness, the brain, the nervous system, one's health and the immune system. Persons who are addicted to drugs very often are prisoners of their thoughts and show resistance to any advice ."

After all of this, he may actually ask me for a light (to smoke), isn't nicotine a drug?
Then how can he get advice from an extraterrestrial? Wouldn't he be a "prisoner of his thoughts and show resistance to any advice,"
he said it himself.

we all know how smokers get when they don't get that nicotine on time!!



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 07:53 PM
link   
I just got this in my email-
Claes Elmberg, of the small Taranaki settlement, Okato, will be
in Christchurch next month to present a slideshow and lecture on
the Eduard Albert "Billy" Meier UFO contact case.

Meier's supporters say the 69-year-old Swiss man's claims about
physical contacts with extraterrestrial human beings have met
"all standards for a preponderance of proof beyond a reasonable
doubt".

Keen to elevate an example of folklore to scientific fact,
Elmberg and his disciples would have you believe that all
challenges by scientists and skeptics to debunk the physical and
prophetic evidence "have been soundly defeated", ignoring among
others, the report by UFO authority and Total Research chief
executive Kal K. Korff that revealed how the Swiss farmer
"hatched and continues to maintain the most elaborate UFO hoax"
ever.
Maybe there's someone here who lives in England and can check this out.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by jpl
Hi Vogelfire,

That there is absolutely NO proof or corroboration whatsoever of the nokodemjon lineage thing is not true. However, assuming the "opposite" of this from what i said previously, in that the following below IS absolute proof, is NOT correct either....

...Oh yes... the lineage is different than that from the Meier info, but there are no contradictions if one reads both accounts carefully so as to avoid jumping to conclusions. From two differerent perspectives, is all... also wrt what might be termed "important" and to "who".

___________________________________________________
"The complete Edgar Cayce readings" on CD - ROM
ISBN 87604 - 346 - 5
Reading 364-7
April 5 1932
Virginia beach
"...
8. (Q) Please give the important re-incarnations of Adam in the world's history.
(A) In the beginning as Amilius, as Adam, as Melchizedek, as Zend [?], as Ur [?] [Enoch? GD's note: Perhaps Ur was prehistory person [364-9, Par. 3-A] who established Ur of the Chaldees? I don't think he was mentioned anywhere else in the readings as an incarnation of Jesus.], as Asaph [?] [Songs of Asaph? See Ps. 81:5 indicating that Joseph and Asaph were one and the same?], as Jesus [Jeshua] - Joseph - Jesus. [See 364-9, Par. 3-A.]
Then, as that coming into the world in the second coming - for He will come again and receive His own, who have prepared themselves through that belief in Him and acting in that manner; for the SPIRIT is abroad, and the time draws near...
"

___________________________________________________
"Edgar Cayce's story of Jesus" by Jeffrey Furst
ISBN 0-425-06540-5
Berkley books, New York.
Pages 346 - 350

"...as He is manifested in the heart and in the acts of the body, of the individual, He becomes manifested before men. And those that seek in the latter portion of the year of our Lord (as ye have counted in and among men) '36, he will appear !
..."
_________________________________________________

Note the reference to '36. Meier was born on Feb 3 1937.
His spirit form ("soul") would have inhabited his body in 1936. Also, the pregnancy would have shown at that time.

Like i said, There is more than this, but perhaps for another time.
I'm NO expert on any of this, just stuff i stumbled across.

Just to be clear, NONE of this is FIGU nor Meier information to my knowledge. I'm sure both the Cayce & FIGU "experts" would disagree with my observations as well... !!


To summarize:
Either way, and no matter what one concludes:
If not Nokodemjon, then "who"???


JP



Well, Pierre, simply put, I just don't see it. Or, what I see at best, are vague, illusive, meaningless "connections" that hardly offer any kind of proof, let alone corroboration of the Nokodemjon lineage. Perhaps I've totally missed what you've "observed," other than the "36" detail, and I don't know how you can possibly leap to a conclusion that it refers to the year Billy Meier was conceived and thensome!???

So, putting these readings aside for the moment, can you elaborate on your first statement, i.e. "That there is no proof of Billy's lineage is not true."


jpl

posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Hi mannyp4,

Another of my "heroes" is/was Frannk Zappa. Perhaps his intellect & individuality appealed to me more than his lyrics.

He would not tolerate drugs of any type in his band & there are stories about this.
One morning, coffee in one hand & a cigarette in another, someone confronted him on what, wrt "drugs" he was holding...

"Breakfast" was the reply.
(A simple statement was all, Absolutely no apologies or defensiveness of any kind.)

It's all a matter of perspective, in other words.

Hi VogelFire !!

Regarding Cayce, It's all a matter of individual perspective as well.
We will all have our own points of view on things, mine include info on Cayce, Ramtha & other stuff. Others with these "same" experiences have their own entirely different ideas & conclusions, which most properly differ from mine.

I'm all for sharing info, but i try not getting into arguments if i can help it.
None of us will ever agree on everything, which is OK.
In other words, i don't have any arguments whatsoever with your ideas on things !!

It is always interesting to hear other's points of view on things... through sharing our differences, we learn stuff & evolve.

One further thought i could share on this, since you asked my point of view on this, is that there seem to be several "sources" of info which predict the so-called "2nd coming". (I'm really tempted to insert a bunch of stuff here, to remove the "importance crap" we usually associate with all this.)

Regardless of controvercies over legitimacy on the "sources" & all that,
IF this entire reincarnational lineage thing is accurate, in being a truth or a fact, then there should be SOMETHING mentioned on this somewhere, from other instances of this lineage, besides the Meier info.

Now... as we both seem to agree upon already, the existance of Cayce's statements which if nothing else are "interesting coincidences", are NOT any type of statement as to absolute scientific proof. However, i seem to differ in that i figure that IF these statements did in fact refer to the Nokodemjon lineage, THEN this could be interpreted as corroborative.
I don't think ANY of us will know for sure either way, in this lifetime.
AND... we will disagree on what any of this means, if anything at all.

I also figure whether any of this is presently proveable in a scientific scense is another matter entirely... as we don't presently have the technology to "track" incarnations, fingerprint the spirit/soul & all that.

Our sciences are very primitive compared to what we'll have in the future... & I prefer to stay "attentive" to possibilities, rather than either outright dismiss or jump to conclusions either way.
Scientific American magazine & north America in general "missed out" on the wright brothers. They went to Europe. Alexander Bell would never have invented the telephone, if he "knew" anything at all. And so on.

Again, to restate in ad nauseum, It's All a matter of personal perspective... we are all unique individuals evolving on our own paths.
That we won't agree on everything is to be expected, but ONLY IF we are thinking for ourselves !!!


Unless of course, one is involved with any type of "cult" stuff...
THEN someone or some thing tries to make up our mind for us.
If you're not "IN", then you're "OUT".... or if you're not "FOR" us, then you're "AGAINST" us.
We've heard this before even in "our" politics.
Perhaps we're beginning to think this is "normal"??
Just one example, there are many others of this type of "control".

Although on a somewhat unrelated yet parallel topic, In my opinion, cult-like thinking can include "anti-cult" thoughts also.
The exact topic material does not matter. The same concept & effect can be applied either way. I've seen it where the "fear" of being a "cult" or being "different", has been used in an "attempt of enslavement", to a stupid idea, so to speak.
A "cheap" political trick, often used by "both sides" of an argument.

It's pretty easy to see through this....
Sometimes, a good sense of humour helps !!


Regards,
JP



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann
Anyone up for a good laugh should read Deardorff's "rebuttal" to Dr. M's analysis. It's what it looks like when a Meteorologist goes up against an optical physist who's employed by the Navy...as you can imagine, it's not pretty.


Hello JR,

This is in response to an even earlier post of yours in which you complained about a photo within this rebuttal that's available at: www.tjresearch.info... (scroll down about 15 or 20%). In this photo, during the period that the Mirage jet plane was making passes at the beamship, which continually jumped away from the airplane whenever it started to get close, this one photo (see my Fig. 2a there) shows the craft apparently in the process of jumping, as its lowest 1/4 or so was mostly missing. You, JR, complained that that was due only to Meier's not having held his camera steady enough for that photo.

So I've rescanned the Elders' photo of it and extracted a larger cropping that now also shows the well delineated lower edge of a structure (perhaps a house) at the bottom of the cropped photo. That edge isn't nearly blurry enough to explain the blurred out and missiing lower fourth of the beamship. I've also added a crop from another photo (see Fig. 2b) he took at about the same time when the craft was hovering (and his hand was more stationary), to show that its underbelly should have shown up and not have been missing in Fig. 2a.

I've done this since so many of you on the list probably don't possess the Elders' vols. 1 and 2, so that JR's explanation might at first have sounded reasonable. With the photo materials that the Elders and Wendelle Stevens possessed, which I hope my website now shows adequately, it was readily apparent that the bottom quarter or so of the beamship was peculiarly missing in that one photo.

BTW, JR, with respect to the film segment of the craft maneuvering over the tree top, have you yet come to terms with Maccabee's finding that if it had been a model UFO dangling over a tiny tree, that tree would have been some 50 ft away from the camera?



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Jim-
If you cant look at fig. 2a and then at 2b and see the obvious directions blur present in the jump photo, I feel for you. I really do, as you're letting your belief rule over common sense.

And no, I dont agree with your pendulum approximation, and when you consider the miniature nature of what I believe the film shows...if you can ever get past that, you'll see what I mean.



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 04:42 AM
link   
[edit on 19-2-2006 by mrjenka]



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann
Jim-
If you cant look at fig. 2a and then at 2b and see the obvious directions blur present in the jump photo, I feel for you. I really do, as you're letting your belief rule over common sense.

Which way do you think Meier's camera moved in taking 2a, JR, in a horizontal direction, vertical direction, or where in between?


And no, I dont agree with your pendulum approximation, and when you consider the miniature nature of what I believe the film shows....

What part(s) of Maccabee's analysis do you disagree with, and why, which allowed him to arrive at the 50-ft figure as the distance to the tree, if it were a tiny tree used with a model UFO?

[edit on 20-2-2006 by Jim Deardorff]



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 03:30 PM
link   
jritzmann where are you?

we are still waiting for those pictures



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Yeah I know dude, again work has kept me way too busy. The one day I had off we had a major snowstorm...figures.

I'm off sunday, lets see what goes.



posted on Feb, 24 2006 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jim Deardorff

Originally posted by jritzmann
Jim-
If you cant look at fig. 2a and then at 2b and see the obvious directions blur present in the jump photo, I feel for you. I really do, as you're letting your belief rule over common sense.

Which way do you think Meier's camera moved in taking 2a, JR, in a horizontal direction, vertical direction, or where in between?


And no, I dont agree with your pendulum approximation, and when you consider the miniature nature of what I believe the film shows....

What part(s) of Maccabee's analysis do you disagree with, and why, which allowed him to arrive at the 50-ft figure as the distance to the tree, if it were a tiny tree used with a model UFO?

[edit on 20-2-2006 by Jim Deardorff]


Jim-sorry I missed the post.
Read up on "zoom in and track out" and get back to me. It answers many issues with distance and scale, akin to both pieces of footage.

[edit on 24-2-2006 by jritzmann]



posted on Feb, 24 2006 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Jesus, how effin long will this thread get......27 pages......wow



posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 01:46 PM
link   
It will be more than 1,000 pages as soon as J.R. post his project.



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 12:10 AM
link   
Did this thread die?



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 12:45 AM
link   
it's called shock value.

hearing a nut say crazy predictions is entertaining.
if people want something like that on the way to work, then they will give it to them.



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 01:48 PM
link   
I haven't read the entire thread but.. what all you "debunkers" fail to see when you're so closely looking to the details is that IF he was taking pictures of models, there would have been test shots, shots that failed, or shots where it is obvious that he's using models wich he later cuts out of the sequence.

Nothing like that ever happend. Meier had to bring all his films to a store about 40 minutes away, wich were then sent to 3 different company's to develop. The guy in that store states they were always full rolls of negatives, unedited, nothing cut out to hide anything.

Pretty amazing work for a one armed man.

I'm sure if his intention was making money he could've been rich doing special effects 50 years ago. But that doesn't fit your story does it?

And while he specifically states that everyone is equal and nobody should be idolized, you accuse him of being a cult leader. Uhu.

Skepticism is good if you have an open mind to begin with.

But trying to figure out a theory of how a one armed man can operate a model, a camera and in the meanwhile smoke a sigaret(blasphemy!) is amusing to see. I can't wait to see your video of the weddincake model.

Excuse my sarcasm!



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shroomery
I haven't read the entire thread but.. what all you "debunkers" fail to see when you're so closely looking to the details is that IF he was taking pictures of models, there would have been test shots, shots that failed, or shots where it is obvious that he's using models wich he later cuts out of the sequence.


There were *many* and still are many negatives and photos "lost of stolen" out of any number of Meier rolls of film. This is stated on just about every website or book regarding the case. One could seriously argue that those are the "test" shots, or those deemed unworthy of viewing.

Several of the photos clearly show a small object close to the camera. Some very clearly "poor" shots did make it into public view.

Who said he acted alone? Thats a big assumption. Going on my belief that there's no such thing as a Plejaren ( at least as it applies here) then who's the chick holding the raygun? Right...so in my view thats not acting alone. Unless you consider the chilling idea that all the photos showing the "alien" holding a raygun...the raygun is being held by the right hand. No face, no left hand, no left side at all.
Funny, that right hand is the only one Mr. Meier has...so it doesnt require a huge leap of my faith to see Meier in a wig and tin foil suit. (although I didnt want that mental picture.)

As for my shots, you'll have to make due with the ones I have already done for the time being, as I'm switching jobs and buying a new home. (Things a bit more important and worthy of time.) But, give me a boring sunday....



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join