LOL...it was awesome. Finally the world sees what I've been saying about Horn for a long time. He wont address issues, he'll just babble circles around you and evade the question.

Kal was great, and took this guy to task. I heard a rumour that Horn apparently wants an apology from Kal for his (Kal's) Press release promoting the debate. He either gets an apology or he wont do the second debate.

If it's true, doesnt that sound familiar? Like how he martyred himself into being banned here at ATS when I duplicated Meier's photos and he melted down.

The easy way out for Horn yet again.

Hey Jeff, is there any place we can listen to your radio debate with Horn? I have looked on the Kevin Smith website but he doesn't seem to update his archives too often.

I sent this email to the show:

Nice show! really really good, now a comment:
Mr michael horn likes to talk too much about the WCUFO photo that Jeff Ritzman made, but he always fails to mention that J.R. posted that unfinished photo as a project he was doing in trying to duplicate the meiers WCUFO photo (I was part of that discussion forum). J.R. posted that not yet finished photo to show us how it was going to be, M.H. uses that photo and says it was done for comparison, I wanted to point that out just to illustrate how he tries to manipulate things in favor of himself. I hope in the next debate the "host" can ask him about that.

1. Why lie about that unfinished photo and don't mention the other photos J.R. did duplicate that were better than meiers, with no technology at all. (a string and model)

2. Was not the show about Kal Korff vs michael horn? so why did horn just keep talking about J.R?

3. When is M.H. going to address the issues others talk about instead of twisting things around and not really answering the questions?

I wish these questions could be addressed to him in the next show. Can the host please make notice of how M.H. never really answers the questions and instead he changes the topics of the questions. I would like to also hear the hosts opinion.

Once you get on the page I link to just scroll down to the Thursday December 14th show, then click on the 'Play Now' link at the righthand side.

From the link above, Korff to Horn;
"Our lawyers are now contacting EVERY show and station listed in your resume, where you try to "impress" people with volume instead of substance, and Mikey, I just hope that they let me PERSONALLY slap the handcuffs on you when your time comes."

Can you please expand on who these guys are and so forth without having to listen to a debate and not knowing anything about them?

Michael Horn - English speaking spokesman for Billy Meier, a one-armed Swiss farmer who claims to speak to aliens, meet them, ride around in ships, shoot their lasers, etc., and provides some impressive photos of craft (at least the later ones, the early photos are laughable jokes). Billy also claims to receive prophecy from the Pleidians (aliens).

Kal Korff - Known UFO debunker and skeptic. I say "debunker" because he often fails to approach a case with an open mind, and only concentrates on the evidence that supports his point, he never addresses other evidence or even acknowledges it exists. However, in Meier's case, he's gone above and beyond to show Meier is completely full of it.

To be honest, one look at Meier's early photos, the Asket & Nera hoax, or the laughable pics of a human in a shiny jumpsuit with a PVC pipe homemade "laser" gun are enough to bury even the most eloquent points Horn attempts (and he is a good speaker).

Dissapointing second debate in my opinion, as all that was continually brought up was copyright issues against Korff by Horn.

Horn's shown himself to be a complete hypocrite, as he's violated my copyrighted material repeatedly on his site, so further his skewed point and sell his DVDs and books. He's no different then what he alledges Korff is.

And as a side note, this goofball keeps claiming I "accidentally" admitted that I "cultivate minature trees". Firstly, I dont "accidentally" admit anything when it's typed into a box and the send button is hit. Second, I have been raising Bonsai for many years, however I dont have suitable pines: one is a fig, one is a hibiscus, and one a severely windswept juniper.

If Horn knew is a$$ from a hole in the ground, he'd know well that these can take years to minaturize, and of course I'm not growing a tree for years to photograph with a UFO model. LOL...

I also have not directly said it's a bonsai we're looking at, as I've also said it could be a fake tree altogether, or one made from branches of other trees. I still think a small potted tree is a possibility though.

Horn's "forestry experts" (so he says) have pointed out that we're not looking at a small tree in the Meier photos, because of pruning on the trunks.

Well, I find that highly suspect when a forestry expert should well know Bonsai are pruned exactly like that.

Looks like more selectively edited quotes from Horn.

As a side note I've found that the Fuchsbuel sequence and wedding cake ship "trees" although alledgedly years apart and altogether different locations, have strikingly exact similarities that are far too much to ascribe to nature.

And of course these trees no longer exist, as Meier claims they were destroyed by the Plejarens...again, how convenient.

I emailed Professor/Dr. (I don't know which) Edward C. Jensen one of Horn's tree experts. Firstly to see if he was real and was in fact a tree expert. Secondly to find out what he said exactly about Meier's photos. I was surprised to get a reply last week:



Thank you for doing this fact checking. Here is the direct quote that I provided to the person who made the initial inquiry of me (neither Mr. Horn nor Mr. Meier).

Initial Query:
“The aim is to get the best possible estimate of the height of the section of the tree that eclipses the UFO, as that then gives a minimum size to the height of the UFO.”

My response:
“Overall, this tree is certainly younger than those in the background, but beyond that, it's hard to tell. It's also hard to tell much about species--it's most likely to be a fir, Douglas-fir, or spruce, but I can't say much beyond that. Douglas-fir is not native to Europe, but it's commonly planted there.

The portion of the tree above the potential UFO appears to me to be in the range of 6-10 feet. Although it's pretty fuzzy, there appear to be 5 or 6 whorls of branches with an average growth (and this is just an educated guess) of 1-2 feet between whorls.”

As you can see, I did not verify that the photo is real, or that the object near its top (the potential UFO) is real—both of these judgments are beyond my expertise. I assumed that the tree is real although the photo is fuzzy enough that even this is difficult to verify with any confidence.

-- Ed Jensen





So of course Horn misquoted him just like he does with all his other so called experts. I did a search for the other tree people but I couldn't find email addresses for them.

As usual Aspie, like you said. He does this kinda thing all the time, if people look past their nose you see Horn and this case for what it is.

Interesting that Horn said they ALL claimed this was not a model tree.

Of course, we all have to consider the source. Nuff said.

[edit on 24-12-2006 by jritzmann]

Originally posted by TerraX
He's a sick **** if you ask me.

I dont think thats something we need to work to establish. That one's a freebie. Just let him go, he proves our point everyday without a word from us.

Has no one mentioned this about Meier's Ufo/tree photos. The ones where the supposed UFO is trying to embed itself into the tree.

Why is it in all these photos you can see lots and lots of sky but the main point of interest, the UFO and tree are always right at the bottom. You never get to see the full tree. You never get to see the bottom of the trunk where it goes into the ground.

Now surely if this was real it would be a good idea to take the best picture possible showing every detail. But of course he can't do this as he would give the game away. If he just moved the camera down a little more we would be able to see the tiny tree sitting in some plant pot sat on a table. Or a cut off part of a tree stuck on some kind of tripod.

Some of those Meier photos I've seen are literally embarrassing in their amateurity. Can't say if EVERYTHING he's shown or is claiming is nonsense, but with some of the outright laughable attempts at hoaxing that I've seen in some of those shots, it makes me ask the question - "If you really ARE a contactee, and these beings are in touch and cooperating with you, then why the need to submit a SINGLE fake?"

I assumed that the tree is real although the photo is fuzzy enough that even this is difficult to verify with any confidence

Amazing how Horn get's confirmation of a real and large tree out of this, LOL....

If you want some real fun, ask him about:

1. The Asket and Nera Hoax.
2. The time-travel photos and magazine art.
3. The foil suit-wearing laser gun holder photos.

No doubt he'll bring up how the laser put a hole in a tree (and you can go see it for a fee at Billy's ranch!)...like the aliens have nothing better to do than routinely laser and uproot trees...