Billy Meier UFO Contact Hoax: Discussion

Originally posted by Michael12
I'll do this one in several parts so as to keep the waters clear.

First, a prayer for the skeptics:

May you never face a trial where you will be subjected to a jury of...your peers.

Allow that to float over your heads for a while.

Lets hope there is no God, because you would be in a lot of problems.

Allow that to float over your heads for a while.

More lame excuses. Citing Deardorff's site is another effort in futility, as he's not an imaging professional either...just like you.

Lack of atmospheric distance haze is *obvious* both in mine, and Meiers. And anyone comparing them will see that. Oh, except you.

7 ringlets on the toy space gun, and 7 ringlets on Meier's gun. Same color.

Now folks, whats more plausible? The "similar to" excuse of Horn's which means it's an ET weapon and we're just too dumb to know it...

Or that a guy who's put forth demostrably fake evidence for years (Asket and Nera/Dean Martin performers, WCUFO/trash lid, etc) used a toy raygun to make his prop?

He calls me a liar because he has nothing else to chuck at me. Little boy games that he reverts to when he's caught. As I've said before, it's all projection with Mikie.

"Show us YOUR photograph of YOUR model UFO attached with a support to YOUR miniature tree on a hillside to prove your claims...and when little Jeffie puts his moola where his mouth is."

I already did. For the record, you refuse to acknowledge any of the points the first set of photos made, NOR have you answered my challenge to submit Meier's original photos to a third party independant analyst, right along side mine. Because YOU know the outcome.

So who's the "liar" here? Hmmm?

Your behind is sufficiently kicked by ATS, there's the door.

Originally posted by Michael12
what any fifth grade school teacher would of little Jeffie:

That sounds like what little Mikey wants. Not an adult teacher.

You keep posting the same things over and over.....oh wait, you left out the one armed man stuff in those last posts.

Why is using our screen names an issue? What possible connection does that have with our ability to detect BS?

This thread could use a laugh.

So read this ebay auction for a ray gun:
Ray Gun

Can Zap an Alien Invader from 20 Parsecs!

CAUTION!: THIS IS NOT A TOY! THIS IS A REAL, HONEST TO GOODNESS RAY GUN! DO NOT GO SHOOTING UP THE NEIGHBORHOOD, PLAYING AROUND WITH THIS THING!

Ill give the other side credit this time. The barrel is green.

Originally posted by Dulcimer
This thread could use a laugh.

You mean like Montana could use some sheep?

I see, first no haze, now there is haze. Uh-huh. How's about...detail, as in the remarkable details, dissimilar metals, structures, etc. of the Meier UFOs, care to show us yours?

And since no one else here seems to be able to point out where you duplicated Meier's UFO/tree photos, i.e. a model UFO attached by a support to a miniature tree on a hillside, please post THAT photo for us. You know the one(s) that show that Meier used a MINIATURE/MODEL tree.

Come on Jeffie, come up to the front of the room and do that for us.

And while he's figuring out what to say next, and how to attack someone else like Deardorff to deflect from the painful truth of his incompetence, here's where you can find the Photo Analysis to read for yourselves, for those of you that trouble yourselves to read and think:

www.theyfly.com...

BTW, I'm sure that it's been pointed out to some of you, probably frequently in your lives, that mere attempts at derisive laughter in the face of difficult factual realities, do not suffice to do anything but show the paucity of the laugher's "argument".

Besides, the - very well deserved - last laugh (at all the intellectually and personal character challenged know-it-alls) is...Meier's.

One day the buble bursts Michael. Ever thought about what you are going to do when that day comes?

Originally posted by Michael12
I see, first no haze, now there is haze. Uh-huh. How's about...detail, as in the remarkable details, dissimilar metals, structures, etc. of the Meier UFOs, care to show us yours?

You still here?

Lack of haze Mikie. No haze, cuz there's no distance. Go to school...at least some trade school for your own sake.

Metals? Prove there's any metal in Meier's shots. You see silver and immediately it's metal. Stop pointing everyone at the "official" report, which didnt even spell Meier's camera name right. It's done by a guy who claims to be able to do spectral analysis on video tape (impossibility)...and it's a joke. Ken Dinwiddie at DeAnza stated publicly that THEY put the colors in the "analysis" pictures and even were told to make the bottom of a "beamship" appear to reflect the ground below! Give me a break.

Structures? Who cares about the structure of the model? That has no bearing on it's reality, and this has long been your problem. You refer to a model ship and say it's more complex....who cares? It's still a model. It's the picture we're going after here, not the model's composition.

But thats your movable goal post again, again, your M.O.

Note the deflection of my challenge *after* his was met....deflections over and over since I did them. Nothing but excuses.

You folks recall that Horn has stated umpteen times that there's no metal samples? After prodding him on radio he admits there IS metal in Meier's posession. So why not shut us all up (at least about the metal)and submit it to IIG West? Or have it analyzed by several well known institutes?

Nope, deflections, misdirections, and unprovable/altered statements...more B.S.

And thats all you'll ever get.

I'm done, this is a huge waste of time and dealing with this kind of "person" makes me feel....icky.



[edit on 8-5-2007 by jritzmann]

Originally posted by Cygnific
One day the buble bursts Michael. Ever thought about what you are going to do when that day comes?

You've got to be kidding me. If it hasn't burst already, then there must be plenty of people around to keep it tenuously inflated.

And if not...

Notice the above impoverished response when the opportunity was ripe to display some character and credibility. My answer is, "As someone who's VERY familiar, first hand, with that experience, tell me what it's like - since I'll never know."

And while I waited for it, naturally no one here offered up the answer to why I think using one's real name matters.

Well, I was obviously brought up a bit differently than some people, i.e. I was taught to stand up for the truth and to not hide behind doors or skirts, to sign my name to my own words and opinions, as well as criticisms of others. It doesn't show any character or integrity to make stupid, snide and unsubstantiated attacks and innuendoes, especially not anonymously. Those who do have absolutely no credibility and are simply cowardly (as if that wasn't obvious already).

Likewise, those who support the truth do it no service to do so anonymously either. Actually, I don't care about anyone's reasons for anonymity, you're entitled to it. But it's never been a mark of courage in itself, though it has sometimes given some information to those with the courage to investigate or pursue it - openly.

Michael Horn

Wrong about the spectral analysis, of course, and still I ask:

Please post even ONE photo of the model UFO supported by an attachment to a miniature tree.

Anyone else here have the COURAGE to demand that?

When the skeptics finally do, then maybe they'll start to have credibility.

This thread has become an Internet Mobius strip.

Michael Horn on one side of it, presenting the illusion of participating in and experiencing the thread, yet, never really noticing the content of the thread.

The normal people (too many to list), on the other side, trying to interact with Mikey's side. Posting good content, probably expecting some kind of cogent response, but getting rants about character and alleged cowardice.

Its like two separate discourses, closely related, almost intertwined, yet missing that last little connection of realism.

I know, not exactly a Mobius strip. Just trying to illustrate the odd disconnect I see in this thread. Like two separate threads, weirdly thrown together.

[edit on 8-5-2007 by MrPenny]

[edit on 8-5-2007 by MrPenny]

Please don't confuse those who thinks this ray gun is not genuine as ''skeptics''

All it takes is common sense to realize, I'm not looking at an actual ray gun.

Under my point of view, whoever designed the "weapon" portrayed in the gun-ray picture has no idea of combat, guns, battlefield durability or military affairs in general. Just to give you some examples:

- The trigger has no trigger-guard, making it prone to fire all by itself. Even firearms designed five centuries ago in good old Earth have such "sophisticated" measures in their design.

- To be a hand-held weapon, a handgun, is too cumbersone. If for whatever reasons it must of be of such huge dimensions, make it directly a shoulder fired weapon. Its too big to be a pistol, and it's of no use for close quarter combat.

- The aiming dot in the red plastic thingy is useless. It's not aligned with the rest of the weapon, so it's of no use for aiming. Even the "barrel" is not alligned with the rest of the weapon, so it's useless if you want to hit anything else but the broad side of a barn.

- It's entire construction, specially the long thin tube that protrudes to the back of the handgun, look very flimsy. That tube looks like a problem once you get to close quarter and need to manoever the weapon around. It will get stuck in your clothes, in corners, etc.

All in all, it looks like the product of a person that has no idea of what makes sense, and what does not, in weapon design.

Originally posted by Dulcimer
This thread could use a laugh.

So read this ebay auction for a ray gun:
Ray Gun

Can Zap an Alien Invader from 20 Parsecs!

CAUTION!: THIS IS NOT A TOY! THIS IS A REAL, HONEST TO GOODNESS RAY GUN! DO NOT GO SHOOTING UP THE NEIGHBORHOOD, PLAYING AROUND WITH THIS THING!

Ill give the other side credit this time. The barrel is green.

Good find and a Funny post, Dulcimer,

Must be an alien conspiracy to make real alien ray guns, look like toy ones for our kids to accidentally shoot and vaporise others .... hhahahaaa

Them aliens must have some very high heat and laser resistance plastics with bright colours on it to warn predators away. I love the aliens in "Galaxy Quest" and "Mars Attack".

---------------

Micheal12,

I don't think you will have much success in getting any converts here to believe or buy items from you or Meier, I would suggest that you try your luck convincing the younger crowd at Yahoo chat.

I wish you, Luck.

Look on the bright side, at least Meier was fortunate enough to have such staunch, loyal supporters and believers like you, John Lear and the some others. Why should the people in ATS matter? There are so many more people out there who are more willing to believe.

[edit on 8-5-2007 by ixiy]

Originally posted by Michael12
Wrong about the spectral analysis, of course

*buzz* wrong...try again: All can read it right here:
www.rickross.com...

Excerpt:--------------------------------------------------
"Unable to reach the stars for tests, scientists figured out how to perform experiments on the light coming from them instead. Using prisms or gratings, astronomers separate that light into its constituent colors, called a spectrum, which allows them to determine a star's chemical make-up. This process is called spectral analysis.

Trying to do spectral analysis on the image produced by a camcorder, however, would be like testing a portrait of Abraham Lincoln for his DNA. The man and his image are two very separate things.

Still, Jim Dilettoso claims to perform just that kind of magic.

On a computer monitor, he brings up an image of Comet Hale-Bopp. The comet has a line segment cutting across it and, in another window, a corresponding graph with red, blue and green lines measuring the brightness of the slice.

He shows similar frames with similar line segments cutting through streetlights, the known flares captured by Channel 12, and the 10 p.m. lights of March 13.

Each results in a different graph.

It's rather obvious that the graphs are simply measurements of pixel brightness in the cross-sections he's taken.

But Dilettoso claims that the graphs show much more. To him, they represent the frequencies of light making up each of the images. He claims he's doing spectral analysis, measuring the actual properties of the light sources themselves, and can show intrinsic differences between video images of streetlights, flares, and whatever caused the 10 p.m. lights.

Because the graph of a known flare is different than one of the 10 p.m. lights, Dilettoso concludes that they cannot be the same kinds of objects.

In fact, Dilettoso claims that the graphs of the 10 p.m. Phoenix Lights show that they are like no known light produced by mankind.

The fallacy in Dilettoso's analysis is easily demonstrated. When he's asked to compare the graph of one known flare to another one in the same frame, he gladly does so. But he admits that the two flares will produce different graphs.

In fact, Dilettoso admits, when he looks at different slices of the same flare image, he never gets the same graph twice. And when he produces some of those graphs on demand, many of them look identical to the graphs of the 10 p.m. lights.

When he's asked to produce an average graph for a flare, or anything that he could show as a model that he uses to distinguish flares from other sources, he can't, saying that he knows a flare's graph when he sees it.

It's an evasive answer which hints at the truth: Dilettoso is only measuring the way distant lights happen to excite the electronic chip in camcorders (which is affected by atmospheric conditions, camera movement and other factors), and not any real properties of the sources of lights themselves. "
---------------------------------------
Of course Mikie will claim that this is all rumor and baseless attacks, or disinformation, whatever...take your pick. The bottom line is it documents known physics and the reality of what a camera can do or not do. It's point is well proven and known by anyone with education in it. Since Mikie doesnt, he dismisses it all as heresay or disinformation purposely put forth to discredit Meier.

It's all just such a joke. How many times am I gonna have to post this stuff man...for Mikie to spit out the same regurgitated B.S.?

Originally posted by Michael12
Please post even ONE photo of the model UFO supported by an attachment to a miniature tree.

Nope. Submit the original photos/negatives along with me to a third party picked by an independant. Until then, youre all wet. Of course you'll not respond to this, Mr. Goalpost mover.

Originally posted by Michael12
Anyone else here have the COURAGE to demand that?

Psst...it's not courage, it's called ignoring the answer to your first challenge...moving the goalposts, and trying to run people around in circles. Not gonna happen Mikie-boy. Nobody owes you crap.

Originally posted by Michael12
When the skeptics finally do, then maybe they'll start to have credibility.

Coming from someone with no credibility, I'll sleep fine tonight with your opinion of us.

Enjoy taking his case apart folks...as I said I've said all I care to. icky.

[edit on 8-5-2007 by jritzmann]

Uh, hello (knock, knock) is this thing on?

Now Jeffie, do save me the trouble of pointing out how lacking in knowledge you are, i.e. watch the metal analysis by Mrcel Vogel - the man who actually did the spectral analysis and who displays it on the videotape.

What's that? Oh, you would never spend one penny, blah, blah, etc., ad nauseum.

Wait, Jeffie, you don't have to, really. You see, I'm gonna post, for absolutely no money down and nothing to pay for the next 120 light years, this excerpt regarding the spectral analysis done by Vogel, as published by Stevens in his Investigative report series:

"We could see at this point that there are at least three more things we must do with these specimens. We should have an x-ray diffraction analysis and scanning electron microscope photographs to determine the structure of the alloy – how it is put together. We should also perform an Energy Dispersive x-ray examination, and try to get a good quantitative analysis.

He found first that one face of the micro-specimen examined at 500 diameters magnification bore evidence of the mechanical micro-machining, probably with a laser. Looking at the piece by x-ray diffraction, for elemental analysis, he found a single element deposit of Thulium (Tm, Atomic Number 69, Atomic Weight 168.934), a rare transition element in the Lanthide series, and also of Rhenium (Re, Atomic Number 75, Atomic Weight 186.2), another rare metal. Thulium usually exists only in a transition state in modern Earth technology. He also found traces of Bromine and Argon gases alloyed in the metal. One face of the Thulium showed evidence of micromachining. Looking at that part spectrographically, the Thulium, remarkably, showed only the primary band spike for that element – no secondary bands existed. All of the elements examined spectrographically had missing bands in their spectrums which should have been there if they were normal atomic spectra. This indicates that the elements are put together in a very unusual way from normal Earth technology. The spectrographic bands are entirely different, beyond what one would consider an isotope. The bands showed a very high elemental purity and no secondary bands and no catalyst. Most of the elements studied showed the same un-Earthly characteristics. Basically this indicated a non-electrical cold fusion process of synthesis because there was no ash and no heat residue. Such a process is not known to Earth technology at this time. An elemental Aluminum state of similar purity was also noted, as well as the same for Silver."

Looks like you're running out of diversions, as you long ago ran out of credibility. And it looks like the goal posts that you're talkng about are collapsing in on you too.

Now how's about acting like a MAN and keeping yyour word:

Post the photo please.


[edit on 8-5-2007 by Michael12]

Michael, this really has gone on long enough. You've been debating Ritzmann, both on and off this board, for almost a year, at least, of which I am aware. Nothing has changed. You've made no headway. This particular thread has made a laughingstock of the meier stuff, from plastic ray guns to garbage can lids. Oh, I know there are a few people who will stick by you. John Lear's right with you, the guy who believes the moon has a breathable atmosphere and has half the gravity of earth, who believes an advanced civilization now inhabits Venus, who believes our astronauts have been isiting Mars since the 60's. O-K. Cool. But you guys are in a world all your own. You are not believable. You are not credible. You have no particular expertise (Painting your fingernails doesn't count.) And I doubt you are making any converts with your bullying tactics. I would think you would cut your losses and spend your time in a more positive manner--even if it's promoting the meier stuff. You're not getting any converts here, and I would think that, all things being equal, is a negative for you. There are only so many hours in a day. A coupl eof hours yelling your lungs out here is a couple of hours taken away from selling your CDs.

Let's be clear about this. Ritzmann does not need to produce an exact replica of a fake photo to 'prove' it was faked. Faking it again is not an element in proof. A picture of a plastic gun barrel is sufficient. BUSTED! Thanks for playing, but we need some new material.

Cool, this has been going on for a bit. But there are other's who were there and mayhaps?, do/don't support the pics, film, vid or all three, but has a mighty class of respect who says the laser gun did burn a hole in a tree that he's see with his own eyes afterward. I assume he may mean he did not see the actual demonstration. not sure?

Dallas

Please examine the following:

Thulium is the less abundant of the rare-earths (excluding promethium). However, it is sixtieth fifth in abundance among the constituents of the earth crust. It is, in fact, more abundant than some of the most common elements as cadmium, silver, indium, palladium, platinum, gold, selenium, etc.

The most important sources of thulium are the minerals rich yttrium: xenotime, gadolinite, euxenite, samarskite, fergusonite, blomstrandine, loparite and yttroparisite. However, small amounts of thulium can be found in many common rocks and minerals like apatite and monazite, that also contains cerium. The minerals rich in yttrium are occasionally found in pegmatites in spite of being more frequent when associated to monazite.

source

This has been a public service announcement.


[edit on 8-5-2007 by WhiteWash]