Originally posted by Crakeur

John, if Malin were to state that he has reviewed the photos again and he has looked at the overal picture, the crappy broken ufo's, the toy ray gun comparison to the, um, toy ray gun, the garbage can lid etc, and he now believes this to be a hoax, would you still believe this story?

Originally posted by spacevisitor



Well, I have seen images from the Apollo Moon landings of where many professionals claim that they are 100% fake.
Is that thereby than the ultimate proof that all the Moon landings images are fake, and therefore the Moon landings themselves to? [My English writing is not so good so I apologize for that.]
I think not, and despite of the faked moon landings images, I am convinced that there where brave humans that have landed on our Moon.

Originally posted by johnlear
Michael is certainly not going to admit to a flip-flop on the Meiers photos and to expect him to come clean on exactly what happend is not going to happen.

Getting Malins 'current' take on take on the Billy Meiers photos would be an excercise in futility.

Do you have any idea what that does to your reputation? Do you have any idea as to how your credibility is damaged by statements that basically say it looks like a hoax but you're still believing in the story?

let me put it this way Mr. Lear, your refusal to consider the many glaring issues in the Meier story is harder to fathom than your concept of a giant soul catcher on the moon. That's right, I find that theory of yours easier to swallow than the idea that you refuse to consider the evidence against Meier.

He was keeping it pretty civil and it made the thread more interesting.

Posted by Camilo1: I personally have a hard time accepting some of Meyer`s pictures as being genuine, but Mr. Lear has said many times that he knows Meyer and that he has spoken with him and that makes Mr. Lear have some additional information that the rest of us don´t have.

Originally posted by johnlear

I will indeed continue to support the Meiers case. And you are both welcome to stay and to post. I know how difficult it must be to discuss a case when you have never talked to Meiers, or been to his house in Switzerland or even seen the Wedding Cake in person.

Neither have I as a matter of fact but I have a leg up on you guys!

Originally posted by Tiloke



Crap, I meant to say Mr. Lear shouldn't be the only one making the thread interesting, I really did.

Originally posted by johnlear
Michael Malin was one of the early proponents and supporters of Billy Meiers.

Originally posted by davidbiedny
Jeff,

It seems to me that Lear is simply not interesting in knowing anything factual about this situation, he's much more comfortable with beliefs. Knowledge requires understanding and effort, belief requires absolutely nothing.

You're typing to a wall, buddy. I know it, you know it, and so does anyone else who has taken the time to actually look at the evidence and use their deductive reasoning skills.

Lear will continue to bait you, remember, there are some people who need conflict the way that others need oxygen. Let's save the energy for the stuff that's actually worth the effort. The Meier nonsense is just that, nonsense.

dB

Originally posted by Dallas
davidbiedny,

I disagree with your stuff above. Seems to me it offers little more than disdain for Billy's story and those who support it, is that true?
Though the thread title is with respect to 'rayguns', all kinds of things have been discussed, somethings I believe others I didn't or remain on the fence about.
I just don't feel knocking personalities persuades anyone of anything new or revisited re Billy's case, they were open to hearing thoughts of prior.

What I'd like to know is your points on the case itself please.

Dallas