Billy Meier UFO Contact Hoax: Discussion, page 77

Pages: << 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 18 times

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 04:01 PM by NightVision

Perhaps one of the more intriguing factors of this case is the passion in which the various skeptics/believers have in this case. The ultimate resulting frustration of not being able to 'convince' the other side leads to both sides throwing up their hands, once and for all vowing never to give this case anymore attention. But back it comes, again and again.

Both debunkers and believers alike must share the responsibility for keeping this topic well fed and at the top of the Hot 100 Threads Billboard. Whether you give this topic positive, negative, or unbiased attention, its not relevant.

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 04:18 PM by Annie Mossity

Originally posted by NightVision
But back it comes, again and again.

Youthful exuberance and unknowing [ill-informed] minds would seem the cause for such recurring inspiration and residual interests, imo.

Little more than but yet another field [crop] to harvest from for those with a vested holding in such beliefs, obvious hoax, etc.

A Want to believe selling books, dvds, access to and the like.

Meier's Pyre, if you will, upon which they've been often hoisted on the same petard.

That discussions still exist would seem to demonstrate the same.

What's behind door number 3? The wedding cake, the ray gun, or ASKET?

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 04:18 PM by Malcram

reply to post by NightVision

I tend to agree. However, in this case Indigo does not really appear to be passionate about the Meier case or every piece of evidence being wholly true. I certainly am not, and none of the other recent posters are, as far as I have observed. Rather Indigo seems to be concerned about the supposed debunking of the Meier case having been poorly done, as with that of IIG, and thus being far from conclusive, and he's not letting that pass without comment, as if it was "fact", as if it was "case closed" as some here would like to claim. I tend to agree with him on that. Certainly he seems to believe that much of the evidence in the Meier case may well be legitimate. I don't know about that, I suspect that may possibly be true, but I do certainly feel that the Meier evidence hasn't all been successfully debunked. Far from it. So I find the screaming repetition of "HOAX!!!" and appeals to numbers, etc, ring a bit hollow.

The only real "passion" I see is in resistance to the idea that the Meier case could have any truth whatsoever to it, with no allowance for grey areas or a more complex scenario, and a desperation not to have this case objectively discussed or to tolerate anyone thinking that there might possibly be some truth to it. I had never seen the Site Owners on this board, nor spoken to them, until I referred to Meier and I came into the recent - now deleted - Meier thread. Now suddenly, with this case, I can't seem to move for seething Site Owners LOL. So, I agree, there is a lot of passion surrounding this case, and I'm afraid I've got caught in the middle. Now I can guess how TV camera crews in war zones feel.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by Malcram]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 04:20 PM by Indigo_Child

reply to post by NightVision

Well said NightVision,

What exactly is the problem in accepting that some people are ARGUING FOR Billy Meier and some people are ARGUING AGAINST Billy Meier?

Is that not the same scenorio that plays out in all threads? There are believers and there are skeptics? Why should the Billy Meier case be any different?

We have not arrived at a consensus on any thread and similarly we have not on this one. I think the skeptics simply need to accept that the "believers" are not convinced Billy Meier is a hoax and they have no right to force us to accept that. Just as we have no right to force skeptics to accept Billy Meier.

I think that is very fair. However, if Meier discussion is censored or even banned on this forum, it will just end up strengthening the case, because people will wonder, "Why is Meier forbidden? What are they hiding" I am not making any insinuations by the way, just saying what some people have already intimated.

I think we need to allow free discussion and this means allowing both FOR and AGAINST discussions.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 04:30 PM by DaMod

Everyone Listen Up this will put this bull crap to rest.

I wear tin foil hats, i beleive aliens visit this planet, i beleive billy is total bull crap.

Here is why scientifically why he could not be telling the truth.

The ignition temperature of wood is 280-340 degrees.

A laser capable of burning a hole in that tree instantly would have to have been really powerful.

a standard 100kw laser burns at a temperature at average about 1000 - 2000 degrees c..

The tree should have instantly went up in flames. But lets say it didn't.

What is the range on a laser like this? A high end laser pointer can project at 240 yards. This laser would have had to have been at least 1000 times stronger correct? So how far would this laser have gone before it dissipated? A good guess would be a few miles.... Where is the aftermath? The laser even 20ft over grass would have been hot enough to ignite it spontaneously. So where is the carnage that followed the firing of such a weapon. Why didn't peoples houses get burned or other vegetation (including the tree).

The human race has always been masters of wood. We build with it we use it for tons of stuff. We also carve it.........

All i would need to make that hole is a nice long drill bit some sand paper a blow torch and lacquer to make it look like it had a laser beam fired through it.

Lets move on with our lives please?

Addition:

This is what a really weak laser would do to wood.

YouTube Link

Now a 500 watt laser for exactly 2 seconds.

YouTube Link

Another Laser 400 watt

YouTube Link

These lasers are not even close to as powerful as it would have to be to burn a hole instantly in a tree.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by DaMod]

[edit on 22-4-2009 by DaMod]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 04:31 PM by Aspie

In the same vane, what strengthens the case against Meier is that Meier himself will not allow any of his original evidence be examined or tested by independent verified experts.

None of his original photos or negatives have been tested. He supposedly has some metal but won't release that. Forget Vogel, he was out of his depth and then the sample mysteriously disappeared.

Sound samples? well who tested them? Let's have the original and see what happens.

It's been mentioned before in the other thread no one knows if there is an original copy of his contact notes and prophecies. If Billy has one then lets have the paper and ink dated to see if it is actually from 1958 or whenever he is supposed to have wrote them.

Until he does all this and the testers are independent and do not have a vested interest in the case then the whole thing will have a whiff of deception.

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 04:34 PM by Indigo_Child

reply to post by DaMod

Damod, interesting hypothesis, but I for one have no idea what an ET laser weapon would do. I guess this goes into the unfalsifiable category.

By the way how do you drill an oval hole smoothe as glass?

[edit on 22-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 04:39 PM by DaMod

reply to post by Indigo_Child

The drill alone wouldn't make it smooth as glass it would simply bore the hole. I would then sand it down, and after that burn it a bit and put some lacquer on it which would make it smooth as glass.

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 04:40 PM by Soloist

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
Why should the Billy Meier case be any different?

Because it IS a hoax. Too not condemn it is to condone it, and the last thing Ufology needs is more of the same and we've had too much of that since Billy's whole charade. If things like this aren't called out for what they are then more people jump on that bandwagon (Blossom ,etc) and try and make a buck off of it and make the rest of us look like fools. It makes it hard to separate the wheat from the chaff in this whole UFO mess.

Oh, and cults are dangerous, so uhm, yah, Heaven's Gate taught us that. Anyone that claims to be a prophet is automatically suspect. And if that "prophet" takes fake pictures out of books and off the TV to pass them off as real, then they are 100% bogus, and it is our responsibility to call them out.

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 04:47 PM by Malcram

Originally posted by Soloist

Because it IS a hoax.

In your opinion. Many other credible people hold a contrary opinion. Others hold the opinion that you are partially correct, but only partially. Others are unsure but open-minded and want to hear the evidence of both sides rather than just screamed proclamation.

Maybe we should be policed from hearing anything that is considered a "hoax", according to certain peoples opinion, to "protect" us, rather than letting us make up our own minds? Why don't you and ATS draw up an "approved list" list of cases we are allowed to discuss because you have decided you accept them? Don't you see how unreasonable that is?

[edit on 22-4-2009 by Malcram]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 04:54 PM by NightVision

reply to post by Malcram/Indigo

Agreed. Whether a case is real or a blatant hoax, a well-maintained standard for investigating any claim must be upheld. ATS should be a place where those new and experienced in UFOlogy can feel free to ask questions without fear of ridicule or account suspension.

The Billy Meier case and many like it have transformed from a forum for spirited debate, to a platform for individuals to empty their brimming reserves of internet rage and/or wounds of superiority. The whole concept of intelligently discussing certain critical aspects the Meier case have vaporized like the Space Shuttle Launch in '85.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by NightVision]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 05:01 PM by DaMod

reply to post by Malcram

Alright I will beleive anything you say about billy if you can answer two simple questions.

Your telling me that this

can do this

YouTube Link

2nd question

If it can then all he would have to do is have fired it one time in front of... i don't know... PEOPLE????????????? That would have proved his claim in one shot (so to speak).

THAT IS ALL HE WOULD HAVE HAD TO DO!!!

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 05:06 PM by Malcram

reply to post by DaMod

The point is you don't know anything about ET tech - neither it's aesthetics nor it's capabilities - so how can you judge? You simply can't. Nor can I. Not legitimately at least.

And as Indigo pointed out in the deleted thread, how do you know he didn't fire it? Do you presume it to be visible and look that it would look like a star wars ray gun?

You can't debunk a case with a lack of imagination or an inability or unwillingness to consider alternate reasons for things. And there is a difference between your belief and proof. You believe that because the gun looks tacky to you and because no beam was visible to you that it must therefore be a toy, or be home-made and that it wasn't fired. But that's a belief. I can't accept that as proof and so I can't accept it as fact.

Even if I were to accept it in this case, I don't hold to the view that if one piece of evidence is proven to be fake (which it isn't), that there must therefore be no truth to the whole case. The rest of the evidence has to be taken on it's own merits.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by Malcram]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 05:11 PM by DaMod

reply to post by Malcram

We could have judged had billy fired his laser in front of anyone. Too bad its fake so he can't......

I know i would have demonstrated ET tech. So would you. Why wouldn't he?

Under your same reasoning, why does it have a trigger if it's ET? Why not a switch or a button maybe telepathic command. Why a good ol fashioned trigger?

[edit on 22-4-2009 by DaMod]

[edit on 22-4-2009 by DaMod]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 05:15 PM by Malcram

reply to post by DaMod

LOL Actually I'm not "closed minded", you are frustrated that I won't close my mind, and share your definite, blanket conclusion. But I can't because what you are saying doesn't prove the point conclusively. So, I retain an open-mind. (I see you since edited out that 'very, very closed minded' comment. Thanks for the consideration

)

I honestly don't know what I would have done if I were in Meier's position and I actually had an old ET weapon LOL. Especially as I don't know what his ET contacts allegedly instructed him to do.

I do know this. If I was using a weapon that supposedly was guided by means of thought - as this apparently was - I'd make DAMN SURE no one was around to distract me when I fired it, in case I put an oval hole through someone because they intruded upon my thoughts just by being there or speaking at the wrong time

And I suppose it has a trigger because Billy ET's have fingers and hands like us. But that would be a guess. Perhaps the trigger is like the 'safety' switch - it can't be fired unless the trigger is depressed? The point is, I don't know why it has a trigger and neither do you. Therefore we can't use that to judge if it was a fake or not. I certainly wouldn't consider a trigger in any way to be proof that it was fake.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by Malcram]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 05:17 PM by Indigo_Child

reply to post by DaMod

This is a moot point Damod. First of all Meier was not allowed to use the weapon, and as soon as he did, it was confiscated off him. Others did not see him use it, BUT, what you are overlooking here others have seen the beamships. There are up to 200 witnesses, including an ex-UN Diplomat and many have passed lie detector tests and psychological examinations that they are telling the truth.

So if you are honest about your criteria that you want others to tesify to Meier's evidence, then there you go, up to 200 people are testifying to seeing his beamships. He's even been published in Indian newspapers when he was at the Ashoka Ashram, where again he has many witnesses who saw the beamships.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 05:28 PM by DaMod

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23

Originally posted by Dulcimer
I always photograph my alien friends out of frame.

I believe this was at Alena's request.

_____

Let’s not forget Billy’s time travel adventures where he took these photos…

Which thanks to Space Time News of Razimus.com, we can easily established as being fakes:

Taken from this Zdenek Burian painting:

According to this site, which documents all of Billy’s alien encounters, threre are at least 8 more pictures from that trip:

10 photos from the Great Journey (including cave men & dinosaurs)

Now imagine what the pictures of cave men must’ve looked like??

Gazrok, has Mr. Horn confirm these ones as legit as well?

EDIT: nevermind Gazrok, just did a search and seems you asked him the question before to which he replied:

MH: Your information is second hand and faulty. Re the dinosaur photos I do come down on the side that questions their validity, only because I cannot prove them real (and there are a number of them and they haven�t been connected to any movie I know of) and it�s such an amazing thing to contemplate that they even could be real. As I have long maintained, there are things I can prove and things that remain speculative.

source: www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 13/4/07 by ConspiracyNut23]

If the gun is real i guess these are real too!!!

(sorry for the long quote but it needed to be refreshed in our minds)

I'm done with this post you guys have fun with all that. This stuff makes serious UFO enthusiasts look like lunatics...

[edit on 22-4-2009 by DaMod]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 05:33 PM by Indigo_Child

reply to post by DaMod

Already covered. They are either fake or simply unfasifiable. Again, if you pay attention, Meier supporters are not appealing to these photographs at all and even accept that they are possiby fake, along with the Asket and Nera pictures.

By the way you are shifting the goal post on your previous position of demanding that there should be others to corroborate Meier. I told you up to 200 witnesses corroborate him. What do you have to say to that?

[edit on 22-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 05:36 PM by Malcram

reply to post by DaMod

We've seen those photos. What interests me is has anyone been able to prove that Billy definitely took that photo and definitely presented it as evidence? Lear calls this and other such photos "contamination". I presume by this he means that there are fake Meier photos that have been introduced in an attempt to discredit him. Is that possible?

Does anyone have a copy of the book that is supposedly the source for this picture? When was it published? Has this been looked into thoroughly? Perhaps it has. That would be of more interest to me that seeing the photos again.

I will say that I don't accept that the photograph attributed to Meier is a direct photo of the illustration from that book. They are different, although clearly directly related. Something else has gone on, IMO.

And again, even if this was proven to be the case, it doesn't mean that the rest of the evidence has been debunked or that it can all be legitimately dismissed on the basis of one or two photographs.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by Malcram]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 05:45 PM by Indigo_Child

reply to post by Malcram

I will say that I don't accept that the photograph attributed to Meier is a direct photo of the illustration from that book. They are different, although clearly directly related. Something else has gone on, IMO.

I tend to agree with you Malcram. I still think the similarities are legitimate reason for suspicision, but they don't look exactly the same to me. There are come clear differences I can see when I compare them side by side. I too think something is fishy about them.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]