Originally posted by WhiteWash
There was another man people followed irregardless of proof or sanity...

Therein lies the danger in belief without reason coupled with fanaticism.

You could insert Nancy Leider's picture there also. Spaced out B****!!

Time travelling aliens could give us (and Billy) the proof we need. They could let Billy film them landing and stepping out of their saucer. Invite Billy aboard while he continues filming. Then go somewhere off world or out of time. We could take up a collection to make sure he had a good video camera instead of the crappy one he has been using. I do not understand why we are expected to believe proof we cannot accept. Give us proof we will be unable to debate. We do not want OLD PROOF. We want brand new, shiny proof with ray guns updated to todays sophisticated science fiction prop standards.

Back to square one for those seeking proof. Read the free photo and sound analysis reports, the info on Vogel's patents, the comments by the scientific experts.

If it's not good enough, demonstrate why by simply duplicating the evidence yourself...and show how easy it is to perpetrate a hoax, for 55 years, that can pass scientific testing.

When Vogel said that he couldn't duplicate the metal with ANY technology known and available to him as a scientist (with IBM) he made a statement of some magnitude. He was a professional, it's necessary to not approach professional level information with an amateur's mind.

And it would be helpful for critics to develop their own credibility by actually reading, referring and responding to the information posted early in this forum.

As for why I digressed into other areas, I seem to recall some off topic (to me) posts about umbrellas and ice as a weapon.

I'll also offend the sensitive critics among you by stating a fact, i.e. that none of you are competent to judge the Meier case's enormous amount of evidence since you're clearly ignorant of it and, so far, haven't demonstrate the thinking and logic skills necessary to do so.

However, ALL of you ARE entitled to your own opinions, which is why this isn't an argument for me. It's an attempt at an educational experience such as you might provide me in a field of your expertise in which I am, like you are here, ignorant. I qualify as ignorant in a whole host of different areas. This isn't one of them. And that's why I represent the case internationally and have, so far, defeated every single skeptical challenge (actually the irreproducible evidence does that, I just gloat and irritate people about it).

There's also no need for me to respond to every misrepresentation of the case and evidence, as I said, I'm not here to argue. We can consider this like going to school. You want to argue with the teacher? Don't waste your time in class. Would I sit in an aviation/flying class and argue with someone as uniquely qualified as John Lear? Hardly. I'd either see what I could learn from him, which would certainly include intelligent questions and challenges, or I'd drop out and take his likely suggestion to...go fly a kite.

MH
www.theyfly.com

Originally posted by Michael12
I'll also offend the sensitive critics among you by stating a fact, i.e. that none of you are competent to judge the Meier case's enormous amount of evidence since you're clearly ignorant of it and, so far, haven't demonstrate the thinking and logic skills necessary to do so.

Your judgment is incredibly poor....your attempt at discourse pathetic....shameful.

Those comments are willfully rude, and stating them as fact makes ridicule of your conclusion that the "sensitive critics" lack thinking and logic skills. Mechanically, you construct good sentences; the verbs and nouns agree with the tense, commas and other punctuation appear in the correct places, but unfortunately, your arguments are consistently flawed.

Originally posted by Michael12
There's also no need for me to respond to every misrepresentation of the case and evidence, as I said, I'm not here to argue. We can consider this like going to school. You want to argue with the teacher? Don't waste your time in class. Would I sit in an aviation/flying class and argue with someone as uniquely qualified as John Lear? Hardly. I'd either see what I could learn from him, which would certainly include intelligent questions and challenges, or I'd drop out and take his likely suggestion to...go fly a kite.

Isn't it your job to defend him? Aren't you making money, in some capacity, with your connection to Meier?

Nobody doubts Mr. Lear's expertise at piloting a plane. His thousands of hours on the yoke don't, however, translate into his being an expert on everything.

edited to remove an inappropriate comparison.

[edit on 19-4-2007 by Crakeur]

If that's the case, then it wouldn't be important to think about what the purpose may be, especially of things like the O'Hare and other recent sightings?

Ok, what is the purpose of the O'Hare sighting? Some people (John Lear notably) believe the sighting is real but of a terrestrial (human) craft of some sort. What is your, or the Meier view, of the event?

John Lear defending Billy Meir has definately dropped him down a notch in credibility IMO.

Originally posted by Michael12

I'll also offend the sensitive critics among you by stating a fact, i.e. that none of you are competent to judge the Meier case's enormous amount of evidence since you're clearly ignorant of it and, so far, haven't demonstrate the thinking and logic skills necessary to do so.

Michael12 while I agree with this statement apparently the word 'ignorant' is a hot button here at ATS. Most people don't think they are, thats why they respond as they do.

I find the word 'ignorant' entirely appropriate in many cases and especially in this case because I believe the Bill Meier case to be true and those who do not have simply not researched the case as thoroughly as you.

That said I would respectfully caution using the word ignorant.

I appreciate your taking the time to respond to the questions on this thread. While it does seem useless in some cases there are many that read and absorb but to not post. They are the ones that are important.

I find that the continuous use of tact and respect regardless of the insults that are heaped about are the foundation of successful communication.

Originally posted by Crakeur

Nobody doubts Mr. Lear's expertise at piloting a plane. His thousands of hours on the yoke don't, however, translate into his being an expert on everything.

I think the only reason my former profession came up is that somebody asked about my credentials. I never advanced my ability (or lack thereof) to fly an airplane as a qualification to comment on the tower on the moon, the atmosphere on the moon or the Billy Meier case. If you can post a quote where I did so I would be grateful.

Mr. Lear believes there is a tower on the moon that catches the souls of earthlings. Having him defend Meier is the equivalent, in my mind, of using Charles Manson as a character witness for a defendent accused of murder.

I find that comparison inappropriate and I would respectfully request that you rephrase it. Thanks.

Originally posted by johnlearI find that comparison inappropriate and I would respectfully request that you rephrase it. Thanks.

I have to say that I'm continually impressed with the tact and restraint John Lear shows these insulting posts. The purpose of this site is to advance unusual views, which John certainly does. Why people feel the need to attack him personally when they disagree with his opinions is beyond me.

Mr. Lear,

Horn was referring to your credentials, implying that you are an expert on these things, thus my comments were directed toward him.

I do apologize for the analogy and, in no way whatsoever am I implying that you are violent or murderous and for that I apologize. I will go edit out that part of my post.

Originally posted by 10538
John Lear defending Billy Meir has definately dropped him down a notch in credibility IMO.

Thanks for the post 10538 and just to clarify your comment where would that place the notch at this time? Lets assume that the top notch would be 10 and the bottom notch would be 0. Lets also assume that we are taking into consideration my beliefs that:

All planets in the solar system are inhabited
the moon has a breathable atmosphere
the moon has a gravity of at least 64% that of earths
There are cities on both the near side and far side of the moon
The US has been mining on the moon since the early 60's
The US has bases on both the moon and Mars.
No Boeing 757 crashed into the Pentagon
No Boeing 757 crashed at Shanksville
Virginia Tech was a government controlled operation
Groom Lake is now a decoy for Sandia and other secret bases

Where was the notch (on a scale of 1 to 10) before you lowered it one notch because I defended the Billy Meier case? Thanks.

Hi John,

Points well taken.

Also, I did mean ignorant, as in lacking knowledge, as I applied it to myself.

As for best evidence, please refer back to very recent post directing attention to photo analysis, sound analysis, scientific experts' comments, Vogel's analysis and patents...and the prophetic info, which I think is actually far more important. Re laser weapon, refer back to earlier post linking to Wendelle Stevens' comments re the hole in the tree.

I do know from my stats page that there is an awful lot of traffic coming from this site, probably largely from the silent observers to which John refers.

And since the "you make money from this" thing comes up sooner or later, first, I do all my work, writing, radio shows, correpsondence, travel, research, representing the case, producing the DVDs, film, at my own expense voluntarily...as in FREE, gratis, etc. If people buy the products, or hire me to lectuer, I make money, Certainly no one here has a problem with that.

MH
www.theyfly.com

Originally posted by Michael12
And since the "you make money from this" thing comes up sooner or later, first, I do all my work, writing, radio shows, correpsondence, travel, research, representing the case, producing the DVDs, film, at my own expense voluntarily...as in FREE, gratis, etc. If people buy the products, or hire me to lectuer, I make money, Certainly no one here has a problem with that.

of course not, it's your job to defend his images and his story. if you didn't, you'd be looking for new work. What I find odd is that you, who are paid to respond, are willing to dismiss some of the members and their questions. I'm guessing that is because those questions are not "answerable" by you. It wouldn't look good if you admitted that some of his "evidence" was debunked so you ignore or dismiss those questions, as you did in the post I was referring to when I made the comment about you being paid to answer.

never mind..lol


[edit on 19-4-2007 by WhiteWash]

whitewash, I was kidding when I posted the picture of Ringo.

it wasn't from Meier's collection of stills from tv and catalogues. I was simply pointing out the lunacy of his other so called documented pics.

"All planets in the solar system are inhabited"
Huh? Inhabited by what? Take Jupiter for example. The only attempt to land a probe there resulted in the thing being crushed and vaporized before it got close to the rocky core.

"the moon has a breathable atmosphere"
I'll let you remove your spacesuit helmet first.

"the moon has a gravity of at least 64% that of earths"
16.6 %

"There are cities on both the near side and far side of the moon"
Why can't astronomers see these cities?

"The US has been mining on the moon since the early 60's "
I don't know about this one

"The US has bases on both the moon and Mars. "
I guess it's possible

"No Boeing 757 crashed into the Pentagon"
Very possible

"No Boeing 757 crashed at Shanksville "
The theory is that it was shot down

"Virginia Tech was a government controlled operation"
Why?

"Groom Lake is now a decoy for Sandia and other secret bases"
Possibly true


So that gives you a credibility rating (on a scale of 1 - 10) of 5. So with your belief in Billy Meier your rating slips to a 4. Sorry

Originally posted by niv

Originally posted by johnlearI find that comparison inappropriate and I would respectfully request that you rephrase it. Thanks.

Why people feel the need to attack him personally when they disagree with his opinions is beyond me.

It is interesting how people can become so emotionally invoved in the subject, since at this point in history it really means so little to the general public and affects only a very few individuals.

I've read Mr. Lear's comments and opinions, and I think have a pretty good idea where he's coming from, so I weigh his input accordingly. I don't know him personally, however, I do agree that he appears to be among the more patient and consistently polite folk on the forum.

I also understand how that can really get under the skin of some people with opposing viewpoints or agendas.



[edit on 19-4-2007 by SuicideVirus]