It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

[HOAX]Michael Horns Billy Meier photos[HOAX] from C2C tonight

page: 14
3
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 11:34 AM
link   
When did this thread get the HOAX label? I think I missed something.




posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anatomic Bomb
When did this thread get the HOAX label?


Topics related to Meier photos generally get the "[HOAX]" flag in thread titles here.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT51
As new member to this forum, I am finding out more and more that most of the "skeptics" and investigators" here, are not truth-seekrs, but teenagers looking for some kind of cyber-battle. I've got better things to do.


Well shucks....it's quacking like a duck, walking like a duck, and looking like a duck. I still think you may be a duck.

"I've got better things to do".....good idea, 'cause in a battle of wits, it's best not to come unarmed.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT51
Haha. Yeah, Great catch Lotiki! I'm Michael Horn? Yeah right. It's called CUT and PASTE. Us Mac users use it often. Not one question answered. Nice work guys. Truly.

I can see u guys hi-fiving each other in front of your X-Box's after work, giggling into your .sets. But, I'm afraid your cloudsong, has clearly been "zerged" here.

www.youtube.com...

"We got him this time! That pie-plate gluin' S.O.B.!"

BY all means please continue....this is entertaining. Almost like watching midgets at a strip bar.



Hey dude! Awsome video of Horn here:

Just kidding, but he always reminds me of Horn and meier's not-so-refreshing nutty flavor.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Can we all just PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC ???


Cuhail

ATS Moderator



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrPenny
"I've got better things to do".....good idea, 'cause in a battle of wits, it's best not to come unarmed.


There IS no 'battle of wits'. You clearly don't get it. Move on. Stay on topic.

[edit on 30-1-2008 by AGENT51]



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT51

Originally posted by MrPenny
"I've got better things to do".....good idea, 'cause in a battle of wits, it's best not to come unarmed.


There IS no 'battle of wits'. You clearly don't get it. Move on. Stay on topic.

[edit on 30-1-2008 by AGENT51]


As you can see this has been proven a hoax and even the title has been changed, so let's stay on THAT topic.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dulcimer
If only the space man was wearing 7 fingered space gloves.


Exactly which of these aliens has seven fingers, now? Because the alien holding the ray gun only seems to have the regular five. So I can only assume that seven-fingered one was some kind of inbred, hillbilly alien of some sort.




posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Roflmao Nohup!

I'm just glad they didn't appear to have hands like this:




Now THAT's scary.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT51
Not one question answered. Nice work guys. Truly.


Really? Not one? I think that I, and others on this board, have certainly answered a few of your questions.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Careful Derek!
He might add you to his Foe list as he did with me and rocksarerocks!
Oh Noes!
Whatever will I do now without ever the prospect of him as a friend.
Listen Agent, just because you disagree with someone here on ats, it hardly means you need to run around adding everyone to your foe list. You'll soon see you will have a very VERY long list indeed if you act in such a petulant infantile manner. Just my opinion man. Most people here dislike the whole Horn/Meier deal, as it seems that a LOT of it is so obviously a hoax that the mere fact they bothered to show it to the public is mindboggling in it's idiocy.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT51
Not one question answered. Nice work guys. Truly.

Agent-Horn, all of the questions have been addressed at one time or another. You just refuse to accept the answers.

Let me summarize what has been discussed on this web site, and on others so that you may understand that all of the Horn questions are no longer relevant to the discussion.



1. Where was the model made and concealed?

Irrelevant to the well-documented process of analysis of the photos and discovery of individual components used to make the model(s) in addition to clearly fraudulent photos of an actress and dinosaur.



2. Who in Meiers area possesses the specialized skills required for this precision level of manufacture, at any size?

Based on the close-ups of the WCUFO, there is no precision. Several elements are misaligned and components have fallen off.



3. What is it made of?

Irrelevant to the well-documented process of analysis of the photos and discovery of individual components used to make the model(s) in addition to clearly fraudulent photos of an actress and dinosaur.



4. Where were the materials obtained?

Irrelevant to the well-documented process of analysis of the photos and discovery of individual components used to make the model(s) in addition to clearly fraudulent photos of an actress and dinosaur.



5. What was the cost of these materials?

Irrelevant to the well-documented process of analysis of the photos and discovery of individual components used to make the model(s) in addition to clearly fraudulent photos of an actress and dinosaur.



6. Who paid for it?

Irrelevant to the well-documented process of analysis of the photos and discovery of individual components used to make the model(s) in addition to clearly fraudulent photos of an actress and dinosaur.



7. How long did it take to make? (Remember, a two-armed model maker took four months to assemble his inferior model.)

Irrelevant to the well-documented process of analysis of the photos and discovery of individual components used to make the model(s) in addition to clearly fraudulent photos of an actress and dinosaur.



8. What does it weigh, assuming even a 5' diameter metallic object, as suggested by one debunker?

Irrelevant to the well-documented process of analysis of the photos and discovery of individual components used to make the model(s) in addition to clearly fraudulent photos of an actress and dinosaur.



9. How was it suspended at 30' by a one-armed man? (Setting up just one special effects shot with a 5' (let alone 14) object requires numerous people and lots of time. Meier took over 60 photos of the WCUFO, plus the video.)

Your estimations of size are not compatible with proven information about the size of the model. In addition, thousands of handicapped individuals, including armless sculptors, accomplish impressive feats.



10. Where is the model now, what happened to it, would something of this complexity - and value - just disappear?

Irrelevant to the well-documented process of analysis of the photos and discovery of individual components used to make the model(s) in addition to clearly fraudulent photos of an actress and dinosaur.



11. With all of the photos, both day and nighttime, how could Meier have accomplished all of this unobserved and without accomplices?

Irrelevant to the well-documented process of analysis of the photos and discovery of individual components used to make the model(s) in addition to clearly fraudulent photos of an actress and dinosaur.



12. Why hasn't ANYONE come forward to show that they made and/or now have it?

Irrelevant to the well-documented process of analysis of the photos and discovery of individual components used to make the model(s) in addition to clearly fraudulent photos of an actress and dinosaur.


I hope this puts to rest your assertion that these contrived questions have any relevance to the merits of long-standing efforts to highlight obvious issues with much of the Meier case.


Perhaps now you will provide your assessment of my analysis of the WCUFO zoom video?


[edit on 30-1-2008 by mister.old.school]



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhiteWash
Careful Derek!

Listen Agent, just because you disagree with someone here on ats, it hardly means you need to run around adding everyone to your foe list. You'll soon see you will have a very VERY long list indeed if you act in such a petulant infantile manner. Just my opinion man. Most people here dislike the whole Horn/Meier deal, as it seems that a LOT of it is so obviously a hoax that the mere fact they bothered to show it to the public is mindboggling in it's idiocy.


Thats great. Keep going. You're doing great.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 01:41 PM
link   
The fact that you guys think I'm Michael Horn is what keeps me coming back. Its like watching a bunch of dogs try to wolf down gobs of peanut butter. Keep trying.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Second mention.

Stay on Topic

If you guys are finding nothing else about the ORIGINAL TOPIC to converse about, there's no reason to continue the thread. I don't want to close the thread, but, if things don't veer back to the topic, I'll feel there's no choice.
I'd like you all to also converse in a manner you can be proud of, instead of the baiting of fellow members.

Courtesy Is Mandatory



When members are rude, they not only discourage those whom they intend to hurt, but offend everyone who reads their rude posts, and make the discussion environment less pleasant for everyone.
To engage in stimulating, topical discussion we must minimize the disruption caused by off-topic digressions, and insults or other forms of personal commentary are always off-topic.



Thank you.
Cuhail

ATS Moderator



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Agreed. Now onto Mr.OldSchool. My simple rebuttal is that just because you find Mr.Horn's questions irrelevant, it doesn't make them irrelevant. I've addressed your WCUFO question. See earlier posts.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT51
just because you find Mr.Horn's questions irrelevant,

Perhaps you could help us all understand why these questions are relevant to the analysis of the photographic evidence?

Perhaps you could help us all understand why this amazingly higher standard of replicating the hoax methodology should apply only to the Meier UFO photos?

In the entire history of skeptical debunking of fabricated UFO sightings and photos, analysis of photographs and/or video has been sufficient to prove fraudulent intent. Therefore, it is sufficient here, and the case is a fraud. Unless of course, you have a convincing argument as to why this should be the singular exception?



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Oldschool: You can find the answered to your questions in my earlier posts. Again. Its not like I'm Meier-ite. Just asking questions. Asking such questions causes quite a bit of discomfort around here.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT51
Oldschool: You can find the answered to your questions in my earlier posts. Again. Its not like I'm Meier-ite. Just asking questions. Asking such questions causes quite a bit of discomfort around here.


I'm sorry, but I must disagree. You have not provided a point of view as to why the Meier case should demand an absurdly higher standard over all other cases of UFO photography and videos that have been shown to be fraud.

I've reviewed your responses here, and you seem to continue to evade this point.

This is important because this appears to be the single most important tactic that the hoax peddler Horn relies upon to as a means to continue his business of perpetuating the Meier material. Given that you've brought this aspect into the discussion here, I believe it's only fair that you allow us the opportunity to understand your rationale.

[edit on 30-1-2008 by mister.old.school]



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Well, if you must have an answer, Mr.OldSchool, I simply feel in my own analysis that a duplicate is in order. I respect your findings and can easily see why you feel it is a model. It looks like a model to me as well. But I still have unanswered questions that will likely not be answered here.

That said, let me just say thank you for handling this discussion respectfully using facts and analysis instead of hearsay, third party sources, and personal insults. There are too few Mr.OldSchools left in the world of UFOlogy who have the ability to handle a discussion the way you do. Kudos.

For Whitewash: If you continue to fill my inbox with nasty and threatening U2U messages, I will report you to the Mods and you will simply be banned. Period. I am simply not interested, but thank you for your input.

Might be time to shut this one down....



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join