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: 17
3
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 10:38 AM
link   
This is like a train wreck. I don't see anyone walking away from this satisfied, believers are going to continue to believe, and the others are going to continue to know the truth. I say give it up, I am feeling sorry for all involved here, I can only guess there are a few blood pressures being raised. On to better things maybe?




posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by WhiteWash
 


The Heaven's Gate Cult , a CIA front, from Mr. Lyne's "Pentagon Aliens":




I had known since early 1973 that the cult was connected to the CIA, the
primary purpose being the concealment of government saucer and cattle mutilations
activities





When the news hit the papers in late March, 1997, about the "mass suicide" of the
"Heaven's Gate Cult", I figured that the CIA had decided it was time to 'close out' the
24-year-old operation, which hadn't been very productive of significant, new
propaganda for years. This was especially so where I had already identified it for the
public as a CIA front in my 1993 book. With its members aging, their activities slowing
down, they were beginning to look more like a geriatric care group, so what else was to
be done with them, since they had been 'programmed' for years and were dependent on
the group. The CIA, couldn't have these 'loose cannons' rolling around on the deck, so
they were heartlessly 'put to sleep' like tired old dogs who were no longer of any use to
their CIA mind-control masters.



Is Billy Meier CIA controlled or has he outwitted them.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by derekcbart
 


Not the same as a circular vortex field.
It means the same but why go into Maxwell's Equations, so difficult.

Magnetic field goes around a wire. Current can go around in a circle due to
a varying Mag field. Its all there as you might suspect.

ED: Didn't molten aluminum come off these ships, this has been noted
by other sightings, not just Billy Meier.
Tesla: aluminum is to high frequency electricity as iron is to DC.
So much energy the ship is melting.


[edit on 1/31/2008 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Muhahahaha, those Meier videos are soo funny
www.steelmarkonline.com...

Hey, somebody please tell me a way or give a tip about how to make money from Meier idiocracy. I promise I will believe hard enough and I have the capacity to talk unlogical and non-sense. Thx in advance



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Hello TeslaandLyne,

I'm sorry, but I haven't been able to understand any of your posts in this thread. I don't mean this as any insult, but I quite literally have no idea what it is you are talking about.

Can you please try to clarify your remarks so that I can understand them?

Thanks.

-Derek



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Hello everyone.

Here is the sequence regarding the "light ship" as it occurs in the new DVD.

Guido Moosbrugger (translated):
"While taking the photograph I saw a fiery red big disk..."


"...which didn't appear at all on my photograph, but what I also saw, and what was also on the photo..."


"...was some glittering drizzle which sprayed down from that disk." (note - camera zooms into the photograph)


Moosbrugger then begins describing another event.


As it is portrayed in the DVD I can only read it as though Moosbrugger shot both of those photographs and that he considered both of them to be of spacecraft.

BTW, I'm probably going to be off the boards for a few days so that I can finish my review of the DVD and get it and the video of my being interviewed online at the IIG website as fast as possible. BSpiracy, most of your questions will be answered once I get this material online.

Thanks.

-Derek



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 04:40 PM
link   
Derek - are you talking about the "Silent Revolution of Truth" DVD? Thats already on google video I believe.

Here



[edit on 31-1-2008 by AGENT51]



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by derekcbart BSpiracy, most of your questions will be answered once I get this material online.

Thanks.

-Derek

You and I are in the same boat.. big projects to finish as well as some research.
I understand how time consuming it is to post all this stuff so thank you for the time you are taking after I'm considered a nut for giving Billy credit in any capacity.

I look forward to the COMPLETE skeptic interview as well as the other info you have to share.

Going through the raygun thread I'm at the point where Horn hasn't been kicked off yet so I'm curious as to how that happens.. no one spoil it for me.
He does have so good retorts to the videos and it's refreshing to see he mentions even he doesn't give everything that comes from Switzerland a full 100% belief sticker until he properly investigates it.

Until Derek comes back with his findings I'll probably be looking for the goods I need to debunk the wedding cake myself. I still haven't found the answers to some questions people have posed as well as questions I have. I know Jeff and some others are probably screaming when they read this after they "know" they've proven it false. I'm also going through "Spaceships of the Pleides" to see what arguments are offered there as well.

I hope you have some further video analysis also because I have an exposure question regarding the "two frame ship". this is where I'm 'fiddling" and will be checking into video issues a bit more as time progresses.

b



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by sputniksteve
I say give it up, I am feeling sorry for all involved here, I can only guess there are a few blood pressures being raised. On to better things maybe?


Unfortunately, that's all that's accomplished by this stuff. Which is a bit of an indictment itself. If it was really all crystal clear, and Meier would just provide the incontrovertible evidence he says he has, then there wouldn't be any need for all the rancor. We could sit and evaluate it and all agree that it was wonderful and truthful. It would be such a simple thing to do, and it wouldn't take 30 years to do it.

But no. What we get are hedging and tired excuses and referral back to the same old questionable photos and wild stories that some of the less critical among us are happy to accept as proof positive. But after this length of time, with no real positive proof to be had, the entire subject has just degenerated into a Reptilian joke. It really should only be ventured into for amusement purposes, and with an extremely thick skin.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bspiracy
I know Jeff and some others are probably screaming when they read this after they "know" they've proven it false.


Not at all. I have *always* said, as well as in this very thread: Please do check out the case as well as you can for yourself. No one has to listen to me...go find out for yourself.

Ask the tough questions, and go directly to the sources named by supporters if you can or feel so inclined to. Most are very approachable, and are willing to give your their *real* unedited statements.

Look everywhere and anywhere...and as I've said, if you truly dig and remain skeptical and critical (rather then desiring for the outcome to be what YOU want it to be), you'll come to the same end I have with it.

That, I am sure of.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by jritzmann]



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by derekcbart
 

The image of a circular current or light path:
iigwest.com...
Could be set up somehow in an electric field as Tesla had done.
It just looks more like a light bulb being slung around than a burning
ball of steel wool.
The tangent lines of light means some luminous particle escaped from
vortex fields.
Just suggesting that such a field might be caused by some unknown
apparatus. However it would surely be big, odd and extremely noticeable.
And we would know for sure how it was done.

I think it was luminous material slung around in a circle with
multiple exposures.. perhaps excited by an electric field.
No doubt he is holding up the sling.

Tesla was not above taking multiple exposures of lightning striking
around him sitting in a chair when he was not there any more.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 10:47 PM
link   
iigwest.com...

Never saw fingers of light before however they might be columns
forming in the EM field below the craft.

The large bight area would the bottom of the craft.

As always there is not much but light to go on and thats why there
are so many explanations from fake to plasmatic entities and phantoms.

Light comes from electrons and EM fields can cause the effect under the
right conditions.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT51
Derek - are you talking about the "Silent Revolution of Truth" DVD? Thats already on google video I believe.
Here

Thanks for that link Agent51. Took the time to view Michael Horn's latest dvd and there are certainly comments to be made.

Despite my disagreements with Horn I thought it wasn't a totally bad production. Showing eyewitness testimonials certainly helps to establish some credibility to the case and the people claiming to have witnessed some of the events certainly seemed sincere and not like fruitcakes. Phobol Cheng's (retired UN diplomat) testimonial adds some weight.

However there are a number of other things. I've been a critic of Meier's 'weddingcake UFO' (WC UFO) for quite some time and what I saw on the dvd only confirms it. Horn talks about that the critics said Meier used 'forced perspective' to make the WC UFO pictures and movie, the WC UFO footage is being shown at the same time. The footage actually shows something very peculiar which tends to support the forced perspective in my opinion. I've mentioned this before to Horn and he just laughed it away.
Around 57:36 in the dvd you can see footage of the WC UFO. Meier is standing in the right side of the frame. He walks out of the frame but here's the thing; he's getting up... That in turn would mean that the camera is close to the ground and that in turn helps to create forced perspective if you're using miniatures (relatively small tree - small model). Go take a look. (ED - And if I'm not mistaken the hill is sloping upwards.)

Another, what I consider to be a hilarious moment is when Meier talks about spiritual teachings, taking responsibility, the right to defend yourself and so on, then he opens up a large safe packed with pistols, rifles and even an AK47. Your average Crips or Bloods gangbanger would be insanely jealous of all that firepower. Meier shows 'his' guns one after the other and is being asked if he doesn't find that strange and abruptly replies 'no'. It's around one hour 17 minutes in the dvd. Funny actually.

More on Horn's dvd later.

[edit on 1-2-2008 by TerraX]



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 10:17 AM
link   
I agree. Not a bad production. Still leaves questions though. Here's an old Japanese Documentary on Meier by INTERCEP, later translated into english. At about 27 mins we see Billy again, kneeling down, but this time the craft is much further away. If the craft is hanging by a string, it is much harder to tell from where. Any thoughts?

Here

Also, at 32 mins, another craft appears at a distance (due to environmental hazing) and stops abruptly. If it was hanging by a string, how did he do this? Given the wind gusts as shown by the tree in the foreground, can one discern how this tiny model would somehow be un affected?

[edit on 1-2-2008 by AGENT51]



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   
i also saw the film when my computer was down and i saw the special features. since derek has referred people to the link with all the corrsepondence with horn i think it's fair to mention it too. so let me say that i also now wonder why this thread is still going but for different reasons.

so i'll do what i already know will be the unpoplular thing and ask why the so-called skeptics are still allowed to post here? derek already admitted that he didn't do a good job with his presentation re the tree photos. but in one message he said he only had a month or so to prepare but in the correspondence on the iig page it does seem like he's actually been involved for at least four years. and since he's with a company that is skeptical and attempts to debunk things he can't make that tale stick.

it seems the only persons who can be called liars here without the ats shutting the accusers down is meier and horn. well maybe they are but let's add derek to the list. and let's say that his tree photo presentation is either just not competent or deliberate deception. maybe both and that his saying that he could sue the producers re the contract seems not true since he didn't refute that he approved the interview for the film. the point is why does this guy deserve yet another chance at explaining himself and his company's position when i bet that if meier and horn tried to do the same thing everyone would be all over them.

i am actually surprised that horn wasn't all over him more than what he said in the iig page. unless he's letting derek set himself up for more humiliation or something. in case anyone thinks that this is unfair pardon me but i wouldn't allow anyone who works for me to go on the record like derek did and then back track and contradict himself and then cry foul. in my book no pass for him.

next i apply the same label to biedney again based on the iig letter page and biedney's own site referred to there. his 'proof' now doesn't seem to be any such thing. one photo and then another photo shop guy questions it and biedney back peddles and suddenly where's the proof? how's about opinion and on just one photo? i couldn't ifnd anywhere else on biedney's site where he proved the photo fake sorry.

just caught a couple of episodes of a show called mythbusters. these guys actually deconstruct claims either showing that something is or isn't a myth. so why is it too much to ask biedney to photograph the light fixture and curtain and create a comparable photo to meier's? until then allow me to say liar here.

and jeff ritzman told us he had an only nodding acquaintance with the small model trees but if the copied email is true it's actually 14 years. do we have to use terms like strectching the truth or can we call it like it is. again like the mythbusters show how's about jeff gives a photo of even a compared miniature tree let alone one with his model? how's about one with the model ufo next to the tree with the details seen in the photo that lear posted with all the contures and reflections of the sky tree and everything?

so no pass for any of these guys or for anyone who just says it's a hoax because they say it's a hoax.

i am getting a couple of other photos from wendelle stevens of the sun and tree ufo photo to make my points about that later specially since no one answered any of my questions.

i have started to go through wendelle's books on the investigation to prepare comments for the other things derek says in the film but it will take a little time. i did accidentally
open to the page where he said billy meier told him about two planets beyond pluto and that was about 20 years before they were discovered.

so when ats says anything that has t do wtih the meier case goes under hoax categories i'll cry foul. so far i say the hoax is on the part of the three pseudo skeptics who seem to have told the lies and actually discredit true skepticism.

if they can't do a mythbuster on this low tech case i say give it up.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 01:08 PM
link   
p.s. has anybody here checked out the company that supposedly said the meier ufos weren't models? i'm going to go back over that part too.

and it seems that it was the japanese film comapny that looked at the actual film instead of a copy as derek said but i'm going to go over the whole film more over the weekend.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by FutureSelf1
just caught a couple of episodes of a show called mythbusters. these guys actually deconstruct claims either showing that something is or isn't a myth. so why is it too much to ask biedney to photograph the light fixture and curtain and create a comparable photo to meier's? until then allow me to say liar here.

Just a quick reply. The photo Biedney examined has been duplicated by other people. The one called 'the lightship from Andromeda' or something of that nature. It's in FIGU bulletin nr. 10.
us.figu.org...
Unfortunately you can't see the photo's themselves in the bulletin. They were visible on the website billymeier.com but that site seems to have been taken down.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 02:50 PM
link   
The user, FutureSelf1, is Michael Horn who has previously been banned from ATS several times based on past episodes of inappropriate forum behavior.

While we'd prefer to have Mr. Horn participate in these discussions, he's demonstrated an inability to participate with civility and is no longer a welcome contributor.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 02:57 PM
link   
On one hand (no pun intended), I agree with the logic that just because the look of a particular photo can be duplicated, it doesn't mean that's what was actually done with the original photo. James Randi does this all the time. He shows how something could be done, but never proves how something actually was done.

Whether or not a photo can be duplicated or mimicked is basically irrelevant. Even an absolutely "authentic" photo is of very limited value to begin with if it has nothing else to back it up, because we know people are clever and like to hoax things. It's just completely foolish to just accept any image as "real" just because it looks real. That's what magicians and hoaxers do. Make things look real.

I personally don't care if an image can be mimicked or not. It still doesn't let the person making the original claim off the hook to prove the veracity of their claim. And an image is simply lousy proof, whether it's real or not, for the above reasons.

If Meier, or anybody else making the claim, can't do it with the images alone, then that's tough luck. My attitude is always going to be, "What else ya got?" And in this case, after all this time, they got diddly squat. Hard proof talks and B.S. walks.

Since I have been following this for a while now, however, I wonder what will happen when Meier dies. He's no spring chicken. I assume some industrious person will try to make more money with it, that the ball will still roll for a while. Or maybe it'll finally fade away with the Adamskis and the Bethurums.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 03:12 PM
link   
And there it is for all to see... Horn caught red-handed, yet again, in a blatant misrepresentation of his own identity.

Not that this is surprising - he did it on The Paracast forums, more than once.

He's a skanky, compulsive liar. And he's all yours, Meirites. Have fun with him.

dB

[edit on 1-2-2008 by davidbiedny]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join