Another Misquote Regarding The Billy Meier Hoax

Hello.

As some of you may know my name is Derek Bartholomaus and I am the Lead Investigator into the claims of Billy Meier for the Independent Investigations Group.

Michael Horn is the primary spokesperson for the case and one of the claims that he routinely makes is regarding the veracity of the tree that appears in multiple locations in Switzerland.

Here are the trees:



In the recent DVD "The Silent Revolution Of Truth" Michael Horn makes the following statement:
"Six professors of forestry looked at Meier's photos and looked at the trees and each one determined that the trees are full size mature trees and not models."

The names of the forestry professors are then displayed on-screen for the viewer:


Well, I just heard back from Professor Hanley and this is what he had to say:
From: Donald Hanley
Date: February 22, 2008 9:02:02 AM PST
To: Derek Bartholomaus
Subject: RE: Forestry Quotation Question

I have no idea how you got my name nor do I wish to comment on these photos. Do not continue to use my name in this fashion.

Don Hanley
WSU Extension Forester

So, there you have it. Yet another person quoted by Michael Horn as being someone who supports the claims of Billy Meier and then it turns out that he has been misquoted or never spoken to.


Edited to change image codes.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by SkepticOverlord]

HA
I knew it.
His credibility keeps falling, soon it will be so deep down, if you want to find it again you will need a flashlight!

Are you sure you don't have Donald Hanley confused with this guy?

Yet another person quoted by Michael Horn as being someone who supports the claims of Billy Meier and then it turns out that he has been misquoted or never spoken to.

Derek,

OMG...really? No way! :::faints::::

I'm absolutely shocked and astounded. This is an outrage.

(hey, so I'm no actor.)

Your Professional Model Maker, Miniature tree cultivator, and photographer friend,
Jeff

Jeff, you make models and miniature trees professionally? I'll take one wedding cake UFO next to a miniature tree please.

reply to post by AGENT51


I think Jeff has stated in a previous thread about Billy M. that he does not make miniature trees professionaly.

And asking someone to dupilicate something which you can not see the whole of is difficult.
That is like asking for a copy of rembrandt which you only have a photo copy to use as a model for the painting.

reply to post by AGENT51


Tongue firmly in cheek young man.

Just a nod to my greatly overstated abilities by the fingernail art inventing, film producing, elderly aerobics instructing, water filtration engineering, published songwriter, singer, music and video producer, humorist, science researcher, and writer...Mike Horn.

He's so funny. Life's all about the people that make you smile.

[edit on 22-2-2008 by jritzmann]

Jeff, I was just hackin. You're cool in my book. And you know what? So is Horn. Maybe in another lifetime you guys were friends. Its kinda like that movie Midnight Run. You ever seen that? I love that movie.

I have an off topic question.

Why is it that sometimes when I use the [ img ][ /img ] code the image appears in the post and other times it just says "External Image"?

BTW, I should be able to post another misquote within the next day or so. I'm just waiting for the individual to approve the quote that I want to present.

Hi there.

I have a tangential thread located here.

This other thread is in regards to the strange timeline of events in the Billy Meier Case.

Originally posted by derekcbart
I have an off topic question.

Why is it that sometimes when I use the [ img ][ /img ] code the image appears in the post and other times it just says "External Image"?

The new tags are [ ats] [ /ats]

reply to post by Sauron


Thank you Sauron.

I should also mention that I replied back to Professor Hanley and said, "Thank you for your reply. The person publicly using your name in regards to the photographs is Michael Horn and he can be reached at [email protected]"

-Derek

reply to post by derekcbart


Good work derekcbart!

Have you contacted or are you planning to contact any of the other specialists listed?

This kinds of remind me of Greer's suppose debriefing of ex-CIA director James Woolsey.

One more question, I know this is immoral and unethical, however, to your knowledge, are there any laws in the United Stated against this?


[edit on 23/2/08 by ConspiracyNut23]

reply to post by derekcbart


this cannot even be taken serious...if it is by you, please keep it to yourself

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23
Good work derekcbart!

Have you contacted or are you planning to contact any of the other specialists listed?

This kinds of remind me of Greer's suppose debriefing of ex-CIA director James Woolsey.

One more question, I know this is immoral and unethical, however, to your knowledge, are there any laws in the United Stated against this?

Hi there.

Yes, I have contacted several other people that Michael Horn has quoted. One of which is currently reviewing what I want to say so that he can officially approve it. I don't want to quote him incorrectly. Let's just say that this is an individual whom Horn refers to in almost every article, interview, lecture, etc.

I have also asked Jeff Ritzmann to post his findings of misquotes in this thread as well. He has contacted Michael Malin and Robert Post about what Horn says that they said. For the record, they didn't say what Horn says that they said.

As far as the legality of his misquoting people this is a grey area and is most likely not something that would be successfully challenged. I am not a lawyer and the only legal documents I have ever personally seen are in regards to entertainment industry contracts. I work professionally as a Post Production Producer on various television shows. You can check out my work here. The IIG is not a full time job. It is not even a part time job. It is a volunteer organization.

Hello.

Here is the misquote that I mentioned earlier. The text of this posting has been approved by Marc Weigert, the CEO of Uncharted Territory.


Michael Horn is the primary spokesperson for the Billy Meier Case and one of the claims that he routinely makes is regarding the claim that the company responsible for the visual effects in Independence Day and Godzilla could not recreate the look of Meier’s 8mm movies without using Computer Graphics Imagery (CGI).

In the recent DVD "The Silent Revolution Of Truth" Michael Horn makes the following statement:
"This is one of the films that the owners of Uncharted Territory, the Academy Award winning special effects house, they viewed this film and determined that it was not a hoax. Uncharted Territory said that if they could duplicate Meier's films they would have to go to CGI to do it because these clearly are not models."

I emailed one of the owners of Uncharted Territory, Marc Weigert, and this is what he had to say:
“From: "Marc Weigert"
Date: January 30, 2008 6:02:11 PM PST
To: "'Derek Bartholomaus'"
Subject: RE: Uncharted Territory website: CGI Quotation Question

Hi Derek,

After discussing it again with my business partner Volker Engel, this is how we remember it:

The statement is kind of correct... But not 100% accurate and a bit simplified.

Looking at the "space capsules", we noted that they DO look like miniature models, very simplistic in design and build. It also seemed weird to us that when you see the design of these UFOs, they seem to be designed based on the ideas of that era. E.g. when you watch a sci-fi movie from the 50s, the design of the UFOs reflect design ideas of the time, and are totally different than a UFO in a movie from 2008. That same look seemed to be the case with the spaceships in the movie. They looked like they were human design from a few decades ago.

But, to reflect on the statement that's in the film, I also remember seeing a shot on the Super8 reel that showed a UFO circling around a fairly tall tree. According to that shot, we said that we can't conclusively say whether it's real or not, but it seemed impossible to stage that kind of a shot with a miniature (it would have to be hanging on a very tall crane, with wires - but even then the movements would be hard to achieve.) So, yes, in regards to that shot, we mentioned that we could definitely do it today with CG, but at the time these were supposedly shot - it would have been very hard, probably even impossible, to fake this kind of shot.

So, to sum it up - we did not say "these are clearly not models".”

I followed up with Marc and told him that the owners of the farmhouse in the film have said that there never was a tree on their property. I also showed him the photos of what appears to be the same tree in different locations throughout Switzerland. Marc then wrote:
“From: "Marc Weigert"
Date: January 30, 2008 7:14:47 PM PST
To: "'Derek Bartholomaus'"
Subject: RE: Uncharted Territory website: CGI Quotation Question

Hmm, interesting.
If the tree is a model and it's forced perspective - then you would NOT need CGI to do this shot.

Best,
Marc”

I also spoke with Marc over the phone and he said that they “never made a statement that it was real” and they “do not believe it is real.”

reply to post by derekcbart


Regarding the unauthorized use of statements never made in a video...

I would suggest that the person whose name is being sullied is well within their rights to seek the removal of their name from the video and monetary compensation for any videos all ready sold and therefor impossible to "clean up".

Derek, you may want to let Mr. Hanley (and the other you correspond with) know that not only is his name "being used in this manner" it's on a bloody video that's being sold all over the world via the internet.

reply to post by Springer


Thank you Springer.

I have told Prof. Hanley and Mr. Weigert about the video and I have given them Michael Horn's email address so that they can pursue the matter with him. I am waiting to hear back from several other people mentioned in the video and in each case I showed them how their names were being used in the video. I have not heard back from the others yet, but when I do you will see their responses here.

Based on the emails that Michael Horn has been sending me (which you can read here) I imagine that some of them might be trying to get in touch with him.

As per Derek's request:

Post:
Robert Post: JPL photo laboratory for 22 years, was the head of that lab in 1979, and oversaw the developing and printing of every photograph that came out of JPL at the time: "From a photography standpoint, you couldn't see anything that was fake about the Meier photos. That's what struck me. They looked like legitimate photographs. I thought, 'God, if this is real, this is going to be really something."

The entire story: When Post examined some images with a Magnifying glass, he realized: “a lot of the pictures weren't really photographs at all – they were lithographs,” or high-resolution ink prints made from photos - and, hence, were worthless for purposes of analysis. Furthermore, the photos were “a lot fuzzier than the stuff on the lithographs, and I thought that was a little strange.” Apparently for that and other reasons Post said, “maybe this guy is just a con man. That's not the kind of guy I want to have anything to do with."

Horn admitted leaving out Post's entire quote right here on ATS back some time ago. His excuse was essentially to see if we'd catch him or the selectively edited quote.
------------------------------------
Malin:
Dr. Michael Malin: Principal investigator for the Mars Orbiter Camera on NASA's Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft at Malin Space Science Systems (MSSS), San Diego, CA. Analyzed Meier's photographs in 1981: "I find the photographs themselves credible, they're good photographs. They appear to represent a real phenomenon. The story that some farmer in Switzerland is on a first name basis with dozens of aliens who come to visit him ... I find that incredible. But I find the photographs more credible. They're reasonable evidence of something. What that something is I don't know." Malin also said, "If the photographs are hoaxes then I am intrigued by the quality of the hoax. How did he do it? I'm always interested in seeing a master at work."

I set out trying to contact Malin, which was supremely difficult. Malin finally communicated through Michael Ravine, one of Malin's employees at Malin Space Science Systems who relayed the message that I was curious as to his published comments on the case and if there was validity to them:

Ravine wrote:

Your inference is correct: Dr. Malin indicated to me that he feels the quote referenced above was out of context (NOTE: the quote from Horn's website referencing Malin -JR). The thrust of his comment was that if the images were a fake, they were well done fakes, but he couldn't tell if they were fake or not from the digitized versions of the images he saw. And his general observation of this topic was as follows:

"It really doesn't matter whether they're real or not. If they are real, the occupants don't want to have any substantive contact with us, and certainly they're not offering me a lift to Mars 8^). So screw them! If they're not real, who cares if some nut in Switzerland can make good fakes?"
-----------------------------------------
So, the idea that Horn puts forth, that Malin did an "analysis" of Meier's photos is untrue, and Malin clearly doesn't endorse them as photos of a real phenomenon.

Sound Recording:
I wrote Nils Rognerud who is listed as one of the sound engineers who listened to the Meier beamship sounds, and his responses to me sounded very much like someone who essentially wanted the evidence to be real representation of aliens craft sounds.

"I want to believe that Bully Meier is telling the truth".

I mentioned to him about the aspect that I believed the sounds were generated through and old tape delay guitar effect box, an amp and mic. One can hear listening to the tape on Michael Horn's site, that there is hardly any sound at all at the start of the mp3 file. A "Knock" is heard that sounds metallic. It echoes, and from that echo sound, the warbling feedback ensues. Feedback coupled with a delay effect needs some base sound to "set it off" essentially, and begin the loop of feedback layering over itself, over and over. The knock does this by beginning the feedback and the delay gives it the layered sound by playing itself over "in echo" while the feedback is continuing. I asked Nils what he said to that. His answer was surprising:

"I have never tried the feedback technique you mention, so I can not confirm or deny the possibilities with this sound technique."

So I have to say a sound engineer not knowing very much about what delayed feedback sounds like rather puzzles me.

I contacted SAE Institute, a sound engineering institute located all over the world, but I called the Nashville area and spoke with Justin Spence, who is the sound engineer and course coordinator for SAE. I sent him the mp3 file on Michael's site and asked him his opinion on the sound's creation, and the fact that this was recorded in the 1970's. I mentioned to me that I believed it was a tape delay echo in feedback.

"I completely agree with you", he said, and further stated there was reverb used as well, a fairly standard amp component. Justin commented he thought there could possibly be another effect in there, but wasn't sure as the sound was of such poor quality. He said the "knock" was very obviously a tap on reverb springs to set off the feedback loop. He commented that he could create such a sound in 10 minutes with his equipment, but that the original wouldn't require anything sophisticated. It could be generated by the old equipment with slightly more difficulty due to many variables like distance of the input device to speaker, and setting of echo on the delay effect, amp, etc.

In essence, all needed items to make the sound were completely available to Meier to do this, and quite easily. It seems the sound engineers who've "analyzed" the sounds must have been prior believers in UFO contact cases or the Meier case, because the answer was very obvious to the sound engineer I spoke with.

Originally posted by derekcbart

Well, I just heard back from Professor Hanley and this is what he had to say:
From: Donald Hanley
Date: February 22, 2008 9:02:02 AM PST
To: Derek Bartholomaus
Subject: RE: Forestry Quotation Question

I have no idea how you got my name nor do I wish to comment on these photos. Do not continue to use my name in this fashion.

Don Hanley
WSU Extension Forester

This answer is strange. It doesn´t make any sense as an answer.

Anyone would be interested, for example: How did my name get in that video? Where did you get it? How can i contact the maker of the video?

But..."i do not wish to comment on these photos,do not continue to use my name in this fashion"? what is that answer?