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.

 

is every Meier photo a fake ?

page: 10
2
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by NightVision
 


lol @ NightVision...good one


never thought about that comparison, wonder if Billy can play the guitar ?hmm

might not want to mention it to Billy though he may attract another crowd of followers...




posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
i530.photobucket.com...

One or two things about 'real' characteristics of a real saucer.

You can see the inflatable landing gear underneath the craft.

And a hint of light from electrostatic discharge.



thanks for your post TeslaandLyne


glad you liked that photo and and what do you think about the greenery in the forground ?

do you thinks it's grass or some type of underbrush growth ?


also i didn't know that the ufo had inflatable landing gear ?

tesla's work ? or skunkworks ? or...



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Balez
reply to post by easynow
 


The first picture, is in my opinion a fake.
Look at the grass, look at the ufo, then the tree behind it and the bush to the right.
It has lot more detail than both the tree and the bush.
Now compare it to the grass, about the same detail can be seen.


This image also contains the same characteristics.
The ufo has more detail than the tree behind it which means it is alot closer to the camera than what you think.
If that Ufo was some distance away it would also look bigger compared to the tree behind it.


This image is in just a too bad state to be able to tell anything from it really.
I'd gladly look at a better quallity image





thanks for your post


i will agree that somethings are out of focus in that picture but that proves it's fake ? maybe maybe not and i don't think it's grass either so you may have to reconsider your opinion ?


This image is in just a too bad state to be able to tell anything from it really.
I'd gladly look at a better quallity image


i agree on both points


i think that is a copy from a book but not sure and hoping to find better ?

i have seen in the past that particular photo and it does show the tree branch in front of the ufo. could be a smoking gun either way imo



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
all of the photos that were on the web that he produced have disappeared and from what i can gather his pictures couldn't stand up to the scrutiny of this investigation. correct me if i am wrong



Wrong. I offered mine alongside one of Meier's originals to be ponied up to a 3rd party independent analysis firm. To date, the Media rep has done nothing but cry about wanting a WC duplication. He has not, nor has any party from the Meier camp accepted the challenge.

I accepted theirs to duplicate the photos with simple materials...string and model.

They have since failed to accept mine. We know exactly why this is. We all know.

The ones I did were actually mistaken by some believers - for Meier's, on one of the main Meier discussion forums on the net.

They compare just fine. The complexity of the model is irrelevant. It's the level of effect of size and distance. Both Meier's and my own show no distance hazing whatsoever. Because they are both small models, and both are close to the camera. I could build models that would be more complex...but for what. Thats not the point.

The point was made, photos shot, and end of story. Everything since then from the Meier freaks has been personal attacks and outright lies concerning me. It's disgusting. One pertinent individual involved in the promotion of the case is in my opinion, the WORST sort of scum.

I have since ceased engaging any of that, because it's ultimately like shooting fish in a barrel.

[edit on 23-9-2008 by jritzmann]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 




i will agree that somethings are out of focus in that picture but that proves it's fake ? maybe maybe not and i don't think it's grass either so you may have to reconsider your opinion ?

If objects far away is out of focus and objects closer to the camera is not, it means that it is closer to the camera.

And i used the grass in the bottom of the picture as an example (you even see leafs lying in the grass).
You can see pretty much of the detail of the grass like single straws and such, however on the tree and the bush you can not.

You can clearly see on the weddingcake ufo many details that standout.
Like those round balls (whatever the heck they are)

If it was far away, like the bush as an example, you would just see a shiny object, and not much detail.

I think this is a small model, i believe that every shot of the weddingcake ufo is a model.
As another example the weddingcake picture where the ufo is "claimed" to be hoovering over Mr. Meier's car, which it isn't (those pictures are also in this thread posted by me).

I know i can not prove that every picture that Mr. Meier has taken is a fake.
And it will also be difficult to do such a thing, that goes both ways really, proving them genuine or fake is impossible without originals.

But some pictures however do speak for themself.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by jritzmann
 


thanks for your post jritzmann,


Wrong. I offered mine alongside one of Meier's originals to be ponied up to a 3rd party independent analysis firm. To date, the Media rep has done nothing but cry about wanting a WC duplication. He has not, nor has any party from the Meier camp accepted the challenge.


forgive me for coming in late to this and not being familiar with your work and have only seen the one photo that you have posted here on ATS.

i have to ask you ...what good would it have done to "pony up" your photos to a 3rd party ? i mean...sure you could compare photos all day long but what does it prove ?

showing replicas can only prove that forced perspective is possible, and everyone already knows it's possible. i do understand that having an example to look at does help but it is only circumstantial evidence.

even if you had made an exact duplicate of the WC ufo scene it still would only prove that it's possible to make one.

however... i believe that if you documented the work involved into making such a replica you would lend credence to the fact that it would not be that easy to do wich would in my opinion would substantiate the claims of the "one armed Man " theory and how can he have done all that.

so i think it's a slippery slope to recreate the WC photo's either way. just my thoughts



They compare just fine. The complexity of the model is irrelevant. It's the level of effect of size and distance.


i have only seen the one photo of your work so i cannot honestly comment on the comparison. the photo you posted on ATS is very good work and a great accomplishment in my opinion of that photo.

however i do believe it was more work than you make it out to be and i have read that you had somebody that was a proffesional model maker make this...






if you had to get a pro to make that simple looking model what does that say about Bill's model building abilities ?

would Billy be considered a pro at building models and photographing forced perspectives then ?

if so he should have been working in the film industry and awarded some sort of recognition notariaty.

the Billy Meier photo's are either proof of E.T.'s or proof that the guy was wayyy ahead of his time in photography and model building.

i know you have probably heard this argument a million times but it is a valid one in my opinion



The point was made, photos shot, and end of story. Everything since then from the Meier freaks has been personal attacks and outright lies concerning me. It's disgusting. One pertinent individual involved in the promotion of the case is in my opinion, the WORST sort of scum.


did you expect something different would have happened ? i would have expected that and more. by involving yourself in an attempt to debunk something of this nature you should have known you would be attacked and confronted with people that you wouldn't like in the end.


I have since ceased engaging any of that, because it's ultimately like shooting fish in a barrel.


bet if you were hungry enough, you'd just tip the dam barrel over ...










[edit on 23-9-2008 by easynow]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Its a long story easynow and still learning on about electric fields and
charges and such and electrical momentum being different than
mechanical momentum... and yeah blame it on Tesla and a few other
people.

It may be a perfectly good saucer put in the photo next to the tree.
I don't know how many people were in the Billy Meier dreamworks factory
but apparently ahead of Disney, Lucas and Spielberg.

Why detail a landing gear if its real or done by people who know
the real thing. Consider that. A real possibility Meier was used to
make money off saucers they could not use. The Swiss UFO or
saucer keepers. UFO and Alien stories are still income for things
that can't be disclosed. It aids their cause.

The electrical saucer is grounded without insulating inflatable landing gear.
The cover should be metal to provide a Faraday Cage for the pilot.
There can't be much room in a saucer or the mechanism is very simple.
Nazis guard told grounds keeper not to try and start any engine until
a saucer took off.

ED:
Popular knowledge of Tesla from Jack and Meg:

The power supply goes up in smoke and don't recall any closeup
of the spark gap. One way to obtain high voltage but hard to believe
this old fashion way is used.



[edit on 9/23/2008 by TeslaandLyne]

[edit on 9/23/2008 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Take it from experience, easynow. I have attempted this very same thread and debate with JRitzmann. No matter how many photos or comparisons you make, you'll never convince him that he could've done a better job replicating Meier's photos. Its that simple. Its now an "us vs. them" thing with that club. The moment you question his results, you are flamed as a 'BillyMeier Beleiver Nutcase' and then accused of being Michael Horn. Just trying to save you some time and trouble here.

That said, I think Ritzmann did a decent (B- imo) job, but came very close. He had some problems with no distance hazing in his shots. There are at least a few Meier photos that have distance hazing, model or no model, there's distance hazing.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 06:52 PM
link   
BILLY MEIER

UFO cult leader, claimed contact with Pleiadian aliens. Faked UFO photos and films. Employed props and stop motion/cut photography to make UFOs disappear and reappear on film. Took photos of female claiming it was an alien, photo was actually taken off of a television screen from an episode of the Dean Martin show. The excuse offered when caught red-handed? MIB disinfo, of course! Meier apparently thought no one would figure this out. Photographed magazine pictures of dinosaurs claiming them as proof he traveled back in time. Also has photos showing him with a 'laser gun' - laughable at best and just painful to look at. Meier has supporters, many whom have cashed in on books, videos, and lectures about Meier's UFO hoax. It's amazing that some idiots still defend this hoax...again, you know who you are. If you want to believe in something badly enough, you'll justify it as reality any way possible - especially when the bottom line dollar is at stake. Beware of delusional people trying to use UFOs as a religion or as a way to get into your wallet. SEE: Picture of UFO model used by Meier and Short Piece on Meier and the article The Camera Never Lies? Also see Meier's "official" media rep Michael Horn's website devoted to championing Meier at the expense of all sanity and the official Billy Meier website. You can also see the whacky photos of a Meier UFO here at this laughable attempt to lend credence to the case. It's painful how anyone could keep a striaght face and promote this silly case. Those promoting Meier claim to be offering life saving information for the survival of the human race - yep, that's why they charge for DVDs, books, videos, and lectures. Beware of those selling prophets for profit.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by NightVision
 


thanks for the reply ,


Just trying to save you some time and trouble here.


10-4 on that...

to be perfectly honest i don't see how anyones attempt to debunk this with fakes matters anyway.... no matter how many times you replicate the photo's...it's still just that and that only proves it's possible.

in my opinion Billy's pictures cannot be debunked by simulating them and unless Billy himself confesses to them being fake and shows the proof needed this will remain a mystery.


There are at least a few Meier photos that have distance hazing, model or no model, there's distance hazing.


yes i agree and it may be evidence that there might be some fowl play but considering the experts that examined the pictures said they didn't see any signs of fakery what are we left with ?















[edit on 23-9-2008 by easynow]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by philjwolf
 


thanks for your post,

it's easy to see what side your on by reading your post and i understand why you said what you did but...

i noticed that you left out the fact that there was witness testimony that was not from his following...and i am not bringing this up to defend Billy's claims but since you seem to be an expert on this based on your response what do you say about the witnesses to some of the events that took place ?

www.tjresearch.info...



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by LynUK
Just to add to my post that all recent UFO sighting are earthbound Nazi technology and not 'alien'.

Many of the Adamski-era contactee's, who all mostly described the 'aliens' as blond 'Nordics' (I prefer the term interbred Aryans..) mentioned that full disclosure to us earthlings would not arrive until all our nations spoke as one voice.

Now if that isn't a way of describing a New World Order, One World Government I don't know what is. And as Jim Marrs describes in 'The Rise of the Fourth Reich' -this is the singular goal of the Nazis. A One World Government that rules with a police state iron-fist, a 'Brave New World' were population control and eugenics is the norm.

Somehow, this is all coming together



thanks for your post and i apologise for not responding sooner.


after giving this some more thought i will agree with you that using the Alien angle, wether it be for real or not is part of the plan to help initiate the NWO and i find your observations about the aliens saying there must be one voice before they will have real contact kinda frightening.

how does this tie into Billy Meier i wonder ? is he a tool for the Aliens or the NWO ? or both ?...hmmm have to think on that some more and thank you for bringing that up


[edit on 23-9-2008 by easynow]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 




It may be a perfectly good saucer put in the photo next to the tree.
I don't know how many people were in the Billy Meier dreamworks factory
but apparently ahead of Disney, Lucas and Spielberg.

Why detail a landing gear if its real or done by people who know
the real thing. Consider that. A real possibility Meier was used to
make money off saucers they could not use. The Swiss UFO or
saucer keepers. UFO and Alien stories are still income for things
that can't be disclosed. It aids their cause.


maybe they put this one in the pic too ?



yes apparently he was ahead of the hollywood pro's if every single photo was staged. an amazing feat wouldn't you say ?

not sure i have any alien landing gear to compare it too but it could be old tech no longer used ?

hmm... a used saucer model eh ? never know really ?


maybe tesla craft technology it's possible... he was a genius without a doubt.









[edit on 23-9-2008 by easynow]

[edit on 23-9-2008 by easynow]



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by LynUK
Your are a clever person I have looked over your posts. Is your response to Jim Marrs findings that brief?

While I haven't read Jim Marss book judging from the title and the available information on the internet I think I have a decent impression of what it is about. This is something for another thread but after doing a considerable amount of reading and contemplating I find the Nazi UFO hypothesis highly unlikely. Sorry if that disappoints you but that's my take on it.
Although I take this with a grain of salt (and so should you), Meier makes a couple of references to pre-WW2 German saucer technology and how his contacts, the Plejarens, supposedly influenced - send information to the engineers who build these crafts. Later on 'the Plejarens' seized the support and even provided false information to halt the project when it became clear where German politics was heading. Like a lot things, it's hard if not impossible to corroborate such claims.

[edit on 24-9-2008 by TerraX]



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by rocksarerocks
You pick the worst threads to vent don't you. I wouldn't have even spoken up in a Billy thread because that really doesn't help your cause.


And what 'cause' would that be?
And whats wrong with this thread? Even Internos and Ritzmann are here to play


You are one in a million!


Hey thanks
Nice to be appreciated



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 05:46 AM
link   
Well, let's play the cards on the board then:
in my humble opinion, Jeff's work on Billy Meier case was a top class one.
While i think that to replicate a ufo does NOT debunk it, i am one of those that once someone is proven to have hoaxed something then there's no more room to take him seriously. WHAT Jeff did, was to prove that the stuff presented by Billy Meier was easily fakeable, some of Billy Meier photos were proven to be hoax, there are MILES of pages dedicated to the debunk. So i don't see why we have to research within all the stuff released by this guy.
Now, think about apollo 20 stuff: once the audio was proven to be apollo 11 one, once the flying torso was proven to be a PROOF of hoax, once the extraterrestrial woman was proven to be a SCULPTURE i don't see why we should sleuth on every footage provided by retiredafb. Retiredafb is a clown and who endorses him is a clown as well. The guy is an hoaxer and END OF STORY. With mister Billy Meier it works as well: there's no need to debunk every single photo allegedly taken by him: we should be somehow RACIST with this stuff.
Once one is proven to be an hoaxer, he should be BANNED from serious discussions. To take every single photo and ask to debunk it is equal to ask to a professional like Jeff to WASTE HIS TIME.
This is one of the reasons why we almost don't have the privilege to see Jeff's posts anymore. While we are focusing on this garbage, there's some serious stuff out there worthy to be analyzed, discussed etc.
Billy Meier is NOT part of the serious stuff, don't ask me why he did that: he lives at two hours of car from my home so maybe i know WHO i am talking about. Study all about him, about his group, about his sightings, havE at least an idea WHO you are talking about.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 

Think we have a winner here.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 08:46 AM
link   
Those pictures in the OP look as though the UFOs have just been pasted on imo.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow

however i do believe it was more work than you make it out to be and i have read that you had somebody that was a proffesional model maker make this...






if you had to get a pro to make that simple looking model what does that say about Bill's model building abilities ?


This is the part where I talk about how tired I am of people basing belief on half read posts. The model I used was a simple disc which was a resin cast of a model by Harryhausen, which I own. There is nothing complex about it, just like many of Meier's. Again, focusing on the model is rather pointless...I could have used an household iron or stapler and the result is the same.

This is often the point the defenders of the case want to focus on, not the obvious lack of distance haze, not the short proximity lighting, nor the fact that it bears *exactly* the same traits as a classic Meier shot.

Again, thats the point. Anyone can make a model. Judging from some of Meier's no, he's not a very good one. Many pics of his show warped "hulls" and gaps. It's pretty obvious that he used any junk laying around, since we've identified the majority of the WC "craft" as common found objects.

So, no, I didn't need a "pro" to do anything, nor would you if you did the same thing.

No, duplication doesn't prove a hoax. However, it does prove that there are all the earmarks of the same end result, as a Meier "craft" and a model at close range. If Meier's were large craft at considerable distance, you'd not be able to achieve the same result.

However, Meier's and my own share all the same issues. So what does that tell you. No couple in all that other half truths, selectively edited quotes and lies. Plus, the ones already proven fakes. Now what do you have.

It is no more difficult then a string, model and camera. It's as simple as that. People who claim they see distance hazing in Meier photos, simply don't understand photography or how light really operates in that framework. Remember, many of Meier's more convincing shots, are shot *into* the light/sun. This again gives the impression of haze, but it is not. This also, obscures any supportive strings...convenient.

You get a 3rd party to look at them because you want these tested by modern technology, by someone not at all affiliated with the case.

Jim Dilettoso, the man responsible for the original analysis, the one touted as doing all the hardcore analysis work, relayed to me *in person* and to my face, that the WC craft and others "were clearly models". Jim also told me his analysis is being misrepresented, and he's not happy about it. This is a huge point, and I was happy to have Jim verify it right to me. He's not only been misrepresented to this case, but to me personally as well.

It shows that this case and it's proponents will misrepresent not only it's enemies, but it's alleged supporters...who...actually aren't supporters.

None of the experts touted by the case, such as Dr. Malin, Robert Post, or Robert Nathan, verified the photos as real. Again, it's all misrepresentation of quotes...go ask them. Malin was not given anything but a digital version of some pics, and Post found out his copies of photos were lithographs. He surmised that representatives of the case were trying to trick him. He wanted nothing more to do with it at that point.

Deception is all over the case. If you're willing to do as I have, Derek has, and many others, you'll come to the same conclusion. You cannot escape the answers you'll get..if you're honest about it.

If you're not willing to do so, then really there's no point in me engaging you in any sort of meaningful discussion. It's just a waste of time, and a lot of me re-typing over and over whats already been stated here in years past. Then that leads to conflict which I'm not interested in. In some cases of discussion of this case, I find thats really what the argumentative want - drama.

I'm not in this for "drama" or conflict. I did my part in exposing a case that I personally feel is absolute crap, and is a blight upon UFO study. I detailed the whats and whys, and posted them for the world to read.

Past that, I'm not interested in drama, or argument. I'd rather argue about something important then this drivel.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by internos
Once one is proven to be an hoaxer, he should be BANNED from serious discussions.


Okay so where are the dreaded ATS "HOAX" tags on the Billy Meier threads to let everyone know it has been declared a HOAX?

And why is this particular one such a sore spot with people here anyway? I mean it was opinions in that other thread that got John into hot water as tempers flared.

There have been a lot of hoaxers pass this way, but this story won't go away... yet the experts once again into the fray to keep it alive rather than use the "Its been discussed HERE... and leave it at that.

Seems for some reason a major nerve has been severed with this story





top topics



 
2
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join