is every Meier photo a fake ?

Just dropping in to see how things are going.

Yup, the vitriol and frustration are flowing high. Various accusations being tossed about freely. Nothing really being accomplished, learned, or gained.

Typical Billy Meier thread.

[edit on 25-9-2008 by Nohup]

reply to post by Nohup


I think we've achieved plenty. I pointed out evidence from other sources that he is a hoaxer, a fraud, and a thief. If anyone still supports him, they join that crowd as well.

Originally posted by rocksarerocks
I think we've achieved plenty. I pointed out evidence from other sources that he is a hoaxer, a fraud, and a thief. If anyone still supports him, they join that crowd as well.

Honestly, that's really not much of an accomplishment, as it has been done in far too many other threads in the past. Yet, here is another one. And let me play Billy Meier for a moment and predict that there will be plenty more in the future.

Everybody just go home. There's nothing to see here, folks.

Nohup, Meier threads are always going to be like school playgrounds

But that is what you get when there are so many gullible people around

Wouldn't it be KEWL if guys like you and Nohup actually contributed something USEFUL to a thread?



I mean Nohup's 'obligatory "it's only rocks" posts gets a little stale after hearing it for the 100,000 th time...

:shk:

Life really that boring for ya? Sad very sad

Originally posted by zorgon
Wouldn't it be KEWL if guys like you and Nohup actually contributed something USEFUL to a thread?

You know, I often find myself asking the same question about you. You just let me know what wonderful, new, and valuable information you've contributed to any subject here. Because I haven't seen anything except a lot of pointing at rabbits in clouds from you. If you call that "useful," then I'm afraid we aren't using the same vocabulary.

Life really that boring for ya? Sad very sad

My life is not boring enough to encourage a lot of nonsense just to keep people entertained on a message board. Talk about sad. I get your take. You're a smart guy. But for you, it's all about the laughs. And if people get an ignorant thrill from hoaxes or odd shadows they think are ruins on other planets, hey, who gets hurt, right?

The real funny thing is, a lot of people think you're on their "side," when all you're really doing is playing them for a laugh.

You just go on ahead. I've already done something I told myself I didn't want to do, which was get involved in another one of these pointless threads. Unfortunately, I find myself wanting less and less to get involved in any threads, because so many these days are like this one.

So you just have fun pulling people's chains and leading honestly curious folks down a merry path. It's all just entertainment, right?

Originally posted by Nohup
I've already done something I told myself I didn't want to do, which was get involved in another one of these pointless threads.

Hmmm yes and yet... here you are yet again.

reply to post by zorgon

Well considering I have not stated any opinion either way in this case except that they aren't 'fuzzy'... I have not put my "trust/belief wrongly".

You didn't?

To be sure... but then so do 98.3 % of all other "UFO' stories. The difference with this one it has so many angles and a lot of effort to produce evidence...

Then this statement is what exactly?

When saying something like that you do put your trust that this case have evidence to support it.
And by that you believe in what's happened.

Oh i agree with you, some threads just gets so hostile, for nothing really.

Of course every meier photo is NOT a fake...most of them are still completely irreproducible..

Also...Wally Gentleman, (who studied animation and eventually joined the special fx team at the prestigious Pinewood studios in London, then to emigrate to Canada to serve on the NATIONAL FILM BOARD for 10 years as DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL EFFECTS - then discovered by Kubrick who used him to do the fx for '2001' - then afterwards even moving to hollywood serving as an expert in visually recreating actual flying saucer reports into a series called 'Project UFO') - had the following to say - that you can build a model to fit a certain background - but the trick is to render a model with the right microscopic textures that will fit the true scale of the situation. And then you have to worry about things like the scale of movements, the movement of the background, the simultaneous activity that's going on. Models that are done badly show up like a sore thumb'
Further to that - he said that the objects behind the trees appeared to be at the right distance for ships that were a long way away. - somethings thats called 'aerial perspective' - similar to when you look at mountains one sees different colours that deepen in blue as as you go farther away - all these ships had AERIAL PERSPECTIVE - not to mention the situation of multiple craft flying high in the sky - if you were either throwing models or having models suspended - they'd all be lit within the space that you could either throw or suspend - which might be what - thwenty feet or so??
ANd then to conclude - that the bottom line being - that Meier really had to have a fleet of clever assistancts, at least fifteen people, who would know what the interface relections of shiny objects were at certain times of the day, how to support these objects so that wires are not seen, how to rig it, how to watch it and stand by with their little airguns to spray the strings when they begin showing up. etc etc etc ad nauseum...

People here on ATS seem to think that all of this was easily achieved by Meier possibly with the aid of some co-horts of duplicious men - when really as you can see they would have had to have been absolutely schooled to the HIGHEST degree possible in terms of a staggering level of special fx WIZARDY -in order to accomplice what is the end-result ie the photos themselves....


also to be to be taken into consideration..comparisions of billy meier shots - with photos taken all around the world taken by totally independent witnesses...with nothing at all to do with the case in any respect.


meier original on left compared to pict. taken in los Angeles by independent...




meier original on bottom - independent on top




now meier original on top - independent on bottom




now once again meier original on bottom - with independent on top





now meier original in middle with two independents above and below..




now PICT OF MEIER BEAMSHIP RISING UP OVER DITANT HILL/HORIZON!!


bit hard to do this with a model!!!

Also....The look-alike faces and maybe other features of the two entertainers were copied into Billy's original photos. This fact is obvious to a determined fastidious scrutinizer when abnormalities are observed by making a thorough comparison of the pictures, ie bizarre facial discrepencies.. Obviously, the forgers got a little carried away in their work because they simply forgot to take into consideration the color dots of the cathode tube upon which the previous claim could be based. However, neither round nor square colored light dots can be observed which are still common on TV monitor tubes even today. This invalidates, therefore, the claim that the pictures were photographed from a TV monitor.

Also in regard to infamous dino shot - if people even bothered to conduct a closer inspection what is obvious is that the similarities between them are in reality superficial!

Returning to the photos (of ufos) again...

.....Often there are sequences of shots wherein a small dot in the distance grows bigger and bigger to then appear as a more detailed beamship. that is to say a series of photographs in sequence,
showing a dark point in the distant atmospheric haze as it approaches and grows larger, frame by
frame, until it is recognizable as one of the craft in the photos.

Nearly all of Meier's photographs were shot on 36-frame rolls of positive transparency film and on more than one occasion, he shot more than three rolls of film during the UFO event. In some of the series of photos, he photographed the ship above the horizon and then descending below the horizon, with the frames in numbered sequence. Sometimes there were other obstructions in the photographs. To successfully shoot 108 frames, in sequence, of the UFO image against a dark background, then go out and shoot a ten or twelve-frame run in sequence, with the UFO in proper position relative to the new background scene, every time, several times in succession, without having the image get lighter by the second exposure and without having it in a position where it overlaps something else or crosses another line or is malpositioned in flight trajectory in sequence as it gets smaller in size going away from the photographer.....




finally...further analysis pict of meier beamship rising up over DISTANT HILL/HORIZON - OBVIOUSLY IMPOSSIBLE TO EFFECT USING SIMPLY A MODEL!!!

Wait, is this a parody or are you being serious? I can't tell anymore. You think the children's book that has an "eel" beneath the pterodactyl is different from the Meier exact-same-photograph? You think what? It's a coincidence that they are the same photo with the same eel?

But I get posts deleted for calling a spade a spade?

Hello Gib.

I strongly recommend that you read the report located here: www.iigwest.org...

The discussions you raise have been dealt with in the report.

-Derek

reply to post by Jeremy_Vaeni


Your most prudent strategy would be to not call anyone anything. Point out inconsistencies, debate, discuss, but do it without insulting or name calling. Personal attacks are the surest route to post deletion, or worse.

Originally posted by gib_niner
Also in regard to infamous dino shot - if people even bothered to conduct a closer inspection what is obvious is that the similarities between them are in reality superficial!

You're kidding, right? What are the chances of Meier traveling back in time, taking a snapshot of a dinosaur feeding its young that resembles an artistic impression from a book in stunning detail? How probable is that?

reply to post by derekcbart


There is nothing on that site that serves to adequately explain some of the issues I have raised in regarding to the following....

1. the dino shots are IN NO WAY an exact match - NOT AT ALL - it is absurd to say that they are...

2. also on the issue of the RBG color dots that would undoubtedly be reproduced if the image was taken from a cathode tube.. neither round nor square colored light dots can be observed which are still common on TV monitor tubes even today. Once again...this invalidates, therefore, the claim that the pictures were photographed from a TV monitor.

Also..Not until July 1976 did Billy purchase his first color TV unit (brand SABA) from Mr. Bär's Bauma store, whereas the photos of Asket and Nera were taken a year earlier, on June 26, 1975.

Also - in regard to meier's still totally irreproducible film segments --

there is the following in huge abundance... realistic contours, realistic light levels being refracted - very very realistic aerial perspective - a way of pulsing that is wholly realsitic and believable..displaying levitron attributes or that of hutshinson effect even.

... to show the impossibility of arriving at this filmic realism using strings and so forth - watch the following video ( AT roundabout scollbar 4:40)

ie.youtube.com...

This segment serves to NEGATE any prospect of wires - be they horizontal or vertical or whatever - as this kind of steady & uniform movement that is going CONSISTENTLY left and right & left and right without deviating - is certainly impossible to effect using strings or wires - as strings and wires would introduce an element of inconsistency and uncontrollableness and DISUNIFORMITY to the whole shoot.

gib_niner, where did you get all your info from? from that fraud Horn's website?

reply to post by yeahright


What if--and far be it for me to suggest anyone in this thread fits the mold--but what if the person is clearly delusional?

Am I allowed to say, "You are clearly delusional as demonstrated by your inability to tell a real living dinosaur photo (which doesn't exist) from one out of a children's book (the exact match to Meiers')?" Would something like that not actually be an objective example of delusion?

Anyway here is my favourite UFO on a piece of string, courtesy of Billy Meier

reply to post by derekcbart


On the Contrary .. there is a Military installation right behind his current place. Beeing up there a couple of times. Also to remind oneselfs that in the 1970 Adobe lol just started its buiness no such tools like today on every desktop .... things where real and storys got injected with fake to discredit. Also B.Meier is not a "simple" farmer" he also was involved with finding "scrolls" : The "Talmud of Jmmanuel" is the English translation of an ancient Aramaic script, discovered in 1963 in a cave near Jerusalem. The ancient scrolls, written by Judas Iscariot, the disciple of Jmmanuel (Jesus), had been encased in tree resin and buried for almost two millennia before being unearthed by Isa Rashid, a Lebanese priest of the Greek Orthodox church, and by "Billy" Eduard Albert Meier, a New Age prophet educated by wise celestial teachers from the Pleiades star cluster.
www.avilabooks.com...