One of the statements is false. He either began having his alleged contacts in 1942 or in 1975. It cannot be both, but he has provided different dates on different occasions.
P.S. Concerning the "wedding cake" UFO movie, if you were provided with conclusive evidence that the UFO itself was a small object would you agree that the tree would therefore have to be small as well?
Originally posted by bseven
If this field is ever to be taken seriously then people like that need to realise the new generation of people to the field laugh at his type of shenanigans.
assessing Billy Meier's credibility is not interesting
Looking for credibility is seeking a shortcut to mental laziness...Don't believe anything on some so-and-so's say-so
Credibility is irrelevant, either it happened to me or it didn't, whether I am a believable social role player or not...
I can have a true UFO photo and issue a hoax photo tomorrow...I can tell you obvious lies about my background all day long today and tomorrow still show you where the money is buried...
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by TerraX
He's probably saying (in German): "I hope all these morons buy every word I say."
Very intelligent observation If the rest of your analysis is that astute, I see no reason to pay any attention
Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by Crakeur
he's turned his so called sightings into a business, complete with cult like following. To me, that screams fraud.
it seems that every supposed contactee has a cult following including Greer and Gilliland. so do you think they are frauds as well ?
The way I see it, if someone were contacted and had a message, it would be a message for the good of mankind, not for the good of the contactee.
i think anyone would fall prey to the opportunity to make money when it presented itself.
if you were in the position of a contactee with a message would you be able to resist the temptation to make money ? i doubt it
Originally posted by easynow
wow talk about bait and switch tactics
we were discussing the video and what you claim to be "very suspicious"
care to explain what you think in the video is so suspicious ?
i believe i have seen all the WC photos that are online and i know exactly which one you are talking about. but claiming there is something wrong with those photos because they were shot close to the ground is pointless unless you have something to add to your unfounded theory.
Taking shots close to the ground is a possible indication of fakery.
Originally posted by TerraX However what would you call followers of lets say Charles Manson or David Koresh? Misguided?
Maybe you should pay attention to that angle of the Meier case and why it clashes with the (established) modern society.
Originally posted by LynUKare earthbound, eugenics-crazed Nazis, who categorically did NOT lose the last war (they simply moved elsewhere and let the uniformed patsies 'lose'), and are merely keeping the distraction going strong while they get on with their real plans to take this planet.
Originally posted by kidflash2008The problem is the stories he told to embellish what may of happened. Most people think he is a loony.