posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 04:29 PM
First of all, S&F for posting up the documentary. That was an absolutely terrific documentary and I cannot express in words just how much I am
greatful you linked it. I have since the last 2 weeks become so fascinated with Billy Meier that I've almost obsessively been perusing all his
material I can get my hand on. Of course this is not the the first time I have encountered Meier. I've had a love and hate relationship with his case
for the last few years. It frustrates me so much, there is all this remarkable evidence and this list of prophecies and predictions he has foretold
and there is all this questionable evidence like the wedding cake UFO, the raygun, the photos of the dinosaurs and the meeting with Jesus. I have in
the past vacillated between believing he is an outright hoax to undecided. However, I can safely say now, I am past my undecided phase, and I am
virtually convinced Meier is the real deal now.
In retrospect I was looking at the evidence of the ray gun, wedding cake, dinosaur pics with prejudice. I realised that I could not possibly know what
a 600 year prehistoric Pleaidian gun would look like. I could not possibly know what a picture of an almost 100 million year individual dinosaur would
look like. Ditto for the wedding cake UFO. I still have some doubts about this evidence, it is still possibe he fabricated this just to produce proof
to support his contacts, but I consider this unlikely.
Billy Meiers case is the mother of all UFO cases when it comes to sheer evidence: hundreds of photographs, several videos, scientifically analysed
metal samples, sound recordings, 2500 pages of highly detailed contact notes containing a wealth of scientific, historical and spiritual information.
More than 200 witnesses corroborating his case, who have seen these UFO's themselves in different locations. In addition whistle-blowers from the
government who testify that Meier is genuine. The mass of evidence is overwhelmingly in Meiers favour.
I am familiar with the skeptical objections but have found they have not stood up to scrutiny. I have perused many duplications by skeptics claiming
to imitate his UFO's using models, fishing poles, and perspective trickey and they have been pitiable. They do not even require scientific analysis
because the technical differences between these and photographs and videos is visible to the naked eye itself. Unsurprisingly, even the so-called
professional skeptical bodies have not submitted any of their duplications in for scientfic analysis.
[edit on 13-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]