Deputy witnesses and RECORDS ufo sound for dispatch (same as Billy Meier's)

Put it this way. The footage with the ufo by the tree, with the farm house in the backround. That tree was never even there to begin with. Same as the other photos and footage of a ufo by a tree. The tree's all vanished, which meier said the aliens done that to cover there tracks! lol

Enough said

Originally posted by Jay-morris
Wow!

Another meier thread in a matter of days. Its a bad idea to put it up against the meier ufo sound, as he is a proven hoaxer. Also, most of his videos and photos look fake.

Post a photo of one of his photos you believe to be genuine, or a good photo.

Even though it does sound the same, it just makes me belive that it is hoaxed, or billy meier was jammy and make a sound of a ufo which is in fact how they sound lol

Well, I guess that is just the thing. Everyone likes to slam the old guy but then there is this. I believe the officer's sighting and sound recording is legit. The interesting thing is, now there is collaborating evidence.

Not that I want to get into a debate about Meier, but if I told a story that was true, then embellished it, does that make the crux of my story now untrue?

[edit on 27-8-2010 by FlySolo]

Originally posted by Spangler


Assuming this recording is real and this person saw ‘something’ what exactly does that prove? That people sometimes see ‘something’ they can't explain? Earth shattering news...

You're leaving out an important fact. This "person" is a police officer. Trained observer and responsible for upholding the law. He saw a ufo and called it in. Not just some regular joe ufo sighting.

[edit on 27-8-2010 by FlySolo]

reply to post by FlySolo


The reason why people like to "slam him" is because its people like meier who makes this subject a jok, and a laughing stock. Every photo and movie he has done can be de-bunked. And as for his predictions lol

Like i said in another thread. Meier and his group of followers are nothing more than a cult, and anyone who falls for his stuff, would most prob fall for any cult they they spend a bit of time with.

Some of his photos are among the worst i have seen, and a complete joke, and i can't believe for the life of me why people would be sucked in

Originally posted by FlySolo
Ya ya before you guys start freaking out because I said the "B" word, . . .

I believe Billy was contacted. I believe he was given specific instructions - - - which he ignored. Because of his actions - they left.

When he could not prove his claim - - - he then tried to artificially create proof.

reply to post by Annee


What makes you believe that? He has lied on every aspect of the case, from his predictions to his photos. Why would you believe someone like that would be telling the truth, esp when he still denies to this day that his stuff is fake.

And don't get me started on Mr horn. That man is just strange

Originally posted by Jay-morris
reply to post by FlySolo

 

Some of his photos are among the worst i have seen, and a complete joke, and i can't believe for the life of me why people would be sucked in

You said some. And... Some of his photos are pretty good. I've seen the bad ones and I agree with you. Lets suppose we track down the source of the deputy clip and validate
it. With that done, then we must assume Billy's recording is genuine.

reply to post by FlySolo


You put any photo of meier on here, and it will be de-bunked without a problem

As for the audio on here, and the witneses. Its very interesting, but more information needs to come forth.

I am a huge ufo believer that some ufos defy explanation, and the subject needs to be taken seriously, but people like meier brings the subject down im afraid. And to just mention his name in a thread will raise eyebrows.

reply to post by Jay-morris


I understand your point. I listened to an interview with Stephen Basset where he claimed credibility means nothing. I was thoroughly disappointed with his comment but on the other hand I still know where he was coming from.

Any picture of a UFO can be debunked. Its all perspective anyway. Debunk the photo, debunk the witness. Easy right? But, what if light was shed on a witch hunt to show that "we" were wrong?

Originally posted by FlySolo
You're leaving out an important fact. This "person" is a police officer. Trained observer and responsible for upholding the law. He saw a ufo and called it in. Not just some regular joe ufo sighting.

It's quiet irrelevant at this point because you have yet to tell us what is the source of the recording. Or are we supposed to take all this at face value?

so who is to say that this officer was not playing a Billy Meir video
on his laptop in the car and recording the sound over the
radio dispatch. There are no pictures or video. And don't
most all cop cars have dash cams??? So why are we just
hearing it instead of seeing it?? Lots of questions

Originally posted by Jay-morris


And don't get me started on Mr horn. That man is just strange

I met Horn once. Didn't realize who it was until later.

If there is an Alien on this planet - - its him. Very strange person. Really creepy.

There are reasons I personally believe Billy's initial contact. None that would hold up to scrutiny. So there really is no point in going there.

I can't speak about credibility of sources here... but I can speak from some personal experience.

That's the exact sound I heard when I had a ufo encounter as a child (maybe 8yo?). Sounds like a swarm of locusts - which is how I always described it.

Originally posted by boondock-saint
so who is to say that this officer was not playing a Billy Meir video
on his laptop in the car and recording the sound over the
radio dispatch. There are no pictures or video. And don't
most all cop cars have dash cams??? So why are we just
hearing it instead of seeing it?? Lots of questions

This was in 1981.

Skeptics and believers alike, both have their faults which is why we can never come to a middle ground.
You, as a skeptic, didn't even look at the clip because if you did you would have noticed the date, but yet, as a skeptic ignored that fact

Us, as the believers, choose to focus on the information that resonates within us as truth and ignore the trivial facts that appears to obfuscate the truth.

While both sides are correct in their assumptions, both sides are equally as wrong on the opposing side. Thus, never achieving the always eluding desired truth because of our inability to compromise .

Originally posted by FlySolo
While both sides are correct in their assumptions, both sides are equally as wrong on the opposing side. Thus, never achieving the always eluding desired truth because of our inability to compromise.

Are we to believe that we haven't found out the truth behind the UFO phenomenon because of the ‘inability to compromise’ between skeptics and believers? Utter nonsense!

In fact, if we're to believe — as you do — that there's an alien intelligence behind the phenomenon, all they had to do was land and present themselves, and, regardless of what skeptics say or believe, that question would be settled.

The reality, however, is that both believers and skeptics are nowhere more close to the ‘truth,’ whatever it may be, than they were 60 plus years ago.

Oh and for the 3rd time: what is the source on the recording you present?

It was misty and very cold in the early morning hours of March 17, 1981, as Sergeant Russell Yokum of the Saint Helens, Oregon, Police Department drove on patrol on Highway 30 west of the Columbia River. Saint Helens is a small mill town about 20 miles northwest of Portland. At 4:03 a.m., Yokum's attention was drawn to a bright light that was moving upriver, easterly, toward the Portland Airport 20 miles away. Aircraft passed over here regularly on their way to the airport. But this light was extraordinarily bright, lighting up the river like daylight..................

Rest of it can be read here Sacred Texts or here Dark Gov.


Interesting reason of why it sounds the same is


Which can be read about here

Originally posted by Spangler

Originally posted by FlySolo
While both sides are correct in their assumptions, both sides are equally as wrong on the opposing side. Thus, never achieving the always eluding desired truth because of our inability to compromise.

Are we to believe that we haven't found out the truth behind the UFO phenomenon because of the ‘inability to compromise’ between skeptics and believers? Utter nonsense!

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Bad attitude dude, why even think about it that way?

In fact, if we're to believe — as you do — that there's an alien intelligence behind the phenomenon, all they had to do was land and present themselves, and, regardless of what skeptics say or believe, that question would be settled.

Now that's just a stacked and loaded statement if I ever saw one. You know as well as I do, truth or not, that just would never happen. I'm sure you have more to base your opinion.

Oh and for the 3rd time: what is the source on the recording you present?

You watched the clip didn't you? Then you know exactly what my source is. So what's your point?

reply to post by EvilBat


I see. Nice parallels between the generator noise.

So, if this sound is of a real UFO; 'space craft' I should say as 'Unidentified' can't be called real.

However, this sounds like the rushing of many waters as said by Ezekiel, perhaps Ezekiels experience was accompanied by this sound?

What would be the machinery or the processes involved in producing this kind of sound, if we broke it down perhaps one could figure that out.

'Hmmm, that sounds like a rock in a hubcap', or 'That sounds like an Ultramolecunuclear time-phase alien propulsion system!'

Separate the sounds, compress them, stretch them out.
I am sure there is someone knowledgeable enough in 'sound' science that can interpret and isolate various sounds.

Originally posted by FlySolo
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Bad attitude dude, why even think about it that way?

I'm parsing your words. Didn't you say “[t]hus, never achieving the always eluding desired truth because of our inability to compromise”? Tell me, how am I to think about your statement then?

as well as I do, truth or not, that just would never happen. I'm sure you have more to base your opinion.

My point was to simply underline the fact that if there's an intelligence behind the phenomenon it could reveal itself regardless of what anyone believes. I don't know if it will — right now we don't even know if there is an intelligence behind it — but that's not relevant to the point I made: consensus is not a requirement in order to discover something.