It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by derekcbart
Here's just a brief comment regarding the Pleiades/Plejaren naming situation.
When Billy Meier's story first started getting publicity in the 1970s he said that his contacts came from the Pleiades Star Cluster. Around the 1990s/2000s (I'm not sure exactly when) astronomers who had been examining that area of space discovered that the system was very young, only around 100 million years old, and very hot due to the large number of star forming regions and was therefore unlikely to contain that many planets and if planets did exist then they would be unlikely to support any form of life, let alone intelligent life.
When presented with this information Billy Meier changed his story and started to say that the "visitors" were not "Pleiadiens" themselves, but they were "Plejarens" from an alternate space/time/dimension/universe located "near" the Pleiades Star Cluster.
Like so many situations regarding the case, when confronted with contradictory scientific evidence Meier simply changes his story and "moves the goalposts".
Originally posted by youthsavior
reply to post by Jay-morris
You are not being a professional skeptic if your only going to look at the wedding cake photos.....
Everyone's got your take on them and it's all good..
Fact of the matter is, there's just as much evidence in this case as there is hoax and your blatantly ignoring this evidence...
You disregard his contact notes, what he's said in the past, etc.... And you always refer back to the wedding cake!
Very un professional and immature if you ask me
From IIG:: I have not done a write up on Toutatis or the Iceman, but I have some basic notes on the errors indicated. For example, in the original Iceman press release Meier (through Horn) gave specific details about the age of the corpse and the manner of death. At the time of that press release it was vaguely similar to the scientific information that had been released at that time. Last year the scientists released updated scientific information about the findings and adjusted the date of death and the manner of death which now bears no resemblance to what Meier/Horn originally stated. When this new information was released last year Michael Horn removed the original Iceman press release from his website. I don't know if he has reposted it or not
Originally posted by Jay-morris
reply to post by mahigitam
Just like his other usless predictions, im sure the same can be said about this one. I mean, i found the information on the ww3 prophecy, which you could find no information from, and i got that information from FIGO. His predictions and prophecies are not evidence at all, because its hard, and no one is 100% sure when he actually write them, and you know this is true. Now, put taht with his terrible photo and footage evidence and here we have one of the biggest ufo frauds ever!
I would love to hear your vanishing ufo footage excuse!
His predictions and prophecies are not evidence at all, because its hard, and no one is 100% sure when he actually write them, and you know this is true.
Ok, if Meier can look into the future, how comes he has been wrong on many accations, and also many of his prediction cannot be verified date wise? IIG explains this perfectly on their site.So, what are you saying, he is right sometimes? Are you saying that all his predictions can be verified at the date he says?
And do you believe him, considering we all know he faked his photos and his footage, what makes you think he has not lied about this?
You still have not addressed the heads of state prediction. Will yoh admit you were wrong, and in fact, Meier was wrong?
Anyways, as the predictions hold no evidence whatsoever, lets move on to the vanishing ufo. Can you explain the reason why it looks so fake?
CLAIM: Billy Meier Predicted That Four Heads Of State Would Die Within Seven Days Of Each Other And This Would Signal The Coming Of World War III
Originally posted by Jay-morris
reply to post by youthsavior
Also, about these scientists. They tried to replicate the footage, and while some were ok, most of them were bad. Since then, the footage has been replicated perfectly, and not hard at all.
I'm not saying Uncle Bill didnt hoax anything or not, But that attitude of " It can be replicated so it's obviously false" really burns my buns. They do the same thing on the show Fact or Fiction of SC-FI channel. They seek to disprove stuff by showing how it can be re-created
That proves Nothing! People don't be Stupid! Stop using that was proof!
It does not prove the thing is a hoax or that it never happened.. it ONLY proves that a very good likeness of the thing can be faked. That's it. That's all it proves! period!
Also look at what you said.. " Since then, the footage has been replicated perfectly, and not hard at all" This tells me beck then with the level of technology they Could NOT reproduce the video! It could only be done later with newer technology. this being the case.. if it was hoaxed... how could billy have done it?? He could not have according to this logic.
I'm not saying Billy didn't hoax anything.. I'm saying your own arguments crucify you and make your logic of non effect
My Yesterday's post:
"Meier prophecised not predicted. Can you show me where Meier said WW III was predicted or fulfilled ? It is you who is claiming that "Meier predicted WW III"...So you need to prove it ? If not let us not waste any more time on it and discuss other topics.. "
Please read it carefully, i said meier prophecised not predicted. Meier never said that WWIII has started in 2006, again he just prophecised. Prophecy is different from Prediction.
JohnPhoenix has verywell put it. Inorder to investigate the case, one needs to know what is to be considered as an evidence and what is not....Clearly many on this forum doesnot have that intellectual capacity to separate facts from opinions and get confused one for the other...
I never said "Meier case is true"..i always maintained "let us look into the case and evaluate after considering all the evidence"...I dont understand why one needs to call the other "believer"...If one disagrees with the other, we can still maintain our position with dignity. It is good for a healthy discussion. Eventually some doors will be open to clear perception! Good Luck