It's good to read every page.
ArMap has exposed that site I think as liars.
Good stuff
The video was good and I was going to comment in favor, that's why you really have to read the whole thread, it helps.

Originally posted by FlySolo
Hold on. So he did do a study for a Vienna exhibition. And it was done most likely for Klaus Dona. So which part is not the truth?

Why do you say "most likely"? Is Klaus Dona the only person asking for X-ray diffraction tests?

And even if it was Klaus Dona, we still do not know if it was for these objects, and the part that is not truth is the part you omitted, "I have no possibility to determine the age of an object or the chemical composition".

Wow talk about not looking at things objectively and going on a complete and utter smear campaign.....why not look at the video for what it is...a slideshow presentation of artifacts that with a little research can either be verified or not....as for some of the artifacts....a few of which were defo mayan in origin which is what i look at...and yes....many are verifiable....some of them were also sumar in which again many are varifiable.....the person who put the vid together has done so to satisfy their own curiouisty and to put forward their own bias belief....which may or may not be correct....so why not look at some of the objects with an open mind.....this is not about wether Dr nassim was reputable or not...they are just images of artifacts.

so why bash what it is or who presented ....rather then look at the material contained with and then draw conclusions from that....wow talk about getting a weed on for all the wrong reasons.

now just saying that artifacts could be faked is a generalisation....as some of the artifacts from the sumar and Mayan periods were not faked as i have seen them over and over as people progress deeper and deeper into the ancient astronaut theory.

now i am sure there are others on here who could say the same for some of the other Egyptian and other cultural artifacts presented within.

the end result is the person who made vid has his own agenda....but that does not negate the artifacts found with....could some be faked....yes....but were.....well i will leave that up to people to prove that they were ...but i know many are exactly as they were presented....artifacts from days gone by.

Cool... I guess they are real then...


Hmmm, but I have one question... Everything I saw was created by man, and the "proof" was someone's interpretation of those creations. How can we say that is irrefutable evidence when there is no evidence but interpretations of manmade items?

Anybody know who does the backround music for the video???

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by FlySolo
Hold on. So he did do a study for a Vienna exhibition. And it was done most likely for Klaus Dona. So which part is not the truth?

Why do you say "most likely"? Is Klaus Dona the only person asking for X-ray diffraction tests?

And even if it was Klaus Dona, we still do not know if it was for these objects, and the part that is not truth is the part you omitted, "I have no possibility to determine the age of an object or the chemical composition".

Klaus said he had them studied in Vienna back in '01 so that backs up your email's claim. And you're right. We don't know which artifacts were studied. But regardless, I don't believe them to be genuine anymore than the other artifacts he has which glow under a black light.

Originally posted by FlySolo
Klaus said he had them studied in Vienna back in '01 so that backs up your email's claim.

I missed that part, that makes it more likely that he was the person that had the objects tested for that "mysteries" exhibition.

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by FlySolo
Klaus said he had them studied in Vienna back in '01 so that backs up your email's claim.

I missed that part, that makes it more likely that he was the person that had the objects tested for that "mysteries" exhibition.

No, you didn't miss it, I just listened to one of his radio shows.

How on planet earth...if you can just join me here for 2 minutes....can this be presented as irrefutable evidence?, imagine taking this video into a conference with serious people and trying to convince them Aliens exist, citing youtube as a reference.

seriously those artifacts look extremely suspicious, like they were made very recently, and im sure they can be replicated by college students studying art, imagine what a professional could do.

i clicked on this thread out of curiousity and a misleading title, all i saw was a picture slide show, with minimal detail or logical description/information.

but if people get thrills and excitement out of watching these kind of videos as irrefutable evidence to fuel their fantasies of witnessing an alien mothership land one day, then go ahead.

SHOW some dignity if you're really interested in UFO's and extraterrestials and seek viable evidence at least....doesnt have to be irrefutable, because lets face it, there is no irrefutable evidence they exist, but continue looking...

Originally posted by truthrising2012
So are we at the point where the artifacts still need verification of it's origin? What we do know is the Blossom Group website may be selling hoax artifacts but what Klaus has may still be the real deal if i'm correct?

From what I understand of it all, the artefacts may be real, by that's not very likely. The two artefacts that I could see on the videos from that conference appear at the bottom of the page on the Blossom River site, they are presented as "Coriolis" and "Galaxia".

The best way to make sure one of the artifacts is real is to buy one of them at the auction that is your most favorite, have it put into a study by a professional expert to confirm authentic.

None can debunk if proven authentic obviously, what worries me about this auction is if these artifacts are real life history while not being fakes they should've been put inside of an museum!

I really dislike misleading titles....