Mr. Horn, how do you respond to things presented by Meier, that are now known to be hoaxes? Iíll point to the issue of Asket and Nera, This rather
blurry photo of two ďPleidiansĒ is claimed by Billy to be a picture of the aliens. It has since been found to be taken off a tv set (with the
reflection and curve noted in the picture) and indeed off of the Dean Martin show, of two guests on the showÖ
Here is a link to this: members.tripod.com...
MH: Long ago both Meier and the Plejaren spoke about various problems with photographic material being stolen or altered by parties who had a vested
interest in debunking Meier. This was not a difficult thing for them to attempt because Meierís photos and films were given to a local photo
developing facility, which sent them away for processing. When Meier started to get a lot of attention for his photos from the public he started to
encounter such problems. The photos of Asket and Nera were discovered by them to have been altered by certain parties to discredit Meier.
If only ONE of Meierís (1,200) photos are real, we have a monumentally important story. Likewise for his film segments, video, sound recordings and
metal alloy samples, to say nothing of the abundant prophetically accurate material. I give Meier the benefit of the doubt here. Since we have
physical evidence proved to be authentic why would he deliberately go about discrediting himself? People need to apply a little thinking, especially
when there are sites like this one that, by its very title, acknowledges the possibility that there are forces that operate behind the scenes to
promote certain agendas and discredit others.
Another such known hoax is an alleged time travel photo taken of dinosaurs, recognized as a scene from a movie, or a picture of a post-earthquake LA,
which was taken from a scientific geological magazineÖ If such pictures are hoaxes, is there not reason to doubt the rest?
MH: Your information is second hand and faulty. Re the dinosaur photos I do come down on the side that questions their validity, only because I cannot
prove them real (and there are a number of them and they havenít been connected to any movie I know of) and itís such an amazing thing to contemplate
that they even could be real. As I have long maintained, there are things I can prove and things that remain speculative.
Regarding the earthquake, itís best to not rely on second hand info, it referred to photos of San Francisco, not L.A. And donít tell me they were
ďknown hoaxesĒ. The (11) photos of the future SF earthquake were seen by Wendelle Stevens and a number of other people in 1978. AT THAT TIME Stevens
described what he saw in the photos and what he found especially interesting were the cars. He described them as looking quite different than the ones
of the time (1978), the windshields seemed to come up higher into the roofs, the overall shapes of the cars were much rounderÖhave you been paying
attention to the development in auto design lately? D o the cars of today resemble the cars of 1978 more or the cars Stevens was describing?
By the way, your logic is faulty. If one photo is real, then, are they all real? If one thing is true, is everything true?
You have stated in your introduction that you may not reply to debunkers. I would like to give you the chance to address such points brought up here
though. You of course, retain that option to not reply if you wish.
MH: I have no problem replying to debunkers, they have had a great problem in being truthful.
Another contention is that photo analysis could not duplicate Billyís photos, nor explain them. Yet, here www.ufowatchdog.com...
such duplication. How is that?
quote: On Wednesday, February 11, 2004, The Independent Investigations Group (IIG) and CFI-West published a side-by-side comparison of ďfakeĒ UFO
photos taken by members of the IIG versus ďrealĒ UFO photos taken by Billy Meier on the IIG website at www.iigwest.com/ufopix.html. Having
Michael Hornís original challenge to ďduplicate the effectĒ of the Billy Meier photos, he then changed the challenge to include having the IIG photos
tested in the same manner he claims the Billy Meier photos were tested.
MH: Pay close attention to this answer, which is also amply spelled out on my website. The original challenge had NOTHING to do with duplicating the
ďeffectĒ. If I wanted that I could rent a sci-fi movie. What they stated here is a LIE. They said that Meierís photos were an ďeasily duplicated
hoaxĒ, they accepted the challenge to duplicate ONE photo and ONE film segment. Their photos of little models in no way meet the challenge, despite
taking them more than 3 years to produce and despite there still being no film submitted by them. The skeptics go to great lengths to lie. Letís look
ďHaving successfully completed Michael Hornís original challenge to ďduplicate the effectĒ of the Billy Meier photos, he then changed the challenge to
include having the IIG photos tested in the same manner he claims the Billy Meier photos were testedÖĒ
MH: Obviously, not only didnít they meet the challenge, they claimed that having the photos tested according to the same standards as Meierís was
changing the challenge? What kind of idiocy is that? How do tell if the photos actually duplicated Meierís if you donít apply the same standards?
ďHe also said that he had a piece of metal that he claims to have come from an extraterrestrialÖĒ
MH: An outright LIE. I have challenged anyone to produce evidence that I ever said such a thing. As a matter of fact, the record of my correspondence
with the skeptics is posted for all to see. Please show me where I ever claimed to have the metal. If youíre going to quote despicable liars and
frauds, well, may I suggest a little homework?
By the way, I DID offer them physical evidence in the form of the sound recordings FREELY available at www.theyfly.com Funny thing, they refused my
offer and wonít attempt to duplicate them, or analyze them, because they canít even come close. The sounds like ALL of Meierís other physical
evidence, remain irreproducible to this day.
spacecraft that also proves that Billy Meier has had contact with extraterrestrial visitors.ĒEven the computer analysis as stated by Meier supporters
seems flawed, as seen here www.ufoevidence.org...
quote: The title image shows a Type-4 spacecraft over Mount Auruti, Switzerland, photographed by Billy Meier on 29 March 1976. Above, the two
computer-enhanced images made from this photograph reveal a great deal about this picture. The left-hand image shows, in the words of Ground Saucer
Watch who made the computer analyses, 'evidence of a linear structure above the craft - in plain english, a string or rod supporting the object. The
structure is equally clear in the computerised enlargement in the second image. In addition,study of the focus in this picture indicates that the
object is close to the camera and is therefore small - about 8 inches (20 centimetres) across, not 23 feet (7 metres) as claimed.
Finally, there is the book and investigations by Kal Korff, an investigator who also refutes Meierís claims.
quote: Over the years, UFO investigator Kal K. Korff has cast doubts on Meier's claims, first in a small, self-published book in 1981, then in
subsequent articles in UFOlogical magazines, and with lectures at UFO meetings and conferences. Now he has produced his magnum opus on the Meier saga,
Spaceships of the Pleiades, a 439-page tome that subsumes all previous writings on Meier.
To gather new evidence, Korff set out for Switzerland. To avoid being identified as the notorious Meier skeptic, he disguised himself by letting his
hair and beard grow and adopted the undercover name "Steve Thomas." Armed with a hidden video camera, he and a female companion appeared at Meier's
rural commune for six visits - three of which were "covert,"
MH: I see that this article relies upon Kal Korff, a twice, publicly, self-admitted liar and defamer (he had to apologize to Art bell, twice, on air
for his lies and defamation). A man of so little integrity and courage that he disguised himself and snuck around the center in Switzerland, avoided
talking with Meier, and completely discredited himself. For a thorough debunking of this charlatan, who just so happens to be associated with CFI-West
and James Randi, read the info at James Deardorffís and Jeroen Jansenís sites (linked form mine). And let me add that Ground saucer Watch, closely
aligned with Korff and others hostile to the Meier case, is suspect, relying as they did on Korff and his information. They also tightly focused on
one aspect of the analysis, thereís a whole book written about it.
By the way, the investigative team itself made models for testing the authenticity of Meierís photos, which were distinguishable from the models every
time in computer analysis.
In case I failed to amply answer this or make myself clear, the CFI-West crew ABSOLUTELY FAILED to duplicate Meierís photos, HAVE FAILED TO SUBMIT the
agreed upon film, HAVE FAILED TO ACCEPT MY OFFER to test/duplicate the sounds, HAVE LIED AS TO MY POSSESSION of the metals, etc. ad nauseum.
And they are hopelessly out of their league and incapable of explaining the nearly 50 years worth of prophetically accurate information.
Iíll be glad to go into more detail if you think I missed anything here.