It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Billy Meier, Debunking, Defending, whichever....

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 01:08 PM
link   
I know we've got a few threads on this...but this is in direct response to questions in another thread...

First, I'd like to start with some of his "prophecy". On Horn's site, I saw only two such examples. I do plan to check the local library and see if they have a copy of his DVD lecture, as I do not intend to line suspected hoaxers' pockets. If I truly cannot find it anywhere freely, perhaps I'll bite the bullet and do so. However, to establish that it is prophecy and not simply recanting events of the past, there must be proof that such claims were made and PUBLIC, PRIOR to the events happening. So, if any of Meier's supporters can cite such sources, I'm all ears...

Here are some examples from Horn's site...

“And it will be that the fanatics of Islam will rise up and cover the lands of Europe with war, all will shake and quiver” (applied to be proof of foreseeing the Spain Al Queda attack)

WRONG – How is this “covering” Europe. Not to mention it was an attack, not war. And although it was 3 days prior, nowhere does it say anything like “in 3 days”. Had ANY terrorist attack occurred ANYWHERE in Europe at ANY TIME later, such a vague prophecy could be applied…

A “prophecy” on Reagan…
“A man, who due to his future actions, will align everything toward the purpose, to allow the old prophecies to be fulfilled, which will result in the fact, that slowly but surely everything on Earth will widen into a world-wide war.”

WRONG – There was no World War during his presidency nor even soon afterwards. We are now a couple decades after his presidency, so any war now would be the result of the most recent presidents, not Reagan. Indeed, I’d beg to argue that if Reagan was president right now, 911 wouldn’t have even occurred.

“This will be so, and his inglorious end is already now set, as well as that of the murderous Ayatollah Khomeini, whose end begins to approach within the first days of February of the year 1981, when he will be stricken by an incurable disease.”
“The brain functions of Khomeini are damaged, therefore, capricious actions and decisions are often exhibited by him, which in their final form very often cannot be forecast.”


WRONG – Khomeini died in June of 1989, and of prostate cancer (hardly “approaching the end” in 1981, having nothing to do with his brain. That excuse is simply an easy way out to allow for other inaccuracies to be shoehorned into place.

Now to answer the poster's questions...


quote: 1. Asket and Nera hoax...(Swiss MIBs switched 'em...indeed )

Where is the evidence of this. Can you please link me to both sides of the argument.


Horn's own admittance here on ATS, check the Event. The photos are of two guests on the Michael Douglas show. Billy claims the REAL photos were switched by the Swiss MIBs...



quote: 2. Time travel photos hoaxes (shown to come from other sources)

Don't no anything about this. Not seen mentioned on his site.


Nor would it be, but a quick Google on Billy Meier hoax will turn it up, as will a search here on ATS of past Billy Meier threads. As soon as I get some time to search for it, I'll post it here for you, in case you don't see it in the meantime.

EDIT: here it is..
www.abovetopsecret.com...


quote: 3. Video (a noticeable wobble as if hanging from a string)

UFO's wobbling is not that surprising. I have seen other accounts that show how UFO's wobble when changing speed or direction, or tilting on their axis.


True, but the video is hardly convincing.


quote: 4. That one man can have SO many sightings, and get such pictures, and of a variety of craft, when most never even have one sighting.

Well, the difference being he is a "contact" and has worked with the Pleadians in his past life. Remember, not all men are of the same spiritual development.


So he claims, and thats a tall one. I suppose then, that Billy is the most spiritually advanced being on the planet then? I suppose most cult leaders claim that...



quote: 5. The practice of him insisting on meeting the aliens "alone" and having his "followers" wait for him.

Even if that were true, there would have been someone whose curiosity got the better of him, and snooped on him. Is there someone?

According to Michael Horn there have been dozens of witnesses who have seen the beamships. You are the only one so far who says otherwise. Can I have a link?


Yes, there is someone who snooped. And they found models, etc. Of course, these claims are just as unsupported as Billy's, so can't really say it's fact. Kal Korff

www.theness.com...


quote: 6. The fact that the photos are obviously of smaller objects close to the lens. Many of his photos are so obviously fake that it's a miracle he was ever taken seriously.

Is that not for the photograhic analysis to decide. According to which, they are not obvious, nor fake, in fact genuine. The fact that they remain irreproducable to date, and the ones that have been produced, in age of computer photoediting, have not been tested, nor look as convincing to me, carry more weight than mere incredulity.


They were reproduced, and analyzed, by the ones asked, and THEY themselves claim no big deal. See for yourself...

www.iigwest.com...


quote: Need I really go on....???

Yes, until he is disproven.


WRONG: Extraordinary proof requires extraordinary evidence. I've seen more realistic photos from the hubcap UFO pics in the 60's... He's already been proven to hoax things before, and then offers up lame excuses (Swiss MIBs switched my photos!) But, in the interest of curiousity, perhaps this thread will serve that purpose...


quote: Thanks for the reminder. I'll so after the holiday (will be busy this weekend, so little time to look up his predictions again to do a proper post).


See above, was even easier than I thought...though if you've got links to more than what's on his official site, I'd be interested in viewing that also.

I actually do plan on taking some of my own "Meier" pics...just need to get some models. Already even have the glass needed to do so....


[edit on 29-10-2004 by Gazrok]




posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
I know we've got a few threads on this...but this is in direct response to questions in another thread...


Thank you for this thread. I would also like to know the truth about Billy Meier. I have not been researching his case as much, I only discovered him a few years ago and found a lot of his material impressive. I guess it does not bother me entirely, if he's real or not. The existence of ETs for me is a closed-book anyhow. I guess now you've given me reason to research on him. Talk later.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 02:00 PM
link   

The existence of ETs for me is a closed-book anyhow. I guess now you've given me reason to research on him. Talk later.


No problem.

The existance of ETs for me is likewise a closed book. I've had one incredible sighting in my life, witnessed by dozens of others too (although all of us were only children), and there simply is no other explanation for it. (I've detailed the sighting on other posts here). Since then, it's been a constant fascination of mine, and I've sought to learn all I can, no matter how out there the claims were...

I suppose that's why such frauds make me so upset. Their eventual exposure always sets the UFO field back. Every time a hoaxer is busted, it just reinforces the public belief that UFOs are a subject to ridicule, and ignore, despite the good, solid evidence to the contrary...

For me, I believe that the only reason the Meier case continues to even survive, is due to the efforts of his rep, Mr. Horn. Michael Horn is an intelligent, and well-spoken man. He doesn't fall into verbal traps easily, and is calm when his views are challenged. Still, it appears that he of course is highly profitting off of Meier, and of course has a certain duty to defend him.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:40 PM
link   
I have done some research on the matter. Initially, what you said nearly shifted me towards skepticism on Billy Meier. However, it appears, you have misrepresented his information. I hope not intentionally. I am more convinced he is genuine now.

The passages you have quoted are from the prophecies of Enoch, which are later extented upon by Quetzal in the propehecy of Henoch. As I am going to illustrate to you, these prophecies were projected for long-term, not during the presidency of Reagan.

The Pleaidians state that their prophecies are not guaranteed, that events and shifts in collective consciousness can change them, and sometimes they could be inaccurate themselves. This may sound like a cop-out, but it is quite reasonable, as the future is determined by our actions in the present.

Contact 136# October 14 1980 - Semjase

Note: I will not quote the entire contact, only the relavant elements underlined by Gazok: Reagan; Khomeini; World war as well as some miscellenious predictions.

Reagans election forecasted

141: President Carter will not continue to occupy his position
142: For this reason, a great new man, Ronald Reagan, will be America's new president

Gazrok wrote: There was no World War during his presidency nor even soon afterwards. We are now a couple decades after his presidency, so any war now would be the result of the most recent presidents, not Reagan. Indeed, I’d beg to argue that if Reagan was president right now, 911 wouldn’t have even occurred.

Billy asks Semjase: You said to me years ago, that Ronald Reagan will be the true originator of WIII

231: Certainly He will be the man who lays the foundations for matters, which finally lead to WIII

Billy asks Semjase: But which will not be carried out under Reagans spectre?

232: No, and that is fortunate for Earth Kind

Semjase was calling Reagan the foundation of WIII and clearly said it will not be carried out with under him in office. This should put Gazroks concerns to rest.

Semjase later says that Regans forms pacts with many dictorships in smaller countries, to later enslave, suppress and murder their people. As we know from US foreign policy from Reagan to George Bush(jr) that is exactly what has happened, and during the reign of Reagan, we were affronted with wars on terrorism, which have formed the foundation of the expanding American empire and the current war on terrorism.

Gazrok wrote: Khomeini died in June of 1989, and of prostate cancer (hardly “approaching the end” in 1981, having nothing to do with his brain. That excuse is simply an easy way out to allow for other inaccuracies to be shoehorned into place.

235: This will be so, and his(Reagans) inglorious end is now already set as well as that of the murderous Ayatollah Khomenini, whose end begins to approach within the first days of February of the year 1981, when he will be stricken by an incurable disease.

241: The brain functions of Khomeini are damaged, therefore, capricious actions and decisions are often exhibited by him, which in their final form cannot very often cannot be forecasted

Semjase says, his end is approaching with the commence of the disease, which affects him psychologically, leading to irrational behavior. Semjase does not say he will die, though does say his "ends approaches" Surely enough, Khomenini died 8 years later.

Regans assasination attempt, including location, exact time, as well as identity of attacker was forecasted

300: On March 30 at 21: 45pm(Central European Time) before the Hilton Hotel the event will happen in the city where he is speaking, where the president will be shot down by a student named John Hinckley.

301: Ronald Reagan will suffer a shot in the lung, from which via surgery, the bullet will be removed
Iranian hostage situation forecasted:

Earthquake in Japan and release of Iranian, American hostages forecasted:

195: At the time of Januaray 19, 1981, Japan will be shaken by an earthquake, which will be calcuated to be about 8 points strong on the Richter scale known to you.

196: The quake, despite it's strength, will be without great catastrophe, serves as the end of the Irani-American hostage affair.

197: On the same day at 21:30pm, the American hostages should be freed, however, will be prevented by the power of Ayatollah Khomeini, because with it he wants to strike at the departing president, Jimmy Carter, to whom he does not want to grant the triumpth.

198: For this reason, he prevents the release of the prisoners to the very last moment, so that the release only occurrs on January 20, 1981 at about 18:23pm

I cannot find any information on this Earthquake. Can anyone corrborate it. Semjase does clearly say it will not cause any great harm, so even if this earthquake did happen, it perhaps went unnoticed. The Irani-American hostage did indeed end on January 20th. edition.cnn.com...

Prince Charles marriage to Diana(1981) and her subsequent emotional life forecasted

247: This is also the case with Prince Charles of England, who will get engaged to a certain Diana, which will lead to a marriage during the first half of the year, if these plans, due to the instability of the man, become doubtful again.

248: On the other hand it would be good if Prince Charles does not marry this girl, because if this marriage actually takes place, this marriage will not be a happy one, especially not for Diana, who will have to suffer hard under the tyranny, lack of self control, moodiness and other emotional outbursts of the prince, which understably will be tried to be kept secret under the Royal house.

Prince Charles got married to Diana on July 29 1981, about the first-half of the year. As semjase said, princess Diana was very unhappy indeed, and the royal family did indeed hide a lot of things that happened between her and Charles.

Gazrok wrote: “And it will be that the fanatics of Islam will rise up and cover the lands of Europe with war, all will shake and quiver” (applied to be proof of foreseeing the Spain Al Queda attack)

WRONG – How is this “covering” Europe. Not to mention it was an attack, not war. And although it was 3 days prior, nowhere does it say anything like “in 3 days”. Had ANY terrorist attack occurred ANYWHERE in Europe at ANY TIME later, such a vague prophecy could be applied…


This prediction is not solely to single out Spain "AL Queda" attack, that only corroborates part of it. You also did not quote it fully. This passage comes from the prophecies of Henoch, which basically states the culmination of events in the near future.

215th Contact, February 28, 1987

Quetzal: And it will be that the fanatics of Islam will rise against countries of Europe and it will shake and quiver; everything in the west will be destroyed. England will be conquered and thrown down to the lowest level of misery. And the fanatics and warriors of Islam will retain their power for a long time. However, not only Europe will be affected, but ultimately all the countries and people of the earth, as the great horror expands to a war that will encompass the entire world. After the turn of the millenium, the papacy will only exist for a short while.

Terror attack against WTC forecasted

Quetzal: The United States of America will be a country of total destruction. The cause for this will be manifold. With her global conflicts which are continuously instigated by her and which will continue far into the future, America is creating enormous hatred which will reach propotions barely imaginable to the people of the Earth. The destruction of the WTC - World Trade centre by terrorists will only be the beginning

This concludes this post. This is proof beyond a reason of doubt, that the Pleadians prophecies are 100% accurate and very detailed and specific. In which case, the prophecies of Henoch, which become very likely to pass, should be sirening alarms for us. It is very clear, even today, that the NWO is likely to begin.

I will review other parts of Meiers case in the subsequent posts.

[edit on 30-10-2004 by Indigo_Child]

[edit on 30-10-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 10:22 AM
link   

A “prophecy” on Reagan…
“A man, who due to his future actions, will align everything toward the purpose, to allow the old prophecies to be fulfilled, which will result in the fact, that slowly but surely everything on Earth will widen into a world-wide war.”

WRONG – There was no World War during his presidency nor even soon afterwards. We are now a couple decades after his presidency, so any war now would be the result of the most recent presidents, not Reagan. Indeed, I’d beg to argue that if Reagan was president right now, 911 wouldn’t have even occurred.

Reagan? Sounds exactly like Hitler to me



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 12:36 PM
link   
This post will concentrate on Billy Meiers photographic and film evidence:

Background(those not in the know)

Billy Meier has produced thousands of very clear UFO pictures, from as early as 1975, that Meier claims are Pleaidian beamships. They have been scientifically analysed and have long baffled the scientific community.
However, the "professional" skeptical organizations, like James Randi, and his associates CFR-west dimissed them outright as hoaxes - as obviously, it did not fit their own "scientifc method" without providing any substantiation. Not surprising, as they often dismiss anything that does not conform with the accepted norms of science.

Meier/Horn set them a challenge to reproduce any of of his pictures, under his conditions: Meier was a small time farmer, he only has one arm. He has no access to photographic labs or computer imaging technology.
It took CFR 3 years, after much pussyfooting around and evading, to produce a few pictures. With the aid of modern photography advancements, better quality emulsions, labs and digital technology, mind you. They proudly proclaimed to others, and our esteemed moderator Gazrok, has bought it without much questions, that they have debunked him. However, when asked, for them to have them analysed under the same scrutiny and scientific analysis as Meiers, they outright refused.

One now must ask in all fairness: why would they refuse to have their images tested under scientific analysis from a third body? The clear difference here is, Meiers were tested by highly credible professional scientists, some in JPL labs, who have no apparant agenda or inclination to him. Whereas CFR has a very obvious agenda - disprove.

We will analyse the photos now. I can only give my own unbiassed analysis. I have no allegiance to Meier of any kind. As I said some time ago, I do consider him to be arrogant.

As one would noticed, the UFO models constructed by CFR are very crude, they look like metal blobs, and one can rougly perceive it of small size. They do not look very convincing at all. Another thing to note, is the altitude and distance of camera in all(but one, see below) is very close to the camera. This is not the case with Meiers, where both altitude and distance from camera wise, the UFO are visibly distant.

Some photographs, especially in comparison to Meiers, look laughable.

Photo taken by IIG's James Underwarton, may 2003, at door country, Winconsin.



Photo taken by Billy Meier, March 1975, at Ober-sadeleggg



I am actually very surprised they actually selected this one. It's absolutely laughable. The supposed UFO, looks more like an ink blot on a photograpth.

There is absolutely no comparison, even at the widest stretch of imagination to Meiers, which is far superior, clearer, shows discernable shape and form, and a vast distance between the camera and the beamship. Suggesting the beamship is large.

Photo taken by IIG's Trey Stokes, December 2003, at Tujunga, California



Photo taken by Billy Meier, July 1975, Fuchsbuel-hofhalden




This should have been their magnum opus, as it aims to replicate the very famous Meier beamship passing behind the tree, that has astonished many. They failed miserably:

1. The camera/picture is tilted, this is not the case in Meiers, which is perfectly horizontal. This looks like a blatant attempt to distort visual perception.

2. It is poorly lit, even though Meiers photograph is also in clouded skies, the actual beamship is clearly visible, and is going much further behind the tree, that one can also see the branches of the tree in front of it. The beamship also casts a shadow on the tree. This is not the case with this reproduced one.

3. Also note, how the UFO is on the left side of the frame, which may not sound like much, but as western senses are adapated to look from left to right. Here, we are to look right to left, and coupled with tilting, it distorts visual perception.

As I am a filmmaker myself and quite versed in the art of cinematography. I can tell you: angled/tilted shots, and dark lighting is only used for the purpose of distorting real visual perception, to create an illusory effect. In this case, this is a very cheap trick by CFR. This alone should discredit them from being taken seriously.

Photo taken by James Underwarton, September 2003, at Grand Canyon, Arizona.



Photo taken by Billy Meier, June 1975, at Berg-Rumlikon



This is the only one that aims to replicate a sizable distance from camera. Which it does, except in doing so, the UFO model is reduced to a tiny blob, and loses all discernable dimensions. To the uninitated, it would be dismissed as a speck on the photograph. This is not the case with Meiers, it visibly distant, far into the landscape, yet also retain it's dimensions, and gives a visual perception of large size.

Photo taken by IIG's Trey Strokes, December 2003, at Tunjunga, California



Photo taken by Billy Meier, March 1976, Hasenbol-Langenberg



What instantly strikes me about this photograph, is how much of the lower part of the photograph is covered by a house, to create the illusion of depth. The Meier photograph it is aiming to compare with, is clearly out in the open sky, with visible altitude. Once again there is no comparison.

Photo taken by IIG's Trey Strokes, December 2003, at Giant Rock, California(2)



Photo taken by Billy Meier, March 1976, Ober-Sadelegg/Schmiduruti



This looks doctored to me. It has a very flat perception, and the UFO model looks as if it's been stuck on. The sky is highly suspicious itself, it's looks like a computerized gradiant. I cannot be sure that it is though. The ground below also looks as if it's been composited. The only way to find out for sure would be to subject it to scientific analysis.
Meiers in comparison, has a lot of depth, and is again visibly distant from the camera.

As you can see from this photo analysis, the Meier photographs are far superior in quality everytime. There really is no comparison.
If Meier really hoaxed this by himself, then he would have to have constructed huge life-size models of UFO's. Then he would have to have suspended it with a huge crane. Then manipulated the photographs in a lab, and used some form of digital editing. Any of the following can be easily caught in scientific photographic analysis. A small-time farmer, in the middle of nowhere, 30 years ago, could not have done this.
Meanwhile, CFR, a well funded organization I would presume. Had both the determination, the funds and the equipment, and yet still cannot reproduce succesfully Meiers.

As is it widely reported, CFR's publical refusal to have their images tested, and James Randi's retraction of the challenge in 2004, shows the skeptics failed, thus proving that Meiers photographs are indeed genuine, as scientists originally stated. CFR has lost all credibility, and such a corrupt, lying and decietful organization should not be trusted again.
Here are some testimonials from scientists who analysed his photographs:

Elic Elison: U.S geological survey in Flagstaff, Arizona, created image-processing software so that archeologists can analyse images beamed back from other planets, spent 2 years producing the intricate radar map of clour-covered venus "In the photograph there was no sharp breaks where you could see it had somehow been aritifically dubbed, and if that dubbing had been registered on film, the computer would have seen it.

Robert Post: JPL photo labotary for 22 years, was head of the lab in 1979, and oversaw the developing and printing of every photograph that came out of JPL. "From a photography standpoint, you could not see anything that was fake about the Meier photos. That's what struck me. They looked like legitimate photographs. I thought "God, if this is real, this is really going to be something"

Dr Michael Malin: Principal Investigator for the Mars Orbiter Camera on NASA Mars Global Surveyour spacecraft at MSSS. "I find the photographs themselves credible, they're good photographs. They appear to represent a real phenomena. The story that some farmer in Switzerland is on first-name basis with dozens of aliens who come to visist him... I find that incredible. But I find the photographs more credible. They're reasonable evidence of something. What that something is I don't know.

Wally Genltleman: Director of special effects on the Canadian Film board, director of photographic special effects on Stanley Kubrics "2001: ASO" had viewed Meiers 8mm film segments of the UFO's. Showed that the manpower and costs to fake the films were clearly beyond the manpower and cost of Meiers reach. "My greatest problem that anybody faking this(referring to one of the photographs, the shadow thrown onto that tree is correct. Therefore is somebody is faking this, then they have an expert here. And being an expert myself, I know expert knowledge is hard to come by. So I say, is that expert knowledge there, or isn't there? Because if that expert knowledge isn't there, then this is got to be real.

Here is a 25 page document detaling photographic analysis done on Meiers photos: www.theyfly.com...

In conclusion of this post. I will provide a summary of all the points raised.

1. The skeptics failed to reproduce Meiers photos, even despite their access to modern equipment and photo labs.
2. Meier has more than 1200 photographs, of very good quality, as well 8mm segments
3. The professional scientists have not detected any form of forgery involved.
4. Professional photo-editors and special effects experts say it is beyond Meiers capacity to forge this.

The sheer weight of this evidence is heavier than mere incredulity. Let's not be biased or partial in our investigation. Let's not compromise pride for our ability to think independently. In the end, one farmer, in the middle of nowhere, with only one arm, 30 years ago, with no access to modern equipment, is able to take more than a thousand photographs of giant UFO's, hovering miles in the sky, that skeptics cannot reproduce, and scientists cannot fault. I am well aware that some amateur skeptics and non entity bodies who think they have debunked his photographs. However, when the most professional and experienced scientists have passed them, and the most "professional" skeptics have failed to reproduce them, it clearly shows Meier's photo's must be genuine.

More in later posts.

[edit on 30-10-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Well I dissagree with the claim that this deliberate hoax project proves that Meiers photos are real... Once you figure something out, you can replicate it. If you figure out how to make the perfect illusion, you can do it again. But granted, Meiers photos ARE much more realistic across the board.

Anyway, just one curious question, you said:

The beamship also casts a shadow on the tree. This is not the case with this reproduced one.

How can you tell that, I only see a dark blob of a tree in both photos



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by merka
Well I dissagree with the claim that this deliberate hoax project proves that Meiers photos are real... Once you figure something out, you can replicate it. If you figure out how to make the perfect illusion, you can do it again. But granted, Meiers photos ARE much more realistic across the board.


At the absolute least, for absolutely anyone who is prepared to think objectively, they prove that they cannot be reproduced to even this date. This means they are very credible evidence for Meier case, even if you are not prepared to accept them as proof.

There are only two possibilities

1. Meier's photo's are genuine photo's of Pleaidian beamships, which is the most likely, given the evidence.

2. Meier has somehow pulled of the biggest hoax of the century, without manpower, equipment, money, and one arm to boot. He also been able to devise a complete full-proof system to guard against all forms of scientific analysis, in his time, and even in the future(2004)

In fact, the most likely is 1; given, that there is such compelling evidence for UFO's, and sheer weight of it heaps into an insurmountable pile. As well as the sheer probability of ET civilizations brimming in the universe. It thus becomes far more logical, than one man deceiving everyone, skeptics and scientists alike, for decades, with nothing but his old camera, and his one arm.


Anyway, just one curious question, you said:


I was quoting one scientist who talked about the shadow, as this was the picture he was referring too. I should have specified, sorry.

[edit on 30-10-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 07:04 AM
link   
Me personally, I sort of have an inbetween stance on the Meier case.
On one hand I can't deny the support there is for the case and there
are not only photographs, there are also many eyewitnesses who
experienced unusual things and spoke out about them openly,
supporting Meier's claims.On the other hand some elements of the
Meier case seem highly dubious and even incorrect.

It's only fair to mention that when a person comes forward with
claims of meeting extraterrestrials, a whole range of 'filtering
methods' are placed on that person by the general public who
come in all shapes and sizes.Also, there isn't a general standard by
which the case can be judged.Most people just proceed on the basis
what they find likely without doing some serious research.

I've met Mr Horn's acquintance on the FIGU discussion board a few
years ago.Certainly he's an accomplished speaker and writer, not to
mention an intelligent man.Yet, in my opinion, his efforts sometimes
reach blind fanatical proportions where setting standards is used
selectively.For your information, to my knowledge Mr Horn doesn't
support any other contact case, only Billy Meier's.But as I mentioned
before, people in ufology come in all shapes and sizes, that's what the
Meier case taught me.

I've read quite a few prophecies by Billy Meier, promoted by Mr Horn.
Several things can be said about them.Some seem plain accurate
before it was public knowledge.Yet there's also the possibility that
in scientific circles a certain subject was already discussed and remained
hypothetical untill proven and publicized.Mr Meier could have taken the
hypothetical matter at hand and commented about them in his contact
notes before it was official knowledge.
Secondly some of Billy Meier's prophecies are rather vague.Meaning
that several positive interpretations or outcomes can be applied to it.
Meaning that if you want to see something in the prophecies you're
likely to succeed, just like in astrology.

I've also seen prophecies by Billy Meier that were downright incorrect,
scientificly or as a chain of events that would happen in the future.
Of course Mr Horn doesn't show you those.In one contact note the
start of world war III is described.Russia invades Europe and civic
upheavals start in France and other countries.For me, it looked like
the entire story was written in a cold war mindset.When I looked
at the date when the prophecy was publicized it was in the 1980's,
before the fall of the Berlin wall and the communist block.Nowdays
that prophecy seems incorrect and of little value.Russia isn't going
to invade Europe nor are there any possible conflicts on the horizon.
In retrospect the entire prophecized chain of events seems just
inaccurate and false.

So, what to make of the Meier case? Is he a prophet? To be honest,
I think it's what a person does with the information and knowledge
which greatly influences the outcome.

Regards,
TerraX



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Also, there isn't a general standard by
which the case can be judged.Most people just proceed on the basis
what they find likely without doing some serious research.


Those standards for any objective thinker, would be impartial and throughout analysis of the evidence. It is the evidence that will pass the judgement.


I've met Mr Horn's acquintance on the FIGU discussion board a few
years ago.Certainly he's an accomplished speaker and writer, not to
mention an intelligent man.Yet, in my opinion, his efforts sometimes
reach blind fanatical proportions where setting standards is used
selectively.


Can you give me any examples, where his efforts, reach "blind fanaticial proportions" ?

P.S: Is FIGU discussion board still operational? I have checked many times and I get a time-out error.


Yet there's also the possibility that in scientific circles a certain subject was already discussed and remained
hypothetical untill proven and publicized.Mr Meier could have taken the
hypothetical matter at hand and commented about them in his contact
notes before it was official knowledge.


That possibility is negligible. To imply a farmer would somehow have found advance knowledge of certain scientific concepts, in circulation, in scientific developmental circles, in an age, where the internet did not even exist. Let alone, a special effects expert, but with this, he would become an expert physicist. However, many of his scientific forecasts, had only been corroborated with the development of more advanced telescopes, satellites and space probes.

Unless now, we are also going to say, he had beat the scientists already, and manufactured his own space probes and telescopes, with his one arm


If Meier has pulled of this hoax; then he's constructed UFO's, suspended them with cranes, edited them in photo labs or on computers, and used some very advanced technology to continuely decieve us to date. Then infilitrated into development circles and learnt about inside science breakthroughs, then built his own telescopes, and space probes. Even though that is ridiculous, even if he did all of that, how do you account for his 100% accurate predictions, samples of ET alloys etc?

We could just say, Billy Meier is doing magic, and if he is, why does he need an imagined alien species? He already has enough to pronounce himself as the incarnation of God.

I am going to go for the most simple explanation of them all: Billy Meier is genuinely in contact with the Pleaidians.


Secondly some of Billy Meier's prophecies are rather vague.Meaning
that several positive interpretations or outcomes can be applied to it.
Meaning that if you want to see something in the prophecies you're
likely to succeed, just like in astrology.


I have no found any vague predictions yet. Tell me, how open to interpretation is Reagans attempted assasination? The terrorist attack on the WTC? The marriage of Prince Charles and Diana? The Iranian hostage affair? Meier is not claming he is predicting this. He is claiming the Pleadians are, based on a very advanced mathematical system that views the future.



I've also seen prophecies by Billy Meier that were downright incorrect,
scientificly or as a chain of events that would happen in the future.
Of course Mr Horn doesn't show you those.In one contact note the
start of world war III is described.Russia invades Europe and civic
upheavals start in France and other countries.For me, it looked like
the entire story was written in a cold war mindset.When I looked
at the date when the prophecy was publicized it was in the 1980's,
before the fall of the Berlin wall and the communist block.Nowdays
that prophecy seems incorrect and of little value.Russia isn't going
to invade Europe nor are there any possible conflicts on the horizon.
In retrospect the entire prophecized chain of events seems just
inaccurate and false.


The pleaidians say themselves that they can be inaccurate at times, and human actions in the now, can change the times. Right now, the Pleaidians claim 3.5 billion ET humans are trying to send us positive energy to reverse the negative polarity of our Earth.

However, the prophecies you are calling "incorrect" have not been changed. It still says Russia will invade Europe, and attack US. They are part of the prophecies of Henoch, which are mentioned on Horns site.
As pointed out above, Semjase explictly says, WIII will not be carried out under the adminstration of Reagan. Quetzal, in 1987, also says the attacks on WTC will only be the beginning. Therefore, the attacks of Russia and the civlian unrest in the western world, is meant to happen after the attacks on WTC. In other words in our current times.


So, what to make of the Meier case? Is he a prophet? To be honest,
I think it's what a person does with the information and knowledge
which greatly influences the outcome.


I am not going to put Meier on a pedestal, like he has. Meier is only a vessel for an advanced extraterrestrial civilization, and once you see it from this perspective, everything makes sense.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 08:14 AM
link   
First off, we still need proof that Billy's predictions were published PRIOR to the time the events occurred. This seems to be a simple matter, but I have yet to see such proof.

Second, as I have stated, the actions of a president more than 20 years ago, have VERY LITTLE bearing on current world politics. To claim that Reagan set the stage for WWIII is an absolute mistruth of the highest order, and blatant denial of current world politics.

Third, anyone familiar with Diana and Charles' courtship would predict trouble for them. You didn't need a crystal ball or contact with aliens to see it coming. Almost every tabloid journalist made the same prediction.

Also, 8 YEARS is not getting near your end...
It's almost a decade for Pete's sake!


Again, we still need to see that such prophecies were made public BEFORE the events ocurred. If you could direct me to such a publication, in print (for online can easily be manipulated), I would be happy to then check it out and rethink my opinion of Mr. Meier. I've searched for such, but have as of yet come up empty on this.


If Meier really hoaxed this by himself, then he would have to have constructed huge life-size models of UFO's. Then he would have to have suspended it with a huge crane. Then manipulated the photographs in a lab, and used some form of digital editing. Any of the following can be easily caught in scientific photographic analysis. A small-time farmer, in the middle of nowhere, 30 years ago, could not have done this.


None of his models were, nor needed to be life sized. This is evident in many photos where the shadows on the craft first give the viewer the inkling that something isn't right. It's because such shadows are such that would be on a craft smaller than it appears in the photo. I've explained that it wouldn't take much, even with one arm, to affix a model to a piece of glass, and then angle as to not have any reflection on the glass.

Perhaps the BIGGEST problem with Billy's photos is that he NEVER submitted the negatives for testing, and often multi-generation reprints. This particular reason is the PRIME reason he CANNOT claim the photos passed any kind of scientific test. Without the negatives, photo tampering CANNOT be ruled out. It's a simple FACT. I'm not buying the one arm excuse. I've known quadraplegic painters who can paint masterpieces with the brush in their mouth! Often, handicapped people make up for such impairment in spades, with sheer determination. I have no doubt Billy is in that category.


I have no found any vague predictions yet.


Let me refer you to my first example.


“And it will be that the fanatics of Islam will rise up and cover the lands of Europe with war, all will shake and quiver” (applied to be proof of foreseeing the Spain Al Queda attack)


How vague can you get?


Amazing that prophecied which happened in the past (but supposedly predicted prior) are so accurate with names, times, dates, etc. yet anything to happen after today has NONE of this...
How can you NOT be even a little skeptical???

BTW, attacks on the WTC have been plotted, and foiled, by terrorists since the early 80's. To suspect it as the first successful attack, is hardly an uneducated guess...
It was always THE primary target of such an attack...has been for decades....

As for the alloys, I haven't seen anything where such finds are not producable on Earth, or even particularly remarkable. Besides, if the aliens were willing to give him some to prove his story, wouldn't it be easier and more convincing to give up some kind of harmless technological device? Surely the alien equivalent of a pencil sharpener isn't going to blow up the world...
A bit like giving a caveman a little LED calculator....



In one contact note the
start of world war III is described.Russia invades Europe and civic
upheavals start in France and other countries.For me, it looked like
the entire story was written in a cold war mindset.When I looked
at the date when the prophecy was publicized it was in the 1980's,
before the fall of the Berlin wall and the communist block.Nowdays
that prophecy seems incorrect and of little value.Russia isn't going
to invade Europe nor are there any possible conflicts on the horizon.
In retrospect the entire prophecized chain of events seems just
inaccurate and false.


Well, WWIII is quickly approaching, so I suppose we'll see how false this scenario is soon enough. I think the likelihood of Russia invading Europe as the first step in WWIII, about as likely as Arafat joining Sharon at Temple, but hey, that's just me...



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
First off, we still need proof that Billy's predictions were published PRIOR to the time the events occurred. This seems to be a simple matter, but I have yet to see such proof.


If you have these concerns, then why do you use his predictions to support them being vague

His books are time-stamped. I suppose, to really see if they are prior, you would have to find someone with his earlier books, and if you still suspicious, have them scientifically dated.



Second, as I have stated, the actions of a president more than 20 years ago, have VERY LITTLE bearing on current world politics. To claim that Reagan set the stage for WWIII is an absolute mistruth of the highest order, and blatant denial of current world politics.


US politics is a succession of many administrations, that continue on the work from previous administrations, rarely diverting significantly. Actions in the past are what dictate the course of the future. Also remember, all of the US presidents and cabinets have been nepotistic. We should also not forget, secret societies like the Skull and Bones have been responsible for many of those in power. Many of the decisions of government, are not by the actual elected cabinet, but a shadow entity behind it.

An illustration example of this, is in the current elections, where regardless of who wins, we still get a skull and bones member.

Under Reagans administration we were affronted with wars on terrorism, and pacts with many dictatorships were forged. What Reagan sowed in his time, is what we are cultivating today. In the same, the actions of the British empire, a century ago, paved the way for globalization.


Third, anyone familiar with Diana and Charles' courtship would predict trouble for them. You didn't need a crystal ball or contact with aliens to see it coming. Almost every tabloid journalist made the same prediction.


According to Semjase's forecast, at the time the affair of Diana and Charles was not even out in the open. She forecasted, exactly what time of the year they will be engaged, then married, and then Dianas subsequent emotional life.


Also, 8 YEARS is not getting near your end...
It's almost a decade for Pete's sake!


That's relative then; 8 years is quite a short time. However, I am not using this as as justication for the prediction of his death. Note, I only noted the predictions that were specific and falsifiable. What it does show, however, your original concerns were unfounded. Semjase did not say he will die, let alone die from brain related causes.


Again, we still need to see that such prophecies were made public BEFORE the events ocurred. If you could direct me to such a publication, in print (for online can easily be manipulated), I would be happy to then check it out and rethink my opinion of Mr. Meier. I've searched for such, but have as of yet come up empty on this.


I think we have to come to an agreement then. You will not discuss his predictions, until you have adequate corroborating evidence that they were made in advance of the events. We will talk later on this.


None of his models were, nor needed to be life sized. This is evident in many photos where the shadows on the craft first give the viewer the inkling that something isn't right. It's because such shadows are such that would be on a craft smaller than it appears in the photo. I've explained that it wouldn't take much, even with one arm, to affix a model to a piece of glass, and then angle as to not have any reflection on the glass.


You have any evidence to support this? As I said, the biggests skeptics clearly failed to reproduce succesfully his photographs. Do you want a go?

For that, you will need to do the following, I am not sure how you will arrange it. However, this is the only way, that an attempt could be made to reproduce his images, fairly.

1. You will need to reproduce each of his images IIG tried, in exactly the same manner, and in similar weather conditions. If Meiers UFO's is on the right/left of the frame, yours should also be the same. If Meiers is out in open sky, hovering miles above, yours will need to be the same. The UFO model must also be convincing.

2. You must show proof you are only using a camera, and you must do this with an old 35mm SLR, and no lab work. You must use a UFO model, and not at any point, use any digital manipulation.

3. You will need to have it scientifically validated from a professional source and produce a testimony and a report.

All criteria must be satisfied. If you can do this, it will prove enough evidence for me, to at least completely discount the photographic evidence.


Perhaps the BIGGEST problem with Billy's photos is that he NEVER submitted the negatives for testing, and often multi-generation reprints. This particular reason is the PRIME reason he CANNOT claim the photos passed any kind of scientific test. Without the negatives, photo tampering CANNOT be ruled out. It's a simple FACT. I'm not buying the one arm excuse. I've known quadraplegic painters who can paint masterpieces with the brush in their mouth! Often, handicapped people make up for such impairment in spades, with sheer determination. I have no doubt Billy is in that category.


Well, Meier is not painting, he is producing UFO pictures. The scientists that have analysed his photos, and with all due respect to you, are professionals, think his photographs are adequate evidence. One reason Meier does not release the negatives, is because of one your biggest issues with him "Asket and Nara" which he claims were switched. If he is telling the truth, then it would be unwise of him to repeat the same.


Let me refer you to my first example.


“And it will be that the fanatics of Islam will rise up and cover the lands of Europe with war, all will shake and quiver” (applied to be proof of foreseeing the Spain Al Queda attack)


How vague can you get?


I thought I already explained that. That is part of the prophecies of Henoch, and if you read it in it's original context, it will be specfic and make sense.


Amazing that prophecied which happened in the past (but supposedly predicted prior) are so accurate with names, times, dates, etc. yet anything to happen after today has NONE of this...
How can you NOT be even a little skeptical???


As Quetzal said, it is a prophecy, that can be changed, if we humans change our ways. He was not giving this in the normal prediction format, he was just telling Meier, what is likely to happen. If he had give exact times and dates, it would be more fundemental. WIII is a culmination of events, the Pleaidians may have been able to predict the individual evenets with accuracy, but the goal maybe more elusive.. However, from what I've read from Meier and Horn, the general concensus is 2006


BTW, attacks on the WTC have been plotted, and foiled, by terrorists since the early 80's. To suspect it as the first successful attack, is hardly an uneducated guess...
It was always THE primary target of such an attack...has been for decades....


I don't know anything about this. Please provide further information.


As for the alloys, I haven't seen anything where such finds are not producable on Earth, or even particularly remarkable.


According to the scientific analysis of an IBM patent holding scientist, they are ET manufactured alloys. More on this in later post, the short cut, would be to check out the alloy analysis on Horn's site.


Besides, if the aliens were willing to give him some to prove his story, wouldn't it be easier and more convincing to give up some kind of harmless technological device? Surely the alien equivalent of a pencil sharpener isn't going to blow up the world...
A bit like giving a caveman a little LED calculator....


That would be technology transfer, regardless. Any one component in the system, like the transistor in the Roswell craft, could give us a significant technological breakthrough. I am sure that would be a breach of intergalactic law. In the end, what Meier gets from the Pleaidians, is from their own accord, not yours, or mine.


Well, WWIII is quickly approaching, so I suppose we'll see how false this scenario is soon enough. I think the likelihood of Russia invading Europe as the first step in WWIII, about as likely as Arafat joining Sharon at Temple, but hey, that's just me...


Again, this is part of the prophecies of Henoch, which do not claim any starting or any order, there is a constellation of events occuring, before, during and after WWIII. If we are going into WWIII, then I don't think anyone is going to care how right Meier was, or indeed Titor was, we'll all be fending for each other, trying to survive.

[edit on 1-11-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 12:05 PM
link   

If you have these concerns, then why do you use his predictions to support them being vague

His books are time-stamped. I suppose, to really see if they are prior, you would have to find someone with his earlier books, and if you still suspicious, have them scientifically dated.


I'd be satisfied with a physical book stating the copyright date and publisher/press, prior to the events "predicted" such as when Reagan was shot, etc. As of yet, none of my local libraries have been able to find such a publication, either under Horn or Meier. If you know of a title, prior to these dates, that include these predictions, it would be most helpful. This seems to be the easiest way to put the issue to rest. Until then, I can't really say much on the prophecies, as there isn't yet proof that they aren't simply recounting the past, not predicting the future. So far, the ones we KNOW are for the future, are vague....


think we have to come to an agreement then. You will not discuss his predictions, until you have adequate corroborating evidence that they were made in advance of the events. We will talk later on this.


Hope you have better luck than I did on this.



3. You will need to have it scientifically validated from a professional source and produce a testimony and a report.


Without the negatives, any claim of "scientific validation" is bogus. Negatives can show signs of tampering that prints do not show. Also, it does NOT take advanced tech to do this. When in photo in art, we made all kinds of manipulations in the darkroom, just by moving things around, etc. Double exposures on light backgrounds are incredibly easy.


The scientists that have analysed his photos, and with all due respect to you, are professionals, think his photographs are adequate evidence.


Other professionals have likewise called foul. Why should either of us believe one over the other?


One reason Meier does not release the negatives, is because of one your biggest issues with him "Asket and Nara" which he claims were switched. If he is telling the truth, then it would be unwise of him to repeat the same.


Easy enough to circumvent, provide negatives of already published photos.


That would be technology transfer, regardless.


So would an alloy proven to be extra-terrestrial. Regardless, why then didn't one of these scientists then publish a paper on it, collect their Nobel prize, etc.?


Again, this is part of the prophecies of Henoch, which do not claim any starting or any order, there is a constellation of events occuring, before, during and after WWIII. If we are going into WWIII, then I don't think anyone is going to care how right Meier was, or indeed Titor was, we'll all be fending for each other, trying to survive.


Yes, but apparently, events in the past were told to the minute, day, etc. If these truly were predictions of FUTURE events, what made those events less fluid? What made them more predictable? Right now, my best answer is the simple one...because they already happened when the prediction was made....



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I'll post some of these as I find them...instances when the prophecies were wrong...(even though the site I found them at claims they are no inaccuracies..)


• 1978, 1992:
In his book, Existing Life in the Universe, Meier stated that there are two small planetary bodies outside Pluto's orbit; he called them Trans-Pluto and Uni, and said scientists will discover them in the not-too-distant future.
Corroborated: July 3, 2001 and October 7, 2002, the BBC reported that scientists have discovered a new planet beyond Pluto.


BTW, seems that I've found a few book titles to search for, so that's a good thing... Anyhoo, here he states two planetoids. One was discovered not two, and it was a planetoid, not a planet (unlike the site's implication). The vague "not too distant future" is especially nice here....


• 150th Contact, October 10, 1981:
Meier discussed information concerning the 29 actual moons of Saturn, and the origins of moons from asteroids.
Corroborated: November 2000, scientists announced the discovery of 12 additional moons orbiting Saturn, bringing the "official" total to 28, just one shy of what Meier reported almost 20 years earlier; scientist corroborates the likelihood that moons originate from asteroids.


While only a number off, it's still incorrect. Not to mention, in '81 it was fairly commonly accepted that there were additional moons. It's pretty certain that the 28 number will stand.

Here's my favorite...


• 31st Contact, July 17, 1975:
Semjase informed Meier that Mt Chimborazo, Ecuador, is the highest mountain on Earth (above sea level), contrary to Meier's belief that it was Mt Everest.
Corroborated: June 1996 in Earth magazine, 21 years later.


Whoa! Hold the phone! I suppose the Editor of Earth Magazine was fired...??? Chimborazo is 6267m above sea level. Everest is 8846m above sea level. There isn't even a contest here...Everest has it beat by almost one and a half miles!!! As of 1999. The only way to stretch it being the highest, is by stating it is the furthest point from the center of the Earth (which it is)...and this is only because the Earth is wider at the Equator...however, the prediction states above sea level, not from the center of the Earth.

[edit on 1-11-2004 by Gazrok]

[edit on 1-11-2004 by Gazrok]



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 02:07 PM
link   

So far, the ones we KNOW are for the future, are vague....


They do not have an exact time, but a general time frame of 2006 is given, the events themselves are specific enough. I think you may have to read Meiers latest books to see if anything further is mentioned about events. What is important, if Meiers has genuinely made all of his predictions he claims to, then regardless of the ambiguity of Quetzals prophecy, we should take them extremely seriously. I personally think time is of the essence here.


Hope you have better luck than I did on this.


I hope so too.


Without the negatives, any claim of "scientific validation" is bogus. Negatives can show signs of tampering that prints do not show. Also, it does NOT take advanced tech to do this. When in photo in art, we made all kinds of manipulations in the darkroom, just by moving things around, etc. Double exposures on light backgrounds are incredibly easy.


I beg to differ, negatives are not necessary for photographic analysis. When photographic evidence is required, there is not always the luxury of having the negatives too. Anyhow, as for as I am concerned, either his images are reproduced with the criteria specified, or you accept them as credible evidence.


Other professionals have likewise called foul. Why should either of us believe one over the other?


Which professionals? IIG? The people who are calling them credible, specialize in photo manipulation and scientific analysis, and have had decades of experience in them, further more neither of them have any apparant agendas or inclinations, and their credibility is without repoach.
It is the same argument you are using to support the disclosure project, it would be hypcritical to apply double standards with Meier.


Easy enough to circumvent, provide negatives of already published photos.


You would have to convey this request to Meier and horn themselves, and see if they comply, and if they do not, what is their reason. I am not a representative for Meier, so I cannot answer on his behalf.


So would an alloy proven to be extra-terrestrial. Regardless, why then didn't one of these scientists then publish a paper on it, collect their Nobel prize, etc.?


Yes, but do we have the capability to reverse engineer it, further more, if we did, do we have access to the elements used in it's manufacture. However, instead had they provided Meier with an ET microchip composed of the same alloy, we may not have been able to reproduce the alloy, but we could have found out how it functions, and adapted it to our own materials. In the end, Meiers's alloy does not constitute technology transfer, material transfer maybe, but not technology.



Yes, but apparently, events in the past were told to the minute, day, etc. If these truly were predictions of FUTURE events, what made those events less fluid? What made them more predictable? Right now, my best answer is the simple one...because they already happened when the prediction was made....


This was not a prediction, this was rather a forecast of a scenorio that is likely to manifest, if we do not change our ways. Quetzal did say, that there is a difference between predictions and prophecies. Predictions are events that will certainly happen, and prophecies are events that can happen. This is a prophecy. We can change it, and Meier claims himself, there are some 3.5 billion ET humans sending us positive energy to reverse the polarity of our negativity. Except, it has not been enough.

[edit on 1-11-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 02:40 PM
link   
Instead of sending us their energy, a simple public visit with a world leader would easily suffice.

Charlatains continue to hide behind this "Star Trek" Prime Directive nonsense... I fail to see how revealing their existance to one person isn't violating the same rules.


I beg to differ, negatives are not necessary for photographic analysis. When photographic evidence is required, there is not always the luxury of having the negatives too. Anyhow, as for as I am concerned, either his images are reproduced with the criteria specified, or you accept them as credible evidence.


Guess we'll have to agree to disagree here... Asking someone to reproduce or validate photos scientifically, without providing the negatives, is akin to a doctor trying to diagnose a patient based on a photograph... Billy nor Horn have provided the negatives to anyone else, so I don't think I've got a shot here...
But without independent SCIENTIFIC analysis (which MUST involve the negatives), I will not accept those photos as valid...nor will any skeptic, even those (like myself) who believe. I'm amazed those at the Disclosure Project are doing so. I should add that I believe in the effort put forth by them, but I'll also state that they are too quick to accept evidence that seems good on the surface without delving deeper. This will end up biting them in the ass eventually, if they ever do actually get their day.

Here's a link to an article about the man who did the photo analysis (back in the 80's) that you may find interesting...

www.aliensonearth.com...


Yes, but do we have the capability to reverse engineer it, further more, if we did, do we have access to the elements used in it's manufacture. However, instead had they provided Meier with an ET microchip composed of the same alloy, we may not have been able to reproduce the alloy, but we could have found out how it functions, and adapted it to our own materials. In the end, Meiers's alloy does not constitute technology transfer, material transfer maybe, but not technology.


Again, where's the paper? Such a find would easily give this IBM patent-holding scientist (which doesn't exactly mean much) a lock on the Nobel Prize. So what's the hold up? The logical conclusion is easy. It obviously won't stand up to the scrutiny of fellow scientists, and he knows it, because it isn't remarkable at all, or it could be because he's too busy selling healing crystals....


www.crystalwings.com...


They do not have an exact time, but a general time frame of 2006 is given, the events themselves are specific enough.


Yep, Russia invading Europe...
Guess we'll see, huh?


This was not a prediction, this was rather a forecast of a scenorio that is likely to manifest, if we do not change our ways. Quetzal did say, that there is a difference between predictions and prophecies. Predictions are events that will certainly happen, and prophecies are events that can happen. This is a prophecy.


That's convenient. So what are then, some "predictions" for the future, vs, prophecies? Do THEY include dates, times, etc. like those of the past? I'd be willing to bet thats a resounding "no". And if that is the case, then your skeptic radar should be beeping like crazy....


[edit on 1-11-2004 by Gazrok]



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
Instead of sending us their energy, a simple public visit with a world leader would easily suffice.

Charlatains continue to hide behind this "Star Trek" Prime Directive nonsense... I fail to see how revealing their existance to one person isn't violating the same rules.


The prime directive, or non-interference is for societies, not single individuals. It is reasonable to assume that a civilization must meet certain prerequisites before it's inducted into the galactic community. This may only be possible with observation, monitoring and contacts. I personally believe we are ready, but not on a spiritual level, rather on a technological level, and I think ET's are engaging us on all levels to break us in, and also harmonize our spiritual and technological imbalance. This is a process that directly affects us on a spiritual and mental level, hence disclosure is not something that can be rushed.

Ask yourself, today, are we prepared to accept a superior race of people besides us? I think the Pleaidians, as a spiritually advanced culture, recognizes this, and will only disclose themselves when the time is right.


Guess we'll have to agree to disagree here... Asking someone to reproduce or validate photos scientifically, without providing the negatives, is akin to a doctor trying to diagnose a patient based on a photograph...


Strange that, actual professionals in JPL, and other scientists do not think so. Are you retracting your claim you can easily reproduce them? Alright, so you are not willing to accept them as evidence, even though you cannot reproduce them. Then it would be irrational of you to maintain they are hoaxes or such and such. As far as I am concerned, your argument against Meiers photographs stands nullified.


I'm amazed those at the Disclosure Project are doing so. I should add that I believe in the effort put forth by them, but I'll also state that they are too quick to accept evidence that seems good on the surface without delving deeper. This will end up biting them in the ass eventually, if they ever do actually get their day.


This is your presumption that they have not analysed his case properly. It has no weight in an objective investigation of Meiers case.


Again, where's the paper? Such a find would easily give this IBM patent-holding scientist (which doesn't exactly mean much) a lock on the Nobel Prize. So what's the hold up? The logical conclusion is easy. It obviously won't stand up to the scrutiny of fellow scientists, and he knows it, because it isn't remarkable at all.


Marcel is a highly-esteemed scientist in IBM, holding some 32 patents. Do you have any idea what it would do to his credibility to support the contention that Billy Meier is being visisted by aliens? What exactly would he get a nobel prize for, for analysing a piece of metal? Providing testimony is one thing, but pushing for the existence of aliens who visit Meier, is another thing altogether.


Yep, Russia invading Europe...
Guess we'll see, huh?


You do realize Europe is becoming one superstate now? The entire EU superstate would share borders with Russia, causing much upset in the balance of power. I don't think Russia will be happy. We know, Russia and US are age-old enemies, in a potential conflict between US and Russia, who do you think EU will be on the side of? In a world war, with two big powers, right next to each other, and at odds, of course conflict can break out.



That's convenient. So what are then, some "predictions" for the future, vs, prophecies? Do THEY include dates, times, etc. like those of the past? I'd be willing to bet thats a resounding "no". And if that is the case, then your skeptic radar should be beeping like crazy....


Did I not just tell you, it was not told to Meier as a prediction, it was told as something that is likely to happen. It's up to the Pleaidians what to tell him, give him, or show him. You cannot hold Meier accountable here, he is only the supposed messenger. Here is one reason, why I think exact dates cannot be given, because events are happening so fast, that our timeline is constantly changing. As I said, this is the culmination of events to date. Secondly, I think some information is just too sensitive for a responsible ET civilization to divulge. There can be a multitide of reasons. At the end of the day, it's not in yours, mine or even Meiers power, on what they tell him.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Ask yourself, today, are we prepared to accept a superior race of people besides us? I think the Pleaidians, as a spiritually advanced culture, recognizes this, and will only disclose themselves when the time is right.


If we are about to destroy ourselves, then yes, I would think the time is right.....



Strange that, actual professionals in JPL, and other scientists do not think so. Are you retracting your claim you can easily reproduce them? Alright, so you are not willing to accept them as evidence, even though you cannot reproduce them. Then it would be irrational of you to maintain they are hoaxes or such and such. As far as I am concerned, your argument against Meiers photographs stands nullified.


That's your perogative. However, scientifically they CANNOT be validated without the negatives. That is a FACT, and is incontrovertable. Yes, I can reproduce it, and still plan to do so...however I doubt it will be to YOUR satisfaction. But, I'm doing it for myself as well, so no biggie there. The photo-analyst has a long established link with UFO groups, which you'd know if you checked my link. He's hardly an impartial judge. Lets see if Mr. Meier's photos would stand up to a non-UFO involved analyst? I doubt it, and as such, it was already shot down.


This is your presumption that they have not analysed his case properly. It has no weight in an objective investigation of Meiers case.


Regardless, it will end up biting them in the ass...
Meier isn't the only bad connection they've made, but it is the highest profile link that will eventually hurt their credibility.


Marcel is a highly-esteemed scientist in IBM, holding some 32 patents. Do you have any idea what it would do to his credibility to support the contention that Billy Meier is being visisted by aliens? What exactly would he get a nobel prize for, for analysing a piece of metal? Providing testimony is one thing, but pushing for the existence of aliens who visit Meier, is another thing altogether.


I suppose hawking healing crystals makes him a super credible source? Or did you not check that link either? If there is a way to PROVE that the sample could not be made on Earth and could not have been made by man, then yes, I'd say there is a good chance for a Nobel here... That is the case claimed is it not? It'd have to be, to be proof of extraterrestrial origin....


You do realize Europe is becoming one superstate now? The entire EU superstate would share borders with Russia, causing much upset in the balance of power. I don't think Russia will be happy. We know, Russia and US are age-old enemies, in a potential conflict between US and Russia, who do you think EU will be on the side of? In a world war, with two big powers, right next to each other, and at odds, of course conflict can break out.


Time will tell in 2 years I suppose....



quote: That's convenient. So what are then, some "predictions" for the future, vs, prophecies? Do THEY include dates, times, etc. like those of the past? I'd be willing to bet thats a resounding "no". And if that is the case, then your skeptic radar should be beeping like crazy....


You cannot hold Meier accountable here, he is only the supposed messenger. Here is one reason, why I think exact dates cannot be given, because events are happening so fast, that our timeline is constantly changing. As I said, this is the culmination of events to date. Secondly, I think some information is just too sensitive for a responsible ET civilization to divulge. There can be a multitide of reasons. At the end of the day, it's not in yours, mine or even Meiers power, on what they tell him.


The classic cop out. You have to see that? Can't blame him when he's wrong, but he'll take the credit when right... Blame it on the alien misinterpretation, hehe... We can't be trusted with the info, yadda yadda yadda.....


Please read through the ATS link to the other Billy thread....I think you'll see quite a bit. In the end, we may continue to have a difference of opinion on Billy, but I do appreciate the civil point and counterpoint...





posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 09:20 AM
link   

If we are about to destroy ourselves, then yes, I would think the time is right.....


And what do you think is happening right now? The Pleidians claim they are here for the very purpose of helping us, and Quetzal did say in the 215th contact, that the possibility of ET intervention may materialize.
We are not exactly destroying ourselves yet. When we are, then the time would be right for an ET civilization to intervene, and I am sure in terms of intergalactic law, it is permissable.

The Pleaidians have said, however, that it may take some 700 years before they engage us properly, as we are not mature enough.


However, scientifically they CANNOT be validated without the negatives. That is a FACT, and is incontrovertable.


Again, with all due respect to you Gazrok, but real scientists don't seem to share this opinion of yours. Another fact, the scientists that analysed Meiers photographs were not UFO investigators. Are you misrepresenting facts?

In an investigation involving photographic evidence, there is not always the luxury of havig access to negatives, thus they are proven in others manners. Scientifc analysis does not hinge on negatives, and mind you, the negatives are what produce the photographs anyway, any attempts at manipulation, would register. Have you even cared to read the photographic analysis document on Horns site?

Anyway, good luck in reproducing them, and it would be to my satisfaction, if it meets all criteria. How much time do you need to do this?



Regardless, it will end up biting them in the ass...
Meier isn't the only bad connection they've made, but it is the highest profile link that will eventually hurt their credibility.


It's still an opinion, and based on prejudice against Meier, so I am going to exclude it from this debate.


I suppose hawking healing crystals makes him a super credible source? Or did you not check that link either? If there is a way to PROVE that the sample could not be made on Earth and could not have been made by man, then yes, I'd say there is a good chance for a Nobel here... That is the case claimed is it not? It'd have to be, to be proof of extraterrestrial origin....


Many scientists have spiritual, paranormal and metaphysical beliefs. Is it your right to judge someones because of their beliefs?
Crystals, actually do have healing properties, I know this myself, because I felt the surge of energy from them from a clear quartz crystal, and also felt the magnetic like pull between my palms, when handelling them, I was also able to create a bio-magnetic effect, and cause the crystal to slip of my hand, by sweeping my other palm over it. It was intense. Marcel is not the only one who claims they have healing properties. I am also aware there are scientific studies that affirm the metaphysical properties of crystals.

This kind of attack on credidibility is best suited to the intellectually dishonst and substance impoverished, Randi's and the like. I am surprised you would do the same, especially considering your beliefs in spirituality and extraterrestrials. I am sorry, but I think this is a form of hypocrisy. Please, be impartial in your investigation of Meier, do not let your prejudices come in the way, for they will only limit your intellects.

Edgar Mitchell, also has many spiritual beliefs, and sells new-age stuff, do you also feel he is not credible?

You will find that anyone who makes any form of positive association with the paranormal, becomes a victim of attacks, slander and defamation, regardless of how credible they are. This is against the very scientific method that many skeptics claim to uphold.


Time will tell in 2 years I suppose....


Suppose, theres a time bomb implanted inside you from the Zetan reptillians, that is to go off in exactly 2 years. I give you advance warning. You wait 2 years. Then you explode.

What was the point of the above analogy?



The classic cop out. You have to see that? Can't blame him when he's wrong, but he'll take the credit when right... Blame it on the alien misinterpretation, hehe... We can't be trusted with the info, yadda yadda yadda.....


How has he been wrong with his latest prophecies of Henoch? On the contrary, part of it has already been fulfilled, the attacks on WTC. More, the Islamic attacks on America. More, the formation of the NWO.
At the end of the day, considering his story, it's not a cop-out, it's the truth - he recieves what he is given by the Pleaidians.


Please read through the ATS link to the other Billy thread....I think you'll see quite a bit. In the end, we may continue to have a difference of opinion on Billy, but I do appreciate the civil point and counterpoint...


Yes, people can disagree, and do so in a civil manner, while respecting each other on what they agree on




[edit on 2-11-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 12:15 PM
link   

And what do you think is happening right now? The Pleidians claim they are here for the very purpose of helping us, and Quetzal did say in the 215th contact, that the possibility of ET intervention may materialize.
We are not exactly destroying ourselves yet. When we are, then the time would be right for an ET civilization to intervene, and I am sure in terms of intergalactic law, it is permissable.

The Pleaidians have said, however, that it may take some 700 years before they engage us properly, as we are not mature enough.

We’ll be lucky to BE HERE in 700 years… If all of it IS real, they need to address someone in a position of power, not a Swiss farmer cult leader.


Again, with all due respect to you Gazrok, but real scientists don't seem to share this opinion of yours. Another fact, the scientists that analysed Meiers photographs were not UFO investigators. Are you misrepresenting facts?

Yes, they are. You’ll see that the man I mentioned is a member of CAUS (Citizens Against UFO Secrecy), who wrote the paper on Horn’s site. Likewise, since it is claimed that the validation was done with secrecy agreements with the labs involved, there is no way for a third party to authenticate that these facilities were used as claimed. Isn’t THAT convenient?


In an investigation involving photographic evidence, there is not always the luxury of havig access to negatives, thus they are proven in others manners. Scientifc analysis does not hinge on negatives, and mind you, the negatives are what produce the photographs anyway, any attempts at manipulation, would register. Have you even cared to read the photographic analysis document on Horns site?

Yes, I have read it, (written by the CAUS member). You’ll also note that this man’s expertise is in digital imaging, NOT photo film analysis. This is like trusting a vet to perform an operation on a human. Sure, some things overlap, but completely different animals here. While I’m no scientist, I do have enough expertise in film developing, etc. to know that you need to see the negatives before making a conclusion one way or the other… How hard would sticking them in an envelope be? How hard would being there during the analysis be, if concerned of theft?


Anyway, good luck in reproducing them, and it would be to my satisfaction, if it meets all criteria. How much time do you need to do this?

This likely won’t be till early next year, as other things are occupying my weekends through the holiday season.


It's still an opinion, and based on prejudice against Meier, so I am going to exclude it from this debate.

Fair enough, call it a “prophecy”



Many scientists have spiritual, paranormal and metaphysical beliefs. Is it your right to judge someones because of their beliefs?
Crystals, actually do have healing properties, I know this myself, because I felt the surge of energy from them from a clear quartz crystal, and also felt the magnetic like pull between my palms, when handelling them, I was also able to create a bio-magnetic effect, and cause the crystal to slip of my hand, by sweeping my other palm over it. It was intense. Marcel is not the only one who claims they have healing properties. I am also aware there are scientific studies that affirm the metaphysical properties of crystals.

I myself have many new age beliefs. However, my point was to show that Marcel, like the photo analyst, already has a disposition towards the subject, so he is not the best source to cite as the only scientist to authenticate the samples.


This kind of attack on credidibility is best suited to the intellectually dishonst and substance impoverished, Randi's and the like. I am surprised you would do the same, especially considering your beliefs in spirituality and extraterrestrials. I am sorry, but I think this is a form of hypocrisy. Please, be impartial in your investigation of Meier, do not let your prejudices come in the way, for they will only limit your intellects.

My point is still that Marcel is not impartial. In both the photo analysis, and the sample analysis, Horn is citing the conclusions of those who are NOT impartial, therefore, it is difficult to believe in the authenticity of their validation.


Suppose, theres a time bomb implanted inside you from the Zetan reptillians, that is to go off in exactly 2 years. I give you advance warning. You wait 2 years. Then you explode.

And just what are we to do against it? Warning me that a I’ll be hit by lightning sometime in the future isn’t going to help me avoid it unless you say exactly when and where. This seemed to be no trouble for past events, so why now? (besides the reasons already given). If they truly wished to help, they’d say HOW we could stop it…



Yes, people can disagree, and do so in a civil manner, while respecting each other on what they agree on


Yep



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join