posted on Oct, 6 2004 @ 01:11 PM
I was trying to find the Michaelhorn conversation posts, but I believe they are all on global ignore, anyone know why?
My opinions on both:
Lear: I think he basically means well, but started connecting dots that were pretty far-fetched, and ended up with a personal theory that is WAY out
there. I think there are some tiny truths to some of his observations regarding the grays, but he's lost me with the moonbases, etc.
Meier/Horn: Unlike Lear, this appears to be a planned hoax from the get-go. The photos are obviously models, and some photos (switched by the Swedish
MIBs, that still cracks me up) were even identified as copied from media. I will thank him though, for inspiring me with an excellent idea to fake
UFO photos that may even be the method employed by Billy.
On Lazar: This is a tricky one... I believe there is ample proof that he was where he said he was. There seems to be ample evidence his background
was tampered with. On the whole, his story resonates well with many sources, including docs that date back to the 40's describing the interior of
the ships. I believe Lazar was an unwitting disinfo plant, chosen for his knowledge, but also because he would be easy to discredit when he
inevitably came forward with his story. I think much of Lazar's comments are true to a point, but also laced with disinfo.
As for element 115, currently, the verdict is still out on whether we've been able to synthesize it or not. And Lazar states the properties of it
that enable it's use, are due to it in it's "natural" state. So, without a sample, it's mere conjecture really. To debate his ideas in physics,
you'd have to fully understand quantum physics that we are just barely starting to understand, so I'm not so sure such a debate is possible at this
Consequently, I believe that much of the "yellow book" idea, of the aliens giving us Jesus, etc. is disinfo as part of the acclimation process, as
its a good way of revelation without disrupting the religions of the world.