Billy Meier called the New Nostradamus!?!?

As for the idiotic comment about not being interviewed by David Burd, well:
wtop.com... The interview was presented in four 1 1/2 minute segments. The interview, in case you haven't figured it out, was of me, hence the link to MY site.

Michael. You are just plain lying now. I SPOKE to David Burd and he stated that he never, ever, ever, ever spoke to you. He also stated categorically that you were NEVER on WTOP radio -- not your voice, not your name, nothing. I posted that same link to David's article at the very beginning of this thread. Apparently, you were unable to locate the first post in this thread.

Fact: The reporter from WTOP radio that posted that blurb and aired the story says that 1) you never were on the air; and 2) he's never spoken to you. Period.

I should also mention that I HEARD the story. There were never any "4 1 1/2 minute" segments. That's another bold-faced lie. Since you're not from D.C., you probably don't realize that David Burd does 30, or so, second "blurbs" and that's it.

Here.. listen to David's piece for this week it's on workplace microwave etiquette. (MP3).


No one is buying this lie here.

ADMIN EDIT: Removed link to crap site...

[edit on 1-9-2006 by Springer]

Yeah that sucker is down on hes knees, now knock him out with that damn weddingcake, jritzmann! As i predicted he will mock you for using photoshop he knows you only used it for resizing but that does not matter to his agenda.

Youre the man of the hour, tower of power.


hey michael wanna sell your grandma, here is a dime for you, you sad excuse for a man. Your children will be very proud of you when they realise that their father makes a living as a conman.






[edit on 9-1-2006 by hoeon]

Man I just love reading MHs posts. There'r more entertaining than anything on the boob tube. I think he really believes this stuff.
I'll believe MH when he posts photos he's taken of the craft or aliens. What you say? All that time you spent at the Meier commune and you didnt see the craft or the Plajerans? How can that be? Apparently they have been flying all over the place(1200 photos,videos).
Of course I'm assuming this to be the case because I asked about this in an ealier post and got no response. The wedding cake photos really puzzle me because it looks like this craft was right out there in the open in front what appears to be a hotel or something yet only Meier saw it.
Thats logic for ya.

Really?

If Burd never spoke to me I wonder who I was talking to, who was recording my answers to the questions, etc. Since I don't get WTOP radio, I can only go on what Burd personally told me regarding length of the segments, how much of my actual answers will be used, etc., and feedback from people who heard it. I kept (as in still have) one such email and here is the text sent to me by the listener after first airing:

   "Hi Michael,  I'm in PA. but am close enough to DC to hear WTOP. I was just listening in the car and heard the first report at about 2:15PM EST.  There will be another installment in the 5 o'clock hour.  The reporter mentioned a few of the predictions, one being Jupiter's rings, and I offhand don't recall the other. There were of course, a few giggles from the live newsdesk, but that's to be expected.

    The reporter said that the next one will "make your jaw drop to the desk", so I assume he's gonna bring up the UFO issue.  Everything was pretty much factual, but for the fact that they're referring to Billy as "Billy Myers". Oh well, at least they're that close..I'll be listening at 5 if I can, and send you another report.  Also, good interview with Punnett the other night. He seems to let you speak more than the other 2 hosts, and that's coming from a long time Art Bell fan.  Cheers, Joe A., Glen Rock, Pa."

So your point is? Since Burd isn't in until Tuesday I'll have to wait to get his comments.

And oh yeah, thanks for advertising my other site too.

 

I enjoy reading all this material from both parties, please don't ban anyone and pleople please don't do name callings even if it gets frustrated, instead use bigger words that means the same and its not such an insult.

Im hoping this threat to continue. its getting really interesting and I think this time it will have an outcome.

Note: sorry my english is not that great!

Originally posted by 8Michael12
I see, a little touchy here aren't we? It's okay to put up derogatory posters, maul and vilify Meier, impugn my motives, i.e. lower them to the same kind of financial materialism that has infected the majority of bottom feeders of this world but, hey, I better not call anyone an idiot. Is that your standard of fairness here? No problem, I recognize cowards when I meet them...nice meeting you all. And really, what would one expect from armchair heroes and wannabes?

Now, who exactly are you calling a coward? I dont see me shrinking away from having pictures tested with modern technology, by an independant authority. I'm not a "wannabe" either, as I work in the field professionally, within the scope of what I'm speaking on. You however are making statements about processes and "analysis" you literally know nothing about, because you do not admittedly comphrehend it. So, "wannabe" would be applying to someone else here.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Okay, on with it. Let's simply (and perhaps for the umpteenth time) offer some of the facts of the case. You get to decide for yourselves what you think, if you are capable of it.

According to the "logic" being thrust at us by Ritzmann, any and all equipment used by experts (and the experts themselves) in the fields of photographic, sound and metal analysis, with which countless tests have been made leading to scientifically valid determinations, previously accepted as credible, must be dismissed - if Meier's evidence was ever included among the testing and, heaven forbid, validated by it. Conversely, all is well with the equipment and the experts if Meier's evidence DIDN'T pass the tests.

This means that we should dismiss the following ("antiquated") equipment simply because it was known to have been used to analyze and validate Meier's evidence:

Electron Microscope
Micro Densitometer
Vidicon Tube
Interferometer
Infraredometer
Digitizer
Image Process Computer
Zeiss Microscope
YOOL Laser System
Simmons Gamma/Alpha Emission Tube
Grinnel Computer Graphics Terminal GMR-37
Tektronix Computer System 4081=peripherals
Fairchild CCD-2 Digital Camera
Singer zx-2 Digital Camera
CMX-700 & 340 Computer Video Graphics
Scanning Electron Microscope
Laserscope
HELL Chromograph DC 300

And we should likewise dismiss these companies, their ("antiquated") equipment and personnel as no longer credible:

Hamamatsu Systems
COMTAL
De Anza Systems
Ramteck Systems
ComTol Systems
Evans-Sutherians
Spatial Data
FORTH Systems
JPL
NASA
IBM
USGS
INTERREPRO, A. G.,
SCHORI REPROS
Spectro Dynamics
Eidgenossisch Maerialprufungs und Versuchsanstalt
Boeing
McDonnell Douglas
Swiss Military Air Safety Monitoring Unit
Uncharted Territory
Design Technology
Kodak
De Anza Systems
Excalibur Sound Studios
Naval Undersea Sound Lab
Photo Color Studio
Nippon TV

Funny I think that De Anza is mentioned twice to make the list a bit longer. Also funny that a published newspaper articles says of De Anza's involvement:

"They came to De Anza under the pretext of wanting to buy our equipment. We demonstrated it, and they snapped many pictures and left. We made no data interpretations whatsoever,"

When asked about the captions then seen publicly on those shots, detailing "analysis" they said:

"Those are their interpretations, not ours. Nothing we did would have defined what those results meant."

Fascinating huh? There's more:

When Dinwiddie, an employee then of De Anza was shown the captions that
said:
"Thermogram -- color density separations -- low frequencies properties of light/time of day are correct; light values on ground are reflected in craft bottom; eliminates double exposures and paste-ups."


Mr. Dinwiddie's reply was:

"No, we put those colors in the photo!" Dinwiddie exclaimed. "Jim [Dilettoso] said, 'Can you make the bottom of the object appear to reflect the ground below?' I said yes, and we performed the operations that they asked for."*

Added Dinwiddie: "My impression of Jim Dilettoso is that he freely chooses to use whatever descriptive text he enjoys to describe things. He is not particularly versed in computer technology. He's a pretty good piano player, though." *

Very telling no? How many other companies should we contact to see the *real* story here? How many of them will even know what we're talking about seeing as some of this "analysis" was done backdoor as Dilettoso has stated?

You really should cease using the Swiss Military crap, as you ahve nothing to back that up with either...you have no reports, citing the radar as you do. "Take it for what it's worth" I believe was your comment when you couldnt provide any substancial proof for those claims.

I have several calls out to some of the others, and those will be posted when I hear from them in regard to the case.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Specifically, we should negate the qualifications and contributions from these experts, and others, slandering them if necessary, and it will be necessary for certain lowlifes such as are found here (how am I doing, banned yet?):

Marcel Vogel
Robert Post
Michael Malin
Wally Gentleman
Steve Ambrose
Nils Rognerud
Steve Singer
Jim Dilettoso
David Froning
Robin L. Shellman
Lt. Col. Wendelle Stevens, USAF (Ret.)
Lee & Brit Elders
Tom Welch
O. Richard Norton
Maj. Rudojph Pestalozzi, USAF (Ret.)
Dr. Walter W. Walker
Jun-Ichi Yaoi
James Deardorff
Steven Williams
Howard Ilson

Take special note again of Mr Robert Post. His statements of what he really thought were posted here. Again, when caught, Michael claims he was "testing" us to see if anyone would really check the statements, and that he always knew the Post statements had 2 sides. There wasnt 2 sides. He didnt buy it. Nice try tho Mike. Again, Deardorff knows as much about imaging as you do. Hello? Meteorologist!
If anyone is really into it, make some calls. But first read what these people *really* said, quotes like "if this is real" and their ilk abound. This is not authenticating anything. To say the photos are impressive is not untrue. But it doesnt make them real. Michael would have you believe it does.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Because we are not threatened in our knowledge of the truth we have no problem acknowledging Ritzmann's photos for what they are, very good, even excellent photos of a model UFO. Unfortunately, Ritzmann is not quite so honest and obviously feels very threatened by the work of a one-armed man who's been presenting physical evidence (yes, still irreproducible until tests prove otherwise) for 42 years, and prophetically accurate information for 55 years.

How exactly does this threaten me? No, I offered mine up. Current analysis, independant analysis. Youre the one who wont put up. I really think it's amusing that you feel I'm somehow threatened. Noting your aggressive stance here, I'd say youre the one who's threatened.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Of course, we are also told by the emperor-skeptic-in-chief that Harryhausen's model is actually a better, more convincing one than the real deal shown in Meier's photos! I think that this puts me in the position of informing some dwellers of deep denial that their emperor has no clothes, and poor eyesight as well. But if you can be talked into believing that the Harryhausen model even comes close to the UFOs Meier photographed...well then, I guess you can stay comfortable in those "beliefs", highly valued as they are also by Ritzmann, certainly above the expert opinions of qualified scientists.

Take a look at my model and see if you see a warped hull like this one:
www.figu.org...

Or perhaps the gaping left edge on the center of this one underside:
www.figu.org...

Damn man please, my little Harryhausen model might not be perfect, but it's a long shot from these gaping warped things.

My clothes are pretty well fitting...hows yours?

Originally posted by 8Michael12I should mention that, contrary to what you assume here, I'm not interested in a popularity contest and I don't mind going head to head with people who are illogical, can't back up their stupid claims, etc., and that includes people in the so-called UFO community who champion garbage peddlers as truth tellers and then won't substantiate their "evidence".

Funny, I've taken model photos, shown you everything from found part identifications to edge enhancements of still frames, quoted public published sources on statements selectively edited by someone that you put forth as "authentication", and detailed your snippet of the official analysis calling you on several points youre yet to address because you have no knowledge of it, said I'd submit my pics and negs along with Meiers for independant modern analysis...
::::takes deep breath::::
and yet the man says I dont substanciate anything I say. That is without question the most ludicrous statement I have read yet from this guy. Maybe you need to re-read the whole thread.

Originally posted by 8Michael12The difference between me and, as far as I can tell, every one of you, is that I've been involved in researching this case for 27 years now. I work on every aspect of it because I recognize it as the most important story in all of human history. None of you have troubled yourselves to take what Wendelle Stevens calls the "first elementary step" in a credible examination of the case, which isn't hard to do since the people involved are still around and the contacts are still going on. But you're too lazy, have far too many excuses and think that your concocted "challenges" are brilliant and unique. Hardly, look at the other forums where other wannabes were offering the same stupid nonsense. And the funny thing is that I haven't seen any of you on the lecture circuit presenting your expose of this great Meier "hoax". Gee, I wonder why? If this is such a financially lucrative field, heck, why don't y'all take a shot at it? I mean, come on down!

Funny, that you now take the stance that because we're not trying to be a UFO star like you we're worthless. I lectured a bit when I was more involved in the UFO community, and my last one in DC I mentioned Meier and what I thought of it. This was an event attended by Dick Hall among others, not some back room at the Holiday Inn. When the lecture was over up in another speaker's room whilst talking this gent walks up to me as said "I take great exception to your statements about the Meier case". When I asked him what he found so compelling he couldnt give a straight answer. When I asked him if he thought the film and phtographic data was credible, his answer was "well I dont know about any of that". My answer was "maybe ya oughtta look". Funny.

Michael really refers to actually going to Switzerland and interacting with the witnesses, and looking around. Sadly, Meier's photos and all the issues I have with them, and the "analysis" dont sway me into making the trip. If there was something really interesting to me, I'd go...I spent a hell of alot of money investigating cases from all over, lots of drive time and train time..but Switzerland? Nahh, there's just not any reason to, as I see enough from right here.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Why haven't you showed up? Simply because you're hypocrites and poseurs, comfortable sniping away from your computers instead of getin' all gritty out there.

Again here, Michael pretends to know what we're all about, when he knows nothing. He means going to the alps again...and again, not worth the money, when you see what you can get right from here. Me? I doubt I'd get very far past the gate without being told to leave.
I'd rather buy my son's college education with that money then fly out to see the Semjase Silver Star Center. Thats just me. I just dont see the point.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Now an admission from me. I get involved on these types of forums when things are otherwise on low demand, and the reason is to see if there are really any credible challenges to the case. It may surprise you to know that I even challenge Meir from year to year when I see him. As you can see, I've been on a number of these wildlife refuges and, so far, nothing of real importance has occurred, present company included. The "best" things are the photos from Fortean, IIG and Ritzmann simply because they are all good model shots...that still won't pass the tests Meier's did...and none of you geniuses will submit them for the testing, Ritzmann being the most blatant and obvious in his cowardice to do so (yes, even though we all know the results in advance).

Hey, pal o' mine...you need a hearing aid? I'll submit them when Meier submits his. Todays protocols and equipment.

And ya know, while we're on the subject, say I did submit on my own...who's gonna do it? With what equipment? You think I'd let you pick? See, thats another roundabout from you there...no, I woudlnt submit to anyone YOU pick even if I did go it alone. And you'd not submit to me getting anyone either. So even if I did, how you gonna make it happen?

But, the fact is, your projecting "cowardice" onto me, when it's you who's afraid to put your UFO messiah to the test. Youre not worried about my shots, youre worried about your own. Pro-ject-ion. Say it with me, projection.

Originally posted by 8Michael12As I said, this is a workshop, a testing ground for arguments against the case but the best that the bottom feeders can do is to try to attack the integrity and motives of the contactee and spokesperson and if - YOU - moderator, or anyone else doesn't like the accuracy of the language and my pointing out that morons who hurl unsubstantiated, ignorant charges are guilty of the very thing you'd like to criticize me for, then ban me from your pathetic little club, microcosm of the small-minded world that we live in that it is.

See folks, what you might see here is Michael trying to make himself be the victim of us cruel ignorant people. We've substanciated what we've all said...so what's he talking about? Note how he references the moderator, and then in the same breath calls us morons. Anyone tell me what thats about?

He's actively trying to get banned. Then he gets out of this. But he knows if he walks, we got him. He wants out the only way he can get out...to be banned.

Originally posted by 8Michael12I wonder if any of you quick to attack types stand for ANYTHING, ANYTHING in your own lives, really, and if you'd be willing to take the heat from equally retarded people, such as yourselves, if you did?

Now add "retards" to the list. Thats a new one. I do stand for several things. And I know....EXACTLY....what you mean. Do I have to say any more? Good.

Originally posted by 8Michael12So, if you can't discern the difference between volumes of evidence, proof beyond a reasonable doubt, gathered over several decades...maybe the best place for you to stay and flap your virtual lips is on internet forums where you can impress yourselves and each other with your stupidity. It's okay with me.

I've got a life, quite a life, maybe you need one too.

Did I do it, did I qualify, did I get...banned?

Wait, maybe I'll ban myself!

LOL...I can assure you I have quite the life. Fullfilled without the need to place belief in Billy Meier or Pleadians to define me or who I am. I am enjoying building the wedding ship tho....theraputic.

Wow, sure in a hurry to get banned. Dont let the door hitcha on the way out.


*ref-The Hack and the Quack
Phoenix New Times/March 5, 1998
By Tony Ortega



[edit on 9-1-2006 by jritzmann]

Originally posted by 8Michael12
I see, a little touchy here aren't we? It's okay to put up derogatory posters, maul and vilify Meier, impugn my motives, i.e. lower them to the same kind of financial materialism that has infected the majority of bottom feeders of this world but, hey, I better not call anyone an idiot. Is that your standard of fairness here? No problem, I recognize cowards when I meet them...nice meeting you all. And really, what would one expect from armchair heroes and wannabes?

Now, who exactly are you calling a coward? I dont see me shrinking away from having pictures tested with modern technology, by an independant authority. I'm not a "wannabe" either, as I work in the field professionally, within the scope of what I'm speaking on. You however are making statements about processes and "analysis" you literally know nothing about, because you do not admittedly comphrehend it. So, "wannabe" would be applying to someone else here.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Okay, on with it. Let's simply (and perhaps for the umpteenth time) offer some of the facts of the case. You get to decide for yourselves what you think, if you are capable of it.

According to the "logic" being thrust at us by Ritzmann, any and all equipment used by experts (and the experts themselves) in the fields of photographic, sound and metal analysis, with which countless tests have been made leading to scientifically valid determinations, previously accepted as credible, must be dismissed - if Meier's evidence was ever included among the testing and, heaven forbid, validated by it. Conversely, all is well with the equipment and the experts if Meier's evidence DIDN'T pass the tests.

This means that we should dismiss the following ("antiquated") equipment simply because it was known to have been used to analyze and validate Meier's evidence:

Electron Microscope
Micro Densitometer
Vidicon Tube
Interferometer
Infraredometer
Digitizer
Image Process Computer
Zeiss Microscope
YOOL Laser System
Simmons Gamma/Alpha Emission Tube
Grinnel Computer Graphics Terminal GMR-37
Tektronix Computer System 4081=peripherals
Fairchild CCD-2 Digital Camera
Singer zx-2 Digital Camera
CMX-700 & 340 Computer Video Graphics
Scanning Electron Microscope
Laserscope
HELL Chromograph DC 300

And we should likewise dismiss these companies, their ("antiquated") equipment and personnel as no longer credible:

Hamamatsu Systems
COMTAL
De Anza Systems
Ramteck Systems
ComTol Systems
Evans-Sutherians
Spatial Data
FORTH Systems
JPL
NASA
IBM
USGS
INTERREPRO, A. G.,
SCHORI REPROS
Spectro Dynamics
Eidgenossisch Maerialprufungs und Versuchsanstalt
Boeing
McDonnell Douglas
Swiss Military Air Safety Monitoring Unit
Uncharted Territory
Design Technology
Kodak
De Anza Systems
Excalibur Sound Studios
Naval Undersea Sound Lab
Photo Color Studio
Nippon TV

Funny I think that De Anza is mentioned twice to make the list a bit longer. Also funny that a published newspaper articles says of De Anza's involvement:

"They came to De Anza under the pretext of wanting to buy our equipment. We demonstrated it, and they snapped many pictures and left. We made no data interpretations whatsoever,"

When asked about the captions then seen publicly on those shots, detailing "analysis" they said:

"Those are their interpretations, not ours. Nothing we did would have defined what those results meant."

Fascinating huh? There's more:

When Dinwiddie, an employee then of De Anza was shown the captions that
said:
"Thermogram -- color density separations -- low frequencies properties of light/time of day are correct; light values on ground are reflected in craft bottom; eliminates double exposures and paste-ups."


Mr. Dinwiddie's reply was:

"No, we put those colors in the photo!" Dinwiddie exclaimed. "Jim [Dilettoso] said, 'Can you make the bottom of the object appear to reflect the ground below?' I said yes, and we performed the operations that they asked for."*

Added Dinwiddie: "My impression of Jim Dilettoso is that he freely chooses to use whatever descriptive text he enjoys to describe things. He is not particularly versed in computer technology. He's a pretty good piano player, though." *

Very telling no? How many other companies should we contact to see the *real* story here? How many of them will even know what we're talking about seeing as some of this "analysis" was done backdoor as Dilettoso has stated?

You really should cease using the Swiss Military crap, as you ahve nothing to back that up with either...you have no reports, citing the radar as you do. "Take it for what it's worth" I believe was your comment when you couldnt provide any substancial proof for those claims.

I have several calls out to some of the others, and those will be posted when I hear from them in regard to the case.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Specifically, we should negate the qualifications and contributions from these experts, and others, slandering them if necessary, and it will be necessary for certain lowlifes such as are found here (how am I doing, banned yet?):

Marcel Vogel
Robert Post
Michael Malin
Wally Gentleman
Steve Ambrose
Nils Rognerud
Steve Singer
Jim Dilettoso
David Froning
Robin L. Shellman
Lt. Col. Wendelle Stevens, USAF (Ret.)
Lee & Brit Elders
Tom Welch
O. Richard Norton
Maj. Rudojph Pestalozzi, USAF (Ret.)
Dr. Walter W. Walker
Jun-Ichi Yaoi
James Deardorff
Steven Williams
Howard Ilson

Take special note again of Mr Robert Post. His statements of what he really thought were posted here. Again, when caught, Michael claims he was "testing" us to see if anyone would really check the statements, and that he always knew the Post statements had 2 sides. There wasnt 2 sides. He didnt buy it. Nice try tho Mike. Again, Deardorff knows as much about imaging as you do. Hello? Meteorologist!
If anyone is really into it, make some calls. But first read what these people *really* said, quotes like "if this is real" and their ilk abound. This is not authenticating anything. To say the photos are impressive is not untrue. But it doesnt make them real. Michael would have you believe it does.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Because we are not threatened in our knowledge of the truth we have no problem acknowledging Ritzmann's photos for what they are, very good, even excellent photos of a model UFO. Unfortunately, Ritzmann is not quite so honest and obviously feels very threatened by the work of a one-armed man who's been presenting physical evidence (yes, still irreproducible until tests prove otherwise) for 42 years, and prophetically accurate information for 55 years.

How exactly does this threaten me? No, I offered mine up. Current analysis, independant analysis. Youre the one who wont put up. I really think it's amusing that you feel I'm somehow threatened. Noting your aggressive stance here, I'd say youre the one who's threatened.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Of course, we are also told by the emperor-skeptic-in-chief that Harryhausen's model is actually a better, more convincing one than the real deal shown in Meier's photos! I think that this puts me in the position of informing some dwellers of deep denial that their emperor has no clothes, and poor eyesight as well. But if you can be talked into believing that the Harryhausen model even comes close to the UFOs Meier photographed...well then, I guess you can stay comfortable in those "beliefs", highly valued as they are also by Ritzmann, certainly above the expert opinions of qualified scientists.

Take a look at my model and see if you see a warped hull like this one:
www.figu.org...

Or perhaps the gaping left edge on the center of this one underside:
www.figu.org...

Damn man please, my little Harryhausen model might not be perfect, but it's a long shot from these gaping warped things.

My clothes are pretty well fitting...hows yours?

Originally posted by 8Michael12I should mention that, contrary to what you assume here, I'm not interested in a popularity contest and I don't mind going head to head with people who are illogical, can't back up their stupid claims, etc., and that includes people in the so-called UFO community who champion garbage peddlers as truth tellers and then won't substantiate their "evidence".

Funny, I've taken model photos, shown you everything from found part identifications to edge enhancements of still frames, quoted public published sources on statements selectively edited by someone that you put forth as "authentication", and detailed your snippet of the official analysis calling you on several points youre yet to address because you have no knowledge of it, said I'd submit my pics and negs along with Meiers for independant modern analysis...
::::takes deep breath::::
and yet the man says I dont substanciate anything I say. That is without question the most ludicrous statement I have read yet from this guy. Maybe you need to re-read the whole thread.

Originally posted by 8Michael12The difference between me and, as far as I can tell, every one of you, is that I've been involved in researching this case for 27 years now. I work on every aspect of it because I recognize it as the most important story in all of human history. None of you have troubled yourselves to take what Wendelle Stevens calls the "first elementary step" in a credible examination of the case, which isn't hard to do since the people involved are still around and the contacts are still going on. But you're too lazy, have far too many excuses and think that your concocted "challenges" are brilliant and unique. Hardly, look at the other forums where other wannabes were offering the same stupid nonsense. And the funny thing is that I haven't seen any of you on the lecture circuit presenting your expose of this great Meier "hoax". Gee, I wonder why? If this is such a financially lucrative field, heck, why don't y'all take a shot at it? I mean, come on down!

Funny, that you now take the stance that because we're not trying to be a UFO star like you we're worthless. I lectured a bit when I was more involved in the UFO community, and my last one in DC I mentioned Meier and what I thought of it. This was an event attended by Dick Hall among others, not some back room at the Holiday Inn. When the lecture was over up in another speaker's room whilst talking this gent walks up to me as said "I take great exception to your statements about the Meier case". When I asked him what he found so compelling he couldnt give a straight answer. When I asked him if he thought the film and phtographic data was credible, his answer was "well I dont know about any of that". My answer was "maybe ya oughtta look". Funny.

Michael really refers to actually going to Switzerland and interacting with the witnesses, and looking around. Sadly, Meier's photos and all the issues I have with them, and the "analysis" dont sway me into making the trip. If there was something really interesting to me, I'd go...I spent a hell of alot of money investigating cases from all over, lots of drive time and train time..but Switzerland? Nahh, there's just not any reason to, as I see enough from right here.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Why haven't you showed up? Simply because you're hypocrites and poseurs, comfortable sniping away from your computers instead of getin' all gritty out there.

Again here, Michael pretends to know what we're all about, when he knows nothing. He means going to the alps again...and again, not worth the money, when you see what you can get right from here. Me? I doubt I'd get very far past the gate without being told to leave.
I'd rather buy my son's college education with that money then fly out to see the Semjase Silver Star Center. Thats just me. I just dont see the point.

Originally posted by 8Michael12Now an admission from me. I get involved on these types of forums when things are otherwise on low demand, and the reason is to see if there are really any credible challenges to the case. It may surprise you to know that I even challenge Meir from year to year when I see him. As you can see, I've been on a number of these wildlife refuges and, so far, nothing of real importance has occurred, present company included. The "best" things are the photos from Fortean, IIG and Ritzmann simply because they are all good model shots...that still won't pass the tests Meier's did...and none of you geniuses will submit them for the testing, Ritzmann being the most blatant and obvious in his cowardice to do so (yes, even though we all know the results in advance).

Hey, pal o' mine...you need a hearing aid? I'll submit them when Meier submits his. Todays protocols and equipment.

And ya know, while we're on the subject, say I did submit on my own...who's gonna do it? With what equipment? You think I'd let you pick? See, thats another roundabout from you there...no, I woudlnt submit to anyone YOU pick even if I did go it alone. And you'd not submit to me getting anyone either. So even if I did, how you gonna make it happen?

But, the fact is, your projecting "cowardice" onto me, when it's you who's afraid to put your UFO messiah to the test. Youre not worried about my shots, youre worried about your own. Pro-ject-ion. Say it with me, projection.

Originally posted by 8Michael12As I said, this is a workshop, a testing ground for arguments against the case but the best that the bottom feeders can do is to try to attack the integrity and motives of the contactee and spokesperson and if - YOU - moderator, or anyone else doesn't like the accuracy of the language and my pointing out that morons who hurl unsubstantiated, ignorant charges are guilty of the very thing you'd like to criticize me for, then ban me from your pathetic little club, microcosm of the small-minded world that we live in that it is.

See folks, what you might see here is Michael trying to make himself be the victim of us cruel ignorant people. We've substanciated what we've all said...so what's he talking about? Note how he references the moderator, and then in the same breath calls us morons. Anyone tell me what thats about?

He's actively trying to get banned. Then he gets out of this. But he knows if he walks, we got him. He wants out the only way he can get out...to be banned.

Originally posted by 8Michael12I wonder if any of you quick to attack types stand for ANYTHING, ANYTHING in your own lives, really, and if you'd be willing to take the heat from equally retarded people, such as yourselves, if you did?

Now add "retards" to the list. Thats a new one. I do stand for several things. And I know....EXACTLY....what you mean. Do I have to say any more? Good.

Originally posted by 8Michael12So, if you can't discern the difference between volumes of evidence, proof beyond a reasonable doubt, gathered over several decades...maybe the best place for you to stay and flap your virtual lips is on internet forums where you can impress yourselves and each other with your stupidity. It's okay with me.

I've got a life, quite a life, maybe you need one too.

Did I do it, did I qualify, did I get...banned?

Wait, maybe I'll ban myself!

LOL...I can assure you I have quite the life. Fullfilled without the need to place belief in Billy Meier or Pleadians to define me or who I am. I am enjoying building the wedding ship tho....theraputic.

I'll say it to ya again as I did I PAR, next time ya do C2C lets see if you have the nerve to put me on with you in realtime. Thats good radio.

But I know youre in a hurry to get banned. Dont let the door hitcha on the way out.


*ref-The Hack and the Quack
Phoenix New Times/March 5, 1998
By Tony Ortega



[edit on 9-1-2006 by jritzmann]

Originally posted by 8Michael12
Really?

Really. Remember, you're not dealing with witnesses thirty-years removed anymore, located in remote parts of Switzerland who can't seem to be located. Now you're dealing with live witnesses who can be questioned and speak for themselves.

I kept (as in still have) one such email and here is the text sent to me by the listener after first airing:

   "Hi Michael,  I'm in PA. but am close enough to DC to hear WTOP.

Uh.. nice try. Doesn't work. Lucky for you, I happen to live in Frederick, MD. I also listen to WTOP regularly, so I know that you can't get WTOP past Thurmont. You can't get WTOP AM or FM out of DC -- you have to listen to it up here on 820 am which is broadcast out of Frederick. It only has about a 20 mile range. It's all static by the time you get up the road to PA border (Rt. 15).

You've done a lousy job of faking evidence.

So your point is? Since Burd isn't in until Tuesday I'll have to wait to get his comments.

Who needs to wait until Tuesday. News radio stations are open 24 hours (just in case news happens at night, you know). They can be contacted at night too. So, I went ahead and confirmed with a Senior Writer at WTOP news that Michael Horn was never the subject of an interview on WTOP, but with regard to Billy Meier . . .

We did a funny story on Billy Meier a few months ago.

That's it Michael -- "a funny story". That's all there was, just like in the blurb that started this thread. If anyone wants to confirm this information, they can write to WTOP news and ask for themselves.

It's called caught in a lie, Mike. I'm sure you recognize it well.

And oh yeah, thanks for advertising my other site too.

With your credibility, I don't think that you're going to get too many new customers via this thread.

Did Horn just call himself names in his ever expanding field of friends?

champion garbage peddlers as truth tellers and then won't substantiate their "evidence".

Ding! Its a match.
Hey maybe we could get this Mr. Burd to reply directly here. That should put an end to that.
Edit to add: If you got to WTOP website and do a search For MH you get nothing. If you do a seach for Meier you get the article mentioned by Centrist in his original post. No mention of Horn but they do link to his website so maybe thats why he feels he was included. No mention of Horn in the audio files either.
Try it Mike its that research thing again. There is no validity to the email you qouted as coming from a listener since you didn't post the actual email just the supposed dialogue. My email is readily available so go ahead and forward it to me then I can somewhat verfiy what you state.

[edit on 1/9/06 by longhaircowboy]

Ya know whats really amusing, Michael posted to his "Plejarens Are Real" yahoogroup about my pictures, and how good they were. No doubt alot of them are reading since the usual activity over there has all but ceased the past day or so...except for him.

Interesting no?

Maybe the koolaids wearing off. Qiuck Mike whip up another batch of zombie juice.

Who else in the scientific community have validated besides Dr. F, his own work, and also been so amazed by the Meier info on such a subject? Within 20% doesnt sound so close to me, close, but not out of the realm of guesswork or possibly a scientific magazine or whatnot. So, who else has said they concurr that Meier it's an amazing feat? BTW, that again doesnt equate to validating the case, altho of course it's interesting. But Meier is a smart man too. I'd like to hear, again who else is validating that info.

Also keep in mind Dr. F's work was arbitrary in calculations, so getting within 20% of arbitrary...you see the point. Thats again pretty much a "take it for what it's worth" thing.

Re: the car analogy, the problem therein lies that you dont say, know the working of the car, but preceed to tell me how big the carb is, without knowing *what* it is. Same point.

I look forward to hearing about Dilettoso, I assume you already have the article I quoted...if not I have a link.

Looks like Mr H is gonna get nastier and nastier untill he gets himself evicted from this here cyber-space.

Observing this argument one gets the feeling that he's nearly out for the count, but is desperately looking around for a chair or something to throw at both the referee and the other contender/s.

Heres my 2 cents:

Hey, Mr Horn, why don't you back off on the abuse a bit..... and instead stick with the act of convincing all of us interested observers.

That way all get to watch a nice clean fight..... all the way to the final round.

Finally decided to come clean did he?! Good! We'll forgive him and let you back into THINKING HUMANITY!

Originally posted by 8Michael12


I should mention that, contrary to what you assume here, I'm not interested in a popularity contest and I don't mind going head to head with people even though I am illogical, and can't back up my stupid claims, etc.,

The difference between me and, as far as I can tell, every one of you, is that I've been pedaling crap for 27 years now. I work on every aspect of it because I recognize it as the most important story in all of human history. None of you have troubled yourselves to take what Wendelle Stevens calls the "first elementary step" in a credible examination of the case, which isn't hard to do since the people involved are still around and the contacts are still going on. But I'm too lazy, have far too many excuses and think that my concocted "challenges" are brilliant and unique.

Nice... Keep coming back 12er...

Holy crap. This reminds me of the reverse speech stuff....only....forwards.

I hope someone catalogues this.

Originally posted by Springer
Finally decided to come clean did he?! Good!

We'll forgive him and let you back into THINKING HUMANITY!

Originally posted by 8Michael12


I should mention that, contrary to what you assume here, I'm not interested in a popularity contest and I don't mind going head to head with people even though I am illogical, and can't back up my stupid claims, etc.,

The difference between me and, as far as I can tell, every one of you, is that I've been pedaling crap for 27 years now. I work on every aspect of it because I recognize it as the most important story in all of human history. None of you have troubled yourselves to take what Wendelle Stevens calls the "first elementary step" in a credible examination of the case, which isn't hard to do since the people involved are still around and the contacts are still going on. But I'm too lazy, have far too many excuses and think that my concocted "challenges" are brilliant and unique.

Nice... Keep coming back 12er...

Whenever a BSer comes clean we like to support their turn around efforts with positive reinforcement technique we call "The Archive of Honesty".

Mikey's confession is so placed in the annals of history. Not to mention it will be here in this thread for all to see

Springer...

Well, so now you re-write my posts too. So, Centrist, is it $10,000 or an apology?

Originally posted by 8Michael12
Well, so now you re-write my posts too. So, Centrist, is it $10,000 or an apology?

Michael -- you've been proven to be a liar. You never were interviewed by WTOP news, despite your CLAIM that an interview with you was run in 4 1/2 minute segments. You fabricated a message from a supposed "reader" which contains impossibilities. While I'm sure that you could restate your facts to try to wiggle-out of this, there's no point.

If you insist on sticking around, try being truthful. To this point, you have evaded any hard questions on this forum or simply posted lies in response to them. Further, your abusiveness has pervaded your posts since page one of this thread. You are a disgrace to the field of ufology and an affront to clear thinking people everywhere.

You want me to apologize? For what? I proved that you're lying. Period. Give it up. If you don't like it, take it up with WTOP News. I provided a link to them, try and BS them with your lies.

Spoke with David Burd this morning, he received an email from you. You will receive a copy of an email from him shortly, when he returns to his office.

Now, since I am some lying piece of work, as all shall see, and why I wouldn't back up my slander with $10,000:



MH

[edit on 1-10-2006 by Springer]

Moving right along ... I hope Michael will spend some time answering the "hard questions" and challenges that appear on page 11 of this forum. He appears to have evaded/avoided responding to the poster as predicted at the end of of the post:


"Hi all. This is my first post here, though I registered a while back. I must say, this thread is entertaining...

quote: Originally posted by TerraX
As Cowboy pointed out, something can be said about Meier's prophecies. In the link he provided the 'Henoch Prophecies' by Meier can be read. Here's a relevant excerpt of that article;
( www.nexusmagazine.com... )

SNIP
This will be at the time that tremendous natural disasters will hit Italy and its people, causing severe hardship. But this will also be at the time when Vesuvius could become active again and could spread tremendous havoc.
France will not only be invaded by the aggressors from the outside, but will also be conquered from within as a result of collaborative forces and other forces. This can be envisioned as being the many foreigners of a different religion living in France at that time, and specifically Islam, which will be this force working from within. Once France has fallen, a war to conquer Spain and England will take place. Subsequently, an alliance with the forces of the aggressors will be formed, which will invade Scandinavia."
(Emphasis mine)

I know this has been brought up many times already Mr. Horn, but please enlighten me as to why the above excerpt justifies the following headline on your website:

"NOVEMBER 23, 1981: MEIER SPECIFICALLY WARNED OF FRENCH RIOTS"
( www.theyfly.com... )

The above link gives another quote, specifically
quote:
Italy and France will be shaken, due to revolutionaries, who murderously and by arson destroy every order: Paris will be destroyed from within and burnt down. The inhabitants themselves are those, who lay Paris into rubble and ashes via murder, arson and revolution...
(Emphasis mine)
Again, how the hell do those two quotes justify YOU saying Billy Meier "accurately predicted" the Paris riots that began on 27th October 2005 and lasted for twenty days? Please enlighten me as to how 8,973 vehicles torched, 2,888 arrests and 126 police injured equates to Paris being destroyed and France falling??

Quite simply, you are WRONG. You come across as being reasonably intelligent so I would have to surmise that you know you are wrong but there are many other people out there who will believe you anyway, if you are insistent enough. If it helps selling the DVD's who cares, right?

quote:
SNIP
"At the same time, as a civil war rages in Germany, an enormously bloody revolution will break out in England which will claim more lives than will be claimed by the civil war in Germany. And because England and Ireland have been at war for a long time already, due to the IRA and the police and military forces of England, the result will be (because this feud will continue up to that time) that this revolution will spread out to all of Ireland, especially affecting Northern Ireland. Many lives will be lost during a civil war in Wales, where differences between various parties will arise before the Third World War. Welsh and English forces will clash especially near Cymru, and claim many lives and cause great destruction."

Breathtaking in its inaccuracy. For one thing, England and Ireland haven't been at war for a very long time. At least not since the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921 which established the Irish Free State and secondly, haven't you heard the latest news regarding the IRA? I'm guessing you have not.

Further, It would be pretty difficult for Welsh and English forces to clash, seeing as they are both part of the same army. It may have been possible a few hundred years ago, you know when everything was seperate. There's now a place called The United Kingdom, you may have heard of it...

So, what are we to make of the rest of the so-called predictions? You guessed it.

Judging by most other posts in this thread, I wont be holding my breath awaiting a relevant response from you.

Have a nice day. No, really."