Billy Meier called the New Nostradamus!?!?

Originally posted by Centrist
EDIT: I should also note that Mr. Horn is now calling me at my work phone and harrassing me with the same names he uses in his posts.

How did he get your work phone number?

I believe that the Plejarens stated to Meier that they would not allow themselves to be photographed, or that if they were photographed, they would not allow those photos to be displayed publically.

My isn't that convenient.
Mr. Deardorff- Mr. Horn was NOT on that program. I think the evidence is clear. Oh and welcome to the show. I have respect for your opinions.
I think you'll find that the people on this thread have done their homework. Jritzmans photos are very good. I myself started reading books on UFOs in the 60s and I ain't quite yet. And I'm not afraid to get dirt under my fingernails. Centrist isn't either.
I look forward to your contribution. Hopefully it won't be a tireless regurgitation of the same old same old like MH.

[edit on 1/10/06 by longhaircowboy]

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
It would seem I'm the only one who bothered to contact Mr. Burd. I recieved his reply today and I will paraphras since I don't want legal troubles.
He said he had spoken to Horn about the Meier piece. And further stated that I was the first person to have contacted him about this.
This would bear out my being unable to find a Horn interview on thier website. The piece they aired was on Meier not Horn and I was the first person to ask about it.

Why would posting the email present legal problems? If you have the email, then post it, with headers.

Originally posted by longhaircowboy

I believe that the Plejarens stated to Meier that they would not allow themselves to be photographed, or that if they were photographed, they would not allow those photos to be displayed publically.

My isn't that convenient.
Mr. Deardorff- Mr. Horn was NOT on that program. I think the evidence is clear. Oh and welcome to show. I have respect for your opinions.

Certainly, it could be viewed as convenient, but it is what Meier stated.

Therein lies the problem. Too convenient. It works the same way with all these people who claim to have contact with alien races be they Plejerans or Cassiopians or whatever. It's only they and no one else is allowed to take photos or partake in the conversation even though it apparently concerns the whole of humankind.
It rings hollow in my ears. But then I tend to think logically and intelligently.

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
Therein lies the problem. Too convenient. It works the same way with all these people who claim to have contact with alien races be they Plejerans or Cassiopians or whatever. It's only they and no one else is allowed to take photos or partake in the conversation even though it apparently concerns the whole of humankind.
It rings hollow in my ears. But then I tend to think logically and intelligently.

You gonna post that email or not?

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
But then I tend to think logically and intelligently.

Self-praise is unnecessary and therefore not logical.

I think my post regarding the email was enough. I dont have permission of the author so I paraphrased.
That was self praise? Maybe to you but to me its the truth.
Oh and feel free to go to WTOPs site and contact them yourself.

Originally posted by Centrist
Liar liar pants on fire! I never emailed David Burd. I spoke with a senior writer in WTOP's news office -- one who had access to their archives

But when you sent your email, did you begin the email with: "David:"

Originally posted by Centrist
I don't recall giving permission to post my personal information on the site.

How did he get the information, WTOP had to have given him a copy of your email. I wonder why if Michael is such an attacking liar, why they would give him someone else's email address like that? Seems quite odd to me.

Unfortunately it's more of the same from Mr. Deardorff.

I encourage all of you to read his website, and look at this "analysis" of "proof". Really, do it.

If you dont come away shaking your head at how an otherwise very educated (at least in his choosen area of study) man can honestly type that stuff, then I dont know what to say to you. Some of it is ludicrous.

One instance regards a "beamship", circling a tree. It's obvious when you do separate image grabs in a few revolutions of the circling and layer them...that it's a small object on a central tethered point. I mean it's totally and solidly a tethered thing. Go ahead and try it...really easy to do.

This man says the Plejarens made it look like a tethered object so we who cant accept or buy into Meier's story would be able to shrug it off...but those who want to believe it...well there's the proof.

He calls it "plausible deniability". In his fervor to prove Meier's authenticity, he's shown no far reaching theory is too far, even to the point of absurdity.

He makes the most critical error in all of UFO research...he pretends to know the "alien" mind. I'm confident when I say he doesnt have a clue about the alien mind, nor does anyone else for that matter.

Under his "theory" (and thats all it is, despite that it's his main defense), any UFO hoax, can potentially be real.

Those UFO shots I took? Those could be real. The aliens just made me think I faked em.

See a string on a UFO picture? According to him, that or any other tell tale sign of hoax doesnt prove it's fake...it could be...that aliens put those artifacts in there to give those poor pathetic souls who cant accept it, a "way out".

"Way out" is exactly what I call that. In fact, it's about as way out as you can get. This kind of mindset can set us back 50 years.

But it does offer one thing: Immunity for Meier's pictures and films. And thats exactly why Deardorff invented it.

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
I think my post regarding the email was enough. I dont have permission of the author so I paraphrased.

How convenient...

Originally posted by jritzmann
But it does offer one thing: Immunity for Meier's pictures and films. And thats exactly why Deardorff invented it.

Then throw out the photos for now. What about the prophecy of Paris burning from riots? Now that was on the internet, and I read it, in 1999. Who in the U.S. was preaching "watch out for worldwide attacks by Islam" before Sept. 11, 2001? Nobody that I know of. What are the odds that Meier could have even been close on that--even in 1999...because I can't verify he said it before then because I didn't see the original book that it was published in prior to that. But I don't know of anybody who said ANYTHING close to that in 1999. And I think the warning was that Paris would burn to the ground, which didn't happen...yet anyway...but that's still kind of eerie if you ask me. Especially since he specifically said they were Muslim. Nowadays you see plenty of stories on the Islam situation. But in 1999, again, I don't know of anybody who was saying these things.

Yeah I've been through all of Deardorffs stuff and it is a little on the wack side(just my opinion) but hopefully if he joins this thread at least we can hope it won't be a replay of MH.
Man the waitin on those pics of yours is burnin a hole in my head. Or as Gainsevilles favorite son said- the waiting is the hardest part.

Originally posted by jritzmann
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 wouldn't exactly say that constitutes courage on your part...

I'm not a "wannabe" either, as I work in the field professionally

I think he means you're a wannabe UFO contactee. Or you're a wannabe when it comes to living an out-of-the-ordinary lifestyle. Or you're a wannabe when it comes to having an impact on the world.

Regarding Michael Horn's being on WTOP, since he can't evidently isn't allowed to post on this forum, he sent me what he received from Burd:

From: "David Burd" .......
Date: January 10, 2006 10:55:04 AM PST
To: ......
Subject: Re: Michael Horn Interview?

I can tell you absolutely that Mr. Horn's interview was played here on WTOP radio. I was the one who initially contacted Mr. Horn to do this interview...not the other way around. Since then, I have recieved more email than I can ever remember about the topic. I hope this answers your question.

Regards, David Burd

Regarding Michael Horn's being on WTOP, since he can't evidently isn't allowed to post on this forum, he sent me what he received from Burd:

From: "David Burd" .......
Date: January 10, 2006 10:55:04 AM PST
To: ......
Subject: Re: Michael Horn Interview?

I can tell you absolutely that Mr. Horn's interview was played here on WTOP radio. I was the one who initially contacted Mr. Horn to do this interview...not the other way around. Since then, I have recieved more email than I can ever remember about the topic. I hope this answers your question.

Regards, David Burd

Please excuse my repeats. I'm still trying to learn the ropes of posting on this forum.

Regarding Ritzmann's generalizations, I would invite those with inquiring minds to read about the reasons in www.tjresearch.info/BillyYes.htm#macpend as to why a model couldn't have behaved in the way the UFO did, and why the tree involved was a large one in front of the house in the distance.

Also, it wouldn't hurt to go over the web page in enough depth to understand how Maccabee correctly deduced that IF a model had been involved, swinging over a small tree, that tree would have been some 50-ft away from the camera, and the tree would only have been 2 1/2 or 3 ft tall.

With the scientific approach, one first spells out what seems to be wrong with the previous solution before proposing a better one. In the website I've already spelled out what's wrong with the model hypothesis. Wendelle Stevens did the same years ago. So I await specific comments of substance.

If that were the case then why did Mr. Burd send me an email stating the opposite. Oh don't stop now. I just sent him an email about the above post.
I can hardly wait to see what his reply is.
And Stevens is a......what?.......retired fighter pilot. nothing more nothing less.
Next.

[edit on 1/11/06 by longhaircowboy]

Originally posted by Iseekthetruth

Originally posted by jritzmann
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 wouldn't exactly say that constitutes courage on your part...

I'm not a "wannabe" either, as I work in the field professionally

I think he means you're a wannabe UFO contactee. Or you're a wannabe when it comes to living an out-of-the-ordinary lifestyle. Or you're a wannabe when it comes to having an impact on the world.

And I guess you think you know all about me huh? You know jack. You people always think you can tell others who or what they are...maybe you ought to look at YOU first.

Go call someone a coward you can stand up against with something other then repetitive Horn-isms you've overheard.