Billy Meier UFO Contact Hoax: Discussion

I am curious as to exactly how "irreproducible" soves anything? You keep saying that almost like a rallying point of some sort.

The fact that something is not reproducable means nothing. It is actually an obstacle in the effort to prove whatever it is one is trying to prove.

Truths are verified by the fact they ARE reproducible.

I know several people who can create lots of material that's "irreproducible" which proves nothing more than they can create a whole bunch images, noises, etc... that nobody else can precisely duplicate without knowing exactly how they did it.

Who cares?

Springer...

I think that perhaps the reason that some people emphasize the irreproducibility of some evidence is because so many scoffers keep bragging about how easily they could reproduce some evidence. Let's settle the matter and have someone reproduce the kind of photos and films the Meier produced with the same kind of equipment that he used. I mean I wish some of these people would stop SAYING they can reproduce photos like the ones taken by Meier and actually SHOW us they can do it.

We all know why the tips are red on toy guns, right? so they won't be mistaken for the real thing. Seems a bit unecessary for space weaponry, unless the alien borrowed the gun from HIS kid. Good idea hiding his identity. Wouldn't want to be recognized while walking among the earthlings in your tinted reynold's wrap.

Hi SkyWay,

Exactly!

Originally posted by SkyWay
because so many scoffers keep bragging about how easily they could reproduce some evidence.

I haven't noticed that. Can you point me at some examples of that here at ATS?

Originally posted by MrPenny

Originally posted by SkyWay
because so many scoffers keep bragging about how easily they could reproduce some evidence.

I haven't noticed that. Can you point me at some examples of that here at ATS?

The very second post on this thread. But almost every thread that has either photos or videos has people claiming that they can make fakes just like the ones being shown. I am not going to go through this forum to produce examples that are rampant all over this place. Asking for example of people who claim they can reproduce ufo evidence on this forum is like asking for examples of people who do not believe the "official" version of 9/11. They are all over the place.

Originally posted by Michael12
Hi SkyWay,

Exactly!

Hi there Michael, while I don't agree with the "teachings" of the aliens that have contact with Meier, I don't doubt that the contacts are taking place, nor do I doubt the authenticity of the photos and films.

Originally posted by GideonHM
It isn't people like Billy Meier who hurt paranormal research, it is fools like you who are too ignorant to try and figure how he would forge the information.....
On top of this, a five year old child could post more intelligent and thoughtful posts than what you have produced....
P.S. It is really quite hilarious how angry people get when a certain few disagree with what they have been mindlessly accepting their whole lives....

Lets have a look at what Meier himself said over time. To me he sounds like a 5 year old child hurting paranormal research whenever he could. Seems to me prophet Billy Boy gets a little angry and mindless at times.
Here are just a few quotes from his publications;


"These purported contactees, mediums and channelers are becoming increasingly more numerous, although not all of them are famous or well known. But they are all equally "sick in the head" for they are simply psychopaths, individuals suffering from psychogenic disorders, schizophrenics, etc; they may also be deliberate frauds, liars, hoaxers or charlatans who wish to project themselves into the forefront for reasons of their own image, profit or sectarian faith." Billy Meier - FIGU Bulletin nr.2

"Anything pertaining to the "Little Greys" must be scrutinized with extreme caution, for too many fantasists, madmen, charlatans and delusionals are in the habit of jumping on the bandwagon." Billy Meier - FIGU Bulletin nr.2

"This question-cum-statement was generated by the same source as all of the previous questions. The mental attitude of the person raising the question must really be questioned here. Considering the fact that FIGU and I have always pointed out that nobody should believe anything, not even from me, Billy. This person undoubtedly does not have both oars in the water." Billy Meier - FIGU Bulletin nr.3

"The questions in Bulletin #3 that generated the complaints, were simply reprinted for the purpose of providing other readers with the information, for behind the scenes we felt it necessary, just for once, to state the essential and explain some things for the non-comprehending, the nearsighted, the doubters, troublemakers, defamers, intrigants, sectarians and know-it-alls among others." Billy Meier - FIGU Bulletin nr.4

"The genuine teachings of Mohammed are no more fallacious than those of Jmmanuel. Mohammed's teachings, which he imparted as a reincarnation of Jmmanuel, were also thoroughly adulterated. The teachings of Mohammed were intended to curb Christianity and precipitate its disappearance. However, because of this renewed falsification of the original teachings, the concept proved completely unsuccessful because of certain interfering individuals who were simply as disinterested in the genuine truth, or else, they falsely interpreted the teachings -- as was previously the case with the teachings of Jmmanuel. Therefore, it is totally incorrect to say that Mohammed brought forth fallacious or false teachings." Billy Meier - FIGU Bulletin nr.4

"For quite some time the people on Earth have been speaking again about UFO sightings and alleged encounters with extraterrestrial life forms, especially in Russia, where a splashy story was publicized in Woronesh or whatever the name of that little place in the boonies is." Billy Meier - FIGU Bulletin nr.4

"Anyone claiming anything different simply does not quite have a lucid head and is, therefore, mentally unbalanced." Billy Meier - FIGU Bulletin nr.5

"The site of this spectacle was a ranch in Miramar, where the participants attempted to make contact with extraterrestrials -- as though the latter were actually waiting to communicate with nutty terrestrials." Billy Meier - FIGU Bulletin nr.5


Ah yes, such an outspoken enlighting individual. Be careful with the Meier information, you may turn up like a mental clone. Anyone notice people copying Meier's behavior?

Hi SkyWay,

Thanks for the input and clear reasoning.

I see that the message following yours complains about the harsh perspectives that Meier expresses, as if one shouldn't tell the harsh truth as they know it but rather that directness and harshness should be expressed soley by those who disinform and attack without substantiation. Maybe I missed it but I didn't see where the writer refutes what Meier's saying, he only complains about how he said it. My, my, what sensitivity from someone who's held back no criticism and attack that popped into his mind, with little regard for accuracy.

But wait, I think that I understand the attack from this writer! If I'm not mistaken he's the fellow who, being a dyed in the wool true believer in the Adamski case, was incensed that Meier and the alleged Plejaren said that Adamski was a hoaxer, charlatan and con man...who actually confessed to hoaxing his photos, etc. before he died.

Weeell, if I am remembering correctly, maybe it explains why the vitriol towards Meier at any and every opportunity. Now what was it that the writer was complaining about, accusing Meier of being..."mindless and angry"?

George Adamski (April 17, 1891 – April 23, 1965), was someone at that time who's limited page books and filmed material deserved respect then and even more now.

One message he left before passing-on that stands out in my thoughts is: Stop Nuclear/Atomic testing. Not per George, but per his EBE contacts.

That was some where around /54, and the same sort of warnings from abductees and claimed contactees these days, and since Adamski, are expressing the same sort of dire-strait warning.

Dallas

How right you are Dallas.

ufo's and Nuclear facility interference

There have been many reports of ufo's disabling or interfering with nuclear missle facilities.
Seems we need a babysitter, as the human race is so foolish as to create weapons that can destroy itself.

SkyWay like it has been said before duplicating a photo will not really prove anything but it's been done a lot times anyway, perhads you missed this post? they have been duplicated since 1986 and maybe ealier over and over again, and they all explain how easy it was done.

Ben Harris reproduced the meier's photos and effect 1986-1990 (page 8 to 11)
www.skeptics.com.au...

Herbert Runkel, Bernd Johann, and Thomas Klingler reproduced the meier's photos and effect 1996
www.billymeier.com...

IIG's reproduced the meier's photos and effect May 2003
www.iigwest.com...

BILLY MEIER DEBUNKED UFO IMAGES copyright2004
www.nmsr.org...

uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com...//uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/ufosarecoming/my_photos />

Alan Friswell reproduced the meier's photos and effect June 2005 (check the 3 pages)
www.forteantimes.com...

jritzmann reproduced the meier's photos and effect 2006
www.carbonchamber.com...

Enough with the "irreproducible" tales, we are not in the 60's anymore (look at the links) and with the copying and paste words from meiers supporters.

4,115,159 visitors wow, I see game sites with triple more visitors than that so are those game sites doing a better job than the plejarens or you?

world population is over 6.5 billion people so the plejarens failed in selling dvds oops sorry I meant in "spreading information??" and it seems that for someone carrying information to save the human race?? you are doing a very poor job. Well at least now for the first time you are being honest and clearly said that you do this to promote your dvds selling site.

It's simple go to meiers get a metal sample , test it and prove that all skeptics are wrong. You go to meiers a lot, what is stopping you from doing this? what is the excuse for not doing this?

I gotta tell ya MANNYP4, I checked every site you claimed debunked Billy Meier's pictures and not one of them actually look like real ufo pictures or even that similar to Meier's. The Individual photos looked like they were photoshopped or coppied into each frame. This still leaves me skeptical as to whether anyone can truly reproduce his pictures.

Originally posted by MANNYP4
Ben Harris reproduced the meier's photos and effect 1986-1990 (page 8 to 11)
www.skeptics.com.au...

Herbert Runkel, Bernd Johann, and Thomas Klingler reproduced the meier's photos and effect 1996
www.billymeier.com...

IIG's reproduced the meier's photos and effect May 2003
www.iigwest.com...

BILLY MEIER DEBUNKED UFO IMAGES copyright2004
www.nmsr.org...

uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com...//uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/ufosarecoming/my_photos />

Alan Friswell reproduced the meier's photos and effect June 2005 (check the 3 pages)
www.forteantimes.com...

jritzmann reproduced the meier's photos and effect 2006
www.carbonchamber.com...

Please you are joking right ?, they look nothing alike and if these are the best attempts at reproducing the Meier photos can only suggest those people go back to the drawing board. Alan Friswell's attempts is laughable at best, at least he could have adjusted the contrast on the UFO craft to match the backround image :haha:.

Sorry no cigar.





[edit on 1-5-2007 by helium3]

The real reason was not to debunk anything, it was to show that it can be done without too much efford. Btw photoshop or computers were not used to make those photos which is the main point. They just used fishing lines, small models and a camera applying False Perspective to it. So saying irreproducible is wrong as they show the samething that meiers photos show. "and unknown object in the "air??" in a "False Perspective" way."
you don't need to be an expert to notice the efford all meiers photos show in trying to present the object as big in a false perpective manner. it's quite too obvious. But if you want to go with a more detailed explanation here you go:

thebiggestsecret.online.fr...

But then again like someone said!! everytime he can't answer all the hard questions about the too obvious bad photos, is not about the pictures doesn't matter if they are fake!!!! it's about the "information" Unbelievable

Originally posted by SkyWay
I mean I wish some of these people would stop SAYING they can reproduce photos like the ones taken by Meier and actually SHOW us they can do it.

The above from the post I originally quoted.

The very second post on this thread.

You're referring to a poster claiming they could assemble a "raygun" that looks at least as cheesy as the "raygun" in the opening post. Originally of course, you were referring to the films and photos. So was I.

You said it...now back it up. Show me examples of people claiming this in ATS. JRitzmann doesn't count, he actually did it, demonstrating how a tiny model can be made to look very far away. With film equipment and no digital tricks.

Originally posted by MANNYP4
thebiggestsecret.online.fr...
But then again like someone said!! everytime he can't answer all the hard questions about the too obvious bad photos, is not about the pictures doesn't matter if they are fake!!!! it's about the "information" Unbelievable

Glad you brought that link up Manny, it says it all.
thebiggestsecret.online.fr...

Here are some remarkably accurate quotes from that link;

When Michael Horn, the "official media representative" of Meier started to harass me through a deluge of emails demanding in his usual (for those who know him) insolent style that I remove my comments on the Meier case, I had more than enough confirmation to understand that this man must actually be fully aware of the case being a hoax, merely by considering the way he seems to have to defend it. For whatever reason, financial or other, M. Horn seems to have chosen to pretend the case is supported by a large amount of "scientific analysis", when in fact all of it is either manipulative rubbish, or at best dubious.

Oh. Think I forgot to tell you that I had some correspondence with the person behind that webpage and that I filled him in on the garbage lid connection. Sorry Mikey, now you know. Rest easy, it's accurate. Back to some quotes.

The second strategy is used when an argument that is advanced is too flagrant to be dismissed. In that case they will simply try to ignore it by all possible means, and keep referring to totally unrelated other "evidence", which they feel more comfortable with, without ever addressing the actual argument at hand. And if all else fails, then especially someone like M. Horn will relish in insults of all kinds, until all relevant discussion becomes impossible...
Both strategies are characteristic hallmarks of conmen and swindlers...

Hmm. This guy must be a seer or prophet as well. Stunningly accurate predictions...

M. Horn's reply proves most definitely and conclusively that his own claims and arguments in the Meier case can not be taken serious, besides the fact that they indicate that in reality his unique goal is to willfully deceive people. Indeed, in discussions that have since followed, by email and in various other places such as several forums online, we see this person refusing to acknowledge or even seriously address ANY indications of fakery in pretty much the same fashion...

Right on the money. When confronted with the garbage can lid displayed on the alleged UFO all that Mr. Horn could come up with was something like "that would be too diffecult to machine out of metal". Blatantly disregarding the possibility that a little spray paint on the lid can create the same appearance. Ray gun pictures......lol. Think I'll spare myself the trouble.

Before anything else, M. Horn's answers are of course very unscientific as well as a completely evasive. But in this case it's especially unacceptable, as it comes from someone who's accusing me and so many others of "unreasonable and groundless debunking", who's claiming no uncertain degree of "scientific rigor", who's demanding people to accept nonsensical explanations about lens settings, about the tilt of axis of objects allegedly being "impossible" for when hanging on a string, about impossible sizes of fir tree branches, etc... etc... and who's even demanding to replicate any contested evidence meticulously to "prove" fair observations... All of this always accompanied by endless rants, insults, character assassinations, unfounded accusations, etc..., etc... Clearly, such a person simply can't limit himself to stating he is "not absolutely sure" about what can be seen in this particular picture...

Re: Short attention spans. Some do call it ADD.

The whole duplicating issue was started by CFI-West/IIG, remember these words?

"Meier's UFO photos and films are an easily duplicated hoax."
Vaughn Rees...formerly case investigator with CFI-West/IIG.

"Formerly" because he brought so much heat down on them, since all they could do was claim that they duplicated the "effect". Art Bell threw him off the air when he REFUSED to have his photos tested to same standards as Meier's. No cigar imdeed. Likewise for the others. And let's remember, shall we, that Jeff Ritzmann screamed for a year about Meier using "miniature trees and model UFOs" to fake his pictures.

Oooops.

Ritzmann himself has been a....miniature tree cultivator for 14 years! And he couldn't produce ONE photo with his little model UFO next to one of his trees. Gee, I wonder why?

"But just in case there is still even the smallest doubt, please consider that these six forestry experts, Prof. J.D. Brodie, Prof. D. Hanley, Prof. E.M. Hansen, Richard. K. Hermann, Prof. Holdenrieder and Dr. Edward C. Jensen, have recently established, beyond even a shadow of a doubt, that the trees in the photos are full-sized, mature trees of determined heights and, therefore, the UFOs in Meier's photos, films and video are large objects a considerable distance from the camera and not small models close to it." (See: www.theyfly.com...)

And I do appreciate the honesty of those who see that the false claims are on the part of those attempting to duplicate Meier's photos. People toss about "false perspective"...anyone here wanna try it?

Refresher on the Wedding Cake UFO:

www.tjresearch.info...

www.theyfly.com...

www.billymeier.com...

By the way, anyone notice that Ritzmann refused to allow his photos to be posted for comparison? Why? He claimed that he had duplicated Meier's photos. Heck, I'd want everyone interested to see that if I did it!

Truth wins out in the end, bumpy as the road to it may be.

And isn't it cool how the best argument that some people have is to attack me for my heated exchanges in the past, try to impugn financial motives to me, attack Meier as a hoaxer and cult leader, etc.?

And then someone tells me that "we don't call people names here"!

I love this place!

Now, about the sound recordings, anyone have a progress report?

Hey Micheal.
Been to your site. Read some of it, there's alot to take in there. Also contacted you about an unsubstantiated piece.

But what I really want to suggest to you is this, quoting you from above:
Michael wrote: "Ritzmann himself has been a....miniature tree cultivator for 14 years! And he couldn't produce ONE photo with his little model UFO next to one of his trees. Gee, I wonder why? "

Micheal, If I may give you this little reminder as a fellow Member:
Mr Ritzmann's a member here at Above Top Secret and a Specialist.
Read last months article in a published magazine.. can we leave all that there.

Thanks,
Dallas

Dallas,

If I failed to respond to something please let me know. I get tons of email and some may get deleted if the computer misidentifies it as spam, etc.

As far as Jeff Ritzmann is concerned, he made an awful lot of claims over about 1 1/2 years, especially accusations about Meier using a model UFO and model/miniature tree. However, it was only when he ACCIDENTALLY mentioned in an email that he cultivated such trees that the outrageousness of his accusations - and his complete failure to substantiate them with his previously unrevealed expertise and the availability of everything he needed to do so - became more than fair game.

Now you might notice that Meier never cried about the fact that he was constantly slandered, libeled, defamed, attacked, mischaracterized (let alone shot at, attacked with knives, hatchets, etc.) so I'm not interested in giving a pass to thin-skinned individuals who make charges they can't back up.

Considering Ritzmann's knowledge and expertise, it's a bit damning that he carried on with his attacks on Meier for so long - without deliberately revealing this information, without deliberately revealing that he COULDN'T come close to duplicating, and thereby proving, how Meier "hoaxed" his photos.

You might notice that I am really not into name calling and personal attacks here. But this isn't either. This is calling a spade a spade and pointing out GLARING inconsistencies and honesty issues. Why is it fair game for every accusation to be hurled - without substantiation - against Meier but we can't point out that the emperor has no clothes?

My purposes for being here, as I stated, are a bit different than before. I have no need to take a heavy sword into battle. This is the time, as I think that history will prove, when the truth about the Meier case - and the scurulous, cowardly, unsubstantiated and unwarranted attacks against the man - will all be revealed and the light of truth begin to shine.

The hardocre attackers have had plenty of time and opportunity to either substantiate or retract their accusations. None of them have done the former, most have not done the latter, acting like schoolyard bullies and thinking that some big brother had their backs. That was a miscalculation on all their parts. To be clear, neither Meier, nor me, or any of the supporters of the case, are going to pile on or gloat over the misfortunes of those misfortunate enough to have invested their time and energy in misguided attacks, deliberate or otherwise.

In Jeff Ritzmann's case we have something very clear and inescapably obvious. It puts an end to all this "forced perspective" nonsense, such as is suggested here and by the guy with the website attacking the WCUFO photos. Challenging people to duplicate Meier's evidence is not strictly rhetorical on my part. Ritzmann accepted the challenge and - very uniquely - failed. And he COVERED UP the most important and telling part of that failure.

Now, in light of this stunning technological - and ethical - failure, why do you want me to take a "hands off" attitude to the facts?


[edit on 1-5-2007 by Michael12]