Billy Meier UFO Contact Hoax: Discussion

Originally posted by johnlear
I can fully and completely understand the rejection of the Meier case by the membership of ATS because I know how they think. They want name, rank, serial number, a statement by the President and his Joint Chiefs. Not to mention incontrovertible evidence.

John-I think they'd like just one piece to stand on it's own. Clearly it doesnt. I dont think anyone wants any more from this case then any other.

Maybe the reason people are so hard on it is due to the claims of the proponents, that they make the wild claims and have nothing to back it up of substance. Pieces are being found and identified, and footage is being ID'd as TV screen/TV shows, models wobble on strings and yet the proponents continue to have us believe it's all real and we're fools not to listen.

I think everyone knows at some point UFO data is going to be ambiguous, as thats always been the M.O. for UFOs, but there's nothing ambiguous about toy kitbashing and grain can lid UFOs.

Meier may well have had a UFO experience, maybe even an important one. But my guess is if thats the case, he's muddled it for more then his 15 minutes of fame, and it went completely out of hand or he took it out of hand.

It's also possible he's never seen anything, and it's all just a way to impart his own self-percieved wisdom to everyone and get them to listen.

As I said before, I have no issue with Meier's peace and love and take care of the planet stuff...just dont sell it to me in a fake flying saucer. But, maybe he figured that was the only way people would listen.

A shame we dont have a way to test for motive. But any way you cut it, the case doesnt stand up.

Originally posted by Gazrok
There was no setup in the pic where Billy himself is shown holding the "ray gun". That one photo proves he was a willing participant, and not an innocent "victim" in all of this.

You just can't know the facts behind that photo. Billy might have been posing in the photo for some other reason he was led to believe, and it was used against him. You weren't there Gaz, but if you want to take everything at face value go ahead.

There's an art to the setup. Deception is part of it.

Peace

Originally posted by johnlear
As I mentioned many pages ago in this thread I don’t have the time to defend the Meier case because I am busy with my own agenda and personal business. (And yes, I used the word agenda intentionally). I made up my mind about the Meier case 20 years ago.

Nice to see you freely admit you do in fact have an agenda.
Although I most likely do not have the ability to sway you John on this material,
if looking at the wcufo and the other confirmed and obviously hoaxed material does not sway you that certain aspects of this case are fake, then I certainly cannot, I personally think you seem to believe "all" of this case, because if any of it in your mind was false, you couldn't believe any of it. IMHO I think that Meier actually was possibly contacted by beings in some sort of craft, perhaps a few times. However, I believe after a visit or two, they stopped coming, and he was forced to resort to "other means" to show "evidence", due to popular demand, and the result is material like the raygun, the dinosaurs, the wcufo, et al. Who can say. What CAN be said is the material here that is obviously bullpuckey, has been proven to be such. That is not to say ALL of his material has been. Luckily, we can beyond a doubt conclusively say that the evidence here in this thread has been thoroughly proven to be a hoax.
If Meier DID have an encounter, it is a shame he resorted to tactics of fakery
to continue. He just couldn't stand to let his dreams die.

Meier made his claims and then backed them up with photos. Over time, as the photos were debunked (whatever Horn might say, those photos have been debunked) Meier has changed his story. He has claimed MIB alterations after the fact. How could he have offered up dinosaur pics as actual images only to backtrack and say it is an image that is similar to what he saw? How can he offer up the catalogue girl and then say the MIB pulled a fast one? The same with the tv girls.

He has dozens of ufos parked in trees. That's complete nonsense.

He has several pictures of a ufo with a broken piece that is clearly visible in the pictures and yet nobody explains this.

He has the garbage can lid that is identical to a portion of the UFO.

He has a pathetic looking ray gun that has a nozzle that is identical to a toy ray gun and there is no explanation for this.

Mr. Lear, we here at ATS don't want name rank and serial number, we want truth and honesty. We want answers to questions, not broad stroke diversions. Above all else, we want to keep an open discussion going where respect flavors the posts and emotions don't cloud the content. To be totally honest, I find Meier's story more likely to be real (haoxed photos and all) than many of your theories but you discuss your claims in a manner that is far more respectful and "professional" than Horn could ever dream of doing. It doesn't make either story seem more plausible but it certainly makes it easier to discuss.

I vote No. We need to move on. I know some people, such as Lear, still BELIEVE, but for all practical purposes the debate is over. There was some good woerk done by people here, and I think it is conclusive.

Originally posted by schuyler
I vote No. We need to move on. I know some people, such as Lear, still BELIEVE, but for all practical purposes the debate is over. There was some good woerk done by people here, and I think it is conclusive.

If it were up to me I'd vote 'No' as well. Letting him back will change nothing. He'll just do his same routine all over again. In the past I've had quite a few discussions with him and he doesn't back down on anything regarding the Meier case. The irony is that when it comes to other ufological material Meier's 'ruling' is simply accepted as the gospel and copied. Since Meier thinks&claims he's the only one with genuine material some people act the same way.
I've seen John Lear make contributions in this thread positively towards the case. That's convenient for some people when it's pro-Meier but from experience I know there's only one expert in the Meier case and that is Meier himself. Other people, too dominant, are expelled or persuaded after some time to follow Meier's claims. Beneath the surface there's a strict hirarchy and people with firm personal believes or opinions are not accepted. (Even Wendelle Stevens was asked to drop other projects.)
Discussing this material is great and all but you have to see where it all leads.

Almost 24 hours has passed withuot a single, rock solid "yes" vote being cast.

It's all over then...

Springer...

Originally posted by jritzmann

Maybe the reason people are so hard on it is due to the claims of the proponents, that they make the wild claims and have nothing to back it up of substance. Pieces are being found and identified, and footage is being ID'd as TV screen/TV shows, models wobble on strings and yet the proponents continue to have us believe it's all real and we're fools not to listen.

I think everyone knows at some point UFO data is going to be ambiguous, as thats always been the M.O. for UFOs, but there's nothing ambiguous about TOY KIT BASHING and GRAIN CAN LID UFOs.

jritzmann, can you please explain in clear and simple terms to everyone here how your supposed garbage can lid/toy model theory/claim can fit anywhere in the Meier WCUFO clip, I referred to in my previous post below?

Originally posted by vestri

This is to everyone here in this thread that posted in saying they believe the Wedding Cake Ship is a garbage can lid.

Assuming you all have already carefully viewed the video of the Wedding Cake Ship (1981) on the website at www.billymeier.com... none of you have failed to bring up the fact that Meier has clearly zoomed his video camera across a substantially large piece of real estate, a few hundred feet at least, and that there is absolutely no room for discussing a trash can lid that is only a couple-three feet in diameter...case closed. The supporting shots from his still camera at this same spot also show a large, distant object close to the tree.

The sound of the zooming mechanism of Meier's SABA brand video camera (one of the earliest European consumer camcorders on the market) is unmistakably long in duration and without a doubt indicates a large distance being covered between camera and ship/tree.

I own a videotape copy of this sequence lasting several minutes and which displays a much more sharp and clear picture than the badly artifacted MPEG version on that website. On the videotape, grass blades on the hillside, tree foliage, etc. are way clearer and put the icing on the (wedding) cake for the authenticity of a clearly LARGE, METALLIC OBJECT NO LESS THAN 11 - 12 FEET in DIAMETER. I'm sorry, but if you all want to be truthful to your listening audience here, as well as yourselves, you will all have to completely retract your idea that this is a garbage can lid, period.

Does the whole garbage can lid story sound conveniently contrived to cover up an alleged hoax? I suppose it can seem that way. But the video, the obvious metallic structure and perfectly welded construction, and other high-resolution imagery of this craft that is freely available on the net puts this nice little garbage lid story to rest.

In other words, you all are going to have to come up with a much more convincing case of a hoax here to make it worth at least my while to listen to any of you people in denial. But I will listen and I will comment and question appropriately and in sync with your statements, provided they are honest and sincere in intent.

jritzmann, can you please explain how your toy model claim/theory supposedly being behind all of Meier's WCUFO pics/vids IS CORRECT, by explaining to everyone here how the OBJECT that I am referring to above could possibly be a miniture (1-3 ft?) size toy model, and not the 12 ft in diameter size object as in how I had estimated it as roughly being in my post above? Please give details which clearly explains and backs up your theory/claim of the OBJECT (mentioned above) being the size of a toy model (1-3 ft?) is correct, and my estimation of it being about 12 ft size in diameter is wrong? Explain how/why the method I used in my analysis of the WCUFO clip above is wrong? (eg. used time/duration of camera's zooming effect to roughly measure the distance/size of object)

(p.s when giving your answer, can you please not beat about the bush, or divert away from the specifics of my question, as I noticed you have a habit of doing with MH's questions, thanks)





[edit on 11-5-2007 by vestri]

Originally posted by vestri
jritzmann, could you please explain how your alleged toy model theory/claim supposedly being behind all Meier WCUFO pics/vids, IS CORRECT, by explaining how the OBJECT that I am referring to in my prior post above could possibly be a miniture (1-3 ft?) toy model, and not a 12 ft in diameter size object like how I had estimated it as probably being above?

This one is easy for anyone who has been following along and reading all the posted material.

First, there is my response to this video...

There is clearly a horizontal object, protruding from the tree, that his holding up this "Alien Space Craft."

Has no one wondered why this marvel of extraterrestrial origin is unable to avoid a tree?

Mr. Horn... your comment?

And then we have this glarringly obvious problem with the video that anyone should be able to immediately notice:


I hope that helps put this silly video well to-bed.

Here's an image to give a truer representation of the scale of the Wedding Cake Fake

Sorry, could not resist

You can also see individual tufts of grass on the top of the ridge right next to the small tree. They must have some alien implanted giganto-grass in that part of Switzerland. I'm lookinkg out of my window at a false embankment where exactly the same trick could be done.

You can tell that the lid in the gentlemans' hands above is the same size as the "UFO". Just from seeing one shot of that model in front of the farmhouse AND a bit of garden wall it was obviously only about 18" across.

Just a thought for any benighted true believers out there: Why have Billy's ships ONLY ever shown up at his place. Where is there a photo taken by someone, anyone, else? They came all this way. Paid Billy a visit in the 70's and then hid from absolutely everybody else on the entire planet?

Originally posted by Karilla
Just a thought for any benighted true believers out there: Why have Billy's ships ONLY ever shown up at his place. Where is there a photo taken by someone, anyone, else? They came all this way. Paid Billy a visit in the 70's and then hid from absolutely everybody else on the entire planet?

Because, in the land of the tree parking aliens, the one armed man is king.

It would be nice if we could archive this. The plastic ray gun pieces, for example, are priceless.

Originally posted by vestri
jritzmann, can you please explain in clear and simple terms to everyone here how your supposed garbage can lid/toy model theory/claim can fit anywhere in the Meier WCUFO clip, I referred to in my previous post below?

Sure. You refer to the zoom and it's length as some sort of measurable distance, when it isnt. Lemme explain that. Firstly, if something is large and very distant, you zoom in because you want the object bigger in view.

Right?

The same applies if something is very small at a much lesser distance away. You want it bigger in the frame, and you zoom in. The distance of the zoom means more about it's size in the frame then anything to do with size of the actual object. Torsion's post showing the size (providing it's the size Meier used, as there are varying sizes of the grain can lid) gives a good instance. If thats he correct size, it doesnt have to be very far away...however, getting a half block away from the model is going to make the model small and appear to give scale to the little tree/bush and model. You have to zoom in, to get the image bigger. Doesnt mean it's far and huge.

Think of it this way. If I put a penny on a stick and shot it from 10 ft away, you'd get the long zoom as well. Doesnt mean the penny is 10 ft across. Youre actually swapping out distance for size. Forced perspective, as you have no reference of size. The length of zoom has more to do with the size it's desired in frame then any real distance.

I think the shot with the WC model and the tree with the HUGE blades of grass tell the story quite well.

Originally posted by vestri
(p.s when giving your answer, can you please not beat about the bush, or divert away from the specifics of my question, as I noticed you have a habit of doing with MH's questions, thanks)

Thats about as short and sweet as it gets. I think you have me confused with Horn, as I give specifics as you'll note in reading my posts in this thread. The master of diversion has been banned.

Originally posted by torsion
Here's an image to give a truer representation of the scale of the Wedding Cake Fake

Torsion, would make the balls about the Christmas ball size wouldnt it? It also would make the scale pretty well with the luggage clasps.

Originally posted by jritzmann

Torsion, would make the balls about the Christmas ball size wouldnt it?

It also would make the scale pretty well with the luggage clasps.

Jritzmann, it would seem that you keep trying to convince yourself its a hoax. Let me respectfully suggest you need to let go. You are only preaching to the choir and wasting bandwidth.

Those of us who know its a true story are only mildly amuzed (amazed?) at your continued frantic efforts. Christmas ornaments, luggage clasps? Nice try, but....no cigar.

Let me respectfully suggest you need to take a day off, spend some time with the wife and kids, go see a movie, relax. Maybe even think about 'what if you are wrong'. It surely would be embarrassing for you.

Originally posted by jritzmann
Torsion, would make the balls about the Christmas ball size wouldnt it?

It also would make the scale pretty well with the luggage clasps.

I've never seen the luggage clasps before, excellent (don't tell me they're in this thread somewhere and I've missed them!). Wonder what Horn would say about those if he were still with us.

Looks like we've got Billy by the balls!

Here's another tree hugging ufo with a misplaced piece:




Such clumsy workmanship! Anyone would think Billy had made these with one arm tied behind his back!

Originally posted by johnlear
Those of us who know its a true story are only mildly amuzed (amazed?) at your continued frantic efforts. Christmas ornaments, luggage clasps? Nice try, but....no cigar.

I think you might be alone in that category so perhaps you can explain how you know this is true. I'm of the assumption that even Horn doesn't believe this b.s. He's merely defending it for the coin.

You have no vested interest and you know it's true. I'd love to hear your reasoning.

Originally posted by johnlear
Those of us who know its a true story are only mildly amuzed (amazed?) at your continued frantic efforts. Christmas ornaments, luggage clasps? Nice try, but....no cigar.

Mr. Lear? Ordinary terrestrial parts are clearly visible on the alleged Meier UFO and are staring you blank in the face. And you make suggestions that Jeff is embarrasing himself? Have a cigar and chill out.