Billy Meier UFO Contact Hoax: Discussion

Originally posted by Crakeur

John, if Malin were to state that he has reviewed the photos again and he has looked at the overal picture, the crappy broken ufo's, the toy ray gun comparison to the, um, toy ray gun, the garbage can lid etc, and he now believes this to be a hoax, would you still believe this story?

I believe that Malins 'flip-flop' on the Billy Meiers photos was similar to Carl Sagan's flip-flop on his 'bases of the back side of the moon' in the 60'.

Carl Sagan, in the 1960's proposed that if aliens were visiting earth that they would probably use the back side of the moon for bases. Sagan was very well educated and very well spoken and the government could not have this kind of speculation going around particularly in the early 60's when the giant cover-up was being put into place.

I speculate that the government went to Sagan and said something to the effect, "Look, we'll tell you what's going on but in return we need your help on influencing the public." And I think Carl went for the deal. He was immensly popular, he was Johnny Carsons' guest many times, and influenced the public on flying sauers, aliens and outer space in the manner that the government wanted. In other words, sure there were aliens but they were way 'out there', there certainly weren't any around our solar system.

Michael Malin was one of the early proponents and supporters of Billy Meiers. He was well spoken and very knowledgeable. In my opinion the govrnment went to Malin and said something like, look, "We need someone to handle the Mars photography. If you can possibly see your way clear to quit fiddling around with the Meiers photos we could use your help." And the deal was done.

Michael is certainly not going to admit to a flip-flop on the Meiers photos and to expect him to come clean on exactly what happend is not going to happen.

Getting Malins 'current' take on take on the Billy Meiers photos would be an excercise in futility.

[edit to correct BB Code]

[edit on 5-18-2007 by Springer]

One of Meier's more hilarious methods of weasling out of a corner can be found in his Contact #249.

Billy, it seems, has been accused of plagiarising a book on meditation written by Buddhist Thera Nyanaponika. All upset and sulky Billy complains to Ptaah - his space friend. Ptaah tells Billy not to worry about this "absurd claim... you should not concern yourself with this preposterous defamation."

Ptaah goes on to explain that Nyanaponika (and others) actually plagiarised Billy because the source of Nyanaponika's work came from texts Billy had written when he was 11 years old. Ptaah's space buddy Sfath had dictated the words and the resultant texts had been passed around over the years and had eventually fallen into the hands of Nyanaponika!

Billy had clearly forgotten all about it but was pleased and relieved when Ptaah explained the real absolute truth.

go here to read more of this giggly schizophrenic ramblings:

www.steelmarkonline.com...

and here if you want to see a nice high resolution flying saucer photo:

www.steelmarkonline.com...

But, "Billy" CAN'T forget what the aliens tell him. He said they gave him the power to accurately recall every word they ever exchanged.... Yet again, he changes his story when confronted.

And , as promised, here is the link proving that his "predictions" are false too.

You can see that when a science book prints incorrect info about other planets, a few weeks later, that same false information ends up in his "contact notes"

www.iigwest.com...




[edit on 18-5-2007 by Tiloke]

Originally posted by smartie
spacevisitor, you really need to read through this thread, I have already shown a link to this being thoroughly DEBUNKED here it is again:

thebiggestsecret.online.fr...

No disrespect smartie, but I advice you to look at this.

www.theyfly.com...

Originally posted by davidbiedny
I see no rational reason to look at ANY of the other Meier material. The photos are fakes, which tells me all I need to know about this "case".

Well, I have seen images from the Apollo Moon landings of where many professionals claim that they are 100% fake.
Is that thereby than the ultimate proof that all the Moon landings images are fake, and therefore the Moon landings themselves to? [My English writing is not so good so I apologize for that.]
I think not, and despite of the faked moon landings images, I am convinced that there where brave humans that have landed on our Moon.


[edit on 18/5/07 by spacevisitor]

Originally posted by spacevisitor



Well, I have seen images from the Apollo Moon landings of where many professionals claim that they are 100% fake.
Is that thereby than the ultimate proof that all the Moon landings images are fake, and therefore the Moon landings themselves to? [My English writing is not so good so I apologize for that.]
I think not, and despite of the faked moon landings images, I am convinced that there where brave humans that have landed on our Moon.

So you admit that his pictures are fakes? And if you'll visit the link I posted right above you , you'll see that his "predictions" are false too.
What else is left to believe for this case? He lied about the photos and he lied about the contacts. Theres nothing left.

Heres a question. Does Meier have a job? What does he do? Does he make a living off his "contacts"? Maybe God just gives him money seeing as he is the reincarnation of Jesus and Mohamed and Buddha (according to him).

-------------EDIT--------------

Actually, read the FIGU site , your actually allowed to go live with God himself if you want to, as long as you pay a tithe.



[edit on 18-5-2007 by Tiloke]

Originally posted by Tiloke
Heres a question. Does Meier have a job? What does he do? Does he make a living off his "contacts"? Maybe God just gives him money seeing as he is the reincarnation of Jesus and Mohamed and Buddha (according to him).

Here's the link to the 60 page price list of Meier merchandising junk:

www.figu.org...://www.figu.org/download/preisliste.pdf

dB

David, if the WATS vote was still there, I'd vote for you. I completely missed all of that and though all he got was what his followers gave him to live there. I had no idea it was that complex.


Yaaaay, I got an applause for my long post last page, thats awesome.


Toot-Toot

Perhaps a better name for this thread would be "Eduard 'Billy' Meier, Fact or Fraud?(was Raygun Pics)" seeing as we can not all agree its fake.

[edit on 18-5-2007 by Tiloke]

Originally posted by johnlear
Michael is certainly not going to admit to a flip-flop on the Meiers photos and to expect him to come clean on exactly what happend is not going to happen.

Getting Malins 'current' take on take on the Billy Meiers photos would be an excercise in futility.

based on your post, it seems to me that if Meier himself admitted it was all a hoax, showed everyone the tree connecting brackets, the toy gun, the sears catalogue, the toy ufo's etc, you'd still be of the belief that it happened and now Meier is changing his story as a result of gov't intervention or some other ludicrous (and paranoid) reasoning.

a mind that has been closed down and locked in on a story for 20 years, with no room for reason, is a bad thing. Mr. Lear, you said earlier that the photos do show signs of a hoax and yet you still believe the story. Do you have any idea what that does to your reputation? Do you have any idea as to how your credibility is damaged by statements that basically say it looks like a hoax but you're still believing in the story?

Originally posted by Crakeur

Do you have any idea what that does to your reputation? Do you have any idea as to how your credibility is damaged by statements that basically say it looks like a hoax but you're still believing in the story?

No Crakeur, I don't. Please tell me.

let me put it this way Mr. Lear, your refusal to consider the many glaring issues in the Meier story is harder to fathom than your concept of a giant soul catcher on the moon. That's right, I find that theory of yours easier to swallow than the idea that you refuse to consider the evidence against Meier.

Originally posted by Crakeur

let me put it this way Mr. Lear, your refusal to consider the many glaring issues in the Meier story is harder to fathom than your concept of a giant soul catcher on the moon. That's right, I find that theory of yours easier to swallow than the idea that you refuse to consider the evidence against Meier.

Yeah, I know what you mean. A lot of people are having trouble with the BSMOTM (the Big Soul Machine On The Moon). Well how about the gravity on the moon? Where does that fit in? Would that be after Meier and before the BSMOTM? Or would it come before the BSMOTM? Just curious.

As a clarification is this the Michael Malin we are all talking about? It wasn't that easy to get his e-mail and I'd hate to think I wasted my time.

Education: A. B., 1971, University of California, Berkeley, Physics; Dissertation, 1975, Ph.D., 1976, California Institute of Technology, Planetary Sciences and Geology

Umm, if thats him, what part of his education makes him qualified to analyze photographs? Please understand , it looks to me like this man has had some great accomplishments and is well educated.

In geology.

I see he is the team leader for a couple camera projects, but that could be due to his leadership skills and knowledge of Mars (planetary sciences major), not any photographic credentials. I am not asking this to argue, just for clarification. The Meier camp has been known for misquoting and exaggerating before. Like calling a photo-hut technician an "expert image analyzer" .
If he says he changed his mind about the Meier photos or was misquoted, than why would you ignore that? If no-one ever changed their mind, we would all still be sitting in caves trying to decide if rocks are edible.

As I sad before , I set a few emails in the last few days to him, with links to the thread, inviting him to please come set the record straight as to what he actually saw and said back then as well as what he thinks now.


-----------------------EDIT----------------------------EDIT---------------------

I really hate to talk about someone when they are no longer here.

I came across this on wikipedia,

OH MY GOD- IT'S GONE NOW!!!!

Michael horn had an entry on wikipedia. One of the phrases that stuck out while it was there was that FIGU has never ever said that Horn is their representative. I did some searching and the only places on the internet that I can find referring to Mr. Horn as an "authorized media representative" are on Mr. Horns sites or sites hosting interviews with Horn. I can't find one place on the FIGU website that lists Horn.....They say there guy in the U.S. is Scott Whitney. Even their video links don't go to his sales sites.(uh-oh...wait a minute, his prices are waaay lower and it seems like he tried pretty hard to get a site name almost identical to Meiers) Has anyone seen a Meier site (not a Horn one) that lists Horn as a media representative?I can't find any mention of him. Scratch that, I found his name under "supporters". When you click on his name, even though its a link, it does nothing. Clicking on anyone else's name brings up their site.

Why does he have a separate site at all? Wouldn't you think he would send us to Meiers site? He was pretty adamant that he didn't have a financial interest.

I'm starting to think he's just some con-man trying to cash in on this by underselling the cult. Using a dead princesses name to try to sell his sit-down scam workout tape isn't helping.

Also , did anyone else see that Wiki entry?


P.S. I don't know if the vote is still going on ,but I vote to let Mr. Horn return. He was keeping it pretty civil and it made the thread more interesting.

P.P.S Why can't I indent my paragraphs?

[edit on 18-5-2007 by Tiloke]

"Mr. Lear, you said earlier that the photos do show signs of a hoax and yet you still believe the story. Do you have any idea what that does to your reputation? Do you have any idea as to how your credibility is damaged by statements that basically say it looks like a hoax but you're still believing in the story?"

I don´t understand this post. What does Mr. Lear`s opinions have anything to do with his credibility?. I`d like to remind Crakeur that Mr. Lear is one of the most credible people here, he has information that most of us only dream of having. He has dedicated a lot of time and effort to not only this thread but all of the threads and questions asked in his section of ATS.

I personally have a hard time accepting some of Meyer`s pictures as being genuine, but Mr. Lear has said many times that he knows Meyer and that he has spoken with him and that makes Mr. Lear have some additional information that the rest of us don´t have. Therefore I don´t think that it`s fair that someone wants to disqualify Mr. Lear`s opinions based on what they know or perceive to know. Mr Lear has more information and bases his opinions on more information.

I think that some of the pictures DO look fake, but others DON`T, so I think that the reasonable thing to do is to keep an open mind and not jump to judgement.

Originally posted by Tiloke

He was keeping it pretty civil and it made the thread more interesting.

Tiloke, I consider your comment that Michael Horm was keeping it pretty civil and made the thread more interesting a direct and personal insult.

Posted by Camilo1: I personally have a hard time accepting some of Meyer`s pictures as being genuine, but Mr. Lear has said many times that he knows Meyer and that he has spoken with him and that makes Mr. Lear have some additional information that the rest of us don´t have.

Originally posted by johnlear

I will indeed continue to support the Meiers case. And you are both welcome to stay and to post. I know how difficult it must be to discuss a case when you have never talked to Meiers, or been to his house in Switzerland or even seen the Wedding Cake in person.

Neither have I as a matter of fact but I have a leg up on you guys!

Emphasis mine


In fact Mr Lear has said he has NOT met or talked with him...


-----------------EDIT-----------------

Crap, I meant to say Mr. Lear shouldn't be the only one making the thread interesting, I really did.



[edit on 18-5-2007 by Tiloke]

Originally posted by Tiloke



Crap, I meant to say Mr. Lear shouldn't be the only one making the thread interesting, I really did.

Thats much, much better Tiloke. And I qccept your apology (at least that what I thought "Crap" meant.

Edit to correct quote BB code (again)

[edit on 5-18-2007 by Springer]

Originally posted by johnlear
Michael Malin was one of the early proponents and supporters of Billy Meiers.

False. Show me *any* serious involvement by Malin in the case and anything past his out of context quote put forth by the Meier clan.

He's already related to me his real feelings, and has directly said he was quoted out of context.

Whats more plausible, that he's quoted out of context or the govt told him to back off.

I'll state it *again*:

Malin has communicated that he never saw original pictures, but a digital representation (perhaps the one that Ken Dinwiddie was instructed to alter?). It also relayed that he couldn't tell if they were fake or not from the digital representations. It becomes very clear he didn't do any "analysis" on the photos at all. He said that his comments were taken out of context (shocker!).
His last words to me were:
"It really doesn't matter whether they're real or not. If they are real, the occupants don't want to have any substantive contact with us, and certainly they're not offering me a lift to Mars 8^). So screw them! If they're not real, who cares if some nut in Switzerland can make good fakes?"

Please...

This is really getting stupid.



[edit on 18-5-2007 by jritzmann]

Jeff,

It seems to me that Lear is simply not interesting in knowing anything factual about this situation, he's much more comfortable with beliefs. Knowledge requires understanding and effort, belief requires absolutely nothing.

You're typing to a wall, buddy. I know it, you know it, and so does anyone else who has taken the time to actually look at the evidence and use their deductive reasoning skills.

Lear will continue to bait you, remember, there are some people who need conflict the way that others need oxygen. Let's save the energy for the stuff that's actually worth the effort. The Meier nonsense is just that, nonsense.

dB

Originally posted by davidbiedny
Jeff,

It seems to me that Lear is simply not interesting in knowing anything factual about this situation, he's much more comfortable with beliefs. Knowledge requires understanding and effort, belief requires absolutely nothing.

You're typing to a wall, buddy. I know it, you know it, and so does anyone else who has taken the time to actually look at the evidence and use their deductive reasoning skills.

Lear will continue to bait you, remember, there are some people who need conflict the way that others need oxygen. Let's save the energy for the stuff that's actually worth the effort. The Meier nonsense is just that, nonsense.

dB

___________________

davidbiedny,

I disagree with your stuff above. Seems to me it offers little more than disdain for Billy's story and those who support it, is that true?
Though the thread title is with respect to 'rayguns', all kinds of things have been discussed, somethings I believe others I didn't or remain on the fence about.
I just don't feel knocking personalities persuades anyone of anything new or revisited re Billy's case, they were open to hearing thoughts of prior.

What I'd like to know is your points on the case itself please.

Dallas

Originally posted by Dallas
davidbiedny,

I disagree with your stuff above. Seems to me it offers little more than disdain for Billy's story and those who support it, is that true?
Though the thread title is with respect to 'rayguns', all kinds of things have been discussed, somethings I believe others I didn't or remain on the fence about.
I just don't feel knocking personalities persuades anyone of anything new or revisited re Billy's case, they were open to hearing thoughts of prior.

What I'd like to know is your points on the case itself please.

Dallas

Dallas youre kidding right? Read the thread man, how many times do either of us have to provide answers to the questions...I have to wonder about you for even asking David about his issues with the case as public as he's been just as I have been.

Dave-youre right, negative attention for some people must be the emotional equal to nicotine.