To All of You Who Doubt The Billy Meier (HOAX): Watch this.

reply to post by Jay-morris


Don't go making accusations now. And the only reason I'm questioning your true knowledge on the case is because you obviously have been brainwashed by all the anti-meier supporters, which you are yourself. If you actually have done the research you say you have you wouldn't be throwing around such stupid remarks such as "he claims to have taken the dinosaur photo" because through thorough research one will learn that there is no evidence of him making that claim and if there is prove it to me. and don't send me some rubbish link where someone else say's it's his either. because unless he is quoted saying it, it can not be proven otherwise.

reply to post by Jay-morris


False. He's saying that he might have put photos in his album to describe what it was that he saw. Ok, so how does that mean that he claims to have taken them?

Originally posted by youthsavior
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

Don't go making accusations now. And the only reason I'm questioning your true knowledge on the case is because you obviously have been brainwashed by all the anti-meier supporters, which you are yourself. If you actually have done the research you say you have you wouldn't be throwing around such stupid remarks such as "he claims to have taken the dinosaur photo" because through thorough research one will learn that there is no evidence of him making that claim and if there is prove it to me. and don't send me some rubbish link where someone else say's it's his either. because unless he is quoted saying it, it can not be proven otherwise.

Oh dear So why am i a ufo believer? Why do i believe that some ufo's defy explanation and need further investigation? Why do i have many debates with ufo de0bunkers on this board and other boards? But because i have done my research on this case (ublike you) that makes me brainwashed lol give me a break!

Originally posted by youthsavior
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

False. He's saying that he might have put photos in his album to describe what it was that he saw. Ok, so how does that mean that he claims to have taken them?

And i am saying that they are his photos, and not photos that have been planted. Of course meier came out with the crappy excuse. Like he did with the Semjase photo. He always seems to come out with these BS excuses after he has been caught, but you guys fall for it everytime

reply to post by Jay-morris


Wow! Can you read??????????

It says in the passage you quoted. If he couldn't take photo's of what he saw he would use photo's (that are not his) to best describe what he saw. Sorry Jay-Morris but I refuse to debate with you any further. Nor will I respond to any more of your posts and accusations. Your wasting my time and I'd rather speak with more open-minded people.

Originally posted by youthsavior
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

Wow! Can you read??????????

It says in the passage you quoted. If he couldn't take photo's of what he saw he would use photo's (that are not his) to best describe what he saw. Sorry Jay-Morris but I refuse to debate with you any further. Nor will I respond to any more of your posts and accusations. Your wasting my time and I'd rather speak with more open-minded people.

edit on 9-3-2011 by youthsavior because: edit

Open minded! your so open minded your brain has fallen out!!!!
You don't seem to understand what i said in my last post. Meier always comes out with an excuse when he gets caught out. The flamming ufo,Semjase photo, dinosaur photos, missing tree's etc Does this not bother you at all?

Lol you can't debate with me on this case because you know very little. All you have done is prove my point that you believe almost everything you come across, even if you don't research it. This problem with the ufo subject is people like you. And the sad thing is, you don't even know it. You just blindly believe someone who is a proven hoaxer, only becaus ehe has made you feel good. So, it has taken a well known hoaxer to make you feel good about yourself

And the sad fact of the matter is, all the teachings that meier uses, he just copied from other people, and just threw ET in there to give it a twist. Its just so sad and a shame that people like you are so gullible

Billy said the Plejara told him to take photos as "proof". It's been 30yrs or so now. Give me one good photo of a landed craft in a field with Billy standing in front of it, and maybe a truck in front of it. His many photos and films of suspended models are not proof. Regardless of how cool some may look, and how obviously super fake many look as well. The person who "examined" the metal sample is not even a Dr. or has any degree to be an expert in this, and now the samples are gone. Dilletoso is not a PHD, and not a photography expert. Their old-time on running many generation films through a pixalater proves nothing. There are no negatives. And in many photos, suspension wires can be seen. If this is a true case, the Plejaran would give us real proof, since this is what Billy said they wanted to give him metal and photos for, yet these are not proof of anything.


The above photo is very obvious, it's a small model held up(we can't see the top) very far in fron of the truck. The focus proves this. Now as I have said many time, I really ENJOY this case. I LOVE these pics and film, and the story in very entertaining, but the more I look into it, the more blatantly fake this case is.

reply to post by tom502


Even though that photo shows an obvious small object close to the camera, the believers will just look at it and believe it. Thats just the way it is, and the reason why its impossible to debate with these people because their belief is so strong that they don't care what you say, or what evidence is out there that proves this case too be fake.

The OP has said that learning about the meier case has made him a better person, but the teachings that meier preaches have been around for years. A good person to learn alot from is Jason Chan

Hey ATS, My first post here, so I hope I do well. I myself am on a fence when it comes to this case. And yes, it's a case, not real nor a hoax until proven otherwise. I have seen more in this case that would make me believe than reject it but there are still issues with it that make me just sit back and wait for the truth. To just say it's obviously a hoax or real without taking the time to at least try and absorb all the information available is ignorant. Stating someone proved the pics were fake is just as bad as saying someone proved they are real. I have studied his ufo pics carefully and even gave them to my wife who is a PS expert and we both feel they are legit. Then we look at the Asket and Nera photos and just shake our heads at them and Billy's story. I'm still waiting to see the full size photo with Austin Powers standing over them saying, YEA BABY, LET'S SHAG IN THE WEDDING CAKE! But seriously, this is the biggest issue with Meier. For every piece of good evidence they show, there's something else that just makes a lot of people say, HOAX! And as far as his predictions are concerned. Yes, many are right on and some are far off. He claims the future can always be changed by our actions. Well, okay I'll give him that but many of his predictions are not that amazing when you think about it. Cell phones, computers, the internet...I saw all of that predicted at Disney's World of Tomorrow 30 years ago. And San Francisco? My pug keeps telling the Big One is coming! But if you do take the the time to read Meier's writings, at the least you will be entertained because I've been WOWED more than once! Listen, I would love this to be true, but there will always be the one thing people, including myself want that Billy says will NOT happen. And that is 100% physical proof that The Plejaran are real. And I'm not talking about Michael Horn's proof. He's another person who I feel does more bad than good for his case.
Sorry Billy, we just can't believe by faith alone. And by the way, isn't that one of the problems they have with religion?
In closing, if this is real and nobody believe's Billy, it's his own fault. He's been his own worst enemy over the years and he continues to make bad decisions. If it's a hoax, it's the most elaborate hoax ever, and Billy must just be an amazing savant.

reply to post by maddog99


You do not need photoshop to realise that meier photos are hoaxes. I really don't know how you came to these conclusions. Please post what photos you believe to be real?

Are you telling me that this photo
does not show a model close to the camera. Can't you see that the ufo is close to the camera, and not above the car. The focus should you a clue.

Or how about this photo that shows bits of the model coming off, not to mention the base of the ufo is exactly the same as a trash can lid here


I don't know how anyone can look at these photos and feel they are real.And now we know the ufo's are models, then that just makes it logical why all the tree's vanished. Its because he used model tree's with his ufo models. I mean, how much more evidence do people want to see when it comes to this case.

His predictions. Why does he release his predictions after the date they happened. How is that predicting anything? Always how wrong has he been when its comes to the ww3 dates? More than once

As for his so called teachings, these teaching have been around for years. Way before meier. All meier done was put the ET spin on it

Hi,
I dont understand why one calls the other as "Believers" when the only thing they do different is to ask more questions and look at the case critically without any bias..
Let me tell you how a "believer" smells like...he avoids scientific method and is more inclined towards his subjective validation rather than objective verification, interprets data in only one way even though it doesn't fit the data at hand...unable to hold & test multiple theories, jumps to conclusions even though there are many holes in his theories, rejects & doesnot include the data that does not fit his preconceived ideas on the case..so basically he views the world through belief and bias
...

I have already demonstrated, how by disregarding premises(which is completely against scientific method) one will come to wrong conclusions...And it seems this is completely OK for them. This is the reason why there are professional people dealing with civil, criminal cases who follow scientific procedure..do not settle their cases on online forums where anybody can claim anything and throw their opinions even though they seem baseless..

SubjectX says that(as far as i understand, please correct me if wrong).as the premises are not verifiable one should not construct arguments from those premises. Let me give an example, the entire scientific method rests on theorizing, constructing various hypothesis and testing them after acquiring data...
ex: multiple universes, tachyons, wormholes, time travel....as the existence of these cannot be verifiable at present, shall we disregard them !!

I would like to offer my analysis on the "Disappearing Tree" issue to those who are interested and mostly for those who are open minded and asks more critical questions...

First Disappearance of Tree & removal of memories, photos,...with exception of Billy and few other people on May 3, 1975(a).


2 Witnesses who had seen the "disappeared" tree before it got disappeared (126 C):
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"..The branches in close contact with the spacecraft withered and began to die. It looked dehydrated and turned down. Another strange effect noticed was that the upper part of the tree glowed in the dark after this incident."
Ms. Margarite Rufer went back to the site later with Jacob Bertschinger, and they noticed that the whole tree was dead. They went back again 3 days after that and found the tree had disappeared completely. There was no hole in the ground or any evidence that the tree had ever been there. When Meier's pictures of this contact first came back from the developers, one of Meier's friends went out to the site and located the very spot from which the pictures were taken..."

Now it is gone and no one who actually should know about it can remember it; even the old farmer who through the years cut down the branches to use them as firewood(b).
Wendell Stevens, reported that a farmer who swears that a tree was never on his property has a funny habit when he mows his grass...he always cuts AROUND the area where the tree was shown to be standing in the photos.

2nd Disappearance demonstration to group members(149 & 509 C, October 17, 1976):
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total witnesses - Hans Schutzbach, Herbert Runkel, Margarite Rufer, Jacobus Bertschinger, Amalia Stetter, Olga Kalder, M.Flammer, Guido Moosebrugger, Kalliope, children and others
All of the above are credible witnesses & are not proven to be mentally incapable, so their testimony is valid. Some people in the above list have taken the post of Meier's enemies later, ex: H.Schutzbach, Kalliope,.
From this you can infer things, which i need not mention here. If need any clarifications , let me know


More info:
Total of 5 giant fir trees were eliminated in the course of the demonstrations along with all memories of these trees(d).

Sources:
a] Message from the Pleiades Vol 1(1979) - pg 183, CR 16, May 3, 1975
b] Message from the Pleiades Vol II (1990) - pg 251
c] Preliminary Investigative Report(1978) - Pg 126,149, 509
d] UFO...Contact From the Pleiades(1983) - pg 66, Volume 2
e] And Still They Fly(1991) - pg 114

reply to post by Jay-morris


www.steelmarkonline.com...

Jay,

What do you think of these photo's, just curious. I personally believe that the trashcan ufo is just a trashcan lid too, I hope you know that, but some of his other photos seem more legit.

www.futureofmankind.co.uk...

This is a good read too... It talks about the analysis of his other photo's..

His predictions. Why does he release his predictions after the date they happened. How is that predicting anything?

There is somuch information where meier has written down in the form of conversation as contact reports, some where exclusively written down as prophecies and predictions. By the way, can you show me where Meier "Predicted" world war III will be in 2006..as far as i know, he mentioned that world war III as a prophecy but not as a prediction.

Havent you looked into the corroborated information yet...let us look into it..
Here www.theyfly.com...
In 1978, Meier predicted the forthcoming discovery, and subsequent naming, of a comet that would be called Toutatis.
Also in 1991 & 2006 Meier has written down info regarding the discovery and the cause of death(arrow stuck in his body) of ICEMAN..www.theyfly.com...

I would like to hear your take on these...

reply to post by mahigitam


Thank you for a great link.
Here is another one.
www.deepspace4.com...

• 31st Contact, July 17, 1975: Semjase informed Meier that Mt Chimborazo, Ecuador, is the highest mountain on Earth (above sea level), contrary to Meier's belief that it was Mt Everest. Corroborated: June 1996 in Earth magazine, 21 years later.

Originally posted by mahigitam
SubjectX says that(as far as i understand, please correct me if wrong).as the premises are not verifiable one should not construct arguments from those premises. Let me give an example, the entire scientific method rests on theorizing, constructing various hypothesis and testing them after acquiring data...
ex: multiple universes, tachyons, wormholes, time travel....as the existence of these cannot be verifiable at present, shall we disregard them !!

Not quite. What I was saying is that using unverifiable premises derived from the source in question in order to prove the truth of the source in question is a logical fallicy, and therefore invalid.

This goes for using statements from Meier to prove the truth of statements from Meier, or using the Bible to prove statments from the Bible, or anythink of that ilk. It's no different than if I were to claim that I understand the meaning of everything, and as proof I said "because I say so".

reply to post by subject x


That makes sense, but the only reason I see how this could work is if we looked to what he's said to determine whether or not he's actually said it. Not to determine whether or not it's the truth but if he's said it and not somebody else who claims he has. Then, looking at it this way would be justifiable.

reply to post by youthsavior

Certainly, if you were to use a statement credited to Meier in an attempt to make a case that he never said that, and had evidence to support your case (evidence other than Meier claiming to have never said that), there would be no problem.

But to use one of his claims to try to prove another of his claims, well, that dog don't hunt.

reply to post by mahigitam


Im sorry, but i don't buy what the witnesess say one bit. Why would they lie? Maybe for the attention, maybe because they are in on it, who knows, but at the end of the day, witnesess is not evidence. If witnesess was evidence, then we would have had disclosure by now, considering all the people coming forward about ufo's, but we don't have disclosure.

Right, back to the tree's. There is evidence that meier used the same tree for different locations. You can find this evidence here . From this, it is pretty obvious that he used the same tree for different locations. Anyone who disagree's simply will never believe the evidence against billy meier, so it will be interesting to see if you are open to changing your mind, or if you are just your normal billy meier believer that is blinded by the man himself.

Now, there is more than enough evidence that meier used model ufo's. You only have to look at the ufo above the truck to know this, as the model is clearly near the camera and the reason why it looks out of focus, while the tree and truck look normal. Again, you can't argue with this because the evidence is there.

As for the footage of a ufo going around the tree on a farm. There was never a tree there! And not just that, the ufo wobbles like its on a string, and you never see the ufo go behind the tree.

So, again, you have showed no evidence to prove this case real, while i have posted plenty that points to this case being a hoax.

Originally posted by mahigitam

His predictions. Why does he release his predictions after the date they happened. How is that predicting anything?

There is somuch information where meier has written down in the form of conversation as contact reports, some where exclusively written down as prophecies and predictions. By the way, can you show me where Meier "Predicted" world war III will be in 2006..as far as i know, he mentioned that world war III as a prophecy but not as a prediction.

Havent you looked into the corroborated information yet...let us look into it..
Here www.theyfly.com...
In 1978, Meier predicted the forthcoming discovery, and subsequent naming, of a comet that would be called Toutatis.
Also in 1991 & 2006 Meier has written down info regarding the discovery and the cause of death(arrow stuck in his body) of ICEMAN..www.theyfly.com...

I would like to hear your take on these...

Billy meier predictions are worthless, and he has been wrong when it comes to world war three, and he does only release information after the event has happen. But for some strange reason, meier believers refuse to look at the evidence

Originally posted by youthsavior
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

www.steelmarkonline.com...

Jay,

What do you think of these photo's, just curious. I personally believe that the trashcan ufo is just a trashcan lid too, I hope you know that, but some of his other photos seem more legit.

www.futureofmankind.co.uk...

This is a good read too... It talks about the analysis of his other photo's..

edit on 10-3-2011 by youthsavior because: add link

I have read both links before. Let me ask you this. Do you think those photos are any different to the photos in this link They were done exactly the same way as meier done his photos. Also, how about the footage below.




And this video completly de-bunkes the wedding cake photos.