Welcome to the Billy Meier UFO Research website! › Forum › Miscellaneous › Introduction › Reply To: Introduction
I meant MANY (not all) photos and videos supposedly taken by Meier (Ex: space trip, WCUFO, Energy ships, etc.) were, beyond reasonable doubt, shown to be either outright fakes or most certainly fakes.
First of all, Meier took HUNDREDS of UFO photos, most of them as part of a photo series. Mahesh, do you understand WHY photo series are significant to TRUE UFO research? Because it greatly complicates the hoax theory. Time of day becomes very limited for a one-armed man to set up a hoax in remote locations with steep hills and other challenging terrain. The multiple locations of the UFO in each series must be taken into account when attempting to duplicate for the sake of debunking. None of this was ever done, not by Phil Langdon, not by Anthony Wharton not by anyone.
Next, photos a man may or may not have actually taken(space trip series) CANNOT prove a man hoax unless his explanations can be ruled out. How have you done so? You haven’t.
And while the Energy Ships hoax theory is very compelling, no hi-res duplication attempts have ever been published. WHY NOT? What is hiding in the details of these attempts? Time and time again, close scrutiny of Meier’s UFO evidence reveals elements which cannot be easily duplicated, if at all. Publishing poor quality duplication attempts and claiming it debunked is all about putting on a show, NOT true UFO analysis.
But the WCUFO has certainly NOT been shown, beyond reasonable doubt to be fake. Similarities in appearance can be explained by plausible deniability And when the duplication attempt is of poor quality, then it is UNreasonable to assume it has been a success.
This automatically casts severe doubt on the rest of his so-called evidence and stories.
Only if you ignore plausible deniability. Mahesh, why do you ignore the possibility of plausible deniability?
Comparison will prove nothing at all.
It can prove Langdon’s duplication attempts a failure. This is what both you and Phil fear.
We have top level photo experts from IPI institute in University of Southern California (1980 video will be released in time) saying that the internegatives made in Switzerland by Wendelle from the supposed-originals and brought back to USA for analysis are worthless for verifying the authenticity of Meier’s beamship pictures.
Here is where the skeptic argument becomes shady: Proving UFO images to be a hoax and proving them to be authentic are only the two extremes. Neither may in fact be completely possible since proof outside of mathematics is technically not possible. Proof becomes very subjective and greatly dependent on each individual. All it means is what convinces one person to the next. For example, if you have zero understanding of science, then any scientific analysis and subsequent conclusions will be meaningless to you.
Although photographs of a large object in the sky on its own cannot prove this object is of extraterrestrial origin, analysis of such photographs(even if they are not originals) can, if properly done, systematically rule out known hoax methods. This is what Stevens and his team did. They employed multiple photogrammetric methods(science) for this. Their analysis was corroborated by physicist Neil Davis. How has IPI refuted their work?