Introduction

[Elba]

[Taro]

mahigitam,

He is simply of the opinion that sharing high-res versions of his beamship-recreations is not only unproductive and distractive but can be used to twist it into being a pro-Meier one. I concur with him.

Twist? How can MORE information, i.e. higher resolution, be twisted? More information can only move an investigation closer to the truth. I think Phil(and you) are afraid closer scrutiny will reveal more truths about Phil’s so-called, “recreations”, i.e. that they are in fact NOT true recreations at all. If he didn’t want people to look at them then why did he make them at all? Think about it.

[Jacobs Trouble]

Just admit it, the Plejaren only care about 30,000 individuals and they use a device to make certain they find the information.

It will make a whole lot of sense to you if you finally admit it to yourself, they don’t care about anyone with the exception of those few in number individuals – couldn’t give a fuck actually, they care so little about whether anyone outside the 30,000 knows that they’ve never even introduced themselves lol

admit it and stop fighting for exposure

[Taro]

30,000? Device? What the heck are you talking about, Jacobs Trouble? Do you have a source reference for any of this? Also, what does it have to do with Langdon’s duplication attempts? Sounds like something more suited to my thread, Is it POSSIBLE for aliens to have staged a fake UFO hoax?

[Borg Daily]

Jacobs Trouble you’ve got some nerve havn’t you, comin around here, coming around here. After what you said

” Honestly, this is EXACTLY the kind of time-wasting, deer-in-the-headlights “thinking” that the warnings were intended to PREVENT and AVOID. Nitpicking dates is PRECISELY the kind of avoidance of reality, failure to understand and take the warnings seriously thinking that – unfortunately – shows how lITTLE even those who claim to be interested in this material indulge in.

The question ABSOLUTELY ISN’T: “…how far apart would each of these two civil wars take place?”

The question IS: When the hell will you grasp the reality and act accordingly?

outrageous language jacobus, around here.

Taro to answer your questions for him, Jacobs Trouble is probably reading theyflyblog. They post translation extracts in the text from time to time and recently they had a number in a blog between 20 to 30 thousand as the figure for the general number studying the spirit teaching or the truth from a recent contact.

When he mentioned a device he was probably talking about the technologies offered to Billy to preserve the truth as it was written in the goblet of truth, would have to read the goblet of truth to understand him.

[Tony]

<cite> @mahigitam said:</cite>
Tony,

Sorry for replying late, as I was out of town and just arrived today. I wasn’t notified of your comments on the blog which usually happens through email. You should have emailed me.
In the meantime, I wrote to Phil and got a response. He is simply of the opinion that sharing high-res versions of his beamship-recreations is not only unproductive and distractive but can be used to twist it into being a pro-Meier one. I concur with him. So, beside his high-res copies, if you are interested in any material, let me know.

p.s.: More importantly, the files I have aren’t high-res copies at all. I guess, the originals must have been with Phil himself.

So just so we are clear you are not interested in actually investigating aspects of this case unless the result is going to damage Meier? Is this correct? I would like to be sure we understand each other.
Regards,
Tony

[mahigitam]

Meier’s beamship photos have been shown to be fakes beyond reasonable doubt. The onus is on Meier to provide originals for investigation FIRST. When he does that, then I would convince Phil to get his originals for investigation by experts, too.
There is no “aspect” of the case that points to anything extraordinary or alien. If there is, I would gladly like to review it and publish it on my website FIRST since the whole world has been waiting for any such evidence.
I have yet to see (from you and others) at least one article rebutting our work exposing Meier as a fraud. The reason for that is obvious, all you have are fairy tales/excuses for all the negative evidence in the case. If this is the way pro-Meier “researchers” work, then it totally justifies Phil’s or for that matter any skeptic or critic’s response.

[Tony]

Where exactly have the hundreds of Meier’s daylight Beamship UFO photographs been shown to be fakes beyond reasonable doubt? Who has proven this? The request for Phil’s high resolution photographs were to compare them optically to the high resolution photographs released in the photo inventarium, you don’t need originals for this. Why are you both afraid to do this?

[Taro]

Meier’s beamship photos have been shown to be fakes beyond reasonable doubt.

By whom, exactly? TRUE UFO research is the domain of science, not law by the way. Unidentified Flying Objects, whether swinging models or interstellar vessels deal with the physics of motion. Photographic evidence deals with the physics of light. You do not have enough scientific knowledge to make a truly reasoned conclusion. Neither does Langdon.

The onus is on Meier to provide originals for investigation FIRST.

How do you figure? If Meier doesn’t care what you think, does this automatically make him a fraud? That’s false reasoning and you know it. If Phil doesn’t want his images scrutinized it’s because he’s afraid the flaws will damage his credibility. If there weren’t any, he would have nothing to hide.

There is no “aspect” of the case that points to anything extraordinary or alien.

Physics impossible for a swinging model comes to mind. But one would have to understand a little basic physics. Have you looked at the abrupt 270º maneuvre in the Pendulum film closely? I have. Pendulum motion is basic physics. Do any of BMUFOR’s staff/contributors have any scientific background? Anyone at all?

I have yet to see (from you and others) at least one article rebutting our work exposing Meier as a fraud

Actually, there’s one theory which accounts for what you interpret to be fraud: Plausible deniability. Mahesh, do you believe it’s possible for aliens to have staged a fake UFO hoax? If not, why not? I’ve started a thread if you’d like to join in.

[Tony]

So again …let me see if I have this correct, Billy’s daytime photographs have been shown beyond reasonable doubt by Phil Langdon I would imagine you mean, Phil who refuses to let anyone on the internet see the full resolution images of his own recreations to actually compare them…and you who have taken it upon yourself to collect all the available data on the Meier case (read-destroy Meier) agree that this is the correct way to conduct research. Am I missing something here? I actually thought your research on the space pictures was very good, It actually caused me to dig deeper into it myself and I found the actual frame from the spacesuit photographs used in the fake picture and posted it up on the FIGU facebook page.
But you are not actually interested in objective research, why do you even make the pretense? You are clearly biased, most likely you like some others took everything you read at face value in the beginning without actually thinking about it and then became angry at the thought of having been duped by the most incredible hoax in the world and decided to destroy everything. You have at your disposal the biggest collection of material on Meier in existence outside of FIGU.
Step back and be honest in your work, be balanced. Whether you think the case is a hoax or not you do yourself or anyone any favors by being biased in the analysis. Keeping information and data to yourself to prevent comparisons that may be “twisted” into pro Meier is dishonest.
How could comparisons be twisted into something they are not, they will either show something or they will not. Whether they help or hinder either side will just depend on the facts.
Be honest in your work or change the name of your website into something that reflects the actual nature of what you are doing.

[mahigitam]

@ said:
So again …let me see if I have this correct, Billy’s daytime photographs have been shown beyond reasonable doubt by Phil Langdon I would imagine you mean, Phil who refuses to let anyone on the internet see the full resolution images of his own recreations to actually compare them…and you who have taken it upon yourself to collect all the available data on the Meier case (read-destroy Meier) agree that this is the correct way to conduct research.

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. This automatically casts severe doubt on the rest of his so-called evidence and stories. Having said that, I don’t see any point in Phil supplying high-res images of his photos when what Meier provided were copies of copies that are multiple generations away from the supposedly-stolen originals. Comparison will prove nothing at all. 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. They demanded to see the originals, which of course were suspiciously missing. If you disagree with their expert-conclusions, I would like to see your reasoning behind you insisting on non-original photo comparisons. Also, would like to know how it would effect the genuineness or lack of it of Meier’s images.

[Tony Quinn]

You said Billy s beam ship photographs were proven beyond reasonable doubts to be hoaxed.
No one has ever argued for a very long time about the space photographs being authentic.Meier stated they were all tampered with in 1978. It’s also stated multiple times elsewhere in the contact notes. While it’s interesting finding out where the photographs originally came form debating it seems redundant.
The wcufo is a good example of why we need Phil’s pictures in HD. It does not matter if the originals are even available due to the visual detail and quality of the survivng images. There are visual qualities to compare for instance the components used in Phil’s versions vs Meiers, the quality of the construction etc. Phil had unlimited time, two arrms plus the original photos to work from, Meier was constantly watched and surrounded by others with limited time. If you think that doing a comparison that may show that Meiers wcufo looks far superior in construction under close scrutiny is biased then your own reasoning is seriously flawed.

[Taro]

Tony, while I disagree with you that the Meier case is,

the most incredible hoax in the world

it is of course debatable. In any case, this was very well put:

If you think that doing a comparison that may show that Meiers wcufo looks far superior in construction under close scrutiny is biased then your own reasoning is seriously flawed.

Finally, a skeptic with some objectivity.

(Edit: Sorry, I may have just made an assumption myself. You may have made the first statement from Mahesh’s point of view, only.)

• This reply was modified 5 years, 5 months ago by Taro.

[Taro]

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?

[Tony]

I’m not a skeptic Taro, that would imply that I’ve made my mind up about something I know nothing about. I’m only interested in finding out the truth. I’ve been investigating this for years, in person , in Switzerland at locations. I was the person who offered to fly Phil Langdon out to Switzerland to test his model theory out at Hasenbol. He refused saying he was too busy. He seemed to have many months to spend in English fields making facsimiles of Meiers photographs. There are things that I don’t understand in the Meier case and there are things that I can safely say I have a reasonable knowledge about to make a determination for instance- I don’t understand why the wcufo looks the way it does but in my career I have been an engineer and welder and I’m also a qualified goldsmith and I know I am looking at something beyond a supposed model made of bin lids, Christmas ornaments and thumbtacks. This would not be obvious to most people unless you have some knowledge of the techniques involved in creating certain things but it should become very obvious to anyone if anyone puts the two things directly side by side for comparison. That is my way of conducting research through direct knowledge. I know Phil could not make his recreations at the Meier locations because I’ve been there myself. His methods are impossible in those locations.

I know the space pictures are fake,we have seen where the photographs came from thanks to Mahesh and others, I even found the original of one myself.
Anyone who has read the contact notes knows this was declared decades ago, documented in print from at least 1978, they are irrelevant to proving anything.
The energy ships are interesting, good find that they resemble the street lamps in the yard. Which Meier stated at the time they took the forms of…a statement which no one really took notice of until recently.( Billy seems to have a habit of mentioning what people will be arguing about several decades later)
I’ll wait until another analysis by others comes out and I need to read everything else about it.

[Author]

Posts