[Taro]

BTW Mahesh, it’s interesting to note, by your silence, precisely where you draw the line with respect to logic. When ALL possibilities are considered, the entire basis for your hoax conclusions begins to fall apart. You’re just not man enough to admit it.

[Taro]

Ok, thanks. BTW, Mahesh, I noticed you haven’t weighed in on this topic of discussion yet. Finding the question a tough one? 😉

[Taro]

Between which dates?

[Taro]

Test.

[Taro]

Have there been posts deleted by the admin recently? I’ve been made aware that my very informative comparison has possibly disappeared:

https://archive.org/details/BillyMeier808ComparisonWithPhilLangdon

A simple comparison of an original UFO photo with its corresponding skeptic produced, debunk effort is very educational. It’s also particularly relevant to this thread.

[Taro]

Unclear. Are you telling me I should give up on proper, logical analyses? That’s absurd.

[Taro]

What exactly do you mean by, “completely out of hand”, Simon? The hard, logical questions and observations regarding true UFO analysis? “God” forbid there’s any of that here at BMUFOR.

[Taro]

Yes you did make an enormous assumption, here it is;
“Taro: Maybe the Plejaren and other races involved…”

Ed, do you understand the meaning of the word, “maybe”? Here it is:

adverb
perhaps; possibly.

I’ve stated a possibility. I am not assuming it is a possibility, it IS a possibility. If you can prove that it is impossible, then my statement would be incorrect. Since, it is essentially unprovable(at this point, anyway), it remains a possibility. Do you understand, now?

Oh, but you and the other brainwashed UFO cult fanatics nitpick the tiniest details until you can continue believing in a fraud.

You call it “nitpicking” I call it ACCURACY. Also, the way you defend your alleged alien friends is much more cultish than objectively discussing the finer details of UFO analysis.

1. The WCUFO was duplicated.

To what standards? For someone who’s LOOKING for a reason to dismiss the Meier case or for someone who’s looking for accuracy? Why can’t Langdon match Meier’s pristine surface? Langdon has two arms. Why does the Harcostar not exactly match the actual WCUFO base? Where are all the coloured “gems”? Where’s the pattern on the cupola? There’s more but let’s start with these.

2. The Beamship on a string was duplicated.

No, it wasn’t. There are a number of maneuvers seen in Meier’s films that are PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to duplicate with a simple model on a string. You are incapable of seeing them because you are so deluded by your own fantasies of meeting aliens that you refuse to acknowledge them:

A 90º change in lateral pendulum direction in less than one turn without a single wobble is impossible. A gradually INCREASING conical pendulum without any visible hand pulls is impossible. A smooth acceleration followed by a smooth deceleration with no visible hand pulls nor wobbles is impossible. A model disc retaining its perfectly horizontal orientation while tracking across the ground(similar to a spinning top), is impossible with a swinging model.

3. The Energy ship was duplicated.

How does the ex-FIGU attempts’ halo compare to Meier’s, particularly, #720? Impossible to compare with the small and poor quality versions offered by the ex-Figuans. Why won’t they release full resolution versions? What are they afraid to reveal? Same goes for Langdon.

His Talmud Jmmanuel is simply a copy of the Bible where he made alterations to his liking

How can you be sure it isn’t the other way around? That Meier wrote the TJ in a previous life and IT was copied and altered. How can you be sure your version is correct?

The only thing that’s there is simply the attempt of creating a new religion which Michael Horn and you seem to support when you state that ultimately the Meier case is about the spiritual teachings

Check your brain, Ed. Once again you see only what you want to see. I’ve never supported ANY religion nor cult. I’ve stated that his spiritual teachings are what HE is about because that is what he claims. I’ve only restated known facts. The UFO case itself is about many things, and in MY opinion, if you ask me(which you never did), it’s about what I call a puzzle for us Earthlings to solve.

You’re simply in the Meier matrix, unable to think outside it.

It’s funny how you try to project your own obsession with your fantasy world onto me. I’ve made it a point to be as objective about my approach to this UFO case as possible. I’ve ensured that I understand the sciences that went into all the many analyses. Have you?

[Taro]

No, I don’t think they created an

actual verifiable hoax

although at the moment I do not rule out the use of small drones. I believe most if not all of the UFO evidence they’ve allowed was designed to have a hoaxy gloss on the surface but a deep look reveals the alien reality. It’s a puzzle for us to solve if we choose to. The fact that new things are still being discovered about the UFO stuff(Rhal Zahi’s work, for example) decades after it was first released demonstrates the depth to which these puzzles go to and the lengths to which they’ve gone to for the sake of plausible deniability. I believe there’s more yet to be discovered. But back to your first question, again all of the UFO stuff was, in my opinion, meant to be verifiably genuine. All the disappearing originals(photo, movie, metal-crystal) was part of the plan to ensure the controversy would last. Maybe they will mysteriously reappear someday, maybe not. But what’s left still has value for study.

As for the CR’s there’s a few things I personally suspect to be false:

The first one that got my attention was that Jitchi(sp?) character from Meier’s travels with Asket. He seems to be a little out of place. The fact that Asket would accept a complete stranger who, regardless of her telepathic and other advanced skills, could pose a risk to safety on a time-travel mission. Meier bopping him in the nose, Asket letting him loose on a trip into the past, the whole thing stinks of a fictional character.

Their explanation for the Hill’s case. First they said it was genuine then they said they were wrong, it had to do with Earth’s magnetism or something. There’s no doubt the Hills are genuine and they at least believe in the story they’ve given as well as supporting testimony from external sources regarding their honesty and character. The fact that their versions line up as well as the star chart Betty described are the main things that have me convinced ETs were involved. So, I think this was part of the Plejaren plan to call all other contactees but Meier false. I believe they’re doing this to give hoax theorists another logically flawed reason to justify their position in their own minds.

San Fran earth quake photo explanation. According to Quetzal, the Baavi mistakenly transmitted the image at least a year too early but I think this was entirely deliberate. So far, the only real indication that the GEO mag painting and Meier’s original earthquake pics don’t match is Wendelle Stevens’ detailed explanation of Meier’s originals.

The term, “beamship”. I think this was deliberate to make “Billy” Eduard Albert Meier(BEAM) look like an egotistical sci-fi writer or something along those lines.

That’s all I can think of, off hand.

[Taro]

That’s quite an assumption Taro.

It’s not an assumption. I’ve stated a possibility based on known facts:

A) Meier has unduplicatable UFO evidence.
B) Meier has scientifically tested UFO evidence and witnesses.
C) Meier has one arm and no known accomplices.

By referring to Meier as a, “scumbag psychopath” YOU are the only one making assumptions.

More likely is that Meier copied the elements of contactee cases before him.

It is LESS likely since

A) Meier has unduplicatable UFO evidence.
B) Meier has scientifically tested UFO evidence and witnesses.
C) Meier has one arm and no known accomplices.

He was part of a UFO study group before he went public and he actually visited George Adamski’s lecture and met him in person. What’s clear is that Meier had a big interest in UFOs and contact stories way before 1974 when he went public with his own story. And being the scumbag psychopath that he is he immediately started attacking others..

All of this can be explained by plausible deniability, including the previously mentioned facts.

[Taro]

Objectivity is the handy wipe : )

• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by Taro.

[Taro]

Maybe the Plejaren and other races involved modeled their fake UFO hoax after real UFO hoaxes from the past so that his case could easily blend in with the group. Like Spielberg’s E.T. hiding among Gertie’s stuffed toys.

[Taro]

In this case a conclusion that the objects are definitely large, which would most likely mean Meier’s claim of what they are is correct.

Genesis III did conclude one of Meier’s “beamships” was 21-ft wide, if I’m not mistaken.

With regard to the pictures, as far as I know they never had any originals to examine.

From Stevens’ Preliminary Investigation Report:

“The standard 35mm internegatives used in commercial copy printing of the positive 35mm transparencies produced good pictures all right, but we were searching for some revealing method to get to the real truths behind these diapositives. We took them to a custom photo laboratory and had custom enlarged internegatives made on 4″ x 5″ film plates, and then from those we printed 20″ x 30″ enlargements. All we had accomplished that was different was to carry the depth of image in the original transparency into a larger format negative capable of recording the magnified depth of image more efficiently than paper. Then when we printed back into larger format on paper we carried more of the original depth of image forward to the paper print, and we got spectacular results.”

Does NOT having originals necessarily invalidate any analysis on what is available? Has a photogrammetric expert ever questioned Genesis III’s approach?

So I think that conclusion is not very useful. But honestly, the pictures have never been my greatest interest in the meier case, so I’m not an expert on this issue.

There doesn’t appear to be any experts on this issue at BMUFOR.

But the point is there are no originals, no researcher ever got the originals, so you can’t make a valuable comparison.

Not true at all. Comparing a hi-res, digital copy of Meier’s WCUFO(#808) with Landon’s does in fact have value even if Langdon makes no effort to duplicate the photographic environment, i.e., proper dimensions of the structures surrounding the WCUFO, proper lighting, etc. If both images are the same size and resolution, i.e., the exact same quality, the flaws in each can then be quantified. You can count them. If Langdon’s has more flaws than Meier’s the duplication falls short of success, particularly considering Meier’s disability. We can also properly evaluate all the individual parts Langdon used and how much they do or don’t resemble the parts seen in Meier’s. This is why you, Mahesh and Langdon are reluctant to release them.

It’s just a damn name, get over it, but yeah, you need something catchy. What’s wrong with that?

It’s misleading and deceptive. You justify dishonesty if it serves your agenda. If you’re only “archiving” UFO evidence, then why does it “need” to be catchy?

Yeah, sure.

So, it’s POSSIBLE that the Meier case is a staged UFO hoax orchestrated by aliens, correct?

But from a terrestrial researcher’s perspective the evidence would point to a hoax, so he would conclude it most likely is a hoax.

Not all terrestrial researchers are the same. Some use a higher standard of analysis: Science. Science concludes most likely NOT a hoax.

Sure you can come up with some alternative theory that aliens have staged a hoax, but if we never get to see the real thing, how are you ever going to prove it?

First of all, this “alternative” theory, if you actually understand the UFO evidence and analyses, makes the most sense. And who said anything about proving? Proof outside of mathematics is subjective. All it means in a UFO case is what convinces one person to the next. If you don’t understand the science, you will have a very different perspective on the case than someone who does.

If aliens stages a fake ufo hoax, what value does it have for us anyway? A bunch of aliens telling us BS? As far as I’m concerned, they can fuck off.

Sounds like you haven’t read Deardorff’s theory on plausible deniability.

http://www.tjresearch.info/denial.htm

The value is in protecting our developing society from the shock of the alien reality.

But the point of Meier’s story seems to be they have some valuable teachings to bring us. So why would they do anything else than to do their best to gain our trust and come of as reliable as possible? Why give prophecies that have the same mistakes as the newspapers and are only published after fulfillment?

Why do you believe you can understand how aliens thousands of years advanced would think? If they have knowledge that you don’t, don’t you think that might change their approach from yours?

Why send us impulses with pictures that are identical to frames from old space pictures, and give some horseshit explanation that isn’t even compatible with the facts?

Not compatible with which facts?

Why rip off ‘spiritual teachings’ from other writers?

If Meier was here in previous lives thousands of years ago then maybe HIS work was ripped off first.

I don’t see why I should go to such great lengths and still try to uphold this billy meier story in the face of so much BS.

And yet all of what you refer to as BS can simply be explained by plausible deniability. So, where does this leave you as a “researcher”?

If there’s something ‘real’ about it after all, it’s still covered in shit.

If someone handed you a large diamond covered in shit, would you refuse? Think about it.

[Taro]

…and the flat-Earther trolls.

[Taro]

It got too real.

[Author]

Posts