Outer Space Pictures – Apollo-Soyuz et al. – Timeline


Contents

June 18, 1975 – Contact Report 26

Contact Date: Wednesday, June 18, 1975, 4:11 AM
Verifiable Publications: Semjase Kontakt Berichte (1st ed.) Block 3, 1977
UET-WS* Vol 5, 1979-1980s
Semjase Kontakt Berichte (2nd ed.) Block 2, pg. 215-216, 1987
Messages from the Pleiades (1nd ed.) Vol 1, pg. 251-252, 1988
Plejadisch-plejarische Kontakberichte Block 1, pg. 200-201, 2002
Messages from the Pleiades (2nd ed.) Vol 1, pg. 294-296, 2005

In CR 26 Semjase clearly mentions that the Plejaren have been following the development of the joint space venture planned by the USA and USSR in the middle of July 1975 since the beginning of the project, which according to NASA was in 1970. She a even says that they have been influencing this joint project and at times made certain attempts to fail, to prevent us from acquiring cognitions that could make us destroy ourselves. This implies the Plejaren know a lot about the project and should also know the size, color, design etc. of both the Apollo and Soyuz spacecraft that went up in space and docked with each other on July 17, 1975.

Messages from the Pleiades (2nd ed.) Vol 1, pg. 294-296, 2005 (corrections included)

Semjase:

6. (…)
7. My new task is only taking me to some planets of your system and to your satellite, the Moon.
8. This is in connection to some incidents that have happened lately.
9. The Earth scientists have started various exploration and investigation attempts to research space and some planets, which demand our attention.
10. Besides there are some new aspects regarding certain matters, which two of your great powers want to undertake as of about the middle of July.
11. These are the states of America and Russia, who in cooperation want to clear up certain factors, which is why they want to work together in a space laboratory.
12. This requires our utmost attention and all sorts of supervision, for the parties involved shouldn’t acquire more cognitions, than the earth scientists and powerful leaders can manage.
13. The danger of reaching of too large cognitions has unfortunately come tangibly near, so we have to check and control everything.
14. If too many new cognitions are acquired, then this could bring very heavy consequences for earth humanity, especially because the human being of earth is not mature enough for certain things and would utilize the respective new cognitions to consolidate the power of certain states.
15. The greatest danger lies in the fact that the new cognitions could lead to the complete destruction of earth humanity and their world, if they are applied according to certain principles.
16. This would lead to a bad disturbance of big proportions in the SOL system, by which the whole SOL system harmony would be affected.
17. Further neighbored planet systems of earth would also become affected and could, depending on each case, under circumstances evoke a smaller or bigger system catastrophe.
18. That’s why we must prevent certain cognitions etc.

Billy:
This is interesting, Semjase, but I thought this attempt would only be undertaken not until the early eighties?

Semjase:
19. It’s already going to happen.

Billy:
It amazes me that you so often speak about these things, which is not exactly your habit, as until now you have only conveyed me with these matters under the seal of secrecy.

Semjase:
20. Certainly, but the things addressed here aim at very special consequences.
21. The human being of earth must be oriented about the fact that not simply all power is with his scientists and politicians and that other beings exist, who are concerned about a certain order, so the people do not have to live in too much concern and fear.
22. On the other hand it should also become clear to the powerful ones of your world and the scientists, that they cannot simply freely at will release the reins to the insanity of destruction.

Billy:
I have to say that I’m OK with that, as many of these gentlemen fall into megalomania and insanity all too easy. But – have you already done similar things more often?

Semjase:
23. Certainly, but not only we.
24. We have followed the entire development, and also influenced it in certain ways.
25. On the other hand we have had to engage ourselves in eliminations in different cases, or at least make certain attempts fail.

Billy:
That sounds just like you have interfered in all matters to some extent.

Semjase:
26. Surely, if you want to phrase it like this.

July 15, 1975 – Contact Report 30

Contact Date: Tuesday, July 15, 1975, 9:46 AM
Verifiable Publications: Semjase Kontakt Berichte (1st ed.) Block 4, 1977
UET-WS* Vol 5, 1979-1980s
Semjase Kontakt Berichte (2nd ed.) Block 2, pg. 238, 1987
Messages from the Pleiades (1nd ed.) Vol 1, pg. 280, 1988
Plejadisch-plejarische Kontakberichte Block 1, pg. 226, 2002
Messages from the Pleiades (2nd ed.) Vol 1, pg. 327-328, 2005

In CR 30, Semjase tells Meier to prepare for the space journey that will start in the early morning of July 17 during which he will photograph the Apollo-Soyuz coupling. The Plejaren have also constructed ‘a special apparatus’ by which he could make better pictures.

Messages from the Pleiades (2nd ed.) Vol 1, pg. 327-328, 2005 (corrections included):

Semjase:
1. On different occasions I have received your thoughts, which unfortunately I had to ignore, while my present task occupies me very much.
2. And as I now take up contact with you today it will, for very specific reasons, only be for a short time, because you should prepare yourself for the early morning hours of the 17th of July, which is within two days.
3. At a given time I will then call you and pick you up from a suited location.
4. Equip yourself with sufficient film material, because this will be of importance.
5. As the first earth human being you shall photograph an event, which is of extreme significance and importance for your race.
6. It’s about the coupling maneuver of both American and Russian space capsules, which you shall film.
7. For this purpose we have constructed a special apparatus, by which you will be able to take better pictures with your camera – at least that’s what we hope for.
8. These will be the first photographs of this kind, which show such a maneuver independent of the earthly space capsules.
9. Additionally prepare yourself to be absent for a longer time, because before and after the photo event you will undertake a very far flight, which is not possible even for many space-travelling life forms.
10. In the universe only few life forms exist at this time who are able to cover such great distances, because this is only possible by breaking and using the hyperspace.

July 17, 1975 – Contact Report 31

Contact Date: Thursday July 17, 1975 10:14 AM
Verifiable Publications: Semjase Kontakt Berichte (1st ed.) Block 4-6, 1978
UET-WS* Vol 5, 1979-1980’s
Semjase Kontakt Berichte (2nd ed.) Block 2, pg. 242, 1987
Messages from the Pleiades (1nd ed.) Vol 1, pg. 283, 1988
Plejadisch-plejarische Kontakberichte Block 1, pg. 228, 2002
Messages from the Pleiades (2nd ed.) Vol 1, pg. 331, 2004

CR 31 is a very lengthy report, some of which is available online, we will just list the highlights relevant to the Apollo-Soyuz coupling in the verses 11-69 spoken by Semjase in a chronological order:

July-September 1975 – Development and fate of outer space photos

Refer to More References – Outer space photos section.

September 1975 – Contact Report 32

Contact Date: Monday, September 8 1975, 2:16 PM
Verifiable Publications: Semjase Kontakt Berichte (1st ed.) Block 6, 1978
UET-WS* Vol 6, 1979-1980’s
Semjase Kontakt Berichte (2nd ed.) Block 3, pg. 404, 1987
Messages from the Pleiades (1nd ed.) Vol 1, pg. 342, 1988
Plejadisch-plejarische Kontakberichte Block 1, pg. 363, 2002
Messages from the Pleiades (2nd ed.) Vol 2, pg. 534-535, 2005

In CR 32 Meier complains to Semjase and Asket (see verses spoken by Asket between verse numbers 213-216) about the appearance of a the half-oval shaped frame of the viewing screen that constantly appears in the photos taken through the special viewing screen, which actually was constructed for Meier by the Plejaren to take better pictures:

Billy:
Nonsense, just leave it already. If you allow it, and there is still enough time, I would like to ask you a question.

Asket:
213. Just ask.

Billy:
Thanks. You said that the device was useless for taking pictures… I mean the one from Semjase. What about the one that you two created together? Do you think that I will be able to take better photos with it later, and that I won’t be always fighting with the screen frame?

Asket:
214. I think that the device will be good.
215. But what do you mean, that you fight with the screen frame?

Billy:
You know, Semjase’s device is somewhat small and complicated for taking pictures. When I take a shot, the small screen frame and the screen enclosure always bother me, and I constantly have the darn thing in the picture. The semi-oval shape of the frame always shows up on the image.

Asket:
216. I will see to it that these flaws do not appear on my device.

On pg. 342 of Messages from the Pleiades, Vol 1, censored version the following is stated regarding this:

“This part of the special viewing screen frame showed up in several of the Apollo-Soyuz docking photos we had seen before they disappeared in a theft at the Meier house. When those slides were printed this was usually lost in the picture cropping.”

Mid-1970’s – Removal of outer space pictures from photo albums

Refer to Outer space pictures.

July 1976 – Lou Zinsstag – Timothy Good letter

Carl Jung’s cousin Lou Zinsstag, who had amassed the largest collection of UFO case histories and photographs in Europe, said the following in a letter written to Timothy Good, dated July 10, 1976, after her first visit in July to Meier, who was living in Hinwil at that time:

“For a hundred francs, I shall get 50 color photos, and the young man promised me to make a good representative choice. Besides the UFO pictures and a splendid film of twenty minutes, he showed us some other pictures which I have difficulty to describe. Eduard told me that he had been in outer space several times and he has seen some of our planets from a rather near viewpoint. First, I could not believe it and just made polite noises, but then he showed us those photos. Among them is one which would make a sensation. In their flying saucer, he and his companions watched the latest Soyuz-Apollo coupling, and for a moment they were at a distance of three meters. In these pictures you see the back of a Russian cosmonaut, his helmet, and the three letters ‘COI’ on his outfit. On another one you can see the coupling maneuver in action, much better than on TV. Other pictures I will not describe in the letter. It’s too difficult.”

August 1976 – Il Giornale der Misteri article: Semjase l’amica delle Pleiadi

An article – SEMJASE L’AMICA DELLE PLEIADI – was published in Il Giornale der Misteri, Nr. 65, August 1976 by Ilse Von Jacobi, a journalist living in Munich who frequently wrote about metaphysics and the paranormal. This article is also published on pages 45-51 in the FIGU book Ausschnitte aus Zeitungen und Journalen über <Billy> Eduard Albert Meier (BEAM) und seine Kontakte mit den Plejaren, published in 2011. It contains a photograph of the Apollo-Soyuz docking allegedly taken by Meier:

IL GIORNALE DEI MISTERI (August 1976) by Ilse Von Jacobi

“This photo shows the famous Apollo-Soyuz docking, and was taken – says Meier – from aboard a UFO.”

October 1976 – Esotera article: Herrn Meiers seltsame Reisen ins All

A photograph (similar to the above picture) of the Apollo-Soyuz docking was published in an article – Herrn Meiers seltsame Reisen ins All – on Meier in Esotera, Nr. 10, October 1976 with the following caption:

“Dieses Foto des Kopplungsmanövers zwischen amerikanischer „Apollo“-Raumkapsel und der russischen „Sojus“ am 17. 7. 75 will Meier während einer Raumreise vom UFO Semjases aus auf genommen haben (oben).” 

“This photo of the docking maneuver between American “Apollo” space capsule and the Russian “Soyuz” on 17.7.75 was taken by Meier from Semjase’s UFO during his space travel (above).”
[Rough translation]

This article is also published in Ausschnitte aus Zeitungen und Journalen on pages 55-60.

April 1978 – Quick magazine article: Ufos and unserem Himmel?

A similar photo of the Apollo-Soyuz docking was published again in Quick magazine (Germany), Nr. 17 on April 20, 1978 in an article – Ufos an unserem Himmel? – about Meier.

“Rendezvous im Weltraum:
Als sich im Juli 1975 Amerikaner und Russen im Weltraum trafen, war auch ein Schweizer dabei. Eduard Meier behauptet, er habe die Kopplung der Apollo-Kapsel mit dem Sojus-Raumschiff von Bord einer fliegenden Untertasse aus beobachtet und dabei dieses Foto geschossen. Man mag glauben, was man will – nur eins ist sicher: Dieses Bild kann weder von einem amerikanischen noch von einem sowjetischen Astronauten gemacht worden sein. Die Unscharfe der Aufnahme erklärt Eduard Meier mit den besonderen Verhältnissen an Bord eines Ufos.”

“Rendezvous in space:
When Americans and Russians met in space in July 1975, a Swiss man was also present. Eduard Meier claims to have observed and photographed the docking of the Apollo capsule with the Soyuz spaceship from aboard a flying saucer. You may believe what you want – only one thing is certain: This image could not have been made ​​by either an American or of a Soviet astronaut. The fuzziness of the photograph are due to the special conditions on board a UFO, Eduard Meier says.”

June 9, 1980 – ICUFON Report: The Eduard “Billy” Meier fraud

Col. Colman S. von Keviczky (1909-1998), the internationally prominent ufologist and Hungarian military scientist, founded ICUFON (Intercontinental U.F.O. Galactic Spacecraft Research and Analytic Network) in 1966. He published a report on the Meier case, which was sent to Wendelle Stevens and Thomas K. Welsch of Genesis III Productions, Ltd. on June 9, 1980. See the highlighted part on the pages 4 & 5 of the report containing information on the Apollo-Soyuz photos, and also the corresponding slides – Abstract C & D. For the full report, see the pages 114-120 of the book – Ausschnitte aus Zeitungen und Journalen.

ICUFON - pg 4ICUFON - pg 5

ASTF - photo 65   ASTF - photo 63

January 29, 1981 – Bieler Tagblatt article: Doch mehr als ein umstrittenes Phänomen?

An article on Meier – Doch mehr als ein umstrittenes Phänomen? – was published in Bieler Tagblatt (Switzerland) on January 29, 1981, which contains a paragraph about the Apollo-Soyuz docking:

Bei Sojus-Apollo live dabei:

Im Juli 1975 trug sich im Weltraum etwas Sensationelles zu: zwei Raumschiffe reichten einander die «Hand». Die russische Sojus und die amerikanische Apollo demonstrierten ein Ankupplungsmanöver. Eduard Meyer behauptet nun, er sei just am selben Tag mit «seinem» UFO unterwegs gewesen und habe diese bahnbrechende Szene der Weltraumforschung fotografiert. Freilich wird ihm diese Aufnahmen nicht jedermann «abkaufen»! Er verfügt auch sonst über ein ansehnliches Repertoire von Fotos und Filmen…”

“Live present at Soyuz-Apollo:
On July 1975, something sensational took place in space: two spaceships reached each others «hand». The Russian Soyuz and the American Apollo demonstrated a docking maneuver. Eduard Meyer now claims that he was just traveling on the same day with “his” UFO and has photographed this groundbreaking scene of space exploration. Of course, not everyone ‘buys’ (trusts) these photographs! In addition, he has a considerable repertoire of photos and movies.”

This article is also published in Ausschnitte aus Zeitungen und Journalen on pages 140-141.

March 1981 – The Meier Incident: The most infamous hoax in Ufology

In March 1981 Kal K. Korff, with editorial assistance from William L. Moore, publishes a book: The Meier Incident: The most infamous hoax in Ufology. On page 28 of this 124 pages book, Korff  mostly presents the results of  Col. Colman S. von Keviczky’s ICUFON report from 1980:

TMI - pg 28 - cut

1982 – UFO Contact from the Pleiades: A Preliminary Investigation Report

Following is an excerpt from pages 254-255:

And how would he get color photographs of our space vehicles in orbit? If he shot the Apollo-Soyuz docking maneuver in space from color simulations on TV or elsewhere, why haven’t we been able to find the same simulations, or the same angles and shadows and climatic patterns over the earth’s surface, and where did he get them and what did he do with them…without anybody in his family or circle of friends knowing about it??

August 1986 – Extraterrestrial Strategy: Implications of the Embargo Hypothesis

In 1986 now retired Research Professor Emeritus (OSU) James W. Deardorff wrote a 309-page unpublished book – Extraterrestrial Strategy: Implications of the Embargo Hypothesis – in which he referred to the Apollo-Soyuz pictures on page 138-139:

On Meier’s second trip, Semjase took Meier on a quick tour of Venus, Mercury and Jupiter in her beamship, and then back to Earth where he was allowed to observe the coupling of the Apollo and Soyuz space craft on July 17, 1975, and even to photograph it with the earth in background. The Pleiadean craft were invisible to the Earth astronauts. The photos were somewhat blurry, because, according to Stevens, all of the original photos of that extended trip into space had been stolen from Meier’s closet (along with many of the saucer photos), with only a few negatives remaining which had been made by a home-made slide copying technique. They looked realistic except that the Russian spacecraft was shown with its solar30 panels not quite fully deployed. According to Korff, after interviewing William Drews of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Soviet craft should have had its panels fully extended, and NASA animated simulations showed the Soyuz craft with its solar panels folded. The implication was that Meier’s photos were pictures of NASA animations shown on TV. However, in researching these points Stevens could find no NASA simulations showing the solar panels only partly deployed, and on the photo he could find none of the telltale video signs associated with the camera shutter speed in combination with the TV scanning sweep lines.

References
30
Korff, K. K., 1980: (see Ch. 5, Ref. 15)

1988 – Review of Korff’s Report: “The Meier Incident — The Most Infamous Hoax in Ufology”

In 1988 Deardorff wrote a 20 page review of Korff’s 1981 book with the title ‘Review of Korff’s Report: “The Meier Incident — The Most Infamous Hoax in Ufology‘, although it was never published. On pages 9-10 of Deardorff’s unpublished work, he responds to Korff’s analysis of the Apollo-Soyuz photos:

Regarding Meier’s reported 5-day trip during which he said Semjase permitted him to photograph the Apollo-Soyuz link-up in 1975, one of Korff’s objections (p.28) is that the Soyuz spacecraft had straight solar panels extending outward, not partially folded ones as in Meier’s photo. This information was said to have come from William Drews of NASA. However, if one reads the Soviet account of this link-up25 one can see from the main drawing that the Soyuz solar panels are pictured to have been in a partially folded orientation, as in Meier’s photo. The drawing was made by one of the two astronauts who was on that flight: Alexei Leonov, who is also an amateur artist.

References*
25 Lebedev, L., and Romanov, A., Rendezvous in Space: Soyuz-Apollo (Moscow: Progress Publishers (in English), 1979) p. 10.

* pages 19-20 of Deardorff’s unpublished work

The drawing of Soviet cosmonaut Alexei Leonov to which James Deardorff was referring is available on the NASA website, along with a short description:

Leonov A-S painting

“S75-25077 (May 1975) — A photographic copy of a painting made by cosmonaut Aleksey A. Leonov, commander of the Soviet ASTP first (prime) crew. This symbolic artwork, representing a Soviet Soyuz spacecraft docking in Earth orbit with an American Apollo spacecraft, was finished in May 1974. The sketch for the painting was made in 1973 following the signing of the space agreement between the United Stated and the Soviet Union. Leonov said that his painting symbolizes the new type of international cooperation of working together in space. The original painting, which measures 80 centimeters by 160 centimeters (1 cm. = 0.39 in.), is on display in a museum in the city of Baku on the Caspian Sea. In making the sketch for the painting Leonov used a model of an earlier Soyuz spacecraft and a picture of an Apollo spacecraft. Later, he obtained a model of an Apollo which helped him check the configuration of the American spacecraft. The tanks on the Docking Module are no longer exposed on the current DM configuration, he noted. Also, this would not be an exact view of the sun as seen from Earth orbit. Leonov took artist license in stressing the symbolism in his artwork. The Soyuz is represented smaller in the painting than it actually is, Leonov added.”

1988 – Message from the Pleiades Vol. 1

Wendelle Stevens publishes Messages from the Pleiades (1st ed.), Vol 1 in 1988. On page 291 he presents the same picture of the Apollo-Soyuz coupling as in Kal Korff’s 1981 book with the following  caption:

“17 July 1975, Near Space. Meier photographs the docking maneuver from Semjase’s ship. These color photos clearly reveal the yellowish green hue cast inside by the orange to pink “window” sensors from outside.”

1990 – Contact Report 236

Contact Date: Thursday, April 26, 1990, 12:03 AM
Verifiable Publications: Semjase Kontakt Berichte (2nd ed.) Block 13, pg. ???, 1996
Plejadisch-plejarische Kontakberichte Block 6, pg. 270, 2005

In CR 236 Ptaah says that all the falsified outer space pictures were from a future film that was produced with the help of telepathic impulses send to the Earth people, which explains why these pictures resembled the reality:

Billy:
Then still the last question: over and over again, I am asked about the space photos of my great journey, namely in reference to whether these were traded around and became falsified.

Ptaah:
302. You probably don’t mean the paper images but rather the slides.
303. Yes, those were greatly falsified by the machinations of the fallible ones, and I mean all of them, because out of all those that Quetzal took and examined, there weren’t any that weren’t maliciously manipulated, and they ultimately turned out to be shots that correspond to a future film that was produced by our impulses on the Earth.

Billy:
And how did it happen, then, that the shots resembled the conditions of reality?

Ptaah:
304. Because our transmitted impulses were given to the Earth people in the form of impulse-images that corresponded to true, existent things of foreign worlds.

Billy:
Planets, suns, humans, apparatuses, dinosaurs, and plants – were all these things included?

Ptaah:
305. That corresponds what was done.
306. But now, my friend, that must be enough of the questions.

Billy:
Okay. I’m satisfied. Thank you. Then now, fire away with what you still have to discuss privately…

The statement that all the falsified pictures came from a future film seems to contradict what was already published by FIGU earlier about the pictures. For example, in CR 68, November 12, 1976 (See Messages from the Pleiades, 1st ed. Vol 3, pg. 222, 1993), Meier says to Semjase that the pictures of Universal Barrier which Meier allegedly shot during his July 17 Great Space Journey was shown on TV on Nov 8, 1976. He also says that the pictures of Venus, Mars, Jupiter, the Great Spacer etc. were shown on TV in a different program, a few months before. Also the Pteranodon picture which Quetzal identified as a fake and destroyed it was an illustration made by Zdenek Burian, published in 1972 in the book Life Before Man, written by Zdenek V. Spinar and first published in Prague. Also the cave men pictures are very similar to a 1965 illustration made by artist Rudolph Zallinger. This clearly shows there are many different sources of the falsified pictures which were allegedly inserted by MIB to discredit Meier: several TV programs broadcasted over several months and paintings of different artists.

When asked about the name and release year of this future film on the English FIGU forum, Meier replied in July 2014 that he didn’t know.

The same question was already asked in March 2010 on the German FIGU forum, to which Meier’s son Atlantis Meier responded:

Hallo Moby,
leider muss ich dir auf diese deine Anfrage negativen Bescheid erteilen. Auf Anordnung von Ptaah hin wurde das an einer unserer Sitzungen vor einigen Jahren so beschlossen. Die Begründung liegt darin, dass alle diese Dinge, auch im Bezug auf Billy`s grosse Reise, schon mehrere Jahrzehnte zurückliegt und dass diesbezüglich alles notwendige schon mehrmals dargelegt wurde. Damit soll verhindert werden, dass diese alten und abgeschlossenen Dinge nicht wieder aufgewärmt und neuerlich verblendete und irregeleitete FIGU- Gegner auf den Plan gerufen werden.

Hello Moby,
Unfortunately, I have to decline an answer to your question. By order of Ptaah this was decided on one of our meetings a few years ago. The reason is that all these things, also regarding Billy’s great journey, are already several decades ago and everything about it has already been said several times. This is to prevent that these old and closed issues are revisited again and again attracts blinded and misguided FIGU opponents.

1991 – Und sie fliegen doch! (1st ed.)

The late Guido Moosbrugger, core group member of FIGU, publishes a book – Und sie fliegen doch! – in which he responds to the criticism on the Apollo-Soyuz photos in the ICUFON report from 1980 written by Col. Colman S. von Keviczky and in an unidentified German magazine, of which the name and date were not mentioned. He also presents two additional Meier’s Apollo-Soyuz pictures (#71 & #72) which he uses in his rebuttal. Later this book was published in English in 2001 and 2004 and an extended German version was published in 2012. In all versions the rebuttal of Guido regarding the Apollo-Soyuz photos remains the same. Below are the pages from the 2004 English edition.

Note: In the third point in Guido’s response to criticism #1, he refers to photo #64 which he says shows a model given to Meier by Semjase and not an actual ET craft. But photo #64 is a genuine ET craft according to Meier, so this is probably a mistake and he should be referring to photo #65 instead. See Abstract C (#65) under ‘1980 – ICUFON Report: The Eduard “Billy” Meier fraud’ in the 1980 section for the Semjase’s model.

ASTF - photo 63   ASTF - pg 36   ASTF - pg 37

ASTF - pg 174   ASTF - pg 175   ASTF - pg 176

1995 – The Billy Meier Story – Spaceships of the Pleiades

Kal K. Korff publishes his book ‘The Billy Meier Story – Spaceships of the Pleiades. On pages 240-244 is his analysis of the Apollo-Soyuz docking photos, on pages 264-265 it is mentioned that Hans Jacob wrote a letter to a Swiss TV-station, including one of Meier’s Apollo-Soyuz pictures, asking if they knew where the picture might have originated.

SOTP - pg 240-241

SOTP - pg 242-243

SOTP - pg 244-245

SOTP - pg 264-265

1997 – Aus den Tiefen des Weltenraums… Kontakte mit den Plejadiern/Plejaren

FIGU publishes the book Aus den Tiefen des Weltenraums…Kontakte mit den Plejadiern/Plejaren. On page 155 Meier mentions the space pictures, including the  Apollo-Soyuz pictures:

“Today, my entire and still existing photo material which, for the most part, I had photographed myself, is comprised of more than 1,000 pictures, but while only 500 thereof refer directly to beamships, resp. UFOs and the landing tracks etc., as well as to extraterrestrials and their foot- resp. shoe prints. Originally, more than 3,500 photos existed of space ships and landing tracks as also of alien worlds and of the Apollo-Soyuz docking in the Earth orbit but during the course of years, all these were stolen and also manipulated to a great extent, in order to be able to accuse me of swindle and of fraud.”

1998 – Contact Report 260

Contact Date: Tuesday, February 3, 1998, 10:27 PM
Verifiable Publications: Semjase Kontakt Berichte (2nd ed.) Block 15, pg. ???, 1987
Plejadisch-plejarische Kontakberichte Block 7, pg. 479-482, 2005

In CR 260 Ptaah says the following about the forged space pictures:

Ptaah:
86. Among the forgeries and falsifications weren’t just the photos that showed our aircraft but also those images that you made on your Great Journey.
87. This is especially true for the dinosaur images as well as for the Apollo-Soyuz images, but also various other images belong with these.
(…)
93. But now, we can no longer investigate what is actually the case, unfortunately, because as you know, Quetzal took all the originals and copies of slides and negatives, etc. from your workroom and eliminated them, so today, we can no longer investigate the concerns in this respect.

2001 – And yet… they fly! (1st English ed.)

Guido publishes an English edition of his 1991 book ‘Und sie fliegen doch!’ titled ‘And yet… they fly!, which contains the same photos and response regarding the Apollo-Soyuz photos on pages 208-210.

2001 – Plejaren Ptaah verifies Meier’s outer space pictures and concludes 42 of them are genuine or only slightly falsified

In FIGU Special Bulletin 20 (original German here) an article was published regarding controversies about Meier’s UFO and outer space photos (especially the Pteranodon photo) and how these were manipulated by third parties (MIB, photographer Schmid etc.). Embedded in this article is an article written by FIGU core group member Hans Georg Lanzendorfer (HGL) about the same topic. Below are some relevant excerpts from this article:

“HGL: After the freshly developed dinosaur pictures were in the hands of “Billy,” these were seen and inspected by Quetzal. During this, dozens of pictures were noted by him, which quite clearly could not have come from the world NEBER and, therefore, had not been taken by “Billy,” about which Quetzal got very angry
(…)
This especially concerned that photograph, on which a pterosaur, with an ejecting fish and a white spot on its belly, was portrayed. With the help of this counterfeit, “Billy” should have one day been made a deceiver and contact swindler. Because of the manipulations, the photos were immediately recovered and destroyed by Quetzal in the middle of the 1970s, and indeed, still before they could be brought into circulation by FIGU or by “Billy.”
(…)
Before the original photos were removed and destroyed by Quetzal, however, the foundation member of FIGU, Guido Moosbrugger, came into the possession of some copies. However, he had to make the promise to the Plejaren and “Billy,” never to make the copies available to the public or to get rid of these in any way because the falsification from a foreign hand was also among the preserved photos. Should he fail to comply with the instruction, the pictures would have to be immediately confiscated and destroyed by the Plejaren, as this also happened with the originals of “Billy.” To this day, Guido Moosbrugger feels bound to his promise and has always kept the pictures under wraps.

In the course of the joint correction work on the Contact Reports by Ptaah, Florena, Enjana, “Billy” and Bernadette Brand, the time for clarifying had also come. In the year 2001, Guido was asked by “Billy” to make some of the photos available for publication in the corrected Pleiadian/Plejaren Contact Report Block. Therefore, since the year 2001, several genuine dinosaur pictures and dinosaur slides from the possession of Guido Moosbrugger are to be found with “Billy” again, but these remain strictly under wraps. For the publication in the Contact Report Block, it was strictly ensured, with the help of Ptaah, that it only concerned “Billy’s” genuine pictures or his pictures that were only slightly falsified by Schmid, whereby the aforesaid falsification, for a logical reason, found no use. For this reason, the photo of the pterosaur that was falsified by a foreign hand is not shown in the new, hardback Pleiadian/Plejaren Contact Reports Block No. 1.
(…)
Ptaah: Of the more than 1,378 pictures from your Great Journey, only a few remain, namely 42, which really came from you, while the majority of the 1,336 pictures consisted of foisted photocopies of some drawings, etc., which Quetzal discovered very quickly at that time, which is why he destroyed all slides and photos.
(…)
Worldwide, none of your dinosaur pictures and space pictures, etc. have been published, other than those that are shown in new Contact Report Block. These, however, are only a few copies of the real 42 shots, to which only very few falsifying and not any major changes were made.

This article implies the pictures published in the Pleiadian/Plejaren Contact Reports are some of the 42 surviving space pictures that were checked very carefully with the help of the Plejaren Ptaah and are genuine or only slightly falsified.

2002 – Plejadisch-plejarische Kontaktberichte Block 1

Meier publishes the first block of the 3rd edition of the Contact Reports, Plejadisch-plejarische Kontakt Berichte Block 1. CR 31, which is about the space journey, contains a couple of dozen space pictures. On pages 232 and 234, which describe Meier witnessing the Apollo-Soyuz docking there are 7 photos, non of them have a caption, but from the context it seems they are related to the Apoll-Soyuz coupling and/or any satellites of terrestrial or extraterrestrial origin Meier might have photographed (see Semjase verse 65).

Note: The text is intentionally blurred due to copyright issues, leaving out only the photographs.

PPKB 01 - pg 232 - CR 031 - Blurred   PPKB 01 - pg 234 - CR 031 - Blurred

2004 – And still they fly! (2nd English ed.)

Guido publishes a ‘completely revised and updated 2nd edition’ of his 2001 book titled And still they fly! (1st edition was titled And yet… they fly!) which contains the same photos and response regarding the Apollo-Soyuz photos on pages 174-176.

January 11, 2010 – Contact Report 486

Refer to More References – Outer space photos.

2012 – Und sie fliegen doch! (2nd German ed.)

Guido publishes an expanded 2nd German edition after his first German edition 1991 book – Und sie fliegen doch! which again contains the same photos and response regarding the Apollo-Soyuz photos on pages 347-350. No changes or corrections were made.

July 2014 – UFO-Prophet investigation and articles

On July 23, 2014 Mohammed Q. Hassan (Arlington VA, USA) brought to the attention of Mahesh Karumudi (one of the webmasters of BMUFOR) that there where dissimilarities between Meier’s photos of the Apollo-Soyuz docking and the mock-up model of Apollo-Soyuz which he observed in the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum. This lead to a thorough investigation which revealed many interesting facts and eventually resulted in a 3 parts analysis posted on Mahesh’ blog ufoprophet.blogspot.com:

Billy Meier’s Outer Space pictures: Apollo-Soyuz docking & Others
Part 1/3 – Wednesday, August 6, 2014 (Timeline and Conclusions)
Part 2/3 – Sunday, August 10, 2014 (Analysis of pictures in Guido’s book)
Part 3/3 – Thursday, August 14, 2014 (Analysis of pictures in PPKB 1, Final conclusions and Implications)

The investigation of the Apollo-Soyuz et al. pictures on this BMUFOR site is for the most part copied from the exhaustive, lengthy 3-part analysis first published on the UFO-Prophet blog.

August 2014 – Notification of the forged pictures to FIGU

On August 20, 2014, James Moore, webmaster of the Billy Meier Wiki Futureofmankind.co.uk notified Christian Frehner (CF), core group member of FIGU since 1987, regarding the analysis done by Mahesh on the Apollo-Soyuz et al. pictures on Ufoprophet.blogspot.com:

From: James Moore <xxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.com>
To: FIGU – Christian Frehner <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Cc: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 6:36 PM
Subject: Apollo-Soyuz photos in CR31

Hi Christian,

Mahesh has done a fine investigation of the Apollo-Soyuz photos in CR31 which have been discovered to be from a Soviet space documentary which was aired in the Soviet Union a few years before the great space journey. Some others seem to be from a NASA animation. 1 appears to be from previous Apollo mission, 1 from a previous Soviet mission and 1 remains unidentified.

Please allow the core group to consider his investigation, and determine the reality. It may be prudent to remove or label such photos appropriately from future editions of PPKB block 1 after the review is complete, in order to eliminate confusion in the reader. An explanation in a future bulletin would also be beneficial to those of us who are aware of this discovery by Mahesh.

Salome
James

From: James Moore <xxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.com>>
To: FIGU – Christian Frehner <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Cc: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 6:36 PM
Subject: Apollo-Soyuz photos in CR31

Here is his investigation

http://ufoprophet.blogspot.co.uk

Were you already aware of this please?

Salome
James

From: FIGU – Christian Frehner <christian.frehner@figu.org>
To: James Moore <xxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 6:36 PM
Subject: Apollo-Soyuz photos in CR31

Hi James,

Yes, I am.
We don’t discuss these old issues anymore nor do we any investigation. Since Billy doesn’t own the original photos/slides anymore, there’s no occasion or chance to publish any counter-information or correction or proof.
Besides, the space photos are just an interesting side-topic and nothing more. What’s important is the spiritual teaching information.

Salome,
Christian

 On the same date Simon Goudswaard, passive member of FIGU since 2011, who assisted Mahesh with the investigation sent a German summary of the investigation to CF:

From: Simon Goudswaard <xxxxxxx@xxxxxx.nl>
To: Christian Frehner / FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Cc: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 10:16 PM
Subject: Forged space pictures

Hi Christian,

As already was mentioned to you by James Moore and maybe other people as well, some of the space pictures have been identified as forgeries, while they seem to be currently published as genuine or only slightly falsified. For your consideration I’ve in short listed all the points of criticism for each picture (see appendix), in what with a little bit of imagination could be identified as German :-).

Best regards and Salome,
Simon

Within an hour on the same date, CF replied:

From: Christian Frehner / FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Date: Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 7:22 PM
To: Simon Goudswaard <xxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xx>
Subject: Re: Forged space pictures

Hi Simon,

Thank you.
Since Billy doesn’t own the original pictures anymore, there’s no opportunity or possibility to present a reply or “proof”. Additionally, we are not interested to discuss this issue any longer.

Salome,
Christian

This answer and the fact that CF reply came after only 36 minutes after Simon sent the summary suggests that CF didn’t really take the time to read it, so Simon responded as follows:

From: Simon Goudswaard <xxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xx>
Date: Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 9:59 PM
To: Christian Frehner / FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Cc: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Forged space pictures

Hi Christian,

It was stated in Sonder Bulletin 20 (http://www.figu.org/ch/verein/periodika/sonder-bulletin/2005/nr-20/getuerkte-photos?page=0,6), in an article about forged pictures etc.:

’Es liegt weder im Interesse der FIGU noch im Interesse von ‹Billy› Meier, dass im Falle seiner wahrlichen und realen Kontakte mit ausserirdischen, intelligenten menschlichen Lebensformen die Unwahrheit verbreitet wird oder irgendwelche gefälschten UFO-Photos eine Verbreitung finden.’

That was in 2005, is that still valid or does FIGU not care anymore if there would still be demonstrably false pictures in the material (which is different from pictures that cannot be proven to be authentic)?

Salome,
Simon

P.S. I’m aware of CR 486 (http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/Contact_Report_486), but I don’t think it applies in this case.

After two days, CF still hadn’t replied to this, so Simon sent this mail:

From: Simon Goudswaard <xxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xx>
Date: Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 4:58 PM
To: Christian Frehner / FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Cc: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Forged space pictures

Hi Christian,

Did you not yet read my last mail? Or do you not want to answer it?

Frankly, I find your first answer quite illogical. You don’t need to have the original pictures to see the pictures in the PPKB and Guidos book are clearly not taken in space in July 1975, which would be obvious in a second to any space expert, and to a laymen like me after a few hours of Google search. For example because the depicted craft Saljut 1 (1971) and Soyuz 4 & 5 (1969) were not even existent anymore in July 1975, during the Great Journey, and these photos are even identical to images from old space documentaries from the late 1960’s and early 1970’s:

Salyut 1 comparison

Soyuz 4 & 5 comparison

ASTP Picture 2 comparison

I already find it very strange that such pictures are still in the contact notes today. But what I find even stranger is how issues like this are dealt with by both the core group, and by a many passive members, which has become apparent from a fiery Facebook discussion. Off course a bunch of fake pictures in a book is in and of itself not important at all. But how is the fact that such silly pictures are being published as genuine or only slightly falsified, and the way any genuine criticism is being dealt with in the present and past even remotely compatible with a community that promotes logic, reason and truth, teaches to question everything, and even has advanced extraterrestrials as their allies? Furthermore, do you think these pictures will at some point turn into authentic pictures? Do you think nobody will notice this strange discrepancy anymore in the future? Or will this yet be another embarrassing Asket-Nera like story?

I think it’s best for FIGU to deal with this now, because it will not go away by itself and without a doubt will again lead to questions like this in the future (cause and effect), you can’t ignore this forever. As a FIGU member I find it a quite embarrassing thought, that these pictures will still be in the material in 10 or 20 years. I repeat this quote from HGL in FSB 20:

’Es liegt weder im Interesse der FIGU noch im Interesse von ‹Billy› Meier, dass im Falle seiner wahrlichen und realen Kontakte mit ausserirdischen, intelligenten menschlichen Lebensformen die Unwahrheit verbreitet wird oder irgendwelche gefälschten UFO-Photos eine Verbreitung finden.’

Best regards,
Simon

The next day, CF responded:

From: Christian Frehner / FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Date: Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 8:21 AM
To: Simon Goudswaard <xxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xx>
Subject: Re: Forged space pictures

Hi Simon

It is a fact that the space pictures have been manipulated before Billy got them back from the laboratory. We don’t know to what degree. In PP Block 1 there are a couple of these photos taken as an illustration. It really looks that some of those photos were copies from books. Billy of course did not make photos from books or old films. Everything is unfortunate. Perhaps it would have been wise to not have published the manipulated photos, but since they have been published and are in the book, that’s a fact, too, and seems to be a mistake. This cannot be made unmade today.
Anyway, it has been frankly stated that the photos were manipulated, and there was a reason that Quetzal has taken the photos away from Billy.
I don’t think that these photos will turn out to be 100% authentic just because time is flowing into the past.

I think that the people in the future (or at least many of them) are intelligent enough to realize that these photos have led to controversial discussion etc. and are, actually, not crucial for the Billy Meier case.

Have a good day.
Salome,
Christian

Although CF acknowledges that the pictures could be manipulated, it still doesn’t seem he has actually taken a look at the analysis because then it would have been clear to him the pictures are practically 100% forged. So Simon once again tries to bring this to his attention:

From: Simon Goudswaard <xxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xx>
Date: Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 10:04 AM
To: Christian Frehner / FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Cc: karumudi mahesh chowdary
Subject: Re: Forged space pictures

Hi Christian,

If you will carefully read the document I sent to you earlier, it will become apparent to you that at least the Guido pictures and most of the PPKB1 pictures are practically 100% manipulated, not to say replaced.

I’m aware it has been stated many times that the space pictures have been manipulated, but that is a long time ago and you can’t hide behind this argument forever, especially because, with regard to the pictures that are published in PPKB 1, Sonder Bulletin 20 (2005) states this:

Im Zuge der gemeinsamen Korrekturarbeiten an den Kontaktberichten mit Ptaah, Florena, Enjana, ‹Billy› und Bernadette Brand war auch die Zeit der Klärung gekommen. Im Jahre 2001 wurde Guido von ‹Billy› gebeten, einige der Photos für die Veröffentlichung im korrigierten plejadisch-plejarischen Kontaktbericht-Block zur Verfügung zu stellen. Daher befinden sich seit dem Jahr 2001 wieder einige wenige echte Saurier-Bilder und -Dias aus dem Besitz von Guido Moosbrugger bei ‹Billy›, wobei diese jedoch strikte unter Verschluss bleiben. Für die Veröffentlichung im Kontaktbericht-Block wurde unter Mithilfe von Ptaah streng darauf geachtet, dass es sich nur um echte oder nur geringfügig durch Schmid verfälschte Bilder ‹Billys› handelte, wobei die genannte Fälschung aus logischem Grund keine Verwendung fand. Aus diesem Grund ist auch das von fremder Hand gefälschte Photo des Flugsauriers nicht im neuen, gebundenen plejadisch-plejarischen Kontaktbericht-Block Nr. 1 abgebildet.

So, the pictures in PPKB 1 are supposed to be genuine or only slightly falsified, which clearly they are not, at least not all of them. Given the fact that the Plejaren are technologically 8000 years ahead of us, this seems like a very weird glitch to me. If only 1 false picture slipped trough, that would already have been a little odd, but so many pictures, which any space expert could identify as fakes in a second?? It makes me wonder what method they used to check these pictures for authenticity.

Also it is very weird to take pictures of 1969 and 1971 space craft as an illustration for a space journey in July 1975.

Off course everybody makes mistakes, and the past cannot be changed, these pictures have been published, so be it. But, the future is still open. If I may offer a suggestion: simply make a short statement in a Bulletin now, that these space pictures cannot be trusted after all, as a number of them have turned out to be forgeries. In the next edition of PPKB 1 (and maybe also PPKB 2) and USFD, remove at least these forged space pictures (to be honest, the others look quite fishy to me as well).

Surely the people of the future will eventually find out the truth about the Meier case, but I think in general that will go a little bit quicker if the history books show that FIGU has a track record of being open to genuine criticism and adequately correcting mistakes, of whatever nature they might be, which is what FIGU stands for, doesn’t it?

Salome,
Simon

To which CF responded a day later:

From: Christian Frehner / FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Date: Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 8:43 PM
To: Simon Goudswaard <xxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xx>
Subject: Re: Forged space pictures

Hi Simon,

Thank you.
I will discuss the issue with Billy regarding removing the photos in a next edition.

Salome,
Christian

It seemed the message finally came across after FIGU passive member Simon repeatedly explained why the photos are fake and that publishing fake pictures damages the credibility of FIGU. But as you will see from the below information, Meier apparently wasn’t interested to respond to this issue.

August-October 2014 – Questions by Mahesh Karumudi to Billy Meier on FIGU Forum

On August 25, 2014, this question from Mahesh Karumudi (online name: Mahigitam) was answered on the FIGU forum in the topic ‘Your Questions to Billy Meier–Answered‘:

Billy,

http://futureofmankind.co.uk/w/images/9/9f/Apollo-soyuzX6.jpg
Are all the 6 different photos in the above illustration come from Apollo-Soyuz docking on July 17, 1975 ?
Or do some photos in those six, not belong to Apollo-Soyuz docking ?

We don’t know because Billy is not in possession of the original slides/photos anymore.
(Note by CF: And after so many years Billy does not remember the exact details.)

A day later, on August 26, 2014, Mahesh Karumudi asked the following questions, which were responded to on September 30, 2014:

Billy,
When I recently looked into some of the Apollo-Soyuz pictures & others that were published in Guido’s ‘Und sie fliegen doch!’ & also in CR 31 (PPKB 1), I found that 11 outer space pictures are certainly falsified and have been traced back to NASA animation (early 1970’s), Russian documentaries (1969 & 1972),..etc – all of which were produced before your Great Journey in July 1975. Some pictures are of spacecrafts that were not even in space during your Great Journey. For example Salyut-1 in your photos was from a frame of a documentary made in 1972 and the Soyuz 4-Soyuz 5 coupling photo was from a frame in a documentary made in 1969.

CF has already received a shortened german version of my analysis and you may want to look into it, if you haven’t already seen it. Now, my questions are:

1. Would there be any explanation (by you or/and Plejaren) on this discrepancy, just like the explanations which were given in earlier times on similar anamolies – Asket-Nera, Universal Barrier, WCUFO,..etc ?

2. Would these pictures be removed entirely or would they be published as-it-is which would give the obvious message that they are genuine ?
(Of course any of the above actions could only take place after you or Plejaren analyse the pictures once again & confirm their source.)

If possible, many are interested to know how this has even occurred when Ptaah around 2002 strictly ensured that no fake pictures would enter into PPKBs as this statement by Hans George Lanzendorfer from FIGU special bulletin 20 clearly states:

“In the year 2001, Guido was asked by “Billy” to make some of the photos available for publication in the corrected Pleiadian/Plejaren Contact Report Block…For the publication in the Contact Report Block, it was strictly ensured, with the help of Ptaah, that it only concerned “Billy’s” genuine pictures or his pictures that were only slightly falsified by Schmid, whereby the aforesaid falsification, for a logical reason, found no use.”

There’s no need for a “correction”.

(Note by CF: Actually, these pictures are not an important issue. They were used in the PP Block only as an illustration.)

To what extent this issue has been discussed within FIGU, as CF said would happen in his last reply to Simon, is not clear, but if it was, the conclusion seems to be the there is no need for correction because these pictures only serve as an illustrations and aren’t necessarily Meier’s authentic pictures. This seems in direct contradiction what is stated about these pictures in FIGU Special Bulletin 20, which is why on the same date, September 30, 2014, Mahesh asked this follow up question on the FIGU forum, which was answered on October 28, 2014:

Dear Meier,
In response to my question whether the faked Apollo-Soyuz pictures would be removed entirely or would be published as-it-is which would give the obvious message that they are genuine; you responded as follows:

“There’s no need for a “correction”.
(Note by CF: Actually, these pictures are not an important issue. They were used in the PP Block only as an illustration.)”

Why do you think there is no need for correction ?
Do you still consider these photos as authentic, photographed by you during your space journey ?
If not, why publish the pictures, faked by MIB in PPKBs as authentic ?

CF, these pictures were checked & authenticated by Ptaah. I still don’t understand what you meant by this: “They were used in the PP Block only as an illustration.”

If FIGU is fine with having faked pictures in its publications, why did they remove the Venus, Jupiter, Pterdactyl, Asket-Nera (captions changed),..etc ?
Why not just have them in photo albums & just say what you have just said ?

Billy’s comment: This is old hat.

Critical questions on this issue were totally ignored and no further explanations were given other than the Meier’s single-sentence responses. Apparently, Billy considers this a closed topic and doesn’t want to discuss it anymore, nor spend any time on it.

October-November 2014 – Mail conversation between Mahesh Karumudi and Christian Frehner

On November 23, 2014 Mahesh asked clarification to Christian Frehner (responses in blue) regarding the forum responses to his questions. This lead to the following mail correspondence:

From: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:08 AM
To: Christian Frehner/FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Subject: Billy’s Q/A – Apollo-Soyuz pictures

Dear CF,

The following is the Q/A on english FIGU forum and your response. I am going to just focus on your response.

Mahigitam
Billy,

When I recently looked into some of the Apollo-Soyuz pictures & others that were published in Guido’s ‘Und sie fliegen doch!’ & also in CR 31 (PPKB 1), I found that 11 outer space pictures are certainly falsified and have been traced back to NASA animation (early 1970’s), Russian documentaries (1969 & 1972),..etc – all of which were produced before your Great Journey in July 1975. Some pictures are of spacecrafts that were not even in space during your Great Journey. For example Salyut-1 in your photos was from a frame of a documentary made in 1972 and the Soyuz 4-Soyuz 5 coupling photo was from a frame in a documentary made in 1969.

CF has already received a shortened german version of my analysis and you may want to look into it, if you haven’t already seen it. Now, my questions are:

Would there be any explanation (by you or/and Plejaren) on this discrepancy, just like the explanations which were given in earlier times on similar anamolies – Asket-Nera, Universal Barrier, WCUFO,..etc ?

Would these pictures be removed entirely or would they be published as-it-is which would give the obvious message that they are genuine ?
(Of course any of the above actions could only take place after you or Plejaren analyse the pictures once again & confirm their source.)

If possible, many are interested to know how this has even occurred when Ptaah around 2002 strictly ensured that no fake pictures would enter into PPKBs as this statement by Hans George Lanzendorfer from FIGU special bulletin 20 clearly states:

“In the year 2001, Guido was asked by “Billy” to make some of the photos available for publication in the corrected Pleiadian/Plejaren Contact Report Block…For the publication in the Contact Report Block, it was strictly ensured, with the help of Ptaah, that it only concerned “Billy’s” genuine pictures or his pictures that were only slightly falsified by Schmid, whereby the aforesaid falsification, for a logical reason, found no use.”

There’s no need for a “correction”. 
(Note by CF: Actually, these pictures are not an important issue. They were used in the PP Block only as an illustration.) “

CF, these pictures were checked & authenticated by Ptaah. I didn’t understand what you meant by this: “They were used in the PP Block only as an illustration.”

Does this mean that you acknowledge them to be fakes ?

But simple logic dictates that – some of the spacecrafts (Soyuz 4, Soyuz 5 and Salyut 1) were not even in space during July 1975. How can you use them as Illustration when they don’t even exist in space ?
Illustrating what exactly ?

Regards
Mahesh Karumudi

From: Christian Frehner/FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Date: Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:28 AM
To: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Billy’s Q/A – Apollo-Soyuz pictures

Hi Mahesh,

I guess that you already read Billy’s comment in the forum.

Salome,

Christian

From: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:57 AM
To: Christian Frehner/FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Subject: Re: Billy’s Q/A – Apollo-Soyuz pictures

Hello CF,

Of course I have read Meier’s response which is: “There’s no need for a “correction”.
Which clearly skirted the main question, which is – does Meier acknowledge that the Apollo-Soyuz outerspace pictures as fake or not ?

If Meier acknowledges them as fakes made by MIB and yet says there is no need for a “correction”, then it raises further ethical & logical questions, which I am not going to raise here. My specific question to you is not about Meier’s response but your own response. You said:

(Note by CF: Actually, these pictures are not an important issue. They were used in the PP Block only as an illustration.)

Obviously a lot of contradictions raise from your response. Hope you respond to all of them.

These outer space pictures were checked & authenticated by Ptaah (FIGU Special Bulletin 20, 2005) as genuine pictures taken by Meier and not as illustrations. How do you explain this ?

If it is just used as illustration purposes, then why was it not mentioned in the contact blocks that they were just there for illustration ? Instead they give the clear message that they were real pictures taken by Meier.

Again illustrating what exactly ? Simple logic dictates that – some of the spacecrafts (Soyuz 4, Soyuz 5 and Salyut 1) were not even in space during July 1975. How can you use them as Illustration when they don’t even exist in space ?

Regards
Mahesh Karumudi

From: Christian Frehner/FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Date: Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:01 AM
To: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Billy’s Q/A – Apollo-Soyuz pictures

Hello Mahesh 

See my answers below:

Am 28.10.2014 um 07:27 schrieb karumudi mahesh chowdary:

Hello CF,

(…)

  1. These outer space pictures were checked & authenticated by Ptaah (FIGU Special Bulletin 20, 2005) as genuine pictures taken by Meier and not as illustrations. How do you explain this ?

Ptaah said (PP Block 10, page 17: “These are only a few examples of the genuine 42 pictures, at which only a few falsifying and not very important changes were made.” In other words: These are not the original photos, but photos which look similar to the original ones. They are still falsified photos.

Logically, falsified and/or altered photos cannot be the original ones.

  1. If it is just used as illustration purposes, then why was it not mentioned in the contact blocks that they were just there for illustration ? Instead they give the clear message that they were real pictures taken by Meier.

As you can read from my explanation above: Ptaah is stating that these are a few examples of the 42 genuine photos, but which do not correspond  100% with the original photos.

  1. Again illustrating what exactly ? Simple logic dictates that –  some of the spacecrafts (Soyuz 4, Soyuz 5 and Salyut 1) were not even in space during July 1975. How can you use them as Illustration when they don’t even exist in space ?

Since these photos were not published in the Semjase-Blocks (yellow and brown editions), and since they are not 100% identical with the original photos (according to Ptaah’s statement), I look upon them as illustrations. They cannot be taken as proof.

Regards,
Christian 

From: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 8:58 PM
To: Christian Frehner/FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Subject: Re: Billy’s Q/A – Apollo-Soyuz pictures

Dear CF,

“1. Ptaah said (PP Block 10, page 17: “These are only a few examples of the genuine 42 pictures, at which only a few falsifying and not very important changes were made.” In other words: These are not the original photos, but photos which look similar to the original ones. They are still falsified photos. Logically, falsified and/or altered photos cannot be the original ones.

  1. Ptaah is stating that these are a few examples of the 42 genuine photos, but which do not correspond  100% with the original photos.”

Yes these falsified photos, technically cannot be called as original & 100% authentic ones because Ptaah said that they were falsified in CR 384, PPKB 10 which is also published in FIGU Special Bulletin 20.

But from the Ptaah verses in the FIGU Special Bulletin 20  (including the same one you quoted), he actually says the following regarding the level falsification done on these photos:

  • “..only slightly falsified by Schmid, whereby the aforesaid falsification, for a logical reason, found no use”
  • “..only very few falsifying and not any major changes were made.”

Ptaah clearly says that these pictures are only very slightly falsified with no major changes at all. He also clearly says that this falsification found no logical use at all – meaning that most of the ORIGINAL content photographed by Meier still exist in these 42 outer space photos.

Do you agree with this logical conclusion ?

Regards
Mahesh Karumudi

From: Christian Frehner/FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Date: Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 1:43 AM
To: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Billy’s Q/A – Apollo-Soyuz pictures

Hi Mahesh,

See below:

Am 31.10.2014 um 16:28 schrieb karumudi mahesh chowdary:

Dear CF,

(…)
But from the Ptaah verses in the FIGU Special Bulletin 20  (including the same one you quoted), he actually says the following regarding the level falsification done on these photos:

  • “..only slightly falsified by Schmid, whereby the aforesaid falsification, for a logical reason, found no use”
  • “..only very few falsifying and not any major changes were made.”

These are Hans Georg Lanzendorfer’s words, not Ptaah’s. It’s an interpretation of what Ptaah said in PP Block 10 on page 17.

Regards,
Christian

From: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:02 AM
To: Christian Frehner/FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Subject: Re: Billy’s Q/A – Apollo-Soyuz pictures
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Christian Frehner / FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org> wrote:

But from the Ptaah verses in the FIGU Special Bulletin 20  (including the same one you quoted), he actually says the following regarding the level falsification done on these photos:

  • “..only slightly falsified by Schmid, whereby the aforesaid falsification, for a logical reason, found no use”
  • “..only very few falsifying and not any major changes were made.”

These are Hans Georg Lanzendorfer’s words, not Ptaah’s. It’s an interpretation of what Ptaah said in PP Block 10 on page 17.

The first sentence as you said, is made by HGL but the second sentence is made by Ptaah himself.
Are you suggesting that HGL’s interpretation is wrong ?
Below, I will explain with 2 reasons why HGL’s interpretation of Ptaah’s words is technically correct.

REASON #1:

Ptaah:

“..Of the more than 1,378 pictures from your Great Journey, only a few remain, namely 42, which really came from you..”

“..Worldwide, none of your dinosaur pictures and space pictures, etc. have been published, other than those that are shown in new Contact Report Block. These, however, are only a few copies of the real 42 shots, to which only very few falsifying and not any major changes were made…”

(Source: FSB 20)

These both verses (emphasis on the bold, underlined parts) technically mean the same thing as what HGL wrote in his article:

HGL: “..only slightly falsified by Schmid, whereby the aforesaid falsification, for a logical reason, found no use”

The falsification found no use because the major part of these outerspace pictures which really came from Meier were untouched (except the few parts of these outerspace pictures), thereby keeping the integrity of the picture intact.

REASON #2:

Moreover, Meier showed HGL’s article to Ptaah, which he read and agreed with it, without mentioning any modifications to the article. This obviously means that the truthfulness and the accuracy of the content in it was acknowledged by Ptaah.

If you still think that HGL’s interpretation is incorrect, then please ignore it as my below question is framed based on just Ptaah’s above two verses, presented under Reason #1.

QUESTION:

Ptaah from the above two verses, clearly means that the 42 Outer space photos (ex: Apollo-Soyuz, Cave men,..etc), most of which are published in PPKB 1 & 2, really have come from Meier. And moreover in these photos, no major changes or falsifications were made.

This logically means that, the major part of the content in these outerspace pictures published in PPKBs must be GENUINE & only a minor part of the content in these outerspace pictures, can be traced back to FALSIFICATIONS attempted by the alleged MIB/photgrapher Schmid.

Do you agree with this conclusion ?

Regards
Mahesh Karumudi

From: Christian Frehner/FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Date: Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:39 AM
To: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Billy’s Q/A – Apollo-Soyuz pictures

Hi Mahesh, 

Based on what is written in the PP Blocks and in the FIGU Bulletin I can understand that you have come to this conclusion. But there remains the unsolved question of how reality looked like, i.e what exactly has been falsified. And since neither Ptaah nor Billy want to discuss this issue any further, this case remains unsolved. I for my part can live with the situation.

Regards,
Christian

From: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:02 AM
To: Christian Frehner/FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org>
Subject: Re: Billy’s Q/A – Apollo-Soyuz pictures

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Christian Frehner / FIGU <christian.frehner@figu.org> wrote:

Based on what is written in the PP Blocks and in the FIGU Bulletin I can understand that you have come to this conclusion.

Christian, may I know why you seem to be avoiding responding to the simple questions directly ?
My question to you was based on Ptaah’s own words. It is the only conclusion any rational person can reach at. And I have just asked you, if you agree with it or not ?
One would expect the answer as either YES or NO or I DON’T KNOW, along with reasons.

But there remains the unsolved question of how reality looked like, i.e what exactly has been falsified.

I am very much surprised that again you are asking the same question even after you were sent my analysis (see the attachment) 3 months ago on August 20 by Simon, where the side-by-side comparison between the pictures of Meier and the ones from NASA animation and other documentaries are presented.

My research (short version), presented in that document, clearly shows that Meier’s outerspace pictures that have been analysed by me, are not 1% or 10 % or 90% falsified as you seem to be supposing but 100% falsified. In other words, the alleged Meier’s original outerspace pictures were switched with those that come from NASA animation, other documentaries & magazines.

This makes me wonder, whether you have read the document at all in the first place. If you haven’t, then may I know the reason for not reading it ?
If you have, then may I know the reason why you still refer it as – “the unsolved question of how reality looked like, i.e what exactly has been falsified”  – when I have shown that they are 100% falsified ? What are your objections on my research ?

And since neither Ptaah nor Billy want to discuss this issue any further, this case remains unsolved. I for my part can live with the situation.

Beauty of Truth is that Logic & Evidence speaks for itself and requires nobody’s help. In this case the analysis clearly shows that they are 100% falsified, i.e. the alleged Meier’s outerspace pictures have been switched with pictures from TV showing NASA animation, other documentaries and magazines. We really don’t need Meier’s or Ptaah’s confirmation on it. I would still like to hear from you as to why we need only Meier or Ptaah to tell us how much falsification was made in those pictures ?

All this boils down to this simple question:
If Meier/FIGU knows that some pictures are clearly fake, would they then publish these fake pictures in books as genuine ?
(Hope you would at least answer this question directly.)
If the answer is NO, then there is every reason for Meier/FIGU to look at the analysis (see attachment) and take necessary action.

Regards
Mahesh Karumudi

This is the end of the correspondence as Christian Frehner didn’t seem to be interested to respond anymore on this issue even after being notified by Mahesh twice on November 19 & 29. This correspondence once again confirms the lack of interest of Meier/FIGU to discuss the topic of false pictures in the material.

3,116 total views, 3 views today

Last modified on April 27, 2015 at 8:36 pm