Michael Horn & The Billy Meier Contacts

[Michael812]

Now, as we can see, David has acknowledged that he indeed sent that less than warm and fuzzy email to me, so it's acceptable to post the next, somewhat less polite and respectable, one he sent to me, along with mine that preceded it, etc. This is done to show that the lovely concept of "innocent until proven guilty" has not been applied to me, and to the Meier case, as I think shall become evident:

From: dbiedny@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: The Paracast forums
Date: July 5, 2006 12:15:00 PM PDT
To: michael@theyfly.com
Cc: gene@macnightowl.com

Horn,

Were you always paranoid, or is it something that
happened in your adult years?

It's our forum and we will not tolerate extreme
behavior. I'm telling you we don't stop people from
joining, but let's be clear, I would never be accused
of inviting you to ANYTHING at this point. You
continue to call me a coward, it's something you've
done since your first email, and it's really very
insightful of who you are and what you believe. I
really don't understand the source of your abusive
tone and derogatory attitude, I suppose there's
something in your childhood that would explain reveal
the cause of your mental state. A psychologist would
have a field day with you.

dB

--- Michael <michael@theyfly.com> wrote:

B,

I take that as an invitation to join, albeit a
fearful and control
laden one.

MH


Horn,

You can indeed register and post on the Paracast
forums, but Gene & I reserve the right to delete
abusive posts and ban destructive posters. You
behave,
and your freedom of expression is granted. You get
crazy and vitriolic, you get booted. Comprende?

dB

This is what's known as baiting, intentionally designed to get little ol' me to lose my cool and rant angrily, you know, just like three people (at least) have already asserted is the way that I approach such openminded, fair and welcoming folks who are greeting me at the proverbial door here. But, since we are seeing the first signs of self-destruction taking place here from our esteemed moderator, who am I to impede the process, being the mere amateur that I am in all things hostile?

Moving along, we see the lovely post from lancemmody that pretends to repsond to the WCUFO issue. Please note that, for some inexplicable reason, doesn't respond to the specifics raised in either my article, Deardorff's site (complete with computations) or the self-evident unarguable video. Yet he would like me to answer questions about garbage can lids, as if that was indeed the issue. Weeeeell, I think that a little direct response from lancemoody is in order to my aforementioned and referenced information, and to these questions that I raised in my lovely little piece (absolute substantiation for all claims is absolutely necessary, thank you):

1. Where was the model made and concealed?
2. Who in Meier's area possesses the specialized skills required for this precision level of manufacture, at any size?
3. What is it made of?
4. Where were the materials obtained?
5. What was the cost of these materials?
6. Who paid for it?
7. How long did it take to make? (Remember, a two-armed model maker took four months to assemble his inferior model.)
8. What does it weigh, assuming even a 5' diameter metallic object, as suggested by one debunker?
9. How was it suspended at 30' by a one-armed man? (Setting up just one special effects shot with a 5' (let alone 14?) object requires numerous people and lots of time. Meier took over 60 photos of the WCUFO, plus the video.)
10. Where is the model now, what happened to it, would something of this complexity - and value - just disappear?
11. With all of the photos, both day and nighttime, how could Meier have accomplished all of this unobserved and without accomplices?
12. Why hasn't ANYONE come forward to show that they made and/or now have it?

Let me repeat that claims of hoax, models, minatures, etc. MUST be substantiated, something that our moderator, and his co-host on the radio show, have yet to do regarding their counter claims to any of the evidence in the case. (Hint: The six-year, on-site investigation carried out by top investigators, private investigators, etc. NEVER reveal any fraud or hoaxing on Meier's part...we can direct you to the appropriate docuemtnation, but let's not get ahead of ourselves, okay, lancemoody?)

BTW, after the show has aired, and David has posted his images, I'll be happy to respond to any issues regarding the photo in question.

At the risk of being redundant, but necessarily so since he claims that, "I have seen plenty of evidence that shows you to be skilled at avoiding the question, attacking the person and not the idea, and, in short, being completely unreasonable." I will ask lancemoody if he also read the photo and sound analysis documents and if he has specific counter claims - substantiated, of course - that he'd like to make...rather than deflecting this issue of his own non-responsiveness my way.

And, indelicate as it may be at this early stage of our acquaintance, do allow me to copy to all concerned the introductory information that I forwarded to DB, prior to our speaking on the radio, which certainly warranted specific, substantiated commentaries from him (as they will from any other critics of the case) - although, for some inexplicable reason - NONE where ever forthcoming:

See: TheyFly.com - The Billy Meier UFO Contacts:

?Analysis of Meier's UFO Photographs

?Report On UFO Sound Recordings

?Photo Analysis Ends Challenge by Skeptics

?Scientific Experts' Comments On Meier's Evidence

?Randi Retracts Claim Against Meier


You also should research and consider these:

The Bachtelhörnli-Unterbachtel movie film
The Hasenbol Photos
The Bachtelhörnli-Unterbachtel movie film
The Wedding Cake UFOs
More about the Fir Tree
Earliest testimony from Meier-case witnesses
Testimony from some Meier-case witnesses
Overlooked Photo Reveals Swiss UFO-Contact Case Genuine

And from my Newsletter Archives:

Newsletter of March 2005
Newsletter of June 2005
Welcome to the July 2005 Newsletter
TheyFly.com - The Billy Meier UFO Contacts 9/11
TheyFly.com - The Billy Meier UFO Contacts 9/11
TheyFly.com - The Billy Meier UFO Contacts 9/11
Welcome to the September 2005 Newsletter
Welcome to the December 2005 Newsletter
Newsletter of January / February 2006
Newsletter of January / February 2006
Newsletter of January / February 2006
Newsletter of January / February 2006
Newsletter of January / February 2006
Newsletter of May / June 2006

Kinda sorta just a wee bit much for a one-armed guy to pull off, no?

Now, please be so kind and considerate as to respond to the first post of mine in specifics BEFORE going on to make generalized statements about the evidence in the case. I suggest this for everyone's credibility, not just mine. If you do some reading through the rest of the Newsletters, Newsletter Archives, Articles, Prophecies, etc. at my site, you may begin to get a slightly more informed view of a case that has some 24,000+ pages of information...and six categories of still irreproducible physical evidence.

And, when you read the witness testimony, you might also ask yourself just how this one-armed man, with no resources, technologies, finances or collaborators, has managed to keep this case alive, for 64 years...and fool all the geniuses who, effectively, attribute to Meier himself such absolutely brilliant, varied, diverse, spectacular, above-genius level abilitiies in so many disciplines...all while renovating an old farm house, raising his family and avoiding 21 documented assassination attempts.

And okay, I concede that I think it's the most important story in all of human history, so you'll have to forgive me if I didn't state it here as a firm conviction but rather respected you enough to pose it as a suggestion. If my respect in this matter was misplaced, I apologize for offering it where it wasn't warranted.

 

[Michael812]

Ah ha, I see we have a slight misunderstanding as to how real research is done and how accountability is required in response to specifics that have already been provided. Not to worry, this is commonly encountered from those with an agenda to debunk something but who lack the necessary knowledge, information and logical thinking skills to deal with the ever-so-boring details, details that a one-armed farmer presumably did have time to create, over a great deal of time.

May I ever so politely point out that exasperation and impatience do not an effective argument make. Case in point, for those of you who simply wish to find the truth and not prove something wrong...or right...I draw your attention to the documentation I provided, which even included an irreproducible video clip and also detailed analysis of the characteristics of the camera and location under consideration, as well as my own logical and absolutely essential questions; factual realities are not dismissed effectively by armchair experts who assume that they know the answers...when they demonstrate that they don't even know, or understand, the questions.

Now, presuming that some intelligent folks populate this small forum, and that they are not taken in by sleight of hand and huffing and puffing, I invite those parties to look at the information that I have provided in my posts and carefully consider it...especially in the, unfortunately, characteristically light weight, unsubstantiated and off-point commentaries so far offered to counter my information.

Let me go one step further and suggest that sarcastic comments about research are a dead give away that the sarcastee (permit me) is unqualified to respond on-point to the information. While critics of the case, and of me, may think that they have just invented sliced bread, I have found that the positions that I have arrived at, over some 27 years of studying the case, lead me to understand that those people behind the evidence and information, i.e. the case itself, exceed our level of intelligence on this cosmic speck of lint by, well, by light years. That they have also taken into account our own ignorance and arrogance, and provided certain "escape hatches", for those who cannot handle the information, is a testament to their repsect for our free will.

So, for now, and at least until lancemoody demonstrates that he has actually read, understood and considered thoughtful replies to my already provided information, I shall not be addressing his comments any further. I will, if there is sufficient interest, provide more information for/to any people who demonstrate the basic honesty and thoughtfulness, the observable, objective, scientifically-minded approach to discovery that is the antithesis of the tired skeptical approach. If this is lacking, I shan't waste either my time or yours, since my focus is far more on the really important aspects of the case, as you'll see, and which are, ironically, no less inflammatory to the conditioned, unthinking mind than the information we are perusing here, so far.

Of course, I much prefer to yell "Fire!" when I see someone's house starting to burn but, if a less direct, less harsh, more pleasant and diplomatic tone is what they prefer...I just hope that they have fire insurance, since it appears that their preference what they "like", is more important than the plain, direct truth of the matter. Could it be that the Jack's character was on the mark when he said, "You can't handle the truth?"

Just asking, please, really, don't be offended. Anything but that.

 

[Adam]

the allegation that meier could not fake any of this because he only has one arm is at best weak. this is the worst sort of fence post to put up in support of it not being a hoax. in one instance meier is portrayed as a poor, uneducated, one armed farmer. the next we are regaled with tales of meier chasing down murderers in the middle eastern underworld in indiana jones fashion.

i watched the wedding cake video and remain very unconvinced. we see a 'ufo' in the air standing near a tree. big deal. the thing is stationary. what does this prove? nothing. the whole series of wedding cake photos is extremely painful to look at. :'(

i would like to bring up one important point - if this is the greatest event to ever happen to humanity and this is life saving information coming from a prophet, information that is supposed to save humanity, information vital to our planet and place in the cosmos, information that is so spiritual in nature, then why isn't it all simply posted for the viewing public to see for free? the cost of running a website, even a big one, is pretty cheap. there are plenty of pro ufo folks out there publishing their ufo info for free on the internet. if the info is so damn important why charge $25 for a dvd? can you say 'streaming video'? download? google is a cheap place to load your video up to now.

and michael horn is anything but a neutral observer in this. horn can be smooth at times, but he does betray himself with his dismissive and petty e-mailings. he likes to come across as though he has no real stake in the case, but he clearly does. there seems to be no respectfully disagreeing with horn. this forum is not the first place i have seen post his abusive, overbearing emails. believe and your're horn's best buddy, question and you're the enemy in a religious crusade.

i have a suspicion that it has to do with two things - first, he seems apt and very inviting of the fight. he seems to take delight in and thrives on representing meier as the be all end all of ufos - which meier ain't.. second, horn has a stake in this game which is namely the sale of his meier merchandise (books, dvds, speaking appearances). in most of these cases, the latter seems to be the more important of the two.

one other thing bothering me about meier is that the aliens certainly make everything convenient in terms of disintegrating trees where footage was shot, taking credit for the invention of the garbage can lid, and procliming the MIB tampered with photos of asket. none of which i am buying. i agree. let's see an uncut one camera shot video of meier's aliens landing and coming out of the ship. this sorry excuse about 'free will' preventing the aliens from flying over my house is so bad it is just embarrassing. i invite the pleiadians to come to my house with their ships. fields of plenty nearby. now there's no imposing on my 'free will'.

just my two-cents and i look forward to hearing the july 11th episode.

 

[David Biedny]

There is a mechanism in psychology called "projection", here's the definition:

1. The attribution of one's own attitudes, feelings, or suppositions to others: ?Even trained anthropologists have been guilty of unconscious projectionof clothing the subjects of their research in theories brought with them into the field? (Alex Shoumatoff).
2. The attribution of one's own attitudes, feelings, or desires to someone or something as a naive or unconscious defense against anxiety or guilt.

Mr. Horn has displayed this mechanism in emails to me which I have yet to share with the forum. I will be posting the entire thread of emails next week for our readers and listeners to judge on their own. As I've stated, I'm certainly not the first person to be subjected to derogatory, condescending and abusive treatment from Horn, the difference is that I will stand up to his arrogance and smack him right back - must be the New Yorker in me.

In his emails to me, Mr. Horn simply ignores any relevant point I make, telling me that the fact that I have not attempted to replicate Meier's photos is somehow an indication that I can't replicate them. Of course, there is little logic to this argument - the folks that have indeed replicated the photos and techniques are dismissed by Mr. Horn without any direct consideration of the facts.

http://www.iigwest.com/ufopix.html

For example, Mr. Horn claims that Marcel Vogel analyzed a "metal sample" and found it to unusual. He states that Mr. Vogel holds 32 patents, and is therefore a credible technical witness who cannot be found to be anything but factual and flawless. Meanwhile, anyone can search the US patent office database and discover that Mr. Vogel holds not a single patent, period. Confronted with this fact, Horn claims that the patents would be in IBM's name. Of course, anyone who knows anything about patents knows that a corporation cannot hold a patent, it's officially an Asignee, the Inventors are always the individuals involved with the actual invention process. Confronted with these facts, Horn simply employs the time-tested filibuster, changing the subject without any acknowledgement of the facts right in front of him.

Mr. Horn continually references witnesses without any proof of their testimonies, no notarized statements, nada.

Notice how he won't comment on these analysis on this page:

The Meier case: more conclusive 'smoking gun' proof of deception - The Biggest Secret Forum

I took the time to listen to and watch the entire contents of the DVD that Horn is selling, and it's quite telling in that much of the presentation deals with the cult-like aspects of the Meier people - in fact, one of the screens specifically states that this whole thing "is not about UFOs or extraterrestrials", but instead, the indoctrination which is not unlike what the Scientologists do with their target demographic. In the DVD, we are told that there is "another way", their way, to approach life, politics, religion, philosophy and just about any other social construct. Billy Meier is positioned as a prophet, the only person who knows THE TRUTH and is looking out for the collective good. Sound familiar?

The statement that is offered over and over, "how could Meier pull this off, he only has one arm", is both silly and ridiculous. He's a farmer, right? How does he work the crops, the herds of animals with one arm? Two words: technology and helpers. Both have been deployed for years in the fabrications that the Meier camp has presented as real evidence of genuine contact.

When presented with my findings in the July 11th show in regards to the image I can prove is faked, Mr. Horn takes the stance that unless I prove how ALL of the images were faked, my findings are invalid. Next week our listeners will decide for themselves who has the agenda here, and who is being less than honest.

I will remind everyone that Gene & I do the Paracast because we are interested in understanding the paranormal, and will consider any and all stories, while Mr. Horn is selling a philosophy, Meier-related products and a myth. Anyone not agreeing with their mythology is uninformed, skeptical and harboring a dark agenda. Tell me, Michael Horn, what exactly is my secret agenda?

Now, I'm going back to my vacation. See you all next week, make sure not to miss the show!

dB

 

[Michael812]

I see that (relative) brevity will be the most appropriate means from here on, at least until educated challenges, questions, etc. are posed.

So, I'll in no particular order:

1. No one who's posted so far has revealed that they know anything (and I do mean anything) about the six-year long, very expensive, on-site investigation conducted by top level military and private investigators. The required reading is "Light Years" by Gary Kinder, 308 pages, published by Pocket Books/Atlantic Monthly, and the "UFO contact from the PLEIADES - Preliminary Investigation Report" by Lt. Col. Wendelle Stevens, 524 pages, published by UFO Archives. It's your responsibility, not mine, that you read these. Of course, a read of the short excerpts - FREELY available from my site - of the sound and photo analysis were already suggested but not, naturally, yet perused. Also recommended is "And Still They Fly!", which is, heaven help us, actually available from my site, unlike the other two books, and unlike the four volumes of "Messages From The Pleiades", also published by UFO Archives.

Point: No THINKING person, having read the material, will suggest that Meier was, in any way, capable of hoaxing the evidence...even if he'd had four hands. Remember, I said THINKING person.

2. Demonstrating the rush to judgment mentality, that is as insincere about discovering just what some of the spiritual information may be, as they are capable of comprehending it, it's rather quaint that the abundance of FREE information on my site - including the spirtual information linked from here TheyFly.com - The Billy Meier UFO Contacts - The Spiritual Teaching - eluded discovery by our second contestant, Adam.

3. Regarding the WCUFO video, the simple answer is...duplicate it. After all, even David said that duplication is required for physical evidence to be proved, or disproved. So pardon me if people's uneducated opions are less than important to me, as even any of my own uneducated opinions on some matter would be to me, but duplication - not unsubstantiated claims - are REQUIRED. Did somebody not read my previous posts where that point was made, or are attention spans so short that, in the rush to offer boring, uneducated opinions, and the kind of overtly nasty attacks that I've been accused of, the criteria for being taken seriously was overlooked?

4. As David and Gene have already learned, after resorting to the "he's only in it for the money" gambit, Michael Horn represents the Meier case VOLUNTARILY, i.e. for FREE, i.e. without compensation by Meier/FIGU or anyone else. His income, if any, is derived from the sale of products that he has either produced at his own expense, or that others have, at their own expense. Ya know, it's kinda how things work in our system, which I didn't invent. Of course, over the last 27 years, I've paid for every aspect of my work, travel, research, writing, correpsondence, media interviews, etc. - and I maintain a 6-10 hour day doing so, virtually every day, mainly for those MILLIONS of people, in the 90 countries who visit my site, to learn about the case, and who express genuine interest.

Of course, I also donate some (soon diminishing) time to situations where it's apparent that the interest is not genuine...in this case, mostly as an exercise, though the particular muscles involved are in rather good shape, hence the likelihood of over-exertion here being more and more unappealing and unlikely.

4. As for the "one camera shot" routine, how similar to the demand that David made at the end of the second radio interview, and probably destined to result in the same non-responsiveness to the film where the UFO hovers, then moves about 1/4 mile away, then DIPS BEHIND THE HILL (i.e. no model possible) then slowly flies back the 1/4 mile to the top of the screen. Discussed here: The Bachtelhörnli-Unterbachtel movie film

BTW, it's rather embarrassing for me to again have to point out to David that CFI-West/IIG REFUSED to submit their photos to the same standards of testing as the ones that established that Meier's were authentic. Likewise, I have patiently remind him that James Randi RETRACTED his claim that the case was a hoax after CFI-West/IIG failed. Oh yeah, their refusal was on the Art Bell show in March 2004...and of course they never submitted the film that they said that they could duplicate, something that David won't even attempt, I guarantee that no one else here will either.

Now for those of you with integrity who show up, I suggest that in addition to reviewing the information about all the witnesses, that you review this page for the overview presented here, including some of the photos from some of the other photographer/witnesses (let's take bets on what, if any comments, are focused on):

http://meiercase.0x2a.info/meiercase/002/index.php

And even though David is being a bit naughty by not letting you know this himself (since I already sent it to him, and since he wants signed statements) page 210 of "And Still They Fly!" has a copy of the signed statement of 21 witnesses attesting to the facts in the case, and Meier's honesty, and which they say that they will willlingly attest to in a court of law. And, simply for the record, I also sent David this. Please do what he didn't, i.e. read and UNDERSTAND it:

II. Written Signatures in the Common Law (United States)
? ?
While the United States is actually composed of 51 legal systems (50 states and the federal government), it is possible to generalize to some extent about written signature requirements. Generally speaking, contracts and obligations do not have to be in writing unless the law requires otherwise.4) Other formal requirements in US law include the "contract under seal" and notarization 5), which, however, either have little practical importance nowadays (as in the case of the contract under seal), or are so easily satisfied that the justification for their continued existence is questionable (as in the case of notarization, which in US legal practice generally means nothing more than having a secretary certify a signature upon request). As a signature can be any mark on a message made "with the present intention to authenticate" it 6), in US law the emphasis is on whether the signer intended to be bound.7)

As far as Marcel Vogel and his credentials are concerned, let's remember that Vogel was a REAL scientist (22 years with IBM), and demonstrated his understanding of the scientific method when he wrote:

"With any technology that I know of, we could not achieve this on this planet! I could not put it together myself, as a scientist... And I think it is important that those of us who are in the scientific world sit down and do some serious study on these things instead of putting it off as people's imagination." Again, here is another top-level scientific specialist who is unable to duplicate the material presented to him by Meier."

(Note that bit where he acknowledges that he couldn't put it together himself, okay? Well, that's the part that indicates, as I forewarned you, how a real scientist thinks. Let's proceed.)

Vogel was a well respected, probably genius level scientist who even synthesized the chemicals that create bioluminescence in fireflies - when he was only 12 years old. So, do any of you really want to try and attack his credibility - without even having watched his 45-minute long analysis of the metals?

And, finally for tonight, a recap of several points that I've also made to David and Gene in response to their sloppy, irresponsible and unsbstantiated claims (you know, it's really very unprofessional to do things like that, repeatedly). Ah, but before I post that, please let make it clear (if it isn't transparently obvious already) that popularity and profit are not high on my list of priorities, but truth is. So, with that in mind, osme of the problems and false claims made by David and Gene...and some of you good folks too, gee):

1. The false claim that MH is a paid employee of Meier/FIGU.
2. The false claim that Vogel didn't have (develop for IBM) the patents claimed.
3. The reference to the 21 witnesses who already signed a statement regarding truthfulness.
4. The false claim that the UFO sounds were made on a synthesizer.
5. The refusal to acvknolwedge the numerous top level experts who authenticated Meier's evidence (including photographic).
6. The false claim that the house indicated in the various photos wasn't the same one.
7. The refusal to even acknowledge that there is a film with the UFO flying and touching the ground (and other demonstrations as well).
8. The false claim that the 21 assassination attempts on Meier weren't documented by Swiss police.
9. The lack of reference to the 120+ witnesses (including a retired UN diplomat), the fact that all witnesses subjected to lie detector tests passed them...100% completely.
10. The five other photographers, and some of their photographs already submitted to you.
11. The lack of any proof that the WCUFO photos were models.
12. The false claim that the object in the WCUFO video is a two-dimensional cut-out (a claim so obviously not true that it simply reeks of agenda and denial).
13. The lack of relevance of additional notarized statements, especially in light of the certified statements by all of the experts as appear in Light Years and which were vetted by Atlantic Monthly.
14. Your absolute and total unfamiliarity with the totality of published, copyrighted, unalterable, documentation, evidence, witnesses, proof, etc. despite having been directed to it repeatedly.

Now, it's only fair, and accurate, to say that I've given generously of my time and expertise. If I've thrown the pearls where...they're not appreciated, your further posts will so reveal, which will quickly determine if I give any more of time and energy to no useful purpose. Unbelievable as it may seem, trying to give a crash course to the thoroughly uneducated and closed-minded is not my idea of a fun, let alone necessary, thing to do.

For those who are up to it, you have a LOT of homework to do. Don't let me keep you from it a moment longer.

 

[David Biedny]

Michael,

Your words and tone speak for themselves. Anyone who questions the Meier stories is accused of being uneducated, unthinking, uncritical. I have looked at much of your evidence over the years, I've read many words, I've looked at the downsampled video and JPEGs, and I think it's a bunch of crap, except it's trying to be a whole lot more, an entire belief system. And in this I see danger, I see predatorial behavior, a desire to take advantage of those who want to believe, who want a truth more comforting than the reality that surrounds us.

And this is why I'm upset with you, angry even, and am not willing to be polite. Or quiet. Or accommodating. I'm onto you, and this scam. I am not happy about it, and it comforts me to share my thoughts and feelings with our listeners. If you don't like my words, too bad. I don't want someone like you to like or respect me, I want you to want to shut me up. It means I'm hitting too close to the truth for you.

Look at this one statement of yours:

"As far as Marcel Vogel and his credentials are concerned, let's remember that Vogel was a REAL scientist (22 years with IBM), and demonstrated his understanding of the scientific method when he wrote..."

You claimed that this man holds 32 patents. He does not, this is a known fact, not opinion. ANYONE can verify this. You are trying to swerve around the fact that you have been less than honest in this statement. You have not addressed this factual misrepresentation. Why?

I directly challenge you to ANSWER THIS ONE QUESTION.

It's not like I'm trying to "attack his credibility", the man might have been an absolute genius, excellent parent, killer golfer, good cook, but he does NOT hold 32 patents. You claimed this as fact, I challenge it.

Please explain THIS ONE POINT. You accuse me of so may things, of not addressing relevant points, I DARE you to provide an explanation of the patent issue and your statements about it - you always parade the 32 patents. He doesn't have them. Your statement about this fact would be good right about now.

Your credibilty, on this forum, rests on your response.

dB

 

[Michael812]

Lawdy, lawdy, I do declare, is there no end to the hostilities from these..."fair-minded" folks? Must I turn off this computer, lest the dinging of deliberately derogatory dirt dredging disturb my delicate delight? Oh, whoa is me!

Okay, one more time (as I've answered this for Dave before), the info regarding Vogel's patents was published, after thorough vetting I assume, by Atlantic Monthly. I reported it, not an unreasonable thing to do as a researcher. Now, if that info is incorrect, the argument isn't with me, as anyone with a few working brain cells can understand, it's with, ta-da....Atlantic Monthly. Hey, maybe THEY got it wrong...but that in no way diminishes the brilliance and accomplishments of the man, as we'll see in a moment.

The dyspepsia and frothing over this, that is nakedly exhibited by our venerable host here, ?is simply embarrassing to observe, how much more so should it be to actually be disgorging it? And I should be ashamed of myself? Gosh, the jealousy and envy displayed in this desperate attempt to ridicule a genuine scientific giant is pathetic.

Okay though, since the point was raised, a little about Marcel Vogel from:

The Legacy of Marcel Vogel

 

[Adam]

mr.horn, you'll come back no matter what. i have a simple question for you: where are all of the original negatives (35mm and 8mm) from meier's ufo pictures? let me guess: assorted government bad guys, MIB, and aliens took them all...? no, what's embarassing here is that you proclaimed that vogel had all these patents and now you want to place blame at the feet of another source. you mean you didn't verify your facts? isn't this what you accuse everyone else of doing?

and mr.horn, by saying that meier isn't paying you is just another example of your near masterful use of misdirection. you don't do any of this for free. you are compensated through your dvd and cd sales, "donations", lecture fees, and sale of meier related merchandise. you clearly benefit from this. again, if you are so truly interested in this then post your info for free as so many others have. you want to toss challenges out - well, there's one for you and we'll see where your true motives lie.

everyone knows the most popular and successful of ufo speakers does what everyone wants: oohs and ahs the audience by telling them exactly what they want to hear. that and they know how to market their wares. btw has anyone here seen the pictures of meier with the ray gun the pleiadians left him? they're beyond ridiculous.

http://mudskipper.supereva.it/lsrgn.jpg

i wasn't kidding. meier apparently burned a hold in a tree with this crafty little ray gun. :


i saw a piece in ufo magazine where someone produced ufo pictures from some nuts and bolts and other common items. side by side with the meier pics you couldn't tell the difference. i think it won't matter how well done the replication is or whatever other evidence is uncovered to the contrary (and I've seen more than enough to show that meier is a fraud), mr.horn won't abandon his pocketbook or his prophet.

meier is a fruit cake and isn't any more a prophet than the plaster cast gnome sitting in my front yard. idiots like meier have done nothing but marginalize legitimate ufo investigation and have flushed the subject into the sewer.

btw, an analysis from an expert on a meier film: Meier Pendulum-Like but of course i'm sure we'll hear that the person who performed this analysis has some dark agenda.

 

[TerraX]

Sofar Michael Horn has failed to address the erie similarities between the Weddingcake UFO and the lid of a plastic drum.

http://thebiggestsecretpict.online.fr/ufo/garbage_lid_zoom+highl.jpg

http://thebiggestsecretpict.online.fr/ufo/Wedding_Cake_infront_house_B_L+highl.jpg

Meier's claim that the particular drum and lid wasn't around at the time of taking the photographs in 1982 turned out to be false. They were already produced in 1975. harcoster | my blog Take a close look at the lids at this site. More importantly, take a look at the handles of the lid which turn up on Meier's Weddingcake UFO as well.

http://thebiggestsecretpict.online.fr/ufo/Wedding_Cake_garbage_compare.jpg

There's absolutely no doubt the lid matches perfectly with the bottom portion of Meier's alleged UFO. This is substantiated, the latter being a word Michael Horn likes to use frequently. Other parts have been identified as a bracelet and carpet tacks. So we have at least 3 very terrestrial objects on an alleged alien craft. Geesh, could this be a model? Personally I think it is. Meier used the lid of a plastic drum, a couple of dinner plates and other ordinary utensils and spray painted it metallic. Check out the next photograph where a piece apparently fell off and is resting comfortably on the side of the craft.

http://www.tjresearch.info/foto_800.jpg

The movie Meier made of Weddingcake craft on a hillside is impressive. For a long time I didn't see any signs of tempering with it and even thought it was genuine. The identified lid certainly changed that. Have a look at the film a couple of times, after that I'll point out how Meier probably FAKED it.

Ok, watched it a couple of times? Look again and see how Meier 'turns' to the camera. I don't agree with DB that this is a 2D cut out, it is not but it is forced perspective.........Meier in the beginning of the footage is on his knees..... The tree and the model are there but not in the distance or size you think. Actually the camera is close to the ground. Although the resolution aint that great other photographs Meier took at the same time with a normal camera show at what height the camera is positioned.
The Wedding Cake UFOs Scroll down halfway, fig. 9, 10, 11, picture-nr. #843 and two stills from the movie.

Look at Fig. 9/#843. The camera is close to the ground, you can count the seperate grass leaves. The camera is not more then 2 feet above the ground and probably less. This gives of the impression that the tree and craft are of considerable size.

The movie was done in the same way. Camera close to the ground, no structures in the frame to compare distance and size. Just a hill side. What do we see then? Well for starters the same model he used in the first place, and a normal fir (Christmas tree) where Meier probably removed the lower branches to send out the appearance of an adult tree. If you look at the tree you can see that the remaining lower branches are 'flopping down'. Adults firs don't have that problem but when you start sawing in your Christmas tree to fit it in that pot, watch what happens to the lower branches.

I'm willing to bet hunderds of dollars that the tree we see in the film is not there anymore and that people don't recall one being there in the first place. Meier probably took a 6-7 feet fir, sawed it off and stuck it firmly in the ground at that hillside. Next he attached the model to the tree. He set up the camera some 100 feet close to the ground. Take a look at Fig. 11, a movie still taken from some distance. The ground is very 'rough' with some plants sprouting up. None of that is visible in Fig. 9. This is forced angle and forced perspective.

What about Meier in the film? Look at how he moves his body to get out of the frame. Play it a couple of times. He doesn't simply turn his body and walks to the camera, no, he goes backwards and slightly upwards straight out of the frame like he needs to lift up his body. I get the strong impression that he's on his knees just to fit in the overall frame, if he would be standing up that would give away the camera's low position.

Geesh. Billy Meier who labeled so many people as frauds and liars turns out to be one himself. Honesty does take longest and the truth does set you free.

Regards,
TerraX

 

[Michael812]

To Adam's comments:

There has been much controversy around the photographs and story that Meier allegedly put a hole through a tree using a laser pistol loaned to him by the Plejaren, who claimed that it was actually a very old weapon of theirs (see: And Still They Fly, color plates 49-52 TheyFly - Products). Reproduced below is Wendelle Stevens? own written account of the enigmatic episode:

?When I first saw these laser pistol photos I had serious misgivings about them and the whole story of this so-called ?ancient weapon?. But then Eduard Meier took me to the place in the Frecht Nature Preserve, near Hinwil, where he had tested the first one. He showed me a seared line of vegetation that went in a true straight line until it struck an embankment and stopped. He showed me another, and then a limb high above our heads on a tall tree over 60 feet tall, that was severed cleanly at a place about 45 feet above the ground and 20 feet out from the trunk, where the branch was about one inch in diameter. The severed part of the branch was still lying on the ground where it had fallen, and I picked it up and examined it. It was severed cleanly without any fraying but the most noticeable thing about it was the thin layer of seared wood at the break. The charring was no more than 1 inch to 1 1/4 inch deep into the wood, all the way through the branch, and the searing of the bark was likewise very narrow at the break, and so sudden and quick that the sap in the bark did not bubble out and run. Certainly no blow-torch could have done this, and how would a one-armed man get himself or any equipment up to such a fragile and high up position in the big tree? The trees grew so close together here and in such a way that no vehicle could get through without removing some trees first, and that would certainly have been evident.

?The weapon was neither made of metal, nor plastic, nor ceramic, any other substance recognizable in our technology, but most nearly like the composition of a solid nylon block, or bearing. It was smooth to the touch and felt a little slick. It seemed to be made of one piece and was composed of two colors of the same material, a grayish-tan and a rosy-pink or pinkish red end of the barrel and a chamber on the top.

?When Ray Stanford, of Project Starlight, saw these pictures in my home in Tucson in 1979, he insisted the gun was a plastic toy weapon and that it could be proved that the color of the muzzle of the weapon was the same color as the freshly painted red fence in Meier's yard, also seen in the pictures. This, however, was not seen to be true in the same photos for the fence was painted with a glossy blood red enamel, whereas the muzzle of the weapon was a flat rosy-red color.

?But Ray did not know that we had been there and seen the color and the finish of the painted fence ourselves. Nor did he know that we had been to every toy supplier in Switzerland and failed to find any toy weapon anything like the laser pistol Meier photographed. A search of sporting good stores was equally fruitless. To this day we have never found a match for that laser pistol.

?But just as intriguing was our search for a gold Mylar jacket that might look like the one Alena is wearing in the picture with her arm holding the gun. We looked in all the clothing stores, all the sporting good stores, and even checked the uniform supply stores for such a jacket, or even such gold material as might be necessary to make such a jacket, like the arm of the one worn by Alena as she holds the pistol for Meier's photographs. We never found anything like it.

?Then there is the problem of the hole in the tree. The tree was a good 10? to 12? in diameter, and the tree was green and full of sap. How would a man with one arm bore such a hole? An auger bit would have been impossible because it would surely bind in a hole that long in a living tree. How would Meier hold it? How would he turn it? Where would he get an auger bit 12? long by 1? in diameter, a non-standard size that would have to be special ordered and made up by a tool maker? This would leave tracks that could be later traced. And the hole in the tree had to be made in 20 minutes or less and all equipment removed and hidden, never to be discovered again in that short time available.

?Jacobus came on the scene with Meier crouched at the tree examining the still smoking hole that had been burned cleanly through the center of the big tree trunk. The charring was superficial but clear through the tree and out the other side. Then the hole in the tree, which a man could insert his thumb into, was not completely round inside, but somewhat oval in some places, like the hole made by pouring hot water into a snow bank. And the charring through light and penetrating into the wood no more than 1/4? or less, was uniform throughout, including the front entrance and the rear exit from the trunk. And the dark soil behind the tree, in line-of-sight through the hole, was still smoking and fused. I am not taking anybody else's word for this because I was there a short time later and personally examined all for myself.

?For Ray Stanford to say that this was a toy pistol off-the-cuff and without investigation was irresponsible but typical of Ray. He even mentioned this ?toy pistol? in writing later as proof that the Meier case was invalid. Many others have taken the same position on this case with equally invalid and unconsidered statements. To our knowledge, none of them have ever undertaken any on scene investigation to support their armchair statements.

?We think investigators should make very responsible statements and back them up with some kind of evidence, which simply does not seem to happen with this case in Switzerland.

? One well known UFO researcher who claimed he went there to see for himself, actually went to Zurich for 3 days on other business, and then took a half a day out and went down to Wetzikon to talk to Hans Jacob, a man suspected of informing the police on Meier's contact rendezvous, who was then asked to leave the group. Hans was in the group when Meier took the tree-circling photos at Fuchsbuel-Hofhalden, and he took the UFO researcher to that site near Wetzikon, or tried to, but couldn't find the place again; or so he told me when I visited him a couple of days later. It is in the ?investigations? by this man, and others like him, that MUFON relies for their information on the Meier case.?

P.S. The expected slander and attacks on Stevens and the investigators, by the unqualified parties who hurl them, and who've never set foot in the area where these events occurred - and continue to occur - will not be commented on.

MH

 

[Michael812]

Unfortunately, the amateur sleuth, TX, fails to understand that the items in the photo of the lid manufacturer are current items and, of greater importance - DO NOT MATCH THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE WCUFO.

His "analysis" of the WCUFO video is so pathetically desperate and unintentionally comical as to require no further comment.

Overlooked Photo Reveals Swiss UFO-Contact Case Genuine

 

[Michael812]

Annoyingly unavoidable FACTS. Read at your own peril to your unsubstantiated, erroneous and jealousy-motivated beliefs:

Gary Kinder, who was basically a skeptic of the Meier case when he began his investigative research for his book, Light Years, ascertained the following facts. He personally interviewed Willy and Beatrice Bar who owned Bar Photo in Wetzikon. He also personally interviewed Fritz Kindliman, the former owner of the store. All three of these people were quite expert in their knowledge of photography, cameras and photographic equipment. There was NO other camera/film facility even remotely close to Meier's location.

? Meier brought ALL his film (up to 4-5 rolls per week) to Bar Photo for development.
? The personnel never saw ANY evidence that Meier tampered with ANY of the film.
? Meier ONLY bought equipment he could handle with ONE HAND, spending hours examining and experimenting with the cameras to get the easiest model to use.
? Meier bought an old 8mm camera that nobody wanted because it was the EASIEST to use with one hand.
? ?If he had an accomplice, he would not have to try out all the models to see what could be used with one hand,? said Willy Bar.
? Fritz Kindliman handled, and personally inspected, hundreds of Meier's photos, Meier NEVER asked him about dark room techniques, film developing or equipment for such.
? Meier himself certainly had NO color lab ? even Bar Photo didn't since the processing and equipment was TOO COSTLY for THEM, let alone an individual of very modest means.
? EVERY roll, of Meier's 4-5 rolls per week of film, was sent OUT for processing, slides to Lausanne Kodak, Ektachrome to Studio W (Zurich) and prints to Wadenswil Labor Pro-Cine.
? Meier's negatives had to be sent to - ALL THREE.
? Kindliman checked random pictures to ensure quality and NEVER saw ANY evidence of manipulation by Meier.
? NO evidence of manipulation or trickery, i.e. NEVER several shots of a ?set up? on a strip of film trying to perfect a hoax, as would HAVE to occur if he was trying to make a hoaxed shot.
? Meier NEVER brought in individual negatives for prints but ALWAYS the ENTIRE strip (containing ALL the shots on that roll).
? Some rolls were filled - from beginning to end - with EVERY picture showing from ONE to FOUR UFOs, flying with sky and various terrain in the background.
? MOST of Meier's film was in SLIDES and would have required specialized macro equipment to hoax and manipulate, which Kindliman KNEW WITH CERTAINTY that Meier didn't have.
? Meier NEVER asked about macro equipment, lighting macro shots or technique.
? Kindliman found Meier's 8mm film footage to be even more impressive and COMPLETELY AUTHENTIC.

Talk amongst yourselves. Who else would listen?

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I just want to let everyone know that we are looking into a faster, more comprehensive message forum solution for The Paracast. If we migrate, however, we'll make sure that all existing posts are moved as well, so keep the cards and letters coming.

And don't forget that we'll be talking to Michael Horn again on the July 11th episode of The Paracast, so check www.theparacast.com for the latest.

 

[David Biedny]

"pathetically desperate and unintentionally comical as to require no further comment"

Yes, that about sums up your position.

And your "response" to my challenge is exactly what I expected - I rest my case. You call yourself a "researcher", and yet, you are not capable of typing a name into a public database. But this makes sense - you will not indulge ANYTHING which messes with your myth, heaven forbid. Yes, it's not you who has lied, it's someone else! How dare they! Take no blame, and keep your eyes on the prize. Anything else is failure.

And that silliness of me putting down Vogel - who is probably spinning in his grave at the thought of you using his good name to help justify your hoax - It's the equivalent of, "if you don't support the Iraq war, you're against the troops".

In other words, nonsense.

Keep going, Michael, it's actually fascinating to watch you hang yourself with your own rope.

dB

 

[pixelsmith]

i look forward to the re match. i see both sides of this coin. very often times there are threads of truth in every story. much like the bible.

 

[Adam]

mr.horn, you assume anyone questioning meier to be motivated by...jealousy? i was at one time impressed with your demeanor and the way you went about handling the meier case. that has all evaporated now after seeing your insincere, zealous, and childish attempts to shove this case down people's throats in spite of evidence to the contrary. mr.horn, you're nothing short of a fanatical crusader defending his religion. indeed, the pat robertson of ufos.

the ray gun is simply the most embarrassing and outrageous piece of lunacy i have seen. i don't know where you're generating this supposed 'controversy' about meier's toy gun. anytime a point is brought up that brings meier's claims into serious question, if not outright exposing them as lies, you drudge up 'controversy' instead of directly addressing it or you make reference to people being amateurs, or having an agenda.

and terrax has made an impressive case regarding the wedding cake photos - a case you can only address by claiming terrax to be an "amateur sleuth". amateurs are people who read something or hear something and then relay it as fact - hence, your defense of vogel and the fact that you failed to confirm this information before presenting it as gospel. now you want to blame someone else for your amateur research... ??? several comments made by you clearly show that your so-called 27 years of research into this case is not as solid as you claim. in fact, it leaves me to wonder just how much 'investigation' you actually did. also you're dancing around my question about meier's film negatives and several other questions.

mh: "Talk amongst yourselves. Who else would listen?"

obviously you. you keep threatening to stop enlightening us poor, jealous, agenda driven folk. i think you get off on all this attention mr.horn and you also like the stirring the shit because you have nothing else to do. it really is classic - you the defender of the poor, one armed farmer and the aliens attempting to endow us with a higher level of spirituality. you the big hero bringing enlightenment to the heathens in the face of absolute opposition. the quest of the hero.

mr.horn, you're a sad little man on a sad little hill. i'll wait to see what you dream up on july 11. clearly trying to get a straight answer from you isn't going to happen.

 

[michael]

For some reason I get the feeling that even after the July 11th show the Meier believers will remain believers and the skeptics will remain skeptics.

 

[Michael812]

Since we are now certain to have tours going through here, to view an actual dysfunctional laboratory of illogic at work, I will say a few words of clarification regarding the WCUFO video.

While I'm sure David has knots in his stomach over the loony assertion by TX that the WCUFO was NOT a cut-out (now we've got DB and TX whapping each other upside their virtual craniums in dispute, gotta love it!) and anyone with a few functioning brain cells is probably splitting a gut over the nonsensical ?walking on his knees? theory (if you're at all familiar with body mechanics?oh, well, why bother?) but the real piece de resistance is found in TX's stunningly brilliant claim that the object is a small model, ?suspended? on a small model tree, much closer to the camera.

In yet another display of generosity and magnitude of spirit, I suggest that you view this segment at http://www.billymeier.com/archives/Wedding_Cake_ship.mpg and?LISTEN. That's right, LISTEN to the sound of the motor on the zoom and then?TIME IT (it's about six seconds). As James Deardorff explains (The Wedding Cake UFOs), ?When viewing the video, one may hear the sound of the zoom mechanism cranking the lens out; Meier zoomed in and out on the craft twice?From it and its sound track one can be certain that it was a continuous video-taping not interrupted by any shut-downs & movements of the camera equipment; i.e., the two zoom-ins-and-back were genuine, and could not have been staged through shutting down the video-tape, moving six times closer to the tree, turning it on again, etc.?

What he doesn't mention is that by timing the zoom, and listening to the sound that accompanies it, we can (again, if we can THINK) realize that the distance involved actually precludes any possibility of hoax, and completely destroys TX's ?argument?, as if any reasonable person with two eyes couldn't see for themselves what a desperate grasp in the dark it was in the first place.

Of course, if TX wants to?DUPLICATE the model, tree and video, he should do so by all means, (it's less than a minute long, after all) including on his knees (perhaps a symbolically appropriate position for him anyway, as praying, to whatever, for help in gaining sanity may be helpful). Of course, since TX has already indicated that he's a betting man, I'll bet TX ? who has now effectively not only destroyed any shred of credibility he had hoped to preserve, but also convincingly proven the Meier video to be absolutely AUTHENTIC ? well, I'll bet him seven ?X-Men? movie tickets that he won't even try to duplicate it.

I don't want to leave Dave out, since he's tearing his hair out over the TX miniature model claim, when Dave KNOWS it's GOT to be a cut-out, so I'll bet him seven Weight Watcher meals, delivered right to his door, that he doesn't attempt to duplicate the?cut-out, let alone the video either. If I win, (is there any chance that I could lose these bets?) these two guys will treat me to a tour of my local Men's Hair Club, so I can see how the other side lives.

To recap, for those with short attention spans:

TX and DB disagree over the video and its components (not too good for skeptics to do).
Dave shudders (or is it shutters?) knowing a wee bit more about video cameras than TX.
Both can't be right but both are wrong.
TX's confident ignorance contributes to his inadvertently authenticating Meier's video.
TX discovers the need to listen and count?and think, for which he is eternally grateful.
TX sees the metaphorical value in the garbage can lid, as he places his theories in the receptacle and covers it with said lid.

Coming soon: How Dave got the photo analysis?WRONG! You're gonna love this one!

 

[Michael812]

P.S. Before anymore armchair experts chime in with wacky theories, may I again remind everyone here that Meier's photos and films were AUTHENTICATED (declared to NOT be models OR special effects) by both Wally Gentleman (a special effects director on ?2001?) and the two owners of Uncharted Territory (the Academy Award-wining special effects company that did ?Independence Day?), who assured me, personally, along with movie producer Charles Bender (?Solaris?), that IF they could duplicate Meier's films, they would have to go to CGI. Now, if any pathetic attempts are made by (you-know-who) to slam these guys too, well, it would be sad but not unexpected.

To recap, for those with short attention spans:

The above-mentioned experts are among many who put YOUR silly theories to rest.
Back to your pursuit of the mysterious garbage can lid, a more appropriate matter of investigation, suiting the qualifications of those who've graced us with their brilliance on this matter so far.

 

[Adam]

you mean the same guys who supposedly authenticated adrian's ufo photos? http://www.ufowatchdog.com/assembly.html
i'm glad they personally assured you just as you assured us about the vogel information.

if you've never seen mr.horn before, go here to see how bad his acting really is:

razorstream.com - razorstream Resources and Information. This website is for sale!

this is definitely mr.horn on his best behavior.