Regarding the controversy about duplicating Billy Meier’s UFO photos and films
It’s now been over 10 years since I first challenged the top professional skeptics at CFI-West/IIG, in Los Angeles, and others, to duplicate Billy Meier’s spectacular UFO photos, films, video, etc. During this time there have been no shortage of attempts, of varying quality, to do so. Of no surprise to me has been the fact that Derek Bartholomaus, the most recent spokesman for CFI-West/IIG in Los Angeles, had to retract his on record claim that Meier had in fact used model UFOs and miniature trees in his photographic evidence. In order to fully appreciate what this has led to, let’s establish a little background for the controversy over the authenticity of Meier’s photographic evidence.
The Origins of the Hoaxed Photos Claims
While questions and attacks were already directed at Meier as early as 1975, when he first went public in Europe with his evidence, the real issue centered around claims that he hoaxed his evidence by using suspended models on strings. These charges were most vocally leveled by Meier’s main critic, Kal Korff. Korff’s claims established the premise from which most of the skeptical attempts to duplicate his evidence have proceeded. After all, Korff presented what he claimed were original Meier photos in which the strings/suspension lines were visible above the UFOs.
There is, however, a very big, previously not much discussed, problem with these accusations.
Enter the Dragon
In 2004, I was a presenter at the Bay Area UFO Expo, in northern California. While at my speaker’s table, I was approached by a man who said he had some interesting background information on the whole issue surrounding the claims that Billy Meier had faked his evidence. He specifically referred to Kal Korff and, in a bit of a dramatic gesture, presented me with Korff’s business card.
This man, Garret Moore, then proceeded to tell me the story of his own involvement in “assisting” Korff with the very photos that were foundational to Korff’s claims. You can read Garret Moore’s courageous article to learn more. What you will find, of course, is that there never were any strings or lines present in Meier’s evidence. Up until now, I haven’t chosen to make much of this fact, other than the usual accurate disclaimers. I also haven’t chosen to mention that I have a large set of slides of Meier’s photos, dating back to the early 1980s, that were given to me by Randy Winters, in the mid-1990s.
In fact, I used those slides many times during my earlier, pre-Power Point presentations. Neither I nor anyone else ever detected any kinds of strings or suspension lines, despite having some very nice, large projections of the slides.
So almost all of the attempts by the various skeptics have proceeded based on an absolutely flawed and faulty premise of model suspension. Of course most were intelligent enough to not claim that Meier used non-existent at the time special effects, digital effects, etc.
Pointing out the Obvious
Something else that the skeptics seemed to have failed to comprehend in the past many years is that it really isn’t impossible for someone to make almost exact models of Meier’s various UFO. Model making is not by any means a new craft and, given enough time, skill and motivation, one could certainly make impressive models of the UFOs…much the same as excellent scale models have long been made of trains, cars, airplanes, even portions of cities, etc.
So, one can copy an original and do so using a multiplicity of means. For example, people who took the time to study Meier’s UFO photos, films, etc., could then go about creating similar effects even using different materials, i.e. metals, ceramics, painted wood, plastic, etc. Such persons could all make the same claims that they “duplicated” Meier’s evidence and that, therefore, that’s how he made his photos, etc.. But they all couldn’t be “right”, could they? In fact, none of them were.
So while the quality of the model making continued to improve, the skeptics and the debunkers never questioned the very foundational suspension premise that was promoted by a rather scurrilous individual, Kal Korff.
Always Avoided: The Simple, Inescapable Answer
Of course the simple answer – that all the skeptics and debunkers do, and will continue to, strenuously avoid – is to have their work tested using the same standards that were used on Meier’s. When confronted with this clean, clear and easy way to validate their claims, the skeptics either ignore this logical solution (which seemingly could propel them into UFO history themselves) or they try to assail the various experts and scientists, as well as try to be dismissive of the dozens of credible eyewitnesses, etc. Obviously such distractions and dodges only work on the inexperienced and gullible.
The problem for all the skeptics is that a credible computer analysis will reveal what isn’t really in dispute, i.e. that all of their photos, films, etc., show small models relatively close to the camera, unlike the large objects farther from the camera that were revealed in testing Meier’s photos, etc.
So, if Meier didn’t use small, suspended models, then no matter how good the skeptics’ models are, no matter how compelling the photographic “effects” they have created, they have, and always will continue to have, failed to truly duplicate even one of his UFO photos. How can it, how could it, be any other way?
Coup de Grace
We have now come to another historical, culminating point in the skeptical challenge to the Meier case and its evidence, one that also conclusively reveals the despicable character of both Kal Korff and, as an added bonus of sorts, another self-serving disinformation agent named Stephen Bassett (and his delusional, deliberately misleading and distracting “exopolitics” group).
The foundational premise that Meier made and suspended models, used miniature trees, etc., is completely gutted. As far as the skeptics go, there are some nice attempted reproductions of Meier’s original, UFO photos, films and video that effectively pay homage to the authentic originals; imitation is often said to be the best form of flattery.
Our Future Survival
My not having said much about this whole matter publicly for some time (although I was privately personally encouraging some of the skeptics to proceed with their best efforts) has simply helped to provoke and promote the controversy further. But it’s timely now to point all of this out because those people who are able to think for themselves will not only appreciate how nicely this wraps up the whole skeptical challenge, they will – hopefully – move on to the really critically important information, and the spiritual teaching, that is at the heart of the Meier case.
I have long contended that the Meier case is the key to our future survival and it’s clear to me that most of humanity is still fumbling in the dark for that key, as well as unaware of just where and how to insert it. Perhaps now that our documentary on Meier is available nationwide in the U.S., on numerous channels, it will shed the much needed light for those who are truly seeking the truth…including all of the skeptics, debunkers and model makers, etc., if the truth is indeed what they too are seeking.