We hear a lot about so-called peer review. In fact, this is one of the most frequent responses and challenges to the Billy Meier UFO case evidence and information, especially from skeptics and other pseudoscientific types. So, just exactly what is peer review?

From the Lloyd Sealy Library at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice:

In academic publishing, the goal of peer review is to assess the quality of articles submitted for publication in a scholarly journal. Before an article is deemed appropriate to be published in a peer-reviewed journal, it must undergo the following process:

  •  The author of the article must submit it to the journal editor who forwards the article to experts in the field. Because the reviewers specialize in the same scholarly area as the author, they are considered the author’s peers (hence “peer review”).
  •  These impartial reviewers are charged with carefully evaluating the quality of the submitted manuscript.
  •  The peer reviewers check the manuscript for accuracy and assess the validity of the research methodology and procedures.
  •  If appropriate, they suggest revisions. If they find the article lacking in scholarly validity and rigor, they reject it.

·     Because a peer-reviewed journal will not publish articles that fail to meet the standards established for a given discipline, peer-reviewed articles that are accepted for publication exemplify the best research practices in a field.

I’ll take a wild guess and suggest that somewhere in history, something that was once accepted as scientific fact because it was deemed to be so by peer review, may have been amended, corrected, etc. The peers in all these reviews are, of course, just other human beings who, therefore, can and do make mistakes…just like the rest of us. And scientific knowledge moves on and doesn’t remain static.

Regarding “experts in the field” in UFOlogy, just who might these people be and, of course, what is their expertise? Right from the start we see that the majority of the so-called experts are simply people who…report on other people’s evidence, claims and experiences, etc.

In fact, I am in this category but, since I’ve actually been the closest to an extraterrestrial UFO (in addition to my six other sightings about which I can’t make such claims) and because I have received verifiably accurate, documented information from them (through Billy Meier) I call myself “the world’s leading expert on UFOs”.

Obviously, I’m not even remotely as expert as Meier, and quite possibly many others who have been involved with him closely over several decades. However, to the best of my knowledge, few if any of those other people are actively, publicly presenting any information.

So who else does that leave in the mix as an “expert” at this level? It leaves no one, to my knowledge.

Sure, there are people in the “UFO industry” running around the rubber chicken circuit talking about the dead end (gag me) Roswell case, or any number of other ones – for which there simply is no significant, verifiably unique, tangible evidence. That doesn’t mean that other UFO cases, events and/or brief contacts didn’t occur, it’s simply that all reporting on them is usually second or third hand at best.

But absent any universally accepted “UFO experts” among credentialed scientists who should constitute such a peer review board, what’s the best evidence that laymen can turn to, research and evaluate for themselves? As I’ve long suggested, the existence of a verifiable copyright is our own internationally respected, legal standard of proof of prior publication. Not only can any layman ultimately confirm and rely on it but obviously any and every scientist, jury and judge can also (as I have firsthand experience with).

If the prior publication is in fact the exact same information that was only later approved in a peer reviewed paper, or corroborated by a subsequent “new official discovery” or scientific finding, etc., shouldn’t it be afforded the same credibility and authenticity as it would if it pertained to any other respected field of science? And if in fact it is shown to be, by this same objective process of research and evaluation, one of dozens of such legally verifiable proofs wouldn’t that be all the more interesting, and amazing, and completely eliminate the cynical comments of “lucky guess” that the outclassed skeptics often rely on?

Since the core element in the spiritual teaching is self-responsibility, isn’t it thrilling to know that by applying it along with straight-ahead, objective, scientific principles for determining the truth of claims, including verifying the existence of a copyright, you are in control of determining the truth for yourself?

So, this is by no means any criticism of scientific processes, peer review, etc. But we must not let others determine the truth for us, especially by relying on, or citing, “scientific experts” in a field where, unfortunately, not only do none such exist but where the scientific standards themselves are so abysmally low, allowing any and all preposterous, unsubstantiated claims by numerous hucksters to be taken serious and/or promoted uncritically.

It is also to be hoped that those scientists, and others in the professional and scholarly communities, who have intellectual honesty and integrity will cinch up their belts and step forward – without giving lame, wimpy excuses for demurring – and participate in a fair, rigorous examination of the higher standard of proof in the Meier case.

For the latest on authentication of the physical UFO evidence, see also:


Can You…SEE what You’re Looking At?

Can You…SEE what You’re Looking At? (Part 2)

18 comments on “Cutting through the Peer Review Dodge and Distraction

  • Let’s hope some scientists change their stripes, but the ones I have met are like the ones mentioned below.


    “Good, then another question: at the beginning of the contacts with Semjase, she told me the facts regarding the destruction of the Earth’s ozone layer via the irresponsible machinations of the Earth people who would destroy this protective shield all around the Earth by the use of toxic chemical substances. At that time, the task was imposed upon me that I should warn the terrestrial scientists about it, which I also did with a newsletter that I sent to many governments, chemical factories, and universities all over the world, but without ever having received a response or even a slight indication from the receivers.

    But then, some time later, there suddenly appeared newspaper reports, and messages were also broadcast on the radio and on television, which dealt with the destruction of the ozone layer. But the fact that I had made the scientists attentive and had awakened them to this, not a word of it was reported, of course.”

  • This is a post that Dyson wants submitted, which for some technical reasons he’s unable to post himself:

    Well-written and very valuable as usual. You make some very good points about Billy’s proof of genuineness being ignored. But I think your title, like the title of your recent blog about the Disclosure Project, might be misleading.
    “Dodge” (in the context of “dodge and distract” means: “evade (a debt or obligation) in a cunning or dishonest way”. So I naturally assumed from your title, “Cutting through the Peer Review Dodge and Distraction”, that you were going to try to somehow debunk as fraudulent the way science (Latin for “knowledge”) – with all it’s flaws and corruption – goes about increasing our collective knowledge, thus allowing the invention of all the “modern scientific miracles” we’re currently enjoying, as well as allowing the invention of all the “modern scientific miracles” which are simultaneously destroying our planet, I hasten to add.
    So I breathed a huge sigh of relief when I read, “So, this is by no means any criticism of scientific processes, peer review, etc.” I’ve got a lot, but that would lead too far here.

    You ask, “So who else [aside from Billy and yourself] does that leave in the mix as an “expert” at this [“UFO”/anti-gravity propulsion] level? It leaves no one, to my knowledge.”

    To my knowledge, it leaves the people who built, worked on and had some other independently verifiable formal professional association with them, and who came forward with their independently corroborated witness testimony in the Disclosure Project who are still awaiting the open US Congressional hearings we called for in 2001, which you dismiss as yesterday’s news.

    If justice is DELAYED, it’s not made irrelevant, it’s been DENIED.

    In your article, I think you’ve inadvertently conflated a few different groups of people (issues) in such a way that you’ve misled yourself about the main problem.

    1.) We have innocent and naive real scientists who do the openly published work in science, using the peer review methodology.

    2.) We have the military/Industrial Complex’s “above top-secret”, privatised, corporatised, strictly compartmentalised “USAPs”. These Unacknowledged Special Access Programs/Projects were described in detail by Dr. Greer’s early work, before he was suborned, when he published the collected Disclosure Project wistleblowers’ testimonies from some of these secret scientific projects which are responsible for the secret research and development of the nightmare weapons and anti-gravity fake “ET” craft and entities Ptaah warned us about seven years ago in FIGU Special Bulletin 34. These weapons, according to the DP, are being prepared for the “Order of Darkness’s” planned false-flag “alien” invasion/massacre (of all but about a half a billion worldwide who are earmarked to survive as slaves of the untouchable elite). It puts the beneficent Plejaren draconian population-control proposals into their proper context.

    3.) The “ufologists” and “experiencers”, etc., and a raft of other ragtag self-styled “experts” in the field of “UFOs” and all that’s associated with them, who are not real (covert or overt) scientists.

    Ever since I noticed that, above a photograph of yourself on the front page of your website, you wrote (rather immodestly, IMO) in big, bold letters, “Meet The World’s Leading Expert on UFOs”, I wondered how you defined the word “expert”, or how you meant “Unidentified Flying Object”.

    Aside of course from swamp gas, lenticular clouds, atmospheric and other sky phenomena associated with reflected and/or refracted sunlight and other light sources, flocks of birds, swarms of insects, bright planets like Venus and Jupiter (visible in clear daylight if you know just where to look) as well as all the other phenomena like meteors, reflectively-surfaced high-altitude aircraft, and so on and so forth – when we talk about UFOs, we’re basically talking about “flying saucers” and related unconventional aircraft of all shapes and sizes which normally display flight characteristics apparently defying the “laws” of physics as they are (mis)understood by most of the people in categories 1 & 3, above, not to mention almost all the deliberately dumbed-down, ignorant lay-people.

    So – since you seem dismissive of the title “experts” for the Earth people who make the UFO’s which, according to Billy and the DP, account for the vast majority of the UFO sightings not related to the even vaster majority of “Venus” sighting and photographed lens flares, etc., being some of the DP people – and you have no scientific or specific expertise in ether the atmospheric or photographic specialities, etc., – how do you mean it exactly when you invite the public to “Meet The World’s Leading Expert on UFOs”?

    This is especially confusing when your one evident area of actual expertise is associated with the Plejaren IFO’s, and that expertise merely relates to the modern FIGU records of their sightings, photographs, superficial design, etc., as opposed to the underlying physics which powers them, and really any detailed scientific understanding of their material (metallurgical, etc.) nature and specific propulsion and guidance technologies. So wouldn’t the DP’s former USAP employees who made them be the actual “experts” in the majority non-ET flying saucers (UFO’s) and people like our friend Prof. Deardorff, as a respected atmospheric physicist (specialising in the lower atmosphere – the first five miles) – obviously also be much more of an expert on the UFOs associated with atmospheric phenomena than you are?

    In my way of thinking, your self-characterisation as “the world’s leading expert on UFO’s” is analogous to me publicly boasting that I’m the world’s leading expert in the field of ornithology because I own a pet canary.

    As always, Michael, thanks for the ongoing invitation to me to make my comment, and apologies for the length of it.

    2005 litigation and my translation, “How to Live” is distracting/delaying my other answers in reply to the many (often hostile and accusative) questions directed at me on your blog, but I hope to still be able to reply to some errors of fact in the near or middle future.

    I greatly appreciate your most recently stated undertaking, to ban future disrespectful, discourteous and ad hominem aggression, which will surely lead to a much more harmonious and productive tone, in keeping with Billy’s generalised personal advice to you to that effect. An absence of sneering sarcasm will be welcome.

    As a post script: about the fake-looking “UFO”, now centrally featured on your opening webpage, which represents the Youtube video. That’s not Plejaren, and might be misleading for those thinking it is, or thinking that you’re promoting it as such. I reckon I could make you a nice, light and transparent webpage background using that hi-res WCUFO image, cropped/centred, and slightly colour-saturated to compensate for the transparency.


  • My own brief reply to Dyson is as follows.

    I see that what I thought was my actual, relatively simple, clear intention escaped you. Essentially it was to help cut through the excuses offered up by skeptics and pseudoscientists, such as the phony peer review challenge, one that has stumped sincere and genuine proponents of hte Meier case in the past.

    Since we know that certain people will be quick to pull rank, or intimidate those that they think don’t have it, I want people to see through and realize that anyone who actually delves into the evidence and information in the Meier case is, or can be, as “expert” as all of the scientists, in fact more so since they either don’t know or won’t debate the case on its merits.

    Calling myself “the world’s leading expert on UFOs” is effectively an invitation for any of them to dispute, challenge, debate me, etc. And I thought I acknowledged that while there well may be people who know more about UFOs than I (and this is about far more than UFOs) none of them are publicly presenting the information. Nor are any of them presenting anything remotely comparable in importance to the Meier case.

    In fact, I’ve also said that anyone can do what I do if they familiarize themselves with the evidence and information.

    While I could ask why more people haven’t done so, I’d also hope that those who could be more effective would recognize my particular methodology simply for what it is.

    You can be the world’s leading expert in UFOs, ornithology, or anything else you wish. Go out there, get yourself interviews, lectures, make films, write blogs, etc. Or you can content yourself with skillfully misunderstanding a rather simple – NON CONSPIRATORIAL – contribution of mine.

    As for the DP, as I’ve said before, that’s nice. And so is the idea that one day we’ll all have “free energy”. But that day isn’t now and it’s still a long ways off. Not because I don’t sing the praises of the DP, or support the very questionable efforts of its chief fund-raiser Greer.

    I’m also not sure what “Billy’s generalised personal advice to” me is but I’m sure that if nothing else it’s some kind of “message” – from you – meant to intimidate in some way. I hope that isn’t too sarcastic a response for your sensibilities and sensitivities. How nice it would be to see you extend them to others…BEFORE you feel the need to draw your weapon and fire.

    • A fair response, Michael. As for your last paragraph though, I think Dyson’s words you quoted were in reference to what you recently shared, about how you asked Billy what else you can do to help and he replied something like “help spread peace, harmony, etc, etc.” Although Dyson launched an extensive attack, I dont think that was part of it.

      I’m sure Dyson woulda soon clarified, but thought I could help clear the air on this point, lest it be dirtied longer than need be.

      • Thanks Andy, I think you’re right. It occurred to me in the middle of the night too but I was too lazy to get up and fix it. I think a little paranoia rubbed off on me.

      • “Dyson launched an extensive attack”

        I DID???

        I didn’t mean to. Sorry if I gave that impression!

        Michael wrote, “Calling myself “the world’s leading expert on UFOs” is effectively an invitation for any of them to dispute, challenge, debate me, etc.”

        And that’s all I did – accept his invitation to debate – in the spirit of reminding folks that there are people who actually BUILT these antigravity/”free energy” counterfeit “ET” craft who desperately want to reveal that fact and save the planet.


  • Hi everyone,

    Just a small note to prevent some persons worrying about aone things said here:

    From Plejaren information the “false flag UFO invasion” was the last stage in the plan of the Gizeh-boys (the european looking fellas), who were deported by the Plejaren after having attacked their home planet…

    Of course the Gizeh-boys had some minions and their telenotic devices to influence “chosen” people to their likings, also in their plan was the fact that they had to use religions to unite them under one banner… namely theirs as saviours and new “gods” who came here to “Help” us… The Gizeh-boys are truly the only ones who came very close to world domination at a level whoch cannot be achieved by us earth worms… we are not clever enough for that…

    In my opinion the situation is as follows: some of these minions or unknowingly controled people don’t know that their masters are gone and so they still stick to some old plans, but as these different groups lack their stringmasters, the coordination between the groups has become impossible…. as also these groups don’t know from each other that they all played a role in the Gizeh-boys’s plans… Personally i think the possibility of a “false flag invasion” has become very low, because much of the Gizeh-boys technology has vanished with them…. However if someone wants to believe in this and waste his days in fear from “the elites”, “death” and their world domination plans, it is sad but their decision… The millitary complex and these other small groups who have advanced technology have to keep themselves secret as many politicians, dictators and others are looking out for them, because everyone wants a part of the cake… this lies in human nature… So it is better to concentrate on the problems like the rise of cancer, radioactivity, space junk and strive to install peace in the own countries and between countries instead of chasing ghosts ;)….


  • I think it’s ok that people have investigated the Roswell case. People have been threatened back then and sworn to secrecy. Some suffered severe psychological trauma and have been effected for the rest of their lives. If not any investigator had tried to figure out what happened these people would have never been able to tell their story and would have taken it with them in their grave and a piece of history would have been lost, at least for the time being. The body of testimony for Roswell is nowadays so impressive that it’s hardly a question that it happened, you could almost say: case closed. The ‘dead end’ is that the US government/army just won’t stop lying and giving phony explanations.

    Although it’s unfortunate the world of ufology isn’t a single front which also recognizes the truth of the Meier case, anything different was hardly to be expected. We are being confronted with something very unknown to us and it takes a hell of a lot of time to figure out what’s going on. Also a lot of governments/armies are flat out lying about what they know and also there has been a policy of debunking. We’ve created an insurmountable mess of information and disinformation, which no person can possibly oversee anymore and it’s not gonna be resolved easily. Given this situation it’s impossible that a large group of people will even get to know the existence of the Meier case in a short time, let alone take it seriously.

    • All of that seems correct to me except that most of what we call the government probably doesn’t know or care. Certainly higher ups in the military and intelligence areas may. But there is zero chance that they can be made to “disclose” it, or anything else of significance.

      And, since we’re talking about an event from more than 65 years ago, it would seem pretty clear that those who enter the UFO field and go about lecturing, etc., certainly know, or should know that. It doesn’t say much for the credibility of anyone who goes to all the trouble to carry on about Roswell – when the Meier case certainly would be something they’d at least know about. Of course part of my intent with this article was to point out that indeed there are no “UFO experts” out there informing people of anything significant.

      My position is and has always been, if there are actual extraterrestrial UFOs visiting us, there has to be a reason for it. And that reason isn’t to give anyone a career in bloviating about lights in the sky, imaginary contacts and/or alien abductions, etc. The reason is contained in, or I should say the reason is, the Meier case, which I refer to as the key to our future survival.

      • Oh for sure most of the government doesn’t know. There are probably some little groups who keep the secrets for themselves, most people in those groups probably know a little part and only some individuals who know the big picture a little better. If I’d have to guess I don’t expect disclosure within my lifetime, and I’m only 29.

        A lot of ufologists probably know about the Meier case, but the problem is there are thousands of alleged contact cases and it’s impossible to research them all. I know about Raël, the Adamski case and I know there’s a lot of channelers etc. but I didn’t bother to investigate all of them because as of now I just don’t think they are likely to be true. Yet each of these alleged contactees has a group of followers who think their favorite contactee is telling the truth and think the people who don’t buy it are missing something important. If tomorrow one of Raëls followers tells me about his message and how important it is and so on I will probably not investigate it, my time is limited. Every person is looking at the world trough the lens of what he/she already knows and has experienced and you just can’t research everything, it’s way too much, you have to make a selection based on your own judgement.

        A lot of ufologist most likely look at the Meier case like you and I for example look at Raël or Adamski, it just doesn’t compute with what they already know about the world and thus they will choose not to research it, because their time is also limited, and they will, in our opinion, miss something very important.

        From your point of view “UFO experts” aren’t informing people of anything significant, because you know the Meier case. From the standard scientific point of view which still wonders if there’s any life out there, even though it can’t come here because of the great distances, they potentially tell something extremely significant, only mainstream science cannot even accept that, let alone the Meier case.

        The explanation ufologist often give for alien visitation is that they observe us because we are going through this great transition and we are developing nuclear weapons and so on so it would be interesting for aliens to observe us from an ‘anthropological’ point of view and also to ‘contain the danger’ if necessary. It does have a lot of similarities with Meiers explanation, and if the Meier case didn’t exist (or other real contactees where around) it would seem a reasonable explanation to me.

      • The Meier case is reasonable and fair and this counters popular ancient sick brains beliefs of people and so the individual responsible person’s task is a Mission to improve the quality of life for those affected by schizophrenia and psychosis through education, support programs like FIGUs and research of the Meier material.

  • Hi Michael,

    It’s not a competition, but you certainly understand the Meier case and Meier material better than Sarge, especially, the essence of the spiritual teachings. Both of you have demonstrated and confirmed that clearly in this blog.

    Sarge is like other translators that I have encountered, they think because they have translated important written material, that they automatically understand it better than others. That’s incorrect nonsense.

    As I said, most of the college grads I know, could easily translate Meier material, if the knew German, of course. But then again, my degrees are from the University of Michigan (Journalism) and Cal Berkeley (Philosophy), so most of the college grads I know are intelligent people.

    In a way, I’m glad that you run into this kind of absurd arguments and disagreements, because that allows you to know exactly what I face regularly regarding Astrology. It’s like a first grader, who only knows how to add and subtract, criticizing, and arguing with, a professor of mathematics. No Sarge, you’re not a first grader, you’re more like an eleventh grader.

    There’s no substitute for intelligence. Our task is to share TRUTH with open-minded intelligent people, who are willing, and able, to do a personal investigation into what we present, which I know is the most difficult task of all.

    In my opinion, you are doing great, Michael, keep on with the great work.

  • It seems painfully obvious to me that in this plateau of materialistic existence on Earth, the general feeling is that “if your not paid to disseminate information, your not qualified to do so”, and this lends itself to prolonged debate and mistakes, both by those deemed “qualified” and those who think they know who IS qualified. It seems to all fall back on the lack of willingness to apply logic and reason to any REAL investigation, and the assumption by those not WILLING to use effort on their own behalf to determine for themselves what truth is, hence the perpetuation of more “blind faith”, and more “belief”.

  • People talk in logic as the method and the concept was a consensus, but never was , even among philosophers . So there’s the discussion : everyone thinks being in the exact concept of logic and truth. Many thinkers have developed dialectical methods and modern philosophy has advanced further toward a better understanding of intelligence . There is an excess of rhetoric in relation to logic and truth . This is the objective not the start point. Look out! We advance by trial and error , by gaps , the search for truth is not linear . In much that is stated in the notes and texts , there is a logic of confirmation. In many cases we need to ” believe in the hypothesis.” Scientists and great thinkers have been more careful and modest in this matter . Without doubt, there is a intention of logic and scientific view. We all need it, but…would better assess certain rhetorical best. It’s honestly what I think.

        • Thank you. I believe that elevate and enlarge a little more references do not hurt anyone . Not for the purpose of lecturing , just as a logical consequence of better contextualize things are asserted without most basic ( and worse sometimes influenced by the culture discussion web ) . If some people insist on a position that was criticized then expanded the reference. I have written two academic books on philosophy, art and methods of thought , which were adopted in cities of my country , including at one time at the University of Brasilia , although I am not a teacher of classes . You can learn more about these studies , be more reasonable , humanist without being skeptical and understanding how to see others conceptions. Unlike some who pose as owners of some higher understanding of some matter , and in the end , we went from reading his theories knowing less than we already knew from other sources . I never show up signing as ” academic ” or “writer and philosopher with published books” , praising my understanding as superior because it would be unnecessary and unkind . Thank you again.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *