This section will be for questions and (hopefully) answers to a wide range of topics pertaining to the Billy Meier UFO case and its relevance to the world we live in.

Questions on topics such as these and many others are welcome:

To be clear, I certainly won’t be the only one offering answers to the questions, as I know that there are many people who may be more knowledgeable about certain topics and information than I am. So obviously no one should hold back if they have an answer to a question posted here. Of course we’ll all do our best to check the accuracy of the answers as well and see how this approach goes.

Of course there already may be existing answers in the FIGU forum where Billy Meier answers questions almost every month.

287 comments on “The Billy Meier UFO Case: Questions & Answers

  • Sunday, January 25, 2015 – 10:20 pm

    Jedaiah
    Hi Billy,
    Can you describe what travelling on any of the beamships felt like?

    You mean on or in?
    Sitting outside on the spheres of the „Wedding Cake“ beamship felt like being lifted by a platform. The beamship rose and flew smoothly.

    —–

    Was sitting “on” a beamship documented elsewhere before?

          • Maybe I’m not reading his answer correctly? Is he not saying he sat “on” the WCUFO beamship while it was in motion? Is that the same thing you are referring to about the photo??

          • The questioner used the word on, which Meier then accurately answered pertaining to the photos he took when sitting on the OUTSIDE of the WCUFO.

            The questioner proabably meant inside, which I think Meier would have answered as being about the same as sitting…in a room, with no sensations of motion, etc.

  • Rob you ask a good question and frankly I don’t know why therefore if Creation could talk you will have to ask it.
    But one thing is for certain when you observe the animal kingdom the aberations aren’t so pronounced as that of human being’s probably due to their instinctual nature as oppose to us having a free will to choose.
    So in an of itself our misguided and misinformed ways do create unsolvable dilemas especially when man is born a women and women is born a man and men and women born as both.

  • Since Billy will not answer questions about his previous personalities on the Q&A, does anyone have information on where the supposition Billy was Mozart came from? I vaguely remember reading that from the FIGU forum some time ago.

    • Hey Rob, Well look, theres this; Someone cannot be alive and dead at the exact same time can they, lets call that rule 1 in our thinker -brain. Also there has to be a length of time doesn’t there, to live, using the average ages of the given historical time usually. And we also spend 1.52 or did atleast up until recently, the ratio of time in the living to the time in the beyond, so theres that too. So with that info we can write off quite a lot of speculation cant we.

      The Nokedemion spirit was, we are told all the great prophets through out the ages, but also there is additional info, the spirit was also gallileo, merlin, and maybe some other key historical characters, but as I said before, it cannot ever be an illogical universe. Wolfgang lived 27 January 1756 – 5 December 1791. So in the investigation you conduct these dates really have to fit neatly into the narrative and the various rules (that are mildly flexible depending on length of life, age), important because your going to be wanted to work out your own past right?, to make it useful to yourself.

      There is the additional information about the evolution of the face. My opinion about that is wolfgangs facial features are more befitting someone elses evolution and not Nokedemions, I could be wrong, but Nokedemion tends to have an incredibly strongly defined similarly strong features, its not exactly easy to be clear about because the artists of the day did not always paint people the way they really are, but I think mozarts face fits someone else.

      I see where the idea came from, the consistency of greatness through the ages. I dont know, the short answer, but I doubt its correct, maybe I could be wrong but it seems incorrect assumption to me.

      • I’m not interested rob in giving people all the answers because it makes them lazy and stupid but here, providing you do your bit to verify it properly like an independent man, here: Gallileo lived 15 February 1564 – 8 January 1642 (77) , Wolfgang 27 January 1756 – 5 December 1791 (35) 53.2 years in beyond. Gallileo 117 year in beyond. So – 1642+117 = 1759 – so yes, mathematically mozart does about fit the right time frame. Gallileo was italian, wolfgang austrian, not a million miles of separation culturally. So it is plausible yes, apart from as I said about the facial features and definition features, look at the picture of gallileo, – however it is possible that the artist was not into getting it absolutely correct. But there is another thing, that mozart/wolfgang lived only 35 years, which is unusual for the lineage, but he did become ill which cut that life short. So its possible yeah, absolutely possible.

        • So now you work out for me Rob, how long the personality lived for between mozart and BEAM, how long did that personality live for?

          • You want to work this out Rob, you’re going to need some data.
            BEAMs birth date
            The contact report I obtained the 1.52 calculation from, your going to need that to find the additional information.
            When you’ve found that, your going to need the specific world population data from 18th 19th 20th century, to ensure there is no change to that 1.52 calculation.
            And finally there is another factor, you’re going to need the contact report which explains the length of life of the earth human being. You’re going to need that to ensure that what ever calculation you reach it does not become an illogically long length of life.

            Thanks for answering my question Rob.

        • One must be careful to consider “exception(s) to the rule” stated in a recent QTB.

          In the reference about “average” time in the “beyond,” it is exactly that. In light of this, the math would not be an absolute proof of the connection. However, if the birthdates actually overlapped then perhaps one can dismiss the connection altogether for the time being.

          It does not appear that you made the original assertion about Mozart and Billy but I’m more interested in knowing the source of the assertion and how that came about. Many things have said by Billy informally and those things are equally important to consider.

          Thank you for your feedback though. :)

    • Taken from the English FIGU Forum, this is a list fron “Corey”:

      1) Socrates
      2) Aristotle
      3) Johann Georg Faust
      4) Galileo
      5) Mozart
      6) Jakob Ludwig Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy
      7) Grigori Jefimowitsch Rasputin

      Needs further research.

      • “Aristotle drew a distinction between essential and accidental properties. The way he put it is that essential properties are those without which a thing wouldn’t be what it is, and accidental properties are those that determine how a thing is, but not what it is. For example, Aristotle thought that rationality was essential to being a human being and, since Socrates was a human being, Socrates’s rationality was essential to his being Socrates. Without the property of rationality, Socrates simply wouldn’t be Socrates. He wouldn’t even be a human being, so how could he be Socrates? On the other hand, Aristotle thought that Socrates’s property of being snub-nosed was merely accidental; snub-nosed was part of how Socrates was, but it wasn’t essential to what or who he was. To put it another way, take away Socrates’s rationality, and he’s no longer Socrates, but give him plastic surgery, and he’s Socrates with a nose job.”

        ― Thomas Cathcart, Plato and a Platypus Walk Into a Bar:

        In light of the above list of incarnations, this can basically be viewed as an “inside joke.” :)

          • Hopefully “significant earthquakes” peter off from this point for many places sake. If I read the trends correctly it will pick up again later from August through October. :)

  • Besides CR136 line 181, was Lennon ever talked about by Meier?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwUGSYDKUxU

    “Imagine”

    Imagine there’s no heaven
    It’s easy if you try
    No hell below us
    Above us only sky
    Imagine all the people
    Living for today…

    Imagine there’s no countries
    It isn’t hard to do
    Nothing to kill or die for
    And no religion too
    Imagine all the people
    Living life in peace…

    You may say I’m a dreamer
    But I’m not the only one
    I hope someday you’ll join us
    And the world will be as one

    Imagine no possessions
    I wonder if you can
    No need for greed or hunger
    A brotherhood of man
    Imagine all the people
    Sharing all the world…

    You may say I’m a dreamer
    But I’m not the only one
    I hope someday you’ll join us
    And the world will live as one

    • Bob, You know too many of the SS Ranks fleed to South America specially to Brazil and Argentina at the end of the war, that may explain tge swastika on the pool.
      On another note, for my recall Billy’s spirit wasn’t Galileo, he was Copernicus instead, you can take a look at his quotes in Google, also his facial features resembles very much at Billy’s. Copernicus spend his lifetime explaining that the earth wasn’t the center of the universe but it rotates around the sun instead.

    • Also, my understanding of wiki is that it is not a reliable source as most wiki’s allow modification of content by anonymous sources especially where special counter-interests (bias) may be large in numbers.

    • Sorry, I do not see specifics on either of those links you provided, unless you are simply trying to connect the facial features as a basis only.

      If it was in a CR and someone actually knows where, please share. Otherwise my understanding about Galileo still stands for the time being.

  • In CR437,

    “… that by the year 2100, in some cases, the water of the seas will rise up to 160 centimeters. [5’3″] …”

    Any suggestion why the phrase “in some cases” is used? Does the sea level not rise equally across all land masses?

      • “A common and relatively straightforward mean sea-level standard is the midpoint between a mean low and mean high tide at a particular location.” — Wiki

        Daniel, can you give an example how what you say may be true?

        • If it were a sphere then yes an even distribution is expected in physics. Earth is an oblate spheroid or an oblate ellipsoid, so this idea of the harmonic mean of the mass of the ocean sits at slightly different levels, tectonic plates move up and down too, theres a wobble in the earths orbit which will only stabilise much later after 2100, the north pole is headed toward the middle-east, the south pole toward south-most america (will end up in the endless ocean around there somewhere), by around the year 3000 for its complete move, an evolution of movement is therefore expected. Where the pole is affects where the moon is, which affects the tides, which effects the tectonic plate movements up and down, with all that erosion some places will develop colossal beaches, as we know beaches rise with the level. So thats variable 1, variable 2 is how much the ice at the poles, greenland, permafrost etc, melts in that time, so thats why its up to 160 centimetres. I think you can work it out with all these key words ive used here, I dont recommend you spend too much time on it, especially given that you wont be living at that time. :-)

          • I wont accept an explanation that does not reference the real world, just so you know, I dont want a maths formula, if you do investigate

          • Ok, I see where my problem is. I assumed Billy was talking about an average rise, but he was speaking more of a maximum (“as much as”) rise, and “in some cases” would be akin to saying “in some places.” Re-reading what was said after reading some topics on sea-level rising helps:

            http://epa.gov/climatestudents/impacts/signs/sea-level.html

            Speaking of climate change, this link seems to confirm some of the upcoming things already prophesied by BEAM.

            http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/24/world/gallery/climate-change-impact/index.html

          • Thats right rob :-) . You seem like the kind of man that likes to deal directly with the source material and holds no fear of doing so, of assessing knowledge, you know that spirits dont speak (unless its in clicks) you know what the time is and you perceive your relationship with the only future.

            When your ready to move out of the breast feeding data and into the more independent study sets of data, whenever that time feels right, I have a postulation that you can study in your own time;

            There is more evidence to suggest the plejaren are responsible for overpopulation than the earth human alone that would otherwise have naturally been the case.

            In your own time, when your ready to investigate it.

          • “There is more evidence to suggest the plejaren are responsible for overpopulation than the earth human alone.”

            This postulation would require specific backups. If you have already shared this opinion elsewhere, it would save some time just copying and pasting the other thread(s) or pointing to it. Depending on how far up the stream you want to carry this “postulation,” it is entirely possible from a different perspective.

            “Watch out for falling poops,” however. :)

Leave a Reply

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