Hi Taro,

I’m not really familiar with that openminds website, and I wouldn’t know whether your inquiry is sufficient to persuade the moderators to open up material for discussion.

I believe one of the best ways to persuade people (with intelligence) to pay attention to Meier’s information is to continue to have experts in various fields evaluate his claims with respect to their field. This goes a long way toward showing that not only is Meier repeatedly presenting factual information, across theoretical physics, biology, astronomy, politics, and on and on, but that he has quite excellent critical thinking skills – as evaluated by 3rd parties who would know.

For example, I’m not capable of evaluating Meier’s claims in astronomy. Meier says he knows what the wind speeds on Neptune are, and I have absolutely no insight into whether astronomers know this information, or how they would go about getting it, so the significance of those statements goes right by me. Also, i’m not a photographer: I really cannot evaluate whether Meier’s photos are genuine and whether they would be possible to fake in the 1980s without CGI. However, an expert agency can do this. So again, I think the path forward is continuing to get experts to review his information, as Michael Horn has done.

At any rate, cult groups with crazy leaders usually make up material that is irrational and contradicts scientific reasoning. They lie and say things that are readily disprovable. Yet all of Meier’s claims are so factual, and supported with such careful reasoning. And the kind of people who stick to the facts, and using good reasoning, do not start cult groups. That’s why I think the fact-checking is so important, and by third party experts in relevant fields, when possible 🙂

I host a live call in show once a month,where we have interaction with a group of interstellar beings who call themselves Laarkmaa.I am pasting an introduction from the Laarkmaa site that gives a brief overview of what this site is about . It is our responsibility as a race to raise our own conciousness and become all that we are meant to be.
“We Bring Wisdom From the Stars

Does it bring you joy to imagine a world of cooperation and harmony? Does it excite you to imagine yourself absolutely free and utterly safe? Do you wish trust, love, joy, and compassion to be your constant feeling states?

Then Laarkmaa’s messages are for you.

Laarkmaa is a loving group of interstellar beings who contacted Pia Orleane and Cullen Smith many years ago. They define themselves as “one of six and six of one”, meaning that they have both individual aspects and a unified consciousness. Using the Pleiades as a base for helping humanity, they communicate with Cullen and Pia, heart to heart, through the energy of love.

Messages from Laarkmaa help us sow the seeds of conscious choice for change. With integrity, grace, love and generosity of heart, Laarkmaa provides the keys to our own freedom and gives guidance for aligning with universal truth.

It is time for humans to step into planetary and galactic responsibility—and it all begins within each one of us, in every choice we make. Together, in powerful amplification of what we create individually, we weave threads of conscious intention and loving choice to create a beautiful tapestry of manifested reality that will carry us into the New Earth. ”
The wisdom that these beings share with us is life changing and it is meant for all of us .Please check this out for yourself . For instructions on how to take part in the live in calls go to Laarkmaa@laarkmaa.com . Thank you Billy and Michael for the work that you are doing along with other light movers. Let’s join our hearts together and create a new and wonderful world .

Love and Light

Brian

“One of the ways in which the prophetically accurate nature of certain documents can be determined is to simply look at the events that are contained within it that happened…after the document was verifiably known to have been published, online, etc.” — Yes, absolutely. Verifiable! And the best way to do that is to PUBLISH the information, through a publishing company (in a book or even an ebook) with a ISBN or equivalent (including a date). We are in absolutely agreement on that point.

So when Contact Report #221 is listed as being written in 1987, but with no publication date, then I – or Joe Schmoe who stumbles upon the information tomorrow – cannot actually verify when it was written. He didn’t read your website in 2001, or whenever it was launched, when it supposedly contained that info etc.

I want to be clear here: I am not trying to prove that Meier’s information is false. We already agree that it is scientifically accurate. I am trying to get you to see why other people, including smart people, might look away from Billy’s information when you say it is “prophetically accurate,” yet its publication date cannot be verified.

Taken as a whole, along with consideration of Meier’s means, motivation, and opportunity, yes the information appears to be quite authentic, honest, and is scientfically accurate. That says a lot. But if you actually do not have a publication date for a piece of Meier’s content to show others, or some other proof to demonstrate a date, then that items has not been proven to prophetical, strictly speaking. And to date, I really have not found one single piece of information that has unequivocally shows prophetic capabilities. And my frustration is as follows: You seem to understand exactly what I am talking about, and even agree with the point, yet when I ask for a publication date, I don’t get one at all, or the date goes back to 2004, well after the scientific community already knew about it. So again… I haven’t given up hope, but I still haven’t found anything to be prophetically accurate. I am waiting for that day 🙂

That is Benjamin Steven’s website. He has done a lot of great translation work. So has Vivienne Leg. I already emailed Vivienne asking her the same question I just asked you about Contact Report #221. This was her first response:

“Contact 221 was published in German in 2004. The publisher is Wassermannzeit Verlag. The book is called “Plejadisch-Plejarische Kontaktberichte, Block 7.”

So this is an example of a verified publication date and is basically what I was asking for, Michael. The publisher, the book, the date. I could contact the publication agency and they would be able to confirm that information was published in 2004.

The scientific information regarding immunology in Contact Report #221 could have certainly been written by a graduate student in 2004, though probably not an amateur, not even an amateur plagiarising some article he read. I explain why in my previous paragraph that was quite long; perhaps you glanced at it. In short, the immunology discoveries had already come to light in the mid nineties that would have informed Meier’s explanations by 2004, regarding specific and non-specific immunity. Meier’s explanation would have been impossible if it were published between 1987-1995, and therefore proof of prophetic capability or having knowledge that no one on earth had at that time.

Regarding the dinosaurs in Contact Report #221: Scientists were well aware that very large dinosaurs came from Patagonia in the mid 1990s, and knew specifically about the Gigantosaurs mentioned in Contact Report #221. Quetzal stated: “There was one other giant dinosaur on Earth, which we named Gigantic Dinosaur, which reached a size of up to 14 meters.” Earth scientists published about the Gigantosaurus in Nature in 1995. [Coria, R.A. & Salgado, L. (1995). A new giant carnivorous dinosaur from the Cretaceous of Patagonia. Nature 377: 225-226]. Quetzal said 14 meters long, the Nature article says 12-13 feet long. It was such a major publication that it would been featured on the front page of the written journal or website in 1995…

In conclusion: I cannot confirm that Meier used prophetic capabilities to obtain specific factual information about immunology or dinosaurs, published in Contact Report #221 in 2004, that was not already available to other earth scientists. I can confirm that Meier’s information is scientifically accurate and very articulate. Aside from the factual details that Meier does not shy away from using , he also demonstrates very good critical thinking skills to expertly critique the mistaken assumptions that immunologist or palaeontologist experts may have made in their own fields. Meier list of facts and details in that report I can account for; his expert reasoning, I cannot. He has no scientific degree, but his refutation of inappopriate immunology terminology, or the discussion of the way predatory and and prey dinosaurs interact — it’s top notch.

I see Meier as an extremely intelligent man with wonderful, insightful, clear explanations. I do not, however, have simple proof of prophetic capability. That’s where I’m at Michael, and I’ve been giving it my best shot. And I appreciate your feedback and the lively discussion. 🙂

Shelia, regarding the Gigantosaurus, you have only to type in the reference I provided into google, and the first item that comes up is: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v377/n6546/abs/377224a0.html. You will be able to read the abstract, but not the full text unless you go to a library or somewhere with institutional access to scholarly articles.

And to reiterate what I said previously: Meier was aware that earth scientists had made the discovery of the Gigantosaurus by 1998, because he wrote a paragraph on it in his own FIGU bulletin 008. In theory, this discussion would reference his Contact Report #221 information that he already wrote down in 1987 regarding the Gigantosaurus and its size. However, because I have been unable to obtain the a publication date for Contact Report #221 prior to 2004, I cannot confirm that Meier’s information, specifically about the carnivorous Gigantosaurus, predated the earth discovery. Hopefully that helps. 🙂

Sean said “Shelia, regarding the Gigantosaurus, you have only to type in the reference I provided into google, and the first item that comes up is: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v377/n6546/abs/377224a0.html. You will be able to read the abstract, but not the full text unless you go to a library or somewhere with institutional access to scholarly articles.”
Hi Sean, first off you linked a summary of the Nature article and did you find out when that summary was done and when it was uploaded to their site? Just because a summary was done does not mean it was done right away after the article was printed. You said that article would have been on the front cover of Nature in 1995 but you cannot prove that. Can you please go through your “institutional access to scholarly articles” and find that article to prove your claims. I can’t, because I’m just a poor farmer’s daughter and have no access and can’t pull any strings to get a copy of the magazine in it’s entirety, like you can. My library does not keep magazines from 20 years ago. Thank you in advance. I’ll let you know what my mailing address is once you have secured it. Let me know how much I owe you.