BREAKING: IIG Skeptics Retract ANOTHER Claim against Meier Case!

NOTE: Please see the UPDATE below*

On November 20, 2011, I received the following information in an email from Jack Sarlo, pertaining to his correspondence with someone named Ivan Alvarado, who is affiliated with IIG. I have waited to post the information, since Ivan indicated that IIG would update (correct) their information.

They have not done so to date, so I am including their admission, which effectively retracts IIG’s claim. Additionally, I am including links to the Preliminary Investigation Report – a book they somehow failed to research – that clearly states, on pages 424 and 425, that Marcel Vogel also used x-ray diffraction and spectrographic analysis in determining the composition of the metal samples.

A downloadable copy of the book is available here.

……………………………………………………………………………………

Hi,

You’re saying on your website: http://www.iigwest.com/investigations/meier/metal_analysis_deconstruction.html

that a scanning electron microscope cannot reveal the chemical composition of a metal sample.

Yet a description of a scanning electron microscope reveals that it’s actually possible to know the chemical composition. See wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scanning_electron_microscope

http://serc.carleton.edu/research_education/geochemsheets/techniques/SEM.html

Or read quotes from those two pages:

“A scanning electron microscope (SEM) is a type of electron microscope that images a sample by scanning it with a high-energy beam of electrons in a raster scan pattern. The electrons interact with the atoms that make up the sample producing signals that contain information about the sample’s surface topography, composition, and other properties such as electrical conductivity.”

“reveal information about the sample including external morphology (texture), chemical composition, and crystalline structure and orientation of materials making up the sample”

Apparently the technique to identify the chemical composition is not my magnification technique.

Thanks for nice investigation work just wanted to let you know what I found.

Bye,

Jack

-This is the reply from Ivan Alvarado -

Hello Jack,

Thank you for your email. You are correct in pointing out that a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) can identify elements in a sample. This is done qualitatively by using Back-Scattered Electron Imaging and quantitatively through X-Ray Energy Dispersion Spectroscopy, both done with SEM.

The IIG Steering Committee has asked me to review this section of our Billy Meier Case Investigation. We will update this section accordingly.

Thank you again,

Ivan Alvarado

…………………………………………………………………………….

There was a  previous retraction from Derek Bartholomaus, who was the IIG case investigator for IIG. Also worth noting is that the so-called “deconstruction” of the Aket and Nera photographs has itself been deconstructed.

And most impressively, not only has the IIG attempted debunking of Billy Meier’s Jupiter-Io information been shown to be completely inaccurate, the skeptic who did the research for IIG published information that actually confirmed Meier’s accuracy and preemptive publication of this critical information, which itself substantiates Meier’s claims of extraterrestrial contact.

 

*UPDATE: Perhaps coincidentally, just a few hours after posting the above information I received the following correspondence from Mahigitam. It shows that Derek Bartholomaus was made aware of the incorrect assertions by his group, IIG, months ago. He neither responded to Mahigitam, nor corrected the erroneous information. Such is the level of integrity of the skeptics, whose overriding concerns have been to try to discredit the Billy Meier case…instead of to just find, and come to terms with, the truth.

…………………………………………………………………………….
Hello.I am the Lead Investigator into the Billy Meier UFO Case for the Independent Investigations Group.  I received word that you wished to contact me.  What can I do for you?

Sincerely,
Derek Bartholomaus
———-
From: karumudi mahesh chowdary <mahigitam@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:36 PM
To: Derek Bartholomaus <derek@iigwest.org>

Hello,

I have been investigating Billy Meier case myself. The IIGWEST website provided some informative data.
Why i am writing to you sir, is that in one of the pages on “Dinosaur Photo Deconstruction“..it says,
We are not certain where Meier first published his photograph of a dinosaur, but it has never been denied as being an authentic Meier photograph by Meier or any of his proponents.

Regarding this i found some information which clarifies the matter, which has been online since 2005 and recently been translated into english and available here.
http://futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/FIGU_Special_Bulletin_20
http://www.figu.org/ch/verein/periodika/sonder-bulletin/2005/nr-20/getuerkte-photos

The essense of the information in the page is that, “Billy Meier never claimed the dinosaur photo as his, since 1975″.

Secondly, in the page, “Metal Analysis Deconstruction”.. it says
..Marcel Vogel detected the rare-Earth element Thulium using the scanning electron microscope

But in “UFO Contact From The Pleiades – A Preliminary Investigative Report” – Wendelle Stevens – Billy Meier Case(1982), pg 424 says:

“Looking at the piece by x-ray diffraction, for elemental analysis, he found a single element deposit of Thulium..Rhenium..another rare metal.”

I added the page 424 as an attachment.

Hope you make corrections.

Sincerely
Mahesh

Page 424 from "UFO Contact From The Pleiades - A Preliminary Investigative Report" - Wendelle Stevens - Billy Meier Case (1982), "Looking at the piece by x-ray diffraction, for elemental analysis, he found a single element deposit of Thulium..Rhenium..another rare metal."


 

Copyright 2011 - All Rights Reserved. Please do not copy or reproduce the content on this blog for re-publication without the author/s written permission. Thank you.