The Religious Atheists-Skeptics on the Sam Harris Forum

This article is for the benefit of any readers interested in the thread I started on the Sam Harris forum. It pertains to information that I posted and linked to that clearly shows that numerous examples of specific, prophetically accurate information were published by Billy Meier long before “official discovery”.

The veracity of claims of prior publication are established by copyrights, our internationally recognized and accepted, legal standard of proof of prior and/or first publication. While copyrights establish the date that something was first published, the content itself must then be evaluated for accuracy and relevance.

In the case of Meier’s information, its specificity and accuracy can be determined by any interested person. Some specific examples, with relevance to challenges posed on the Harris forum, are listed below.*

The fact that a court of law would recognize that the copyrights constitute the existence of ironclad, irrefutable proof that Billy Meier’s information was published prior to the foretold events, is intolerable to pseudoscientific skeptics because of their rigid, religiously based belief systems. They will go to great lengths to still try to discredit that which they simply cannot tolerate. And make no mistake about it, many of those who consider themselves atheists-skeptics are among the most fundamentalist in their behavior towards, and rejection of even the possibility of the reality of, Meier’s evidence and information.

They possess an irrationality and fervor that is second to no evangelical of any other faith and in fact it can be every bit as much – if not more – blindly irrational in attacking what they’ve presumed to be so easily dismissible.

In the case of documents where the originals are no longer available, such as for the 1951,1958 and 1987, etc., prophecies and predictions, all one has to do is to ascertain when the documents were first published in German and/or when they were first published on the internet. Then, if one is patient, they will start to find evidence in the form of information that is corroborated even after the relatively more recent online dates. Such was the case for Dr. Sanford Weinstein, the formerly skeptical physician/physicist for whom Meier’s information, from 1987, regarding Russian military movements (and subsequent Canadian activities) compelled him to call Meier’s information “astonishing and amazing” and that it warranted the serious attention of our own military.

What is actually revealed in the persistence of skepticism to Meier’s prophetic information – especially since there can be no doubt at all when staring in the face of the various copyrighted books and documents – is a cynical, fearful inability to accept anything that lies outside of the primitive materialism of the skeptical reality. First, character assassination and derision will be employed. Since the skeptics automatically assume that Meier is some country bumpkin who (magically, of course) “hoaxes” everything, and they assume themselves to be far superior to him, they have no trouble trying to laugh him off and dismiss him as lacking any credibility.

Point to any of the numerous credible scientific experts who’ve analyzed and authenticated Meier’s evidence and the catch-22 argument from the skeptics is that you’re “appealing to authority”! I’m sure you can appreciate the irony of so many anonymous online “experts” trying to attack the various scientists they would themselves be citing if they’d disproved Meier’s evidence and claims.

Naturally, the skeptics will move goal posts; avoid admitting their factual inaccuracies, wrong assumptions, etc. A great case in point is the anonymous skeptic on the Harris blog who came out guns blazing as he tried to state that Meier’s claimed prior contacts took place in 1975, when it’s long been documented that they occurred in 1942 and even 1964. The very fact that such cowardly wannabes are so insipidly spineless as to anonymously attack and try to assassinate the character of others is an indication of societal decline, the real magnitude and significance of which is not even barely understood in this and every other crumbling society in which it finds acceptance.

Because of my respect for Sam Harris’ intellect and eloquence, I had hoped that opening a discussion about the Meier material on his forum would bring it to the attention of some real freethinkers and, ultimately, Harris himself. I even asked the moderators to bring the information to Harris’ attention. I have a feeling that Harris wouldn’t approach the Meier material, its evidence and claims with anything resembling the denial and religiosity I encountered from some malcontent who’s ineptitude leaves him/her with no other options than trying to bait and insinuate, while avoiding every single specific answer and example that substantiates the accuracy, authenticity and honesty of Meier’s evidence and claims.

Should someone of Sam Harris’ stature decide to engage in the discussion I think it could produce an outwardly rippling wave of increased interest in, and awareness of…the truth.

 

*

http://theyfly.com/A-Sampling-of-Evidence.html

http://theyfly.com/newsflash91/5100_year_old_man.htm

http://theyfly.com/Wendelle-Stevens-Jupiter-Io.html

http://www.theyfly.com/Fukushima.html

http://www.theyfly.com/skeptical-challenge/confirming-meier’s-jupiter-information-and-debunking-incorrect-debunkers-…-again

http://theyflyblog.com/russia-china-unitenow-hear-before/03/05/2014

http://theyfly.com/Scientific_Experts.html

http://theyfly.com/PDF/PhotoAnalysis.pdf

http://www.theyfly.com/new-documentation

http://theyfly.com/PDF/UFOSoundRecordings.pdf

http://theyfly.com/India_1964.html

http://www.theyfly.com/prophecies-predictions/henoch-prophecies

 

 

 

 

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.

The Universe Has no Place in the University

Or: The perversity of diversity instead of healthy controversy

I recently contacted Arizona State University regarding screening my new film, And Did They Listen? for the students and faculty alike. I was referred, and submitted my film, to Ms. Beatriz Kravetz, a lovely woman who is apparently in charge of such things. Quite honestly, in our brief telephone conversation she came across as an intelligent, sincere and engaging person. So my comments and purpose for posting this exchange are directed at her expressed position, not at her as a person.

I think the email exchange* will tell enough of the whole story, although I have more comments.

In this, oh so politically correct world, where every precious little bit of “diversity” – which simply means “variety” – is worshipfully promoted, without regard for any inherent qualitative value, almost anything that deviates from the norm that has enough vocal proponents can gain a place of unearned prominence, credibility or respectability through sheer force of numbers.

I’m not singling out any particular group or element and of course there are things that may come under the heading of diversity that may well have worthwhile qualities integral to them. If only that was what was being focused on instead of all of the mindless conformity, much of it perhaps stemming from liberal guilt and other examples of institutionalized spinelessness.

But I digress. Anyone who knows anything about the Billy Meier UFO contacts knows that it is the most well documented, analyzed, authenticated and profound body of evidence and information that establishes a credible foundation for Meier’s claims of 70+ years of ongoing extraterrestrial contacts. (This alone demolishes the often-unquestioned claims of “hoax”, etc.)

(NOTE: The Billy Meier UFO contact case has nothing to do, and isn’t to be confused, with the plethora of absolute garbage and delusional disinformation from the lights-in-the-sky chasing “UFO industry” about “alien abductions”, “six-inch aliens”, “extraterrestrial presence on Earth”, “hybrid alien babies”, etc.)

So when Ms. Kravetz’ first response expressed a concern that the topic was “controversial” instead of gleefully welcoming such “diversity”, I knew that trouble lay ahead. And I suspect that her inability to specify exactly what was so objectionable – especially in light of her admission to having taken time from her weekend to watch the film – indicated that perhaps the film so threatened her belief system that it overrode her presumed standards of academic and intellectual freedom, honesty, discovery, tolerance for “diverse” opinions, etc.

When one also considers the quality of the critique by college educated, atheist/skeptic David Sharpe regarding the evidence in the Meier case, my dread about “the level of ‘thinking’ in colleges and universities among skeptics” is more than warranted.

Many colleges and universities obviously encourage their students to “get involved in politics”, evidenced also by the high number of college degreed lawyers who are certainly among the main contributors to the spewing forth of the ongoing political pollution.

But try to bring a non-political, non-religious, non-trendy – but heavily documented, evidence rich body of information that is outside of the dead-end political-religious (and even scientific) paradigm and, well, look out. What makes this even more ironic is that Prof. Paul Davies, who not only teaches at ASU and prattles on extensively about “aliens” and “E.T”, instructed his media representative, Skip Derra, to respond, on November 28, 2012, to my earlier requests to present information about the Meier case, thusly:

“Hi Michael,

I spoke with Paul Davies about your request and he has asked me to relay his regrets. His interests and expertise do not extend into this area.

Thanks for your interest.

Skip”

Well mine do, sir.

Add Prof. Davies to the “Spineless” column…along with Prof. Boghossian. Maybe it’s time to consider “home schooling” high school graduates…if we ever hope to produce quality thinkers anymore. If you want a wake up call, go to China where you’ll find huge audiences comprised of professors, scientists, college age (and younger) people who’ll attend a credible presentation on the UFO topic and ask unapologetically probing, fact demanding questions. Perhaps they don’t spend as much time as their contemporaries here on endlessly entertaining themselves…at least not until after they’ve met their daily academic/educational demands.

To elaborate on a comment a friend recently made, considering that 99.99% of reality is indeed extraterrestrial, is it really asking too much to give a fair hearing to the Meier case information? After all, it would only take one thoroughly discredited presentation to an intelligent college audience to assure that there’d be no further interest in that arena.

However, I think that the result would be quite the opposite, which is why none of the professional skeptics will host such a debate at one of their own venues. And I think it’s why the protectors of the academic status quo, like Ms. Kravitz and Profs. Boghossian and Davies don’t want to take the risk. After all, there are those troublesome little issues about…funding, peer pressure, pride and position, etc.

Considering what’s at stake, too bad the search for the…truth doesn’t head the list of priorities.

*I thank Ron Watson for making me amend the email exchange to include more of my original emails to Ms. Kravetz, which I at first thought were superfluous. But it appeared to Ron and maybe other people that I may have been harsh or confrontational with her. Perhaps it will now be clearer that I approached her in an open, hopeful way:

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Hi Beatriz,

As you can see below, Wendy Hultsman suggested that you may be able to assist me with my desire to have my film screened on campus.
Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Michael Horn

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Hi Michael,

I am sure I don’t need to explain that this is a controversial subject that would be difficult to get ASU to sponsor. Having said that, if you would like to send me a copy of your film, I would be happy to have a private screening with relevant faculty to see if there is any interest in having a public screening with a faculty member willing to put his or her name behind it.

I wish I could be more helpful, but this is the best that I can do.

Best,

Beatriz Kravetz

Manager, Marketing and Communications

School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies

Arizona State University

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Hi Beatriz,
I certainly understand, having reseearched this subject for…35 years. While mainstream television now is carrying all sorts of shows on “ancient aliens” and other sensationalized (and usually mythical) topics, I think you’ll find this to be quite different.
The people that I am working with here in the US include NASA personnel, scientists and military people.
Of course I’m glad to send you a review copy, please send me your best address.
Sincerely,
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

P.S.

Hi Beatriz,

Since I present such conclusive answers to the question posed by Paul Davies the ASU community would probably be both interested and excited to have a chance to see, hear…and challenge them.

I forgot to add that my new film, as well as my two previous ones, has already been picked up for TV, debuting this spring.

Also, just for a further reference, my daughter and I produced this award-winning documentary, which is used by therapists, schools, etc.

Best,

MH

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Hi Beatriz,
I popped one in the mail to your Tempe address on Myrtle Ave..
Best,
MH

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Hi Beatriz,

I hope you’ve had time to see and enjoy And Did They Listen?

It seems that celebrating diversity - in terms of thoughts, beliefs, information, etc. – is also an essential element as ASU.

And I particularly liked this quote, “What is great about a controversy is that people are more open about what’s going on, and you have more access to discussions and arguments.”

Perhaps we could chat about this; let me know if I should give you a call.

Best,

MH

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Michael,

I took some time over the weekend to watch parts of the film. I appreciate the passion and determination you have put into this project. However, I regret to say that it is not something that will be shown nor endorsed by ASU.

If you would like me to return the DVD, I will be happy to do so if you provide an address. If you prefer, I would be happy to donate it to the local public library in hopes that more people may come across it and watch it.

Best of luck to you,

Beatriz

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Beatriz,

I’m troubled by your lack of response to my request to have an explanation regarding your speaking for the entire school in stating that my film won’t be shown there.

That is a rather severe thing to say about a film, especially one that is completely devoid of profanity, pornography, violence, etc. In fact, it sounds like outright…censorship, wouldn’t you agree? Is the information too threatening to your beliefs, religious views, etc.?

Perhaps this is a misunderstanding and you really only meant that, in your opinion, no professor would sponsor it.

Let’s be honest, if I was a trendy, tattooed, twerking, twittering, trans (cultural, sexual, vestite, ylvannian, etc.), not only would my “diversity” be welcomed, I’d probably be well on my way to having my own department at many universities…perhaps even yours.

Think I’m exaggerating? Well, if this is factual, I think you really do owe me an explanation…and an invitation to present something that just may stimulate actual thinking. After all, isn’t that what a university is supposed to be cultivating…instead of promoting belief systems and trendy aberrations?

I look forward to your response,

MH

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Sir,

Yes, it is my opinion. I have been overly generous with my time for you, I even took time off my weekend to watch your film, and quite frankly, I have better things to do with my time.

I encourage you to find someone on the university who will show your film.

I hope you can appreciate that I have responsibilities that I get paid for, responding to every person who would like to have their work shown on campus is not one of them.

I respectfully request that you refrain from contacting me in the future.

Sincerely,

Beatriz Kravetz

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Madam,

Thank you for the clarification.

I’ll only add that while you may well have better things to do with your time, based on the program I linked to below, I think my film would provide a better use of many students’ time than some of what is currently considered worthy of it.

Best,

MH

P.S. When I get emotional, non-specific reactions to my film and information, it’s usually because a person feels that their beliefs are threatened…which is as it should be in our puruit of the truth, since that is what higher education is supposed to be all about.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

NOTE:

I’m amending this blog in response especially to what Nathanael has said in the comments section.

I think that Ms. Kravitz is…frightened. And it’s not because the film has anything to do with scary, imaginary “evil aliens”, “alien abductions” and the rest of the disinformation/entertainment that has contaminated and marginalized the overall UFO/extraterrestrial topic.

Since she couldn’t offer one significant, specific word to criticize or refute the content of the film, I think Ms. Kravitz may be frightened by the impenetrable credibility and non-dismissable reality of the Meier case and its paradigm shattering implications for life as we know it:

There are real, far more advanced, space traveling human beings who see things as they are, shun our institutionalized lying to self and others – including politics, religion and diplomacy - and out of respect for our free will and right to self-determination cannot directly interfere in our relentlessly insane, suicidal behavior.

However, the genie is out of the bottle and while this reality must not be forced on anyone, pulling the blankets over one’s head won’t make the truth disappear. Such reactions are indicative of the pattern of denial, lack of intellectual curiosity, introspection and objective critical thinking that has sufficiently corroded the wiring in so many people’s brains, many of whom are under the illusion that they are “educated”, so that they fail to see just how fearful, controlled and manipulated they really are.

And in place of encouraging real thinking and moral courage, the educational environments all too often substitute shock value and give significance to fleeting contemporary trends, insignificant cultural icons and what people do with their genitalia, etc.

So this little 111 minute film is apparently a danger to the (tuition paying) young people who are inheriting this mess of a world and who deserve to at least consider, question and challenge the information for themselves, not have it hidden from, or decided for, them by anyone else.

See also: 1958 – Warning to All the Governments of Europe / Prophecies and Predictions, especially number 127.

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.

Politics: Retarding Progress through the Art of Advantage

Politics has been called the art of the possible. I call it the art of advantage.

Politics means that we seek to get things, to acquire or get them done and that we’ll, gladly or not, exchange something that the other person (usually considered our opponent) wants in order to do so. Of course we try not to exchange anything at all and are very careful about just what, and how much of it, we’re willing to exchange. This isn’t about compromise, where both people actually want the same thing but disagree on how to go about getting it.

Political thinking means that we don’t do things because they’re right, and we don’t refuse to do things because they’re wrong. We do them because they’re expedient and get us what we want…without regard for the intrinsic rightness of our desires, causes, etc. This can be applied to so-called environmentalists as well as to the more obviously acquisitive types. An ironic example of insidious wrongness is (the supposedly environmentally friendly) Gov. Jerry Brown’s signing a bill allowing fracking in California, a state already suffering a huge water shortage (fracking uses large amounts of water in its polluting, destabilizing process), tectonic instability, etc.

So we watch as those who are indifferent, or oblivious, to the laws of cause and effect play out and enact all sorts of political games, maneuvers and manipulations. But politics certainly isn’t about understanding and respecting the true, universal laws of life, nor the true values like love, peace, freedom and harmony, etc.; that wouldn’t seem to be expedient. Of course, when we take into account the huge, manmade disasters that have ultimately come down on us (and continue to do so) as a result of such ignorance, maybe doing things right the first time, which also includes not doing certain things just because of political pressures, would have been the best, less overall costly way to go.

It all seems so transparently obvious, futile and pathetic but it’s the game that multitudes of people have been trained to enjoy – to love – playing against their ultimate best interests.

Obviously politics isn’t about truth…anymore than religion is. So why do so many people continue to play those games?

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.