Question: Is noted skeptical radio program dodging the Billy Meier UFO case?

I have no shortage of opportunities to be preaching to the choir about the Billy Meier UFO contacts. But I’m always on the lookout for mainstream media shows that will want to explore, and challenge, the case in a more hardball fashion.

I’ve recently sent a couple of emails to Point of Inquiry, the radio show affiliated with Center for Inquiry, the skeptical organization whose Los Angeles investigative branch has run into a fair bit of trouble in attempting to debunk the Meier case and it’s evidence.

I invited Point of Inquiry to interview me (take me on, so to speak) regarding the Meier case, since they are all about skepticism and showing how foolish anything is that seems to lie in the realm of the (nonexistent) “paranormal”, i.e. UFOs, etc. Now I’m sure that they are busy with various things but I’m beginning to get the feeling that they prefer to preach to the choir more than they want to take someone on who’s trying to do the opposite.

Since they’ve interviewed other intelligent, educated, well-spoken guests, most all of whom seem to be advocates for their own positions, surely, in the interest of truth they’d want to engage with someone equally well qualified with an opposing viewpoint, no? After all, I’ve made it easy for them now to not offer the disproved mainstay of previous skeptical attacks on Meier’s UFO evidence. So they would have the opportunity to offer their own substantiated criticisms to support their skepticism.

As I have pointed out, it’s been more than 10 years since CFI West accepted my challenge to them, a challenge which was also posed to other skeptics who had – for far too long – been sniping away at Meier with unrestrained cynicism and nastiness. It would seem that now only the most religiously hardcore skeptics would blindly adhere to the same unfounded beliefs.

But if the good people at Point of Inquiry are sincere truth seekers, our proposed interaction could serve to inform and increase awareness of an authentic and valuable contribution to human knowledge and understanding, which would be something that both sides could warmly welcome, without the need for gloating by, or embarrassment to, either.


3 comments on “Point of Inquiry, Where Did You Go?

  • Hi Michael ;
    It’s good to see you back in the fray once again ( as if you ever stopped ). A human tornado . Of course, the ones you debate with will never admit that you have a good point or that you’re right , but the logic that you always come back to wins over some of those that watch from the ‘cheap seats’ . What I noticed about their closed argument is mostly the same , a few unfortunate loose ends which were falsified / tampered with by some agencies whose business it is to keep things back to the 1940’s , when things were simple , and so were ‘we all’ . Dinosaurs , dancers , garbage can lids and the same old focus on a few things that will keep the same dummies from ever looking further . Instead of frustration , you give the bull another kind of Horn .As for those dummies , try can try to stop the future , where all things unfold in the light of day .

  • Dear POI,

    I gracefully accept your capitulation, thank you. You were the last of the aggressively confident skeptics to fold due to the realization that there was just too much that you couldn’t credibly dispute or confront in the Billy Meier case. I am surprised that you’ve taken a cowardly route, equivalent to skulking away with your tail between your legs…after far too much barking.

    I do wonder if it was the realization that Meier obviously didn’t backdate any of his prophecies and that the information pertaining to Russia, troop movements to Arkhangelsk, etc., as foretold by him in 1987, was just too specific to try to label as “coincidence”.

    I continue to get copies of emails that other people have certainly been sending to you after reading my blog. I’m delighted and even mildly surprised, since many people who’ve long known the truth about the case, its evidence and information often remained silent, most likely to avoid ridicule, attacks, etc.

    I’m certain that each of you is intelligent, dedicated to your point of view – though apparently not to too much inquiry! – and a nice, decent person. I would suggest though that you learn to approach things that baffle you with more open-mindedness, without suspending any logical, critical thinking. It really is respectable to say, “I don’t know,” when such is truly the case.

    If any of you should decide to muster up the courage to delve into what will surely be a less than satisfying experience, from the skeptical perspective, be assured that I will be glad to participate.

    All the best,

    Michael Horn
    Authorized American Media Representative
    The Billy Meier Contacts

  • Only if debate was Truth driven then debate wouldn’t be so bad. Never once have I seen or herd of a debate where someone said ” Hey, you know something, your right, I change my mind! ” Maybe in the truest sense of the word “debate” it would be as such. Where point-of-view opponents would both be the proponents of truth.

    But the picture is as such get the information out at all costs. Even if the forum platform is Debate, Religious, Government,or the ever dreaded Social (with friends, ‘Hey man your ruining my buzz’) I have been doing what I can and will continue to do as such to help humanity right it’s self.

    When I meet someone new I go straight to the over population and to the destructive process know as belief. I talk about how it is the prime mover in the continuing to advance us to the prophecy’s fulfillment and that it need not happen if people can recognize truth and learn to change.

Leave a Reply

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