In regards to the challenges I’ve posed and posted to Stuart Robbins and his refusal to address the blatant evidence of Billy Meier’s prophetically accurate information, his sole criterion for refusing to do so, other than his prejudicial belief system, has been that I wouldn’t prove that Meier didn’t retrodict his Red Meteor/Apophis information.

Plausible Deniability

So, while presumption of innocence until proven guilty may seem like just a quaint notion to Robbins, I’ll actually present my answer…again. Indeed, in the afore-linked-to article I introduce the idea of plausible deniability as it applies to the Meier case. Now this is not a concept that Professor Emeritus James Deardorff, or I, invented. Plausible deniability is, however, a legally accepted term for a particular kind of tactic.

That it may be the answer to Robbins’ demand for proof that Meier actually was told the dates when the incoming object could hit the earth, is something that the still wet behind the ears Robbins may not like.

As a matter of fact, I don’t like it either but I don’t doubt that it may be true. I don’t like it because I know how narrow the focus and thinking capacity of most of the pseudo-scientific skeptics are. As for why it may be true, here’s why.

Anyone who’s actually familiar with the hundreds of Contact Notes (or Contact Reports) that have been published by Meier since January 1975, has frequently encountered Meier being told that, well, that he can’t be told any more about a certain matter because, “That would lead too far.” Or that he can only be told privately, i.e. off the record.

It’s sometimes further explained that the withheld information must, and probably will, be garnered by our own scientists and interested parties in due time. Despite the kind of sophomoric thinking that demands that everything be spoon fed to us – and then still rejects and quibbles over it when it is – the burden of responsibility for our lives still is upon us, as it shall ever remain.

Now, sometimes the withheld information is later released and/or confirmed, such as indeed in the case of the Red Meteor/Apophis. And, in addition to there being numerous examples of this, going back to Meier’s earliest contacts that are documented in the earliest books and transcripts containing them, there’s another glaring example, one that I also presented to Robbins, who obviously wasn’t paying attention.

The Preliminary Investigation Report

I’m referring to the information contained in the Preliminary Investigation Report, specifically to this telltale sentence (emphasis added), “We have promised to observe the ban on release of any information on future events until they happen.” Now this should be understood in the light of the kind of information that was not to be released in advance, i.e. certain world events that were “set in stone”, and the public foreknowledge of which could create even worse consequences than the unpreventable events themselves. (It must also be stated that Meier accidentally gave the entire document containing the predictions to Stevens, instead of only the requested Jupiter information. Hence, Stevens was sequestering it out of respect for the protocols that he knew Meier observed.)

While this too is certain to raise the hackles, eyebrows and blood pressure of the skeptics, i.e. pseudo-scientists, they need to be reminded that real scientists make predictions all the time, based on known information. (They also need to be reminded of the fact that we’re referring here to copyrighted, dated published books and documents supporting Meier’s claims.)

While it’s inconceivable for the pseudo-scientists that anyone could be beyond them in intelligence, scientific and technological knowledge and knowing how Earth human beings think far better than they know themselves, it hardly matters…as the ample evidence indicates.

And considering the voluminous body of already corroborated, prophetically accurate information from Meier – and the virtual absence of misses, such as would be expected if someone merely made a few “lucky guesses” – at the very least, the offered evidence should be investigated and examined in a way consistent with the review of any other claimed evidence in a scientific matter.

So I again suggest that Robbins should approach this not like an argument, or a threat to his belief system but as a scientific investigation. The skeptics need to forego trying to prove that, somehow, Billy Meier, Wendelle Stevens and all others involved actually set up an elaborate, intricately complex hoax to try to deceive them, and instead participate in an honest, objective search for the truth of the matter, wherever it may lead.

NOTE: Coincidentally, after posting my blog rebutting the shallow, pseudo-scientific sophistry of Stephen Novella, and while writing this piece regarding providing the answer to Stuart Robbins, I received a copy of an email that James Deardorff had just sent to Novella, reprinted below with Deardorff’s permission. (It should be noted that Deardorff, who is many times Robbins’ senior in scientific experience and credentials, had written to Robbins at one time also encouraging him to approach the Meier case scientifically. Of course numerous other scientific experts, all of whom are also quite senior in experience to Robbins, authenticated and supported the authenticity of Meier’s evidence.)

Hello Dr. Novella,

In your blog you tried to dismiss the reasonable response of Jamesm that
Billy Meier’s ETs have been providing Meier with evidence which, now and
then, contains seemingly ambiguous elements so that negative skeptics can
latch onto that and accept their own negative interpretation while
ignoring other aspects that indicate reality — i.e., they supply some
“plausible deniability” so that negative skeptics aren’t forced to believe
that which they simply find to be unacceptable.

You called it post-hoc reasoning. But really, do you think anyone could
arrive at Jamesm’s conclusion _before_ there was sufficient evidence for
them to examine? (“Post” means after.)

The evidence you’ve ignored includes the first-hand eye-witness accounts
of over 60 persons who were visiting Meier in Switzerland on and off over
a period of 35 years when a particular event occurred, or were temporarily
living at his converted-barn residence or who lived nearby. You should
read their accounts and meet some of them before claiming they were
deluded or mistaken or in on a hoax. E.g., see .

Or, read how and why the Meier-case debunking started, back around 1978,
in . Or review the ignored evidence
regarding many of his beamship photos that indicate they could not have
been any hoax — along with refutations of
the attempted debunkings. Or see  where,
if a model had been used along with a model tree or miniature tree, the
tree & model would have had to be some 40 or 50 ft away from the camera,
with a pole (to hold a support string for a dangling model) of comparable

You really do owe Mr. Meier a huge apology for portraying him as being a
giant hoaxer, while all those who have known him closely regard him as
being honest and sincere.


Jim Deardorff
Research Professor emeritus
Oregon State University
Fellow, AAAS


20 comments on “The Answer

  • But a lie detector test is evidence NOT proof. If this were about someone stealing a bar of candy the evidence of a lie detector would be accepted but not for such an important issue.

  • David,

    First of all, proof is a very often subjective determination based on the evidence.

    Work with me here, just a little. For now don’t worry about lie detector tests. Don’t even worry about an affirmative assessment from a man who trains soldiers to recognize honesty – when their LIVES depend on it.

    Just focus on the EVIDENCE in the case, the copyrighted, dated, published information. Pay attention to the fact that even Jennifer states that she read VERIFIABLY preemptively published (prophetically accurate) information. That isn’t a fluke. There’s a ton of it. It doesn’t change, it hasn’t been altered.

    Delve into it and think your way through it. Again, Jennifer affirms the prophetic information. Now what will you do with that?

  • MH

    But I know something that they haven’t told Meirs which makes me suspicious. Why prophesise trivia when a lot more is going on?

  • I have read back a few pages and I admire Michael Horn for not losing his cool. He has a mastery of the subject unlike many and we are all of equal value here. I also did not believe the Meier case when I first learned of it way back in 1976 when a friend quit her job to be with Billy. She called him Jesus Christ, but she was new to the information as I can tell many of you responding are as well. I did not know the facts of the case.

    Okay now that was upteen years ago and I know Michael personally, we met in California and Switzerland. I know that he is more knowledgeable than ANYONE in the United States and much of the world. Rather that arguing about semantics, trivialities and innuendo, ask questions! He can save you HOURS of reading in German! Michael speaks German and has been to see the man in question what 20 times now? When I attempt to learn, such as in school or reading in a book I don’t question the book or the teacher endlessly I take the knowledge and make it mine. When I use that knowledge: it becomes mine, in the form of wisdom. From that wisdom comes willpower or might and I have the ability to form the true reality into something compatible to me. It is not by being a liar or master of the subject but as our Swiss friend says… and he is indeed a friend to all mankind: “Mastery and patience are values ​​in life which do not allow for ambiguity, consequently the human being is not concerned with an ambivalence or, Has to live with a duality or inconsistency, but with effective reality and its truth.” or the nature of Love: “Love is an absolute certainty of living and participating in everything. In all that is in existence: in fauna and flora, in fellow human beings, in every material and spiritual form of life of whatever kind, and in the existence of the entire universe and beyond Billy SSSC September 9, 1979 ” his words are numbered but his wisdom is beyond all others… or how about this statement by Semjase a friend who does not visit much after a near death accident in Switzerland: “The human bears a spirit that does not die nor sleep during the deepest sleep of the human; it records all thoughts and motions; it informs the human whether his thoughts are correct or false-if he has learned to pay attention. ” with that, if you understand it; can not fear death. Michael may not have these facts at his fingertips or the tip of his tongue but he knows this information and like Billy will not be here forever. For example: Billy once had a monthly blog where he answered one question from each person. Because of endless questions by hecklers he canceled it. That is now no longer because of one or two smart asses who wanted to complain about photographs and drawings 20 or 30 years after the fact. To explain the importance of this service he did for many years: I one time asked what is the equivalent in the macrocosm (that which is very large) that we call an atom in the microcosm (that which is very small). He very interestingly replied: a galaxy. WOW! do you get the connection, do you understand the implications? Do you even know what I am speaking of? Some bloated windbag that calls himself a scientist would understand instantly. If he was a REAL scientist, the implications in both chemistry and physics are awesome. By understanding the implications of this concept, this simple statement of one word by Billy, you can understand that what we call atoms for example: being one element and then looking at a galaxy and knowing it is what we call atoms but bigger tells us they are NOT ONE ELEMENT but many as a galaxy has many elements all the elements in the periodic tables not just one. Organic would be flowing like a galaxy INORGANIC would be flowing like sand with no orbit or “intelligence”: we call the movement of atoms. The idea that Chemistry is about clusters of stars and planets (the Plejaren do not distinguish between those two and they are ALL called stars). For example they claim there is an unlit sun out there… a dark star… and that is what triggered the breaking loose from the Oort cloud Apophis/AKA Red Meteor which you can negate till the cows come home, but if a super Intelligence tells me it will hit the Earth possibly in 2029 or 2036 on April 13 near the Black Sea… HEY! I’m gonna listen. It is better than worrying about what Bill Maher (the ultra political TV comedian) is saying about Donald Trump or why Hillary still has top secret clearance when most presidents don’t get that even when they are IN office! And someone who equates TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS with “yoga emails ” tells me you’re not paying attention to pertinent information but instead are being led down the primrose path to an uncertain future.

    So to make a long story short. Learn from this man, Michael Horn, who knows more than you do about the Meier case. He has been studying this case, reading the information sometimes in German for years and years from at least 1989 and has gotten the fodder out of the way and is a “walking encyclopedia” when it comes to the information and concepts which are so new to most of not all people on this planet, and why not, the source is billions of years finding the truth. Read and decide. Those that do not know or can’t decide: read.

    Salome : Be greeted in peace and wisdom

Leave a Reply

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