This blog is the response I indicated here that I would post to Zach’s comments. First, for the record, I don’t support and won’t approve any profanity-laden attacks on people on my blog. Vigorous disagreement can certainly push the limits at times but let’s at least have some limits.

It was with reluctance that I described Stuart Robbins’ behavior in the strong terms that I did but I felt the words were appropriate in regard to his own conduct. I am no stranger to being attacked online; there are at least 200 pages, on various forums and blogs that I am aware of, where  Billy Meier and I, or my representation of the Meier case, are gratuitously attacked. And most of them banned me from responding and challenging them, some immediately, others after they found out that I wasn’t exactly the easy target they had assumed.

Returning to Zach’s post, he states that Bruce’s comments were not let through on Robbins’ blog because he “posted several Meier links on his latest post.” Ah ha, well we can’t let THAT stuff go through now, can we?

After all, Robbins has attacked, defamed and declared Meier guilty as a liar, and demanded that Meier prove his innocence. He has demanded answers to my claims about Meier’s information and then refused to respond to the ones I gave. He has failed to respond to clear, verifiable, documented evidence that Meier has preemptively published absolutely accurate scientific information, as I have long maintained and repeatedly presented for objective examination. So linking to anything that may actually further support and/or corroborate Meier’s information, honesty and integrity is – consistent with Robbins’ pseudo-scientific, belief-laden skepticism and questionable ethics – strictly verboten.

By failing to address Meier’s impenetrably, prophetically accurate, skeptic-defeating Jupiter-Io information Robbins has indeed responded in deafeningly loud, blindingly clear fashion. In no uncertain terms his default states that he is incapable of arguing with such evidence since it indeed conforms with the standards of acceptable evidence and proof.

The real question is, “Why is it such a problem for someone who supposedly aspires to be a real scientist to acknowledge scientifically established facts? Is it because he has not yet passed beyond the phase of an immature, pseudo-scientific, popularity-seeking skeptic?”

It seems that Robbins experiences personal pain of some sort to his ego, which prevents him from abandoning his own beliefs. Beliefs are incompatible with science, with facts, truth and knowledge. Just where has Robbins even stated that his priority is seeking and knowing the truth? Has he given it as much mention as his concern for his popularity, for how many hits his blog has gotten, etc.?

The plain fact is that Robbins never expected to be slapped upside the head from every possible angle; after all, he “knows” that Meier is just a “hoaxer” of the same ilk as all of the easy, fish-in-a-barrel, New Age targets that he wants to use to put notches in his virtual online gun belt.

Wow, did he ever get his own head dunked in that barrel!

Again, this is a guy who tries to come off like a real scientist while blatantly acting like anything but. Along comes Meier and screws up his easy ascension to quick celebrity-hood. And the fact that I had submitted to Robbins, through private email, a very open-handed invitation* to explore the Meier material in a completely objective, scientific way – that was never even responded to – tells us more about his actual character.

One of his biggest mistakes has been his failure to show proper respect to those with whom he disagrees, doesn’t understand and/or who know far more than he does, hard as that is for him to imagine let alone admit. All of this indicates huge immaturity, stubborn, pseudo-scientific behavior and symptoms of the kind of objectivity-destroying, intellectual poisoning that truly, truly infects those who adopt the explicit, declared partiality of Skepticism.

As for Zach, he is also revealing being stuck in the same confounded, confused conundrum. Unable to dispute the scientific findings, he tries to take an above-it-all, dismissive attitude, “studying” the poor deluded folk who take this Swiss guy seriously. Zach’s palpable immaturity, his inability to deal with the overwhelming, ego-shattering realization that he could just be aspiring to be another dope with initials after his name, who knows nothing and relies all too often on others who know nothing…well, that’s certainly not what he, or someone else, may have mortgaged their butts for in order to put him through his academic paces, is it?

The truth isn’t meant to hurt it just often does when one’s resistance to it is deeply ingrained. The most stubborn deniers indeed find themselves twisting and turning in the winds of change, nakedly exposed to the elements. And it’s all the more frustrating for them to watch the support from false, ephemeral authorities dissolve and fall by the wayside, unable to sustain even their own weight.

Dropping the self-imposed burden laid upon them by their egos can be as simple as reciting those three magic words, “I don’t know.” It can be refreshingly easy, deeply relaxing and allows one to honestly open to the truth without having to defend prematurely entrenched positions. When the truth is finally known, not only is it liberating, it is all-embracing and one is free to ride the winds of change, aboard a vessel with plenty of room on board for everyone who shares the desire to know the source and the destination.


*Here is the text of one such offer to Robbins that he never acknowledged, from September 6, 2011. I have removed the images, which can be also found here:

Hi Stuart,

I don’t know how to post attachments on the blog and perhaps it’s better for now if I just send you these below.

You are, quite rightly, concerned that there’s credible evidence to substantiate Meier’s claims. Regarding the information I referred to pertaining to Wendelle Stevens having the document with the Jupiter-Io information before it was “officially” announced by NASA, I’m enclosing the copyright page and two other pages, the one where he mentions having it since March 9, 1979, and a second page where, in addition to info about Jupiter’s moons, he mentions the two planets beyond Pluto, which were yet to be discovered at that time. there is other information referred to there that may not interest you.

Of course I also have similar (copyrighted, dated, published) documentation for these:

• 7th Contact, February 25, 1975, and 35th Contact, September 16, 1975:
Connection of A-bomb testing, explosions to ozone damage; high-frequency “elementary radiations” unknown to terrestrial scientists; damage to Earth’s rotation, magnetic disturbances, polar displacement; contribution of bromine gases to ozone damage; penetration of UV through holes, killing micro-organisms and leading to disruptions in food chain, genetic mutations and other long-term negative effects for humans and the planet.
Corroborated: November 29, 1988, with report published by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories announced this “new discovery”: “Atom Bomb Testing Tied to Ozone Depletion”.
Corroborated: 1991, when National Public Radio confirmed the connection between bromine gases and ozone layer damage.
Corroborated: February 24, 1992, Los Angeles Times, “Ozone Hole Damages Food Chain”.

• 29th Contact, July 7, 1975, and 31st Contact, July 17, 1975:
Contact involved specific information about Venus, unknown at the time, including composition of atmospheric gases, surface temperatures, depth of clouds, wind speeds, atmospheric pressure, colouration, variation in terrain, etc.
Corroborated: October 1975 and August 1976, confirmed by probes from the USSR and USA respectively.
Corroborated: February 1981; USGS [US Geological Survey] was producing a topographical map of Venus which, as discovered by the investigative team, further confirmed the details Meier had published five years earlier.

• 45th Contact, February 25, 1976:
Semjase (Meier’s extraterrestrial female contactor) warned him that our extraction of petroleum and natural gas from the Earth, the damming of waters and construction of huge cities are major factors contributing to increased earthquake/volcanic activity.
Corroborated: June 27, 1990, in The Good Life newspaper (now defunct), Los Angeles: “Earthquakes, Oil Interact”.

…and there’s plenty more, even online, that can be found to be preemptively published by Meier, regarding Mars, Saturn, etc.

It would be great if we could elevate the discussion to the determination of authenticity and relevance of such criteria. Obviously, as a scientist, skeptical or not, should the evidence really be solid you would want to know it and determine its value. It’s either real and true or not. That’s what this should be about, not some kind of, pardon me, pissing contest.

I am prepared to assist and support this effort of course…and address your essential question regarding the Red Meteor and Apophis. I’d like to first establish these items so that the explanation can then be considered in light of the overall credibility of the information and evidence.




7 comments on “Twisting and Turning in the Winds of Change

  • It is ba sad fact,that, many people seem to be educated way beyond their intelligence. Possesion of knowledge,cannot guarantee the ability to use it correctly.

    • That is actually a great statement Les.
      My cousin’s wife is a doctor and she is very smart yet so friggin dumb.
      Well I guess it goes for all of us in one way or another.

  • I agree Les , if they had a match and fiddle they could burn down Rome or they could light a fire and cook a meal and fiddle to pass the time . It’s always a matter of choice ; unfortunately some people make destructive choices .

  • To label your self a skeptic or anything before the matter at hand is not the correct approach to the truth. How can you see clearly when your personal identity is crowded by a label that doesn’t uphold neutrality? You have to uphold the status quo according to your self accepted label which becomes/is belief driven at its core.

    Then for the staunch skeptic ” What evidence could you offer them if they don’t accept evidence. “-Sam Haris

    How many time will MH have to throttle the skeptics which an obvious comparison could be offered, A typical christian hasn’t read the bible the same as the typical skeptic hasn’t looked in to the Meier case.

    I must say that by now the ability for an honest skeptic to get a foot hold into the realm of debunking the Meier case is fleeting at best. This is because the like a cotton shirt there is no one thread that holds it together.

  • Michael , I would like to clarify some of my earlier comment on June 13th at 6:52 am .That is that I had only succeeded in levitating a polarized crystalline test unit ; if I may do this , then this is what I would like to say .

    In my amateur everything opinion ; the crystalline test unit is not a capacitor , therefore not a Thomas Brown gravitator nor a Jean Louis Naudin lifter but if I may coin a term and call it a
    semiconductor levitator having high mass to low surface area ratio , as apposed to low mass to high surface area ratio devices . This is not a criticism of anyone’s work . I feel it’s just another way of producing electro-gravitic levitation and I do not claim to be the first to discover this interesting phenomenon using this method . This experiment was carried around 2004 . Further to this , the device appeared to fully lift it’s own weight / mass and was impeded only buy the 10mm weighty silicon EHT cable attached to one end ; of course a fine copper copper wire was at the other end , it could have possibly exceeded lifting 100% of it’s mass only for the silicon EHT cable . The device exhibited the same lift characteristic as described by Thomas Brown on his gravitators ; although this thing I’m sure would have become airborne but for that cable . The fact at that time I knew nothing about impulse technology and black / dark /ether energy . I was baffled as what could cause the effect and all that I could find on the subject provided no satisfaction for what I witnessed over and over and over ; so I dropped the experiment . Over the years I have learned a little more especially in the works of Tesla , Bearden , Bedini , Brown and the hint,s in the Meier contact notes and provided by
    courtesy , Ishwish Ptaah Quetzal and Ishrish Semjase . I do not claim to have everything correct as this an on going process of learning . Good heavens above Dez ; what are you doing with that huge mains cap and little tiny coil . Does Philadelphia exp…….

    • Hi Luis,

      I hope it had the same effect as the proverbial slap on the newborn baby’s bottom, unnecessary as it may actually be for babies.

      Also, please feel free to post here and use your last name too.


Leave a Reply

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