There seems to be some confusion among skeptics as to exactly how copyrights prove the authenticity of the Billy Meier UFO contact case. Naturally, skeptics are confused, especially whenever the Meier case is brought up because they’re so strongly invested in proving it wrong, a hoax, etc., that they forget that real scientists don’t approach extraordinary claims with special skepticism or prejudice because they know that scientific principles, properly applied, are quite sufficient to determine the authenticity of any claims.
Skeptics also love to offer specious, ignorant arguments that “copyrights don’t prove anything”. What they should say is that copyrights in and of themselves don’t prove the accuracy of the information that has been copyrighted. But, blinded by their determination to cling to their religious beliefs, facts be damned, they overlook the clear and simple beauty of just how the Plejaren used our own, terrestrial legal standard for ironclad proof of first and/or prior publication to answer all arguments.
In case it still isn’t clear, this is how one can know within a matter of minutes that the Meier case is authentic, true and real, etc.
I’ll use a couple of the many examples that I often refer to, i.e. the information about Mercury’s core causing the contraction of the planet’s surface and the information pertaining to the death of the 5,100 year old Iceman. Here we have credible evidence, in the form of copyrights, that the information was published long before “official discovery”. And the truly important point of course is that the information was later independently corroborated by the so-called new discoveries.
The copyrights established that the prophetic and predictive information was verifiably previously published by Meier…and the subsequent discoveries confirmed its accuracy. Really, can it be any clearer than that? Because it can’t, skeptics will try to obfuscate, quibble, deny, etc., etc., and avoid the unavoidable and otherwise inexplicable reality that this man, Billy Meier, somehow published the information before our vaunted scientists did. If indeed Meier didn’t just make a couple of “lucky guesses” (another skeptical assumption) then how else can one credibly explain all of the prophetic, impeccably accurate scientific information that he began publishing decades ago other than by what he, and the evidence, have been stating for decades: it was provided to him by extraterrestrial human beings?
The skeptics don’t dare go with the notion that maybe he’s just an astoundingly great…psychic, because they also “know” that’s “impossible” too. So they’re left with one of their favorite principles, Occam’s Razor. And in this case, since it’s so uncomfortable for them, they really don’t like adhering to even their own principles.
When Meier’s verifiable accuracy is simply too much for the know-it-alls, they turn to facetious challenges for “proof” that he published earlier information, such as from 1951, 1958, etc., in those years. Of course the easiest way to prove the 1958 publication date would ultimately rest with…copyrights! Even if such documentation was available the disingenuousness of the person who asks for it – but tries to dismiss all of the other copyrighted proof – is nakedly obvious.
People like this are also often quick to accuse Meier of lying and other unsubstantiated offenses. They obviously not only believe the lies they create but they feel no restraint in making such unwarranted attacks on his character. Since there is no evidence of Meier lying and, to the contrary, his verifiable record is one of truthfulness, we have no reason to ascribe to him the kind of dishonest behavior that such individuals are obviously most personally familiar with, i.e. being liars, and often anonymous cowards, frauds and phonies themselves.
(Of course using a screen name is a form of lying. But that doesn’t seem to trouble a lot people. The idea that a screen name protects one from the “powers that be” is nonsense in a world where we already know the government snoops in everyone’s computer, cell phone, etc. And what kind of a person doesn’t want to be known to their peers as open and honest and courageous enough to stand up for what they espouse claim, etc.?)
As I’ve also pointed out before, there is a fairly simple way to confirm the veracity of the dates of Meier’s earliest prophecies. While there are no remaining originals with copyrights for the prophecies from the 1950s, when specific events foretold within them occur after the earliest verifiable print and/or online publication dates, people will then have the irrefutable proof they want.
But since those people are the ones still effectively “holding out” because they can’t reason anyway, it will be both “not enough” and…too late.
For more examples of Billy Meier’s prophetically accurate scientific information please also see:
…and see “as the time fulfills” for 55 specific examples of Billy Meier’s verifiable prophetic accuracy.