The Sad, Cynical Legacy of Stanton Friedman

A testament to the pursuit of profit over truth, fueled by intellectual dishonesty and cowardice

The email exchanges below will tell the story of what happens when a self-satisfied, profit-oriented member of the UFOCI pretends to want to know the truth about the Billy Meier UFO contacts, until he sees that the truth would crush him, his pretenses and…book sales. Unaware of what the listeners already determined about his credibility and competence, he further reveals his contempt for their intelligence in the second debate.

He deals a death blow to his own legacy, revealing what a complete sham the UFO field and its supposed “experts” really are, and why the topic is often deservedly marginalized by rational, thinking people.



Let me be a bit more direct with you now, after I’ve spent four hours of my time trying to engage in intelligent debates with you, which included providing you with links to all of the documentation that would certainly suffice…had you truly been interested in the Meier case and it’s actual significance. In fact, every so-called “point” you raise in your terse response is answered in the Meier case, you simply never bothered to look. You did take a lot of time attacking a man who’s no longer living and who couldn’t speak in his own defense, of course.

Unfortunately, you were also too lazy, self-satisfied and contemptuous of the facts to bother. So you prefer to default to help continue the actual UFO cover-up – which is now solely about the Meier case – and this cover-up will become an indelible part of your legacy, to your own family and generations of people to come.

I’ll post the results of the listener’s poll for our first debate in case you didn’t see them either:


Friedman Debate


I don’t think it changed in your favor after the second one. You were simply received and evaluated as someone with…no credibility. I doubt that this response of yours will do much to enhance it, or show you were better prepared, sincere, or wanting to continue to anything more than promote your books, chuckle and try to cover up the painful facts that showed you to be completely out of your league.

We know that you tried to involve yourself in the original investigation but were told by Stevens and the team members that no one in the UFO community would be part of the actual investigation, but only qualified, independent experts such as those from NASA, JPL, USGS, etc., who indeed analyzed and authenticated Meier’s evidence.

You continue to promote your career and books based on an utterly unprovable case, with zero accessible evidence, yet you have the absolutely cynical arrogance to try to be dismissive of volumes of independently analyzed and authenticated physical and informational evidence from the only actual, still ongoing UFO contact case.

Frankly, this exhibits a level of contempt for the truth and for the intelligence of all interested parties which, as the listener’s poll demonstrates, was obvious to all.

Of course I didn’t ask you to be “convinced”, I asked that you would show the intellectual curiosity, honesty – and integrity – to pursue the truth. Instead you opted to try to protect your ego, to try to assuage the nagging realization that your years of attack and dismissiveness of the Meier case were ill spent. You didn’t have the courage and strength of character to actually investigate the case because you put profit over principles.

You’ve aligned yourself with the camp of the delusional “alien abduction” proponents, etc., etc. when you could have made a huge contribution to real human knowledge and even the safety of generations of people to come, which may include your own descendants.

When push comes to shove, many people choose mediocrity, compromise, etc., for the sake of personal profit, as you again demonstrate.

Despite the many emails and comments I received, after both shows, that you were transparently inept, posturing and insincere, I actually responded with optimism that you’d see – at this late point in your own life – that it wasn’t too late to champion an open investigation into the Meier case by the community in which you spend your time and make your money.

My optimism was misplaced of course. You performed like a jovial huckster who dodged and avoided any and every opportunity to behave like a credible scientist. You were absolutely no different than the kind of business-as-usual “scientists” that clog up the current educational system and who also have no interest in the truth, for all the obvious reasons.

You were given ample opportunity to create a real, lasting contribution to finding the truth…and you blew it off in favor of milking whatever profits remain from selling tales of limaginary “aliens”.

You fooled no one but yourself.

Michael Horn

Authorized American Media Representative

The Billy Meier Contacts



On Nov 13, 2015, at 11:44 AM, Stan <> wrote:


I must refuse the invitation as I am not convinced. You keep mentioning lights in the sky. I care not at all about lights in the sky.I am concerned with physical trace cases, multiple witness radar visual cases,advanced propulsion technology,large scale scientific studies, clear proof of government withholding information about UFOs. You seem not to be concerned about such matters.Has the Meier Defense community made available samples of ET materials for testing and published their results?. Many have sent comments about the absence of real proof about predictions.

Stan Friedman


—– Original Message —–

From: Michael Horn

To: Taro

Cc: Stan

Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 9:58 PM

Subject: Re: Meier Debate

Hi Taro & Stan,

I appreciate participating in this conversation, as a follow up to last night’s show, and I’d like to move this along effectively as well.

Stan, as I stated last night, it’s time that the Meier case was the focal point of open discussion and examination by the UFO community, MUFON – and more importantly any and all scientists who admit an interest in the UFO topic – anything less would only perpetuate the cover-up. (The real main culprits in the UFO cover-up are in the UFO community and…industry.)

To that end I’d like us to arrange an event wherein I present the Meier case and its evidence and any and all credible parties have the opportunity to question, challenge, etc. It’s that simple. No more runaround nonsense with the lights-in-the-sky-chasers and all of the unsubstantiated claims, etc., they churn out for fun and mainly profit.

As I also said last night, the confirmed discovery of intelligent extraterrestrial life would be the most important event in all of science and human history…exceeded only by contact between extraterrestrials and the people of Earth.

And it’s rather easy to demonstrate that the Meier case singularly fits that description.

I invite Taro to assist in this process so that this event is created and effected at the earliest possible time. What Taro accurately expresses below is indicative of the factual, impenetrably credible information, analyses, etc., that make the Meier case singularly authentic.

What we do – or don’t do – now will be an indelible part of our legacy and what we bequeath to future generations, familial and for the rest of humanity.

Let’s do it.



On Nov 12, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Taro <> wrote:

Hello again, Stan. I managed to catch your debate with Michael Horn last night. During the show you mentioned that

“we have an interesting case here” and that “we need a higher level of discussion of people, the scientific community and especially the journalistic community to do their job, get at the facts, put it in front of the public”

I’m not quite clear on where the subject of the debate, the Meier evidence fits into your “Cosmic Watergate” analogy. Should it be dismissed or studied further? If I had to guess it would be that you were being deliberately vague. Is this accurate? Please understand, I am not attempting to solicit a stamp of approval from you. But I genuinely believe Meier’s physical evidence can hold up to the most critical and meticulous scrutiny. The evidence speaks for itself. And it would appear you may have suggested an interest in verifying this for yourself. Failing to seize this opportunity for a second time now could be the biggest mistake you leave behind. After becoming more familiar now with the sheer volume of material this one, disabled man has presented, what do you honestly think is the probability of hoax? And if it’s not, how will you be regarded by future generations for failing to take action when you had the chance?

We all agree, Roswell happened. The two primary distinctions between the Roswell and the Meier evidence are


– The US government maintains a tight, heavy lid on the Roswell evidence.

– The Meier evidence, although suppressed and distorted is readily available for the rational mind to study.


– Roswell was an accident. There was a crash, there were bodies, numerous accidental witnesses.

– The Meier case is intentional and controlled. The nature of the evidence will be as disparate as the case itself and expecting otherwise is not thinking clearly.

It is not very likely the USG will ever willingly release the Roswell evidence. So, unless we have another(even higher level) Snowden-type disclosure, it is very likely a dead-end. I can only imagine how much more careful those in charge are with the Roswell evidence.

The Meier evidence, although not nearly as cut and dry is out in the open. It may appear tedious to sift through the mountain of      material at first but as one spends time with already established analyses it becomes easier to separate the valid scientific work from the garbage. Critical observations become second nature for a guy like me and already should be for a guy like you. In any case, much of the work is already done. All that is left for someone like you is to review this scientific work and offer a scientific evaluation: Either there are flaws in these analyses or they are sound. You appear to have placed a disproportionate amount of focus on material that cannot by themselves be proved either way. This is not scientific. At the same time, you have quickly dismissed physical evidence based on a very limited frame of reference.

Take Bruce Maccabee’s analysis of the Pendulum Film, for example. Although he very thoroughly explained pendular motion he did nothing to address the possibility that ET’s thousands of years advanced could have mimicked this movement intentionally or the possibility that they had very good reason to do so. By ignoring these very plausible scenarios his analysis was quite simply incomplete. My video comparisons( & clearly illustrate the practical difficulties with the suspended model theory. Rhal Zahi’s detailed analysis goes much further by measuring the periods, proving a model setup would necessarily require a constantly moving node in the vertical. The irregular vertical(yaw) axis of the disc prove a suspended model would also require node movement along the horizontal. How likely do you think it would be for such a suspended disc to remain laterally stable? It has never been duplicated as such. On top of this, there are numerous other unexplained events:

– smooth accelerations and decelerations with no obvious pulls

– a gradually INCREASING conical pendulum with no obvious pulls

– a smooth, 270º turn with zero disruption to lateral stability

– treetop movement AFTER disc passage with no disruption to disc movement or stability

– object fading out then back into visibility(x2), simultaneously appearing in two locations across multiple frames

– an unexplained burn-like anomaly during both of these “jumps”

– a noticeable difference in blur level from closest to farthest position from camera

To base your conclusions on the Pendulum Film entirely on Maccabee’s analysis is very much lacking in factual considerations. This is not scientific. I hope you choose to take a closer look.

I’m including Michael into this conversation since he would be the very best person to help arrange any further analysis of the Meier material should you choose to firmly commit to this higher level of discussion you mentioned last night. Remember, the Roswell evidence is safely locked away. But that which is out in the open is what the “powers that be” would have good reason to go to great lengths to hide by encouraging the muddying of the waters, so to speak.

So? Will you take a closer look at the science?

Taro Istok



164 Replies to “The Sad, Cynical Legacy of Stanton Friedman”

  1. I do not blame Stan Friedman one bit for not wanting to waste his valuable time rehashing this topic which has been proven fake many times. I can’t believe you guys can sit here and 1) still try to prove such nonsense; 2) attack a man that performs rigorous investigations, and has done more for the field of Ufology than many. I mean, how can you sit there with arguments like the aliens may have “mimicked this movement intentionally” to provide an “out” for the skeptics whom could not wrap their mind around it? My gosh, really? All the countless fake pictures Meier has produced, people close to him saying his a liar, etc., etc., and you accuse SF of ignoring factual information?

    I look forward to more amusing claims by your group. In the mean time, I think I will go listen to some Dean Martin and the Ding-A-Lings.

    Doug Slovak

    1. Now that you’ve parroted the ignorance of the UFO community/INDUSTRY – as created largely by the intelligence agencies that want to keep you in this dumbed down state – feel free to actually investigate the overflowing abundance of still irreproducible evidence in the case.

      You’re certainly welcome to comment here but any further unsubstantiated, broad brush inaccuracies won’t be published. That means you’ll have to also credibly refute all that has been authenticated. That also means that you may be disappearing as quickly as you arrived…due to your own incompetence.

      1. And your comment is EXACTLY why nobody takes you seriously. Any idiot can look at his videos and see that it is a model swinging on fishing line. There are so many other elements I could go into, but I won’t waste my time. If you have any irrefutable evidence, then please, direct me to it.

          1. I would like to refer you to this video:
            There are many examples given, but I will pick one. Please refer to the video at time frame 10:49. My first question: Is this not supposed to be a photo album of Mr. Meier’s original pictures? Second question: If it is, then the woman in the picture is claimed to be Asket, is she not? Third question: Mr. Meier has claimed that this is not the original photo of Asket, but a picture doctored by the Men In Black. If this IS his original photos, then what is this picture doing in it? It is obviously the woman from Dean Martin’s variety show…

          2. Well gosh, thanks for referring me to Phil’s video, a guy who I actually encouraged – since 2009 – to take his best shots at the evidence. They fell flat.

            The Asket & Nera controversy is addressed here:


            The problem you have, Doug, is a common one, i.e. you came here guns blazing based on the disinformation and ineptitude of various online armchair “experts”, shills, skeptics, disinfo specialists and wannabes. This isn’t an exercise in name calling, it accurately describes just some of the participants in a rather massive disinfo campaign against the only actual, scientifically proven, still ongoing UFO contacts now spanning more than…75 years.

            If you really want to know the truth and are willing to do the necessary homework, as well as pose the questions and challenges that actually are welcome when sincerely posed, then you may be in for some surprises here.

        1. Will you be the idiot who tries to do a reinactment using only one hand? Good luck tying the fishing line. You probably didn’t think that far ahead eh?

          1. MH: Thank you for the link, I will look into it.

            Sheila: I have certainly thought about the fact that the man had only one arm. This would not have prevented him from tying a fishing line ahead of filming these sequences.

          2. Doug,

            You’re welcome of course.

            To kind of accelerate awareness of certain things, as you go through the five separate categories of physical evidence and the mountainous amount of information, much of which I refer to as prophetically accurate, you’ll have the opportunity to see that the skeptical premise has as an underlying element the unsubstantiated belief that Meier had nothing better to do than try to “fool” people, even thinking ahead how he could outsmart 21st century digital technology, etc.

            The skeptics completely violate one of their own favorite premises, i.e. Occam’s Razor.

            Once you pull the proverbial thread on the sweater of the Meier case, be prepared for some very challenging information, evidence and conclusions as to its authenticity.

    2. Doug,

      A few additional items for you to consider:

      1) Phil Langdon is not an expert in anything. I have exposed his inaccuracies, flawed logic and blatant lies in the comment section of that video. Look for

      Phil Phlubs Volume 2

      He has blocked me from adding further comments on all of his pages. Would he do this if he was confident he had a strong case?

      2) None of Meier’s films have ever been fully duplicated. The most critical elements are not possible with a simple model on a wire. Take a close look at my direct comparison:

      I have isolated the most prominent maneuver in this video:

      Make sure you try this maneuver at home to see just how much more difficult it is than you imagine.

      Along with maneuvers not possible with a model on a wire, there are other elements that need to be addressed before finalizing the hoax theory. Rhal Zahi covers these in this PDF download:

      3) Consider the Asket photo contaminated evidence. There is no way to prove that Meier actually took them(there are three). His explanation is corroborated by Wendelle Stevens’ investigation(i.e. his film rolls were verified to be intercepted/numerous untrustworthy individuals had access to his photos). Also, remember that Meier took hundreds if not thousands of photos. Whoever was responsible for planting the falsified photos very likely counted on these blurry replacements to fool Meier. And photos were never Meier’s primary concern since he had many other things on his mind(raising a young family etc.)

      4) Accuracy is key to an honest investigation: There were no “people” close to him calling him a liar. Only one. There were zero steps taken to validate her honesty. She has provided zero evidence to support her claims.

      5) Extraterrestrials advanced enough to travel to our planet are very likely to be advanced not only in technology but in other areas as well. The probability that they will approach the task of disclosure in a very different manner than we might expect is very high. Therefore, the probability that they would intentionally mimic movements that appear mundane to some is also very high. Only a closer look reveals the reality.

  2. Michael,
    How the hell do you put up with complete idiots trying to look like they have some knowledge of the universe. All of you are just f***nuckles. Who have no knowledge of the plasma. As if you did, you would not be here trying to debunk the un-debunkable. Try meditation, and you might start to unlock your inner power. By doing that and studying creation and plasma you might just be able to see the truth when it is put in front of you. But sadly right now you are just rambling stupidity trying to debunk the truth. I will now no longer answer anyone of you idiots posting here as I can’t raise your soul to my level as you are down so low in intelligence you are un helpable

      1. Hi Michael,

        I’m actually curious why you even allow these comments to be posted. When people go off on diatribes about “plasma” or use sentences that are so grammatically incorrect in English one can barely make sense of them, what is the purpose of letting these people contribute? Are you just being courteous and giving them a place to vent? Do you feel like it’s a slippery slope if you start censoring? What is your rationale?


  3. “Stanton Friedman Extraterrestrial Craft are Real” Published on Jan 28, 2016 At least he comes clean on how much dirt he has on his hands when it comes to nuclear power, and the money he help to waste and he enjoyed it. And now we have neodymium magnetics thanks to the ETs that was a new one.
    Billy Wilson

    1. Thanks for that link Billy Wilson, an hour and a half of my life that I can never get back. Low audience turnout by the looks of it because no one gives a crap what Stan has to say. In response to the question from the audience at the end concerning nuclear testing in Canada, he said no there wasn’t any testing. Well he’s a damn liar since we know about the well documented one in BC in the ’50s. I have a feeling he was part of the electromagnetic experiment on Betty and Barney Hill. Please feel free to extradite Stan’s ass back to the USA so he can face the charge of crimes against humanity.

  4. controversial
    kɒntrəˈvəːʃ(ə)l /adjective / giving rise or likely to give rise to controversy or public disagreement.
    “years of wrangling over a controversial bypass” / “years of debating the controversial Meier UFO case”
    synonyms: contentious, disputed, contended, at issue, moot, disputable, debatable, arguable, open to discussion/question, under discussion

    Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. None has been provided. ‘Controversial’ evidence is NOT extraordinary evidence.

    If the case is supposed to be controversial (as stated by the Plejahrens via Billy Meier) then let it be controversial and refrain from insulting, belittling and talking down to everyone in a condescending manner who doesn’t believe it, like Michael Horn, Taro Istok and FIGU members constantly do. Insulting a man like Stanton Friedman openly, just because he doesn’t believe in this case, is absolutely arrogant beyond belief. This controversy is the contradicting element, and main reason, that this entire case is maddening because for one it is supposed to be controversial but on the other hand Meier/FIGU/Michael Horn and company are twisting arms to make you believe it using ‘controversial’ and NOT irrefutable, extraordinary evidence. That is schizophrenic.
    No wonder nobody wants anything to do with this lunacy. The whole Meier/FIGU clan should be ashamed of themselves and just mind their own business.

    1. It would be helpful if you actually knew what you’re talking about. Extraordinary claims DON’T require extraordinary evidence – although the Meier has has tons of it – it only requires that the …SCIENTIFIC METHOD be applied to the evidence.

      It has, through independent scientific experts, and found to be authentic, i.e. not hoaxed and…still irreproducible.

      This has absolutely NOTHING to do with “belief”. You’re apparently quite unaware that Stanton Friedman has known about the case for decades, wanted to be one of the people examining the evidence and has – shamefully – focused on the very dead-end Roswell case and selling his books.

      I’ve reached out to him over the years and given him every opportunity to say…SOMETHING of substance. He chose to peddle the distractions and disinformation about Roswell instead, while trying to attack the Meier case because he was exempted from mucking it up.

      I suggest you read:

      And as you can see in the blog, the results of the debate between Friedman and me – from people who actually heard it were:

      Friedman 224 ( 1%)
      Horn 17,353 (98%)

      Do yourself a favor, if you want to post here to ”debate” or whatever, make sure you have your facts straight. If you think the Meier case is a hoax, don’t like how it’s represented, etc., that’s fine, you’re entitled to your opinion. But neither I nor anyone else is required to suffer the uninformed and lazy complaints of people who don’t know what they’re talking about.

      The challenges that face humanity – and which are coming upon us – require that people get past the utter nonsense and idiocy of the UFOCI (UFO Community and INDUSTRY) and the various shills, phonies, profiteers, quacks and charlatans who are simply interested in making a buck.

    2. Controversial does not mean questionable, it just means that some people or even a majority of people don’t believe in it, as e.g. was the case with Galileo’s theories. “And yet it moves”, etc. If you have a look at your way of thinking, you may therein find the source of your ignorance, mental slavery, etc. And yes, as Michael said, evidence is just a matter of something that rules out other explanations, not something “extraordinary” like a beamship landing on your lawn.

    3. “No wonder nobody wants anything to do with this lunacy.”
      Now that right there “is absolutely arrogant beyond belief.”
      YOU are saying that I am “nobody” and I find that “insulting, belittling and talking down to everyone in a condescending manner.”

    4. Jan Schultz,

      Thanks for giving “…rise to controversy or public disagreement” here on this blog. Your comments suggest that you’ve overlooked/misunderstood how that works.

      “No wonder nobody wants anything to do with this lunacy.” Now that really is an “extraordinary” claim which I ask YOU to back up, especially as you felt compelled to get involved, yourself, here to make such ignorant comments. Maybe that IS lunacy.

  5. “It would be helpful if you actually knew what you’re talking about. Extraordinary claims DON’T require extraordinary evidence – although the Meier has has tons of it – it only requires that the …SCIENTIFIC METHOD be applied to the evidence.”

    You obviously don’t know the definition of ‘controversy’ which I posted in the beginning of my comment. This case, per statement of the Plejahren, is supposed to be controversial.
    Do you deny this fact Michael? Meiers claims and evidence IS nothing else then controversial. Direct evidence was never permitted, remember? 😉
    Otherwise the whole body of ‘proof’ (pictures, samples etc) would speak for itself.

    “It has, through independent scientific experts, and found to be authentic, i.e. not hoaxed and…still irreproducible.”

    Not very credible scientists that is and therefor it remains a very doubtful case.
    Wendelle Stevens was a convicted felon who spent 5 years in prison for child molestation charges. Not a very credible source/character in my opinion.

    Jim Dilettoso – Wikipedia, Delettoso’s “work” on the Phoenix lights phenomenon:
    “Dilettoso claimed to have used software called “Image Pro Plus” (exact version unknown) to determine the amount of red, green and blue in the various photographic and video images ….Several sources have pointed out, however, that it is impossible to determine the spectral signature of a light source based solely on photographic or video imagery… The maker of “Image Pro Plus”, Media Cybernetic, has stated that its software is incapable of performing spectroscopic analysis.”

    Just because someone tells a lie in their life, doesn’t mean of course that they can’t ever be trusted. But when you make up bunch of BS whole cloth just to seek attention, within your supposed area of expertise…well, the jokes on the one who would cite this guy as a credible source on anything UFO related.

    “This has absolutely NOTHING to do with “belief”. You’re apparently quite unaware that Stanton Friedman has known about the case for decades, wanted to be one of the people examining the evidence and has – shamefully – focused on the very dead-end Roswell case and selling his books.”

    That’s his business. He can focus on anything he wants. Why are you relentlessly trying to change his mind? Controversial = Open for discussion, disputable, arguable…

    “I’ve reached out to him over the years and given him every opportunity to say…SOMETHING of substance. He chose to peddle the distractions and disinformation about Roswell instead, while trying to attack the Meier case because he was exempted from mucking it up.”

    Again. It is up to him to peddle whatever he wants. Does that make him a bad person?

    “Do yourself a favor, if you want to post here to ”debate” or whatever, make sure you have your facts straight. If you think the Meier case is a hoax, don’t like how it’s represented, etc., that’s fine, you’re entitled to your opinion. But neither I nor anyone else is required to suffer the uninformed and lazy complaints of people who don’t know what they’re talking about.”

    Just as predicted. Your pretentious, arrogant character, talking to people in a condescending manner clearly speaks for itself. Keep going Michael but don’t be surprised why no serious investigator pays any attention to you or your ‘controversial’ UFO story.

    “The challenges that face humanity – and which are coming upon us – require that people get past the utter nonsense and idiocy of the UFOCI (UFO Community and INDUSTRY) and the various shills, phonies, profiteers, quacks and charlatans who are simply interested in making a buck.”

    Attacking with insults is the weapon of the weak and narrow-minded.
    Have a nice day.

    1. As I said, you don’t know what you’re talking about and you cobble together bits and pieces from the internet…while leaving out all relevant details.

      Controversy isn’t a static state, nor was the evidence ever intended to NOT be tested and authenticated, which it has been. In fact, direct evidence was indeed permitted, incontrovertible proof was not. But since this is about self-responsibility, proof was certainly “allowed”, it’s just that people had to think the evidence through, test it, analyze it, and detrain the truth for themselves.

      You simply don’t know anything about the evidence, analyses, etc., and rely on naysayers, such as you yourself are.

      You cherry pick some stupid comment to try to dismiss Dilettoso’s work. You can find numerous links to the testing done by independent experts, including the three most recent analyses, at this link:

      Friedman has claimed that the Meier case is a hoax and he freely accepted the debates. It was simply shown that he’s an unprepared huckster who should have simply focused on peddling his books and not making a fool out of himself as a “UFO researcher”, “expert”, etc. You obviously don’t even understand this.

      As for ANY so-called “serious investigators” take the opportunity to name them…even one would be interesting.

      You’ve had ample opportunity to actually say something of substance, which you’ve wasted on trying to attack. You’re painfully unspecific because – one more time – you don’t know what you’re talking about. You haven’t delved into the totality, let alone the details, of the case. Instead you’ve chosen to complain about arrogance and condescension, as if I’m obligated to put up up with amateurs and complainers.

      We’ve suffered more than enough from trolls, spammers, uninformed, negative, angry people. If you choose to stay in an attacking, superficial, unthinking mode, then don’t be surprised if such comments are no longer posted. You’ve been given the opportunity to show that you’re both capable of and interested in intelligent discourse.

    2. Jan Schultz,

      “Jim Dilettoso – Wikipedia, Delettoso’s “work” on the Phoenix lights.”

      Irrelevant and nothing whatsoever to do with the JPL, EG&G, USGS, USC laboratory-grade Multi-Spectral relational algorithm getting Spectrum Analyzer, Waveform Monitor, VectorScope and the Edge Analysis all done to FBI Laboratory division and IEEE standards for Data Coding into a Database that could detect a model, like Langdon’s, in about 5 minutes.

      Maybe you should have stuck with the reading a bit longer than a few days, or, you need to re-read.

  6. Your arrogant and condescending manner is EXACTY the reason why people don’t take you serious and/or want anything to do with you.

    I am well aware of the Billy Meier hoax since the eighties. I looked at his pictures, listened to the sounds, read his spiritual writings, contact notes etc. and am still wondering today how gullible one must be to believe in all this stuff.

    The overwhelming contradictions in the Meier fraud clearly outweighs your desperate attempt to qualify it as real through the opinion of a handful of pseudo-scientists.

    So tell me:

    – Who validated the assassination attempts?

    – Who validated the WCUFO base looks like the Harcostar trash can lid?
    (You don’t need to be an expert or professional photographer to clearly see that Phil Langdons pictures look exactly the same as Meiers. I actually commend him to have copied the ridiculous looking WCUFO.)
    Don’t tell me the biased and emotionally invested Rhal Zahi. Btw. I talked to him and he said that he is no professor or has a PhD. So why do you list him as such?

    – Who validated the MIB’s swapped the ‘great journey’ photos?

    – Who validated the aliens went back in time and removed a tree and wiped locals memories?

    1. Exactly what “people” are you referring to? Since you failed to also name any so-called “serious investigators” this is also a rhetorical question.

      Since you want to still prattle on and again pose already answered and dismissed “challenges”, I’ll let this be the final word from you…an accredited nobody who could have taken the opportunity to present their own actual credentials, qualifications, etc., but, possessing none, didn’t.

      And while most of us here already know it, here’s a link to the people you call “pseudo-scientists”:

      Lastly, Zahi’s analyses can be duplicated by anyone wanting to test the photos, etc., themselves. He lists the protocols, software, etc., and you can even test one of the WCUFO photos using just PhotoShop (

      But you’re a griper, malcontent and know-it-all for whom any real study offers no interest.

      So, while I expect another complaint from you if you’re foolish enough to write again, let it be noted that I gave you three opportunities to say something of value and you squandered them all.

      Have a nice day.

      1. I said what I wanted to say.
        Obviously one can’t reason with people who suffer from cognitive dissonance
        and on top insult everybody who doesn’t share their beliefs.


      1. NOTE: Several emails have been submitted by “Jan Schultz” which aren’t going to be posted until I receive verification of his/her identity.


  7. Wow, yes, Stanton really made a fool of himself. And you know what, I really almost felt sorry for the poor sod.

    1. Don’t feel sorry for him since he’s a perfect example of cause and effect. Holding up bluebook like its a damn bible. It’s tainted and he knows it too.

  8. Jan Schultz, Magicspirit11, silvio8008. This joker goes by a number of aliases. He claims to be a former intelligence officer with the US Navy who’s had top secret clearance. I wish I had notification of these replies; I would have torn him to shreds long ago as I already have on a number of other pages, most recently

    UFO Billy Meier’s Space and Time travel Pictures – Real or Fake?

    His original comment is word-for-word in at least two other places. Add lazy and unoriginal to his list of weaknesses. However his primary flaw is his inability to think for himself. Resorts to endless profanities and death threats when he doesn’t get his way. According to him, both Michael and I have terminal cancer we are unaware of. Information he is apparently privy to. I engage him for the sole purpose of letting him rant on, exposing his ridiculous excuse for logic. Otherwise, he is an enormous time-sink.

    1. I posted this on Mahesh’s blog:

      “Having recently returned from spending 9 days at the center, speaking with Meier for several hours, filming him, speaking with various members, etc., it’s actually difficult to put into words how ridiculous the confused, lazy opinions of the naysayers really are. I again visited (and filmed) the area where the famous log pile photos were taken…impossible for Meier to have hoaxed. But the skeptics won’t trouble themselves to…find out why.

      You’ll notice that Mahesh has never really dealt with Meier’s abundant, independently authenticated UFO photos, he worries instead about the other photos, which have zero bearing on the case.

      And Graeme badly misses the obvious answer to his concerns: it DOESN’T matter who Zahi is because he lists the technologies and protocols he used to analyze the WCUFO photos, which any interested person can acquire and proceed to then duplicate the tests. Even if someone only has PhotoShop they can test and prove a photo to themselves ( Then, when they get the same result everyone else does, they can debunk…themselves. In other words, for those who didn’t understand that the state-of-the-art technologies of Meier’s day were used to authenticate his evidence decades ago, now the newest technologies also confirm those findings. And anyone can duplicate today’s testing, unlike previous ones.

      As for all these claims of plagiarism, Mahesh owns a document in which Meier CLEARLY states – a minimum of 20 – 40 years ago – that he ISN’T the author of many documents but that he accesses them, in their complete form, from the storage banks, adding nothing to them. I’ve read it many times myself.

      Of course this gives some people a bad case of skepticism and they profess that it’s some excuse, etc. (despite Meier clearly having stated it at least two decades ago). Instead, they effectively credit Meier with really superhuman abilities in terms of gathering books from all over the world, getting translations, help from never to be found, non-existent accomplices, the publishing of thousands of page of information, documentation, prophecies, predictions, the spiritual teaching…all while VERY single-handedly building the center, going on contacts, raising his family, dodging assassination attempts of which there are now 23).

      People who’ve grown up in the digital age are often at a disadvantage, especially if they can’t think, are too lazy to do actual on-site research, etc.

      BTW, the fact that the group members who left – apart from supporting all the key elements of the case – were obviously quite free to do so speaks AGAINST any claims of FIGU being some cult. If the restrictions became too mush, they were free to go, as they did.

      It may not be known though it was mentioned at the center, but years ago Semjase told Meier in one of the contacts (I don’t know which one) that five of the then future members would one day leave…as indeed has occurred.

      Having been to the center 16 times, I will also say that it’s doubtful that any of these skeptics could even keep up with the daily chores, the necessities of maintaining the place that Meier himself had to do during the years of greatest photographic and contact activity, etc. In the late 1970s, he worked 20 – 22 hour days, building, planting trees, etc., all in the midst of the contacts, etc.

      Mahesh will have to content himself with, and be grateful for, the comments that he receives on his little blog…while he may someday ponder just how and WHY he decided to dig such a deep hole for himself, certainly in terms of his consciousness. Oh well.”

      Also, thanks for the heads up about “Jan”, since I’ll now require that he prove his identity, should he wish to post here again.

    2. Taro,

      Just want to congratulate you on your excellent work over at BUMFOR and on ‘everything’s a trashcan’ Land-on’s YT page comments. Mahesh has got some messed up people following him and logic truly does baffle them. Even Mahesh wasn’t that stupid before diving head first into the dark hole he’s so dedicated to now.

      Well said Michael too. The people over there are becoming so obsessed with cults and religion, that you’d think it lurking around every aspect of their argument, like a demon of plain truth being kept at bay through a sad, illogical, skepticism. I’d rather be at church than in BUMFOR cause at least you get the odd bit of euphoria and singing (and I hate the church).

      Look forward to your videos/info from your recent visit to the SSSC and it’s good to hear that all there are strong and well.

      1. I second the motion.

        I will also state that someone there went on a long rant to try to rebut what said, inviting me to come back and further debate the issues, etc. I won’t be doing that. I had my say there and people can make of it what they like. It’s basically a…cult of denial and if that’s what they want to engage in, so be it.

        It’ll take a while to put out the next film, etc., but I will discuss some of the things that Meier said in coming blogs.

      2. Thanks but the “flowers” are unnecessary.

        “Even Mahesh wasn’t that stupid before diving head first into the dark hole he’s so dedicated to now.”

        It is very curious behaviour, I agree.

    3. Makes sense that he’s being paid to “try” and debunk Billy’s information because none of these people would be doing it for free because it’s not in their nature to do anything for free therefore they don’t understand it. It’s obvious he’s dying of cancer and wants others to join him. I know of a few cancer cures but since this blog isn’t about cancer, only about the cancerous Jan Schultz (or whoever he pretends to be) he’s only trying to do a psyche job on you two when in fact he hasn’t a clue.
      But he’s obviously in the Stan da mans camp as it seems to piss him off that Stan is clearly unable to fight his own battles and like a good little soldier has taken it upon himself to defend the undefendable.

  9. Taro, you deserve a medal for your patience and logical approach. All those hateful attacks and threats are just cowardly tactics used to divert attention away from the the facts.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.