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.
…………………………………………………………….
Stan,
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:
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.
Authorized American Media Representative
The Billy Meier Contacts
youtube.com/c/MichaelHorn812
…………………………………………………………….
On Nov 13, 2015, at 11:44 AM, Stan <fsphys@bellaliant.net> wrote:
Michael:
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.
MH
…………………………………………………………….
On Nov 12, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Taro <taro.istok@gmail.com> 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
A)
– 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.
B)
– 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(https://youtu.be/SNlmFfb0ADs & https://youtu.be/gMFqSxX1b-g) 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
Michael…another great debate! You were more than patient with Mr Friedman, even as he seemed to be unable to follow your points logically, choosing hearsay and opinion over scientific evidence. It was like listening to a parent trying to spoon feed a stubborn child who just does not want to eat. I hope you didn’t get any on ya. Keep up the great work sir!
Thanks Dave, also please use your last name in future comments, which are welcome, pro or con.
Fat, dumb and happy. A common theme in the “scientific community”. Too content selling books and videos to act like a real scientist. I’m embarrassed for this planet.
Stanton says, “Has the Meier Defense community made available samples of ET materials for testing and published their results?”
Yes. Yes they have.
Well well well
Stan has written himself out of the history books but more importantly he has willing gave up the opportunity of a lifetime to contribute to humanity.
I held onto some false hopes and came to his defense as a result but all leggards that they are the cowardice and spinelessness gets the better of them.
But I guess the truth doesn’t need endorsements from such a person to be valid nor does it invalidate itself through their lack of endorsement.
Pity Stan could’ve used his platform in a meaningful way but ran like a frightened dog in a Chinese slaughterhouse.
Hello everyone.
Michael, what have you heard the skeptics say about the spiritual teaching? To me it proves the truthfulness, the knowledge, the wisdom, and the love of BEAM. It must be included as evidence for any intelligent and rational thinking human being.
Peace, Scott.
These debates have further exposed the UFO community for the frauds that they are. Stantons ingnorance has only served to provide listeners with any reasoning with a more clear picture of complicity to try sweep the truth under the rug. I feel more than anything that Stanton has a grudge and also doesn’t want his ego hurt. Well he did a terrible job of that. What a idiot he is. Rest in peace old man. You’ll be coming back to a s**t storm that you could have helped avoid.
I just read your blog interview with Stan Friedman and I have another idea. I don`t know if this will help prove our point but what about bringing up the WCUFO photos which are much sharper and more obvious? Who can be fooled by those CWUFO photos? You might even want to bring these WCUFO pictures up to Peter Devenport too who keeps spouting lights in the sky too as well on c2c. Hope this helps,it`s just an idea,a thought:)
As always, it’s what people in that business do. Like I said before, there has to be a manual on their behavior somewhere. It was obvious what the outcome would be considering his background. MH has way more patience than I ever could with someone like Stan but he’s the typical know it all govt, university science boy. Better to leave guys like that to their pathetic way of life full of lies and deceit.
There has been six terrorist attacks in Paris with at least 100 people who lost their lifes. Sorry for highjacking the thread. I wonder what this will lead to. Would France and USA coorperate with Russia in Syria against Terrorists?
Hu Swen,The latest I heard was 153 unfortunately. I thought the Climate Talks wasn`t until December. The last I heard was that the Climate Talks will be delayed until further noitice. Paris is still under attack but I heard a rumor on CNN that the US will be next. Sorry to be off topic MH.
Well, you’ve again said a whole lot without saying much of anything, well anything that can be currently vetted. Maybe this physical evidence could be made available now for current analysis. Maybe this group of people could learn to be shall we say slightly more open to evaluation. None of the material that has ever been presented is anywhere close to have proven anything, at least not to the general public. You must know by now that saviors are never taken seriously here. It’s a tried and failed game that most have rejected. It’s dangerous and delusional. If this man was serious, he would produce proof for the masses. Long winded bloviating does not cut it, and if you honestly believe that Mr. Meier has the only footage, you are truly beyond sane thinking. Be careful what you blindly accept, things are often not what you think. You people are in danger if you continue to warp your conscious minds to singular principles, principles that may fail you here. Loose the Human worship, and you may have a chance. Leave your egos at the door, no one gives a s**t.
You’re apparently well out of the loop on all the evidence, documentation, analyses, corroborations of prophetic information, etc. So, before blowing all that empty wind our way, start here (everything on and linked from the page):
http://www.theyfly.com/corroboration-evidence
You must think that aerospace professionals, astrophysicists, etc., who’ve already endorsed Meier’s authenticity, aren’t actually part of the “general public”. You also seem to think that the important thing is to “produce proof for the masses.” Since you’re obviously representing those masses, it should be clear why special efforts aren’t made to satisfy the superficial whims of the unthinking ones.
I’m not sure where you got the idea of a “savior”, oh, I know, you also failed to familiarize yourself with the spiritual teaching, which rests on 100% complete self-responsibility, something you already demonstrate is antithetical to your “prove it to the masses” belief system.
As for “Meier has the only footage”, we’ve never said that. We have said that Meier has the only photographic evidence that so far can be said to be of extraterrestrial objects.
And as far as the rest of your insipid, inaccurate generalizations are concerned, it’s clear that “You people” is at least useful in separating those of us who actually think and ignoramuses like you who simply can’t.
One thing is for absolute certain, you have all made up your minds. This is unwise to say the least when you yourselves do not actually know. What you are doing is called “faith.” You were never given any evidence of the existence of these Humans, yet you accept it without question and even follow what is put in front of you without even an iota of physical proof. Millions have footage and pictures that you yourselves would never accept as being genuine, and you ostracize anyone outside your group. You all have much to learn. I guess we’re all entitled to our interpretations.
The one thing that really is “for absolute certain” is that you really don’t know where you’ve landed, do you?
You simply don’t apparently know that this blog is centered around the singularly authentic, 73+ year long contacts, evidence and information pertaining to the Billy Meier case.
You seem to have us confused with the online, New Age, “alien” gibberish that you must soak up by the ton. And while we indeed all are “entitled to our interpretations” it first requires that you understand the language you’re trying to interpret. Get a clue and come back when you’re not quite so lost and confused.
Yes, faith. Faith in the scientific method which validated Meier’s physical evidence free of hoax.
Robin I think your out trolling for the big lunker.
I am a free thinker and open to evidence wherever it appears. I do not “believe” anything. It seems likely, based off of the evidence, which you are free to peruse at your leisure, that Meier is telling the truth, and in addition, his writings on physics, biology, politics, and most importantly, spirituality, are incredibly insightful.
The funny thing is Robin: you should read the Goblet of Truth by Meier if you want a lesson in not believing things without evidence. I’d say about 30% of the some odd 2,000 pages are devoted to reiterating, over and over again, in many different ways, the importance not accepting anything other than demonstrable knowledge – including not blindly accepting anything written in the book itself, but rather, seeking to understand and experience things for one’s self so as to gain knowledge and wisdom about ourselves and the world. If you’re an atheist or free thinker, you’d probably really enjoy it.
You can not grasp a thought and I am absolutely certain that you can not grasp a thought, either.
As a result, you can not grasp the truth.
And, your anxiety controls you.
So, your doubts about yourself will haunt you.
Prove to yourself that you are literate and able to be literate.
theyfly.com & futureofmankind.co.uk
Hey wrong website go here.
http://usa.raelians.org/
The Meier case is, by far the most extensive UFO case in modern history. It has been scientifically validated free of hoax. It is the ONLY UFO case to be scientifically validated free of hoax. The science has never been properly refuted. So, if it is not a hoax, what other conclusion is there?
If you came here thinking you could sound like you knew what you were talking about, you came to the wrong place. Everyone here is familiar enough with the case to know you’re talking out of your a**. Come back when you’ve actually researched the case. The five minutes you spent on some wannabe debunker’s YouTube channel does not cut it. It’s interesting that you accuse others of precisely what you’re doing: Bloviating.
So you know how to use a thesaurus but not a dictionary.
Get a grown up to search (they’ll know what I mean) “How many people follow religions”, for you, and prove to yourself how warped your “conscious” mind is.
You should (I’m not confident with using could in this instance) learn to savor failure as the great lesson giver it is.
I could go on but I will give you a chance to mull over these few.
Actually I came here to this website because of today’s terror(?) attack in Paris. This could follow BEAM’s predictions of ISIL’s terrorism in Europe and especially France.
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20151114/1030072379/paris-attack-updates.html
See: https://theyflyblog.com/2015/09/18/go-forth-and-multiply-to-divide-and-conquer/
“Many have sent comments about the absence of real proof about predictions.” ~Stanton T. Friedman
I hope 150+ dead is real enough proof for Stan.
Exactly, a quotable quote.
“You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink.”(…and in this case, THINK). Well, at least you managed to get X-zone host Rob McConnell to see the reality. Maybe you’ll have some regular airtime when the next thing(s) happen.
I suggest people stop leading the donkey or horse to the water then they weren’t be so frustrated.
Try a German Shepperd instead or even a camel they are more appreciative and will wag it’s tail.
Nice one – and thank you both for this piece and the one about the Hirt-full. It seems I came to the right place in the first place. 🙂
Aparantly these refugees from the Middle East is beginning to sound all the more like a ruse i.e. a cover to Muslimnize this planet. This sound like a cover for those horrible IS gangs and I just heard on c2c that Craige Hulet said this could be the binnimg og WW4(WW3) by way of a conventional war leading up to a nuclear war if these prophecies turn out to be correct predictions. I hope Hulet is wrong.
“Part of my focus is looking at what governments have done. I’ve got a book “Captured, the Betty & Barney Hill experience”… That gives us some insight about direct interaction with aliens & earthlings” ~ Stanton Friedman
And still they try to tell us that Stanton’s an expert. He goes on to say that “world leading” people agree with his skant third-party info, whilst, confusingly, dismissing the third party, first-hand, multiple-eyewitnessed, independently photographed, tested, recorded, proveably predictive, Meier case. All whilst suggesting that Meier be a “world leader” (world leaders mean a lot to Stan?). He expresses this all publicly, without meaning to be funny, or, realising that those “leaders” have been feeding him the crap perpetuating the systematic & worldwide cover-up he “knows” is going on. He’s like a farmer who blames the cows for eating all the food he gives them for the cowpat he likes to eat… and there’s one precious sacred cow who is producing his very own special kind of waste on UFO-Profit now & he hasn’t even got the balls to defend any of this live with Micheal. Mahesh’s damp squib retaliations by feeding “Pinky” some ideas from “the brain” can’t be reasoned with unless you give Mahesh the answer he wants to hear & that he’s too spineless to stand up, himself, for.
Saturday, November 14, 2015
Facts for Stanton Friedman: Exposing Michael Horn’s lies told during the debate on X-Zone radio show
http://ufoprophet.blogspot.in/2015/11/facts-for-stanton-friedman-exposing.html?m=1#axzz3r3YCgq7l
Well I guess Stan had help
Here is the comment I added, copied here for reference(just in case Mahesh decides to tamper with it):
– – –
2.3 Pendulum UFO
A) “filmmaker and researcher Daniel Drasin has already refuted Rhal Zahi’s pseduo-arguments on beamship being in two places in one frame”
FALSE. Drasin has merely supplied theories, NOT refutation. As I’ve already stated in the comments section which you appeared to have missed:
“So, in the end your splicing theory does not satisfy all the conditions present within the film with due consideration for film to video transfer. You have no explanation for the localized changes in level of blur(i.e. the object as it fades out and in during the jump). In fact, the gradual blurring of the object as it fades out then back in would suggest a splice could NOT have been made during those critical frames.”
Until Drasin can account for the GRADUAL disappearance and reappearance of the object, he has NOT refuted Zahi’s observation of the object “being in two places in one frame”.
B) “Drasin has claimed that there is strong evidence that this film has been tampered by splicing and joining.”
First of all, according to the Stevens investigation, the original 8mm film was analysed by Jun-Ichi Yaoi of Nippon Television and found no signs of tampering. Once again, Drasin offers only unsubstantiated speculation, some of which are in fact careless observations:
Drasin: “you can see the additional dirt-blemishes”
This is not proof of splicing and can be the result of numerous other factors.
Drasin: “the momentary blurring of adjacent frames caused by the extra thickness of the splicing tape”
The cause(“extra thickness of the splicing tape”) is pure speculation. I have already pointed out that the blurring is localized to the object and NOT the entire frame. Careless observation.
Drasin: “a disturbance on the left edge of the frame”
Meier claims to have experienced an electrical shock during the “jumps”. Drasin has done nothing to rule out this explanation.
Drasin: “vertical scratches typically formed when the soft splicing tape passes repeatedly through a projection gate”
Vertical scratches on film will occur with or without splicing tape. Redundant observation.
Drasin: “At 29:00, the the original 8mm film (labeled “the real video”) clearly shows a slight displacement of the WHOLE image at the splice point. which would be expected of a physical splice.”
More careless observation. My comment in response:
“What you refer to as displacement of the entire image is not entirely accurate. Once again refer to the original .flv and observe each frame carefully. You will notice that the shift is not consistent across the entire image as one would expect with a simple splice. In fact, once again the utility poles are barely affected at all.”
Drasin: “At 29:12, the craft “gradually disappears.” But the discrepancy between the film frame rate (16 or 18 fps) and the frame rate of the video (25 or 30 fps) to which the film was transferred, the inherent nature of the transfer “pulldown” process and multiple generations of copying, DICTATES that there should be this type of image overlap across the film cut.”
Already covered: This CANNOT explain a localized change within the frame. Drasin’s theory only addresses a uniform change across the entire frame which is NOT the case with the Meier film.
Drasin: “At 29:51 we can see evidence of a typical cement splice line at the tops of these frames, which means the previous examples were cropped and that the splicing tape was applied over the cement splices, presumably to reinforce it, as was common practice in those days.”
Speculation and careless observation. Here is my response:
“If the white lines at the top of the frames are evidence of a, “typical cement splice line”, why does it change shape from one frame to the next?”
His response:
Drasin: “As for the cement splice line apperaing in a series of frames, I have already pointed out that this video of the projected 8mm film was shot with a CCD sensor. CCD sensors will tend to “lag” or “ghost” when they receive bright light that exceeds their dynamic range.”
My Response:
“The changing shape of the line at the top of frame during the jump does not appear to be consistent with the ghosting from an overloaded sensor. It starts out as a thin dark line and suddenly changes to a white band which increases in intensity until it disappears. I would imagine that ghosting would involve the opposite: A high intensity band which gradually fades.”
No further response from Drasin.
C) “the video which Rhal Zahi analyzed is of very poor quality and is not original but several generations away which means that any evidence of hoax can in theory be erased.”
IN THEORY.
FACT: The pendulum periods Zahi has MEASURED would not be affected by film quality.
FACT: Specific movements(accelerations, decelerations, smooth movements) have never been duplicated(by Langdon or otherwise). These movements, like the pendulum periods are unaffected by film quality.
FACT: The object gradually fades out and gradually fades in TWICE.
What are the chances that film quality will affect only a very specific portion of the frame in a very specific manner, TWICE?
(FACT: YOU have not looked at these frames closely. Neither has Drasin.)
FACT: The treetop is clearly observed to move AFTER the object passes. A model/miniature tree coming into contact with a suspended model disc would have moved AT the moment of contact. A model disc is not large enough to have produced the wake turbulence necessary to affect the treetop AFTER its passage. It can only affect the treetop by making contact. Any suspended disc’s stability would have been disturbed by making contact with another object: There would be UNAVOIDABLE wobble.
D) “Also important is Bruce Maccabbe’s extensive analysis done on this pendulum beamship video, where he concludes that a small model the size of a foot likely has been used by Meier.”
FALSE. Maccabbe’s analysis is redundant. He provides a lengthy explanation for pendulum movement. However, he distinctly avoids addressing the possibility that ET’s thousands of years advanced could mimic these movements.
E) “Also look into Phil Langdon’s work on this video.”
Phil Langdon has failed to duplicate the most critical aspects of the Pendulum Film. Watch my DIRECT side-by-side comparisons:
https://youtu.be/gMFqSxX1b-g
https://youtu.be/SNlmFfb0ADs
A SMOOTH, 270º turn with a suspended disc is IMPOSSIBLE. You can easily TRY it at home if you’d like to TRY and prove me wrong.
F) “MH at around 55:45 min. (part 1) has claimed that it took many times for Phil Langdon to recreate Meier’s photos while Meier only took his photos once. How does MH know that Meier only took the photos once?”
This is not proof of a lie. This can easily be explained by a man who has not only known another man for DECADES but has studied his every move. Horn does not doubt Meier’s honesty. This has nothing to do with intentional deception which is what you are implying.
G) “The hoax theory, that has good supporting evidence, suggests that Meier along with his accomplices may have staged his shots several times on location and used dark room equipment to erase any signs of fraud. Meier then would claim a completely different date for his photo and video sessions and publish only copies that are several generations away from the originals, so no amount of analysis can detect any signs of fraud – which is exactly what has happened with the Lee Elders-Wendelle Stevens investigation.”
PURE SPECULATION. There is ZERO credible evidence for the hoax theory. There is ZERO evidence of accomplices or dark room equipment. How much of your website twists the facts as you have done here, Mahesh?
Great work Taro
Very intelligent, truthful and logical refutation of a lying son of a bitchy debunking attempt
Thank you for posting the link. I rarely, if ever visit his site so I likely would not have seen it.
Hi, all of you… A relevant and perhaps timely reminder of some poignant info’ :
First, Michael’s opening paragraph contains the statement ” the truth would crush him”
Indeed it would. Observing the reactions of people over the last 30 years + We unfortunately still face the massive EGO in people who have not bothered to self educate themselves, don’t want to be told ANYTHING by any one, and cant face the fact that their lives have been a total selfish sham and waste of time ( that’s not necessarily true of course as we are all on different rungs of the evolutionary ladder ) However, it has been my observation that so over inflated is the ego of both professors and scientists and the average young person today that they would never, and indeed may not be able to face the fact that they are wrong ( about ANYTHING) The arrogance is truly astounding !
This leads me to comment on the fantastic patience and compassion that some of us have earned ourselves in trying to deal with and augment and point out and help others; without proselytizing, and learning ourselves that the gift of patience is …patience. Whilst my level is fairly healthy on that point, it no where near matches Billy’s, or probably Michael’s.
I’d suggest that you pay more honor and respect to Michael s self appointed task’ before adding tangled pieces of spaghetti to the information that he helpfully tries to use to help us all, in many ways – compassionately, So keep it simple stupid (k.i.s.s.) that in itself will help, and by the way, what have YOU personally done TODAY that helps the mission, apart from type out some comment on the computer… and before you ask, I do a lot behind the scenes in my own way, and prefer to remain the ‘unsung hero’ : but would like to leave out the word hero. As all-ways many thanks Michael for what you do, and if in anyway I can ever be of assistance in anyway, I will be…
Gary, all we need to do is be our own hero’s and live it the best we can in accordance with the spiritual teaching and our ever unfolding understanding of it. Thanks for doing so.