Evidence of potential consequences of NASA’s ignoring the warnings from Billy Meier and the Plejaren, in 2008, about deflecting asteroid Apophis
Nasa asteroid strike unleashes boulder storm ‘as deadly as Hiroshima’
“However, experts warned that if rubble from a future asteroid deflection were to reach our planet, it would hit at the same speed the asteroid was travelling — fast enough to cause ‘tremendous damage’”.
See the specific warnings and recommendations from the Pleajren about deflecting Apophis as illustrated in The Adventures of Billy Meier comic book:
NEW VIDEO!
UFOs, UAPs, And The Billy Meier UFO Prophecies With Michael Horn
See Francisco Villate’s video:
Apophis, a real threat
See also:
So-called “Astronomer” Can’t Prove Claim He Discovered Apophis
Articles on Apophis
Thanks to Christer Svensson for the NASA disasteroid link.
We should note that the results of the Dart impact documented by NASA confirmed precisely what the Plejaren said would result from such an impact or explosive hit.
Scientists do not often use the word ‘proven’ to describe a current level of understanding. This is reserved for the well-tested laws of nature. Scientific observation involves the close examination of phenomena. Historically, natural philosophers watched, learned and recorded their observations using only their senses, sometimes assisted by simple instruments. Science works on the basis that in many areas there will be always more to know. Even an overwhelming body of evidence may be expanded, or modified, as further work is completed and evidence compiled. That body of evidence usually becomes more complete with more work, but is rarely overturned. This is science at work. Observations need to be meticulously recorded and reported so that they can be compared across time periods, with or against the observations of others, or against benchmarks and standards. Knowledge is drawn from these comparisons. The starting dataset does not necessarily need to be a scientific one. For example, medical records used in hospital administration might reveal patterns of disease prevalence, which could lead to knowledge about how those diseases are caused and transmitted. Academic journals have always had an essential role in the quality control of research. Journals do not publish material without analysis and comment by people skilled in the field of the research to be published, a process known as peer review. Reviewers usually remain publicly anonymous to allow comments to be made without fear of repercussion. Based on advice from the reviewers, a paper can be published or not published, or the author can make changes based on the reviewers’ concerns and resubmit to the journal. As knowledge grows, newer papers with additional evidence generally take the place of older papers. Older papers remain in the scientific record so that the lines of reasoning that led to the current knowledge can still be traced and understood. Scientific knowledge is an aggregate: it is not based on any single publication or work, but rather on continual conversation that publishing represents. A scientist can only communicate what they know and understand; the scientific system ensures that knowledge will continue to expand and mature, and that new knowledge will be created.
Beverly,
Please see the following information for what actual, knowledgeable, scientists state, who never publish theories or incorrect scientific information. We now have over 250 specific examples of search error-free information:
https://theyflyblog.com/2019/05/reference-page-for-nasa-discoveries-confirm-ufo-case-real/
P.S. Hi Beverly,
I didn’t see any response to the information that I shared with you on Thursday morning.
I do want to inform you that, while fancy-sounding, or even plainspoken, explanations about science, and how it works are very nice indeed, our experience is that when presented with impeccably accurate, ironclad, scientific and legal standards of proof of prior knowledge by Mr. Meier of a wide variety of scientific facts, the proof in this case also being copyright verification, which is not a theoretical matter, scientists quickly, how should I put it, disappear from the conversation.
They are neither able, nor willing, to apply actual standards of proof to determine what is factually accurate when it contradicts their own beliefs, prejudices, preconceptions, and self estimation of being far more knowledgeable than they really are. Such has always been the case in many areas of human life, science being also quite amply represented throughout the ages.
So, no rudeness is intended, but we don’t need any more lectures or explanation about how science works, which always contain explanations and apologies, for the shortcomings that are frequently present in such workings, when we have a far better source, and one that has offered its information freely to all of the pompous know-it all’s who simply can’t handle the factual, reality, or factual…truth, a word that is also not welcomed quite often in science for reasons that more reflect on its failure and inadequacies at this level of our knowledge and evolution.
We have a number of articles that date back some years giving additional examples and further explanation if you are interested.
Of course, should you have been taken aback by my first response or this one, please feel free to let me know where you disagree and, especially, please comment on the scientific information that I linked to for you. The fact that it was published prior to all official discoveries is quite easily validated by copyrights of the books in which the information first appeared, etc.
Hi Beverley,
That sounds like a wonderful expression of how science should work, but here on Earth, that’s unfortunately not the case. Scientists are treated like outcasts and fringe nutters when they explore the areas that other scientists don’t believe in. We have a severe case of religious delusion and scientism that percolates through every sphere of research. Instead of being real explorers and researches, we’ve succumbed to stupidity and absurdity.
Truth is not an interest in today’s world of science. The reputation and one’s salary are the guiding factors that drive scientific discovery. It’s a sad state of affairs.
We are only concerned with the truth and the evidence that supports it. When the earthly scientists finally get around to understanding how the scientific method actually works, we might see some real and positive changes. Until then, we’ll continue to have people telling us how science works while never actually implementing those standards. Belief must be completely removed from all aspects of science and exploration. The most freeing thing you can do is to discover and recognize the truth.
Beverly, The world you are writing about does not have a foot hold in the USA and has not since 1911 at least. I wish we lived in the world you write about but we do not. I would not be reading your thoughts and wondering if my entire family will need organ rejection drugs because of a MRA non vax. Any human organ expressing a spike protein is no longer the organ that the human body was born with. You mention older papers that are easily removed now, a 1974 fire made all medical files for military personnel vansh in one night. A local fire killed a single firefighter but made over 50 years of two hospital records vansh. I have given your word great thought and have invested many hours of my time hoping to prove you correct. I am going to be kind here but please give me or not me but someone else at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIJCiHj7b-c and if you dare https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QGPxlx0oOY America is what it is.
Hello Beverly,
I need to sidestep this particular blog topic to record some thoughts here. Permit me to point to your sentences in your above reply : “Science works on the basis that in many areas there will be always more to know. Even an overwhelming body of evidence may be expanded, or modified, as further work is completed and evidence compiled. That body of evidence usually becomes more complete with more work, but is rarely overturned. This is science at work. Observations need to be meticulously recorded and reported so that they can be compared across time periods, with or against the observations of others, or against benchmarks and standards. Knowledge is drawn from these comparisons.”
I cannot claim to think, and conduct myself from a scientific standpoint, but I feel I can comment on such a conveniently overused phrasing that general science seems to cling to. I’m referring to your use of the phrasing, ‘peer review’, and what it has rendered to the public throughout the decades.
You have used the phrasing, ‘peer review’, in your sentence: “Academic journals have always had an essential role in the quality control of research. Journals do not publish material without analysis and comment by people skilled in the field of the research to be published, a process known as peer review.”
Beverly, you and I do not know each other from a ‘bar of soap’, but if you can give 43 minutes of attention, I would appreciate knowing your response to the following documented scientific analysis conducted by a Dr. Marcel Vogel, who worked for IBM in San Jose, CA. He is credited with developing a number of patents for IBM that improved the efficiency of microchip technologies. https://medium.com/broaderinsights/who-was-marcel-vogel-a9430f8c11e3
This blog exists with a focus, on many levels, as to the truth of what Eduard Albert ‘Billy’ Meier represents to our world. Meier freely gave provided Dr. Vogel with some metal samples from the beamship [all too conveniently dubbed ‘ufo’] . . . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jILVZGftFJQ . . .
Beverly, I invite you to please study the video completely!
Beverley . . a short apology is due for my failure, in the evident misspelling of your first name. Thank you for your blog contribution!
A few months ago I sent an email to Richard Moissl of the European Space Agency, Head of the Planetary Defence Office, warning about Apophis (https://neo.ssa.esa.int/contact-us). I received no response. Here is the email I sent:
Hello, I am writing to express my concern about the asteroid Apophis regarding its likelihood of impact with Earth in 2029. The current scientific consensus is that it will not impact Earth on its next flyby on April 13, 2029. But I have read into the subject of asteroids and on what factors can influence their orbit and it seems that we are solely relying on the following assumptions regarding the (lack of) impact threat:
Assumption 1: There are no gravitational effects that can slightly perturb the trajectory of Apophis between now and 2029, such as close flybys between Apophis and other large bodies orbiting the Sun.
But we do not know of all the other bodies that are orbiting the Sun in orbits that overlap with that of Apophis, so unexpected gravitational influences from other bodies cannot be totally ruled out, correct?
Assumption 2: Apophis will not start significantly outgassing, producing a small thrust that will nudge its orbit slightly.
However, Apophis likely contains the mineral chondrite which is known to outgas (https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.05375). So can we really know for certain that Apophis will not start outgassing in a manner that can cause the 2029 near miss to become a direct impact with Earth? Perhaps solar heating will begin to cause buried volatiles to start outgassing?
Assumption 3: Apophis will not collide with another asteroid that can nudge its orbit slightly.
How can this be ruled out since we do not know the orbit of all the other asteroids in the solar system? For instance, Apophis may indeed collide with a small asteroid of a few thousand kg in mass, causing its trajectory to shift slightly. Also, collisions with small meteorites can cause outgassing by releasing volatiles beneath the surface of the Apophis, further affecting its orbital path.
Ultimately what I’m saying is that we are relying on assumptions that the above influences (and perhaps others) on Apophis’ orbit will not happen between now and 2029. Given the extreme severity of an impact should it occur, even if the risk is small, should we not undertake actions to deflect Apophis while we still can? According to this source — The Apophis Planetary Defense Campaign (https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/PSJ/ac66eb) — which took place in 2020-2021, if an impact does occur it would be somewhere in a swath over central Europe and Asia. The ESA has a clear interest in carefully considering this matter.
Regards,
Phil
Apophis is completely irrelevant unless we stand up to the national security state and their failing plan of atmospheric aerosol injections…
NOTE: It’s easy to post unsubstantiated theories when there’s no accountability. Please use your name and a REAL email.
Somewhat related.
On YouTube, in the suggested video lineup, I am seeing an increased amount of “OH NO the aliens are coming” Type videos. Much more so than before. I don’t look up UFO videos on YouTube anymore so I am pretty sure this suggested lineup isn’t based on my personal search criteria. (Algorithms)
I really really hope they don’t attempt this supposed fake alien attack because every religious nutjob on the planet will lose their minds thinking demons are attacking or the rapture is happening. That’ll be worse than the fake attack it’s self and I’m sure that is a large part of the reason for a fake attack. The fake attack isn’t the shadow gov’s focus. It’s the reaction of the people they are wanting.
They are experts on human behavior and they know how to trigger people into being submissive. 80% of 325 million people is 260 million. That’s a lot of nutjobs.
I’m sure Jim Baker and his new cookie-cutter wife are drooling dollar signs from heaven profusely right about now.
D.
Aliens attack Peru village. The fear is slowly being primed.
Many times Billy mentions the “foreigners”. Other times he says all the sightings, abductions, mutilations, crop circles, and so on are US Govt activities. In light of this very concerning video, is he going to say the US. Govt is also responsible for the HUMAN mutilations that were described also? Obviously there is a lot of TRUTH missing but if we can’t depend on it from Billy, who DO we get it from? Maybe the total truth will be too much for us to handle but if we’re going to be subject to the consequences of reality, don’t we at least have the right to know WHY? Maybe it doesn’t matter to those who are no longer here but unfortunately that’s not us.
Chuck,
Please provide evidence where Billy said that ALL sightings, abductions, mutilations, crop circles, etc. are from the US Government. I have a feeling that you can’t. Let’s start providing evidence when we make such claims about Billy.
You should also depend on your own ability to discern fact from fiction. It’s not Billy’s job to feed you every detail about everything. The core of the Creation-energy teaching is learning how to think for yourself. That is when you’ll learn how to recognize and fathom the truth.
Sorry, I shouldn’t have said “all”. Still, Billy does have a lot of criticism of the UFO community. Many of them are obviously disingenuous about the subject and suspect, especially those who deny and suppress Billy’s story, but it still leaves the question, “Is it real, or is it Memorex”?
I’m not sure what you mean by, “Is it real, or is it Memorex?”
I guess you’re not old enough to remember the commercial. Look it up. It should make my point clear.
It’s not that big of a deal Chuck. I don’t watch TV and haven’t watched it for years.
Microplastics found in human hearts for first time, alarming new study findshttps://nypost.com/2023/08/12/microplastics-found-in-human-hearts-for-first-time-study/
Speaking of scientists being warned — this time about the presence of microplastics, the result of plastics breaking down in the environment and ultimately into all living creatures including the human being.
Discussions of this go back to at least 2014. https://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/w/index.php?search=microplastics&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go
The reason they call it apophis is because it look like a serpent head I saw it on live stream when it passed earth last time