| Author |
Message |
   
Lth
Member
Post Number: 57
Registered: 06-2010
| | Posted on Thursday, July 29, 2010 - 11:56 pm: | 
|
> That, Randy, is probably one of the reasons that BEAM and FIGU say not to > prosyletize. People will search for and find the teachings on their own. > If one is interested in spreading the word harmlessly, I think having > something on your person such as a book related to the case etc is a good > way to start a conversation without pushing it on others. If they see a t > shirt or a book you are carrying and then ask questions, then you are free > to talk about it. Springing the subject on an audience without them knowing > that the topic is going to be discussed can have bad effects rather than > good ones as our fellow forum member recently found out. Otherwise letting > people be is likely the best choice. This is my understanding on that > topic. |
Rarena
Member
Post Number: 595
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, July 30, 2010 - 08:36 am: |
|
Hi Lth,
I agree Thomas... proselytizing (converting to ones way of thinking) is not the way to go. If the lady had been more open to the concept of actually enacting world peace... within... she may have been more inquisitive and indeed may be. She has the key to the secret now... People need time to study, digest and process these seemingly simple concepts.
This is as far as I go. A person may be open enough to consider the concepts the Plejaren teach... and it increases their evolution positively. The lady I was speaking with was in her mid nineties and seemed wise enough to be concerned with world peace. As she asked me to speak at her meeting I wanted her to know about my take, before I went... her patently typical response will keep me from that meeting... eh eh... |
Mattopenminds
Member
Post Number: 30
Registered: 11-2008
| | Posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 - 03:15 am: |
|
Dear forum members,
A friend of mine suggested that the Beamship sound recording I played him was fake. He claimed boldly that he could replicate the sound easily so I challenged him to do so. I stated that he must use only equipment available in 1980. Although he was unable to do this due to lack of funds, he did use music programs on his PC that replicated the functions of available analogue recording devices.
I have uploaded his attempt to recreate the beamship recording here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESil--9l6gM
Dan's original email to me
"I've had a go at recreating that UFO sound and I think I've created a fairly similar one. It's not exactily the same but it is undeniably similar.
All I used was a delay pedal and a spring reverb both of which were readily available from the 50's and cheap or easy to botch together with minimal knowledge of electronics.
Now, I know you won't like this but my sound is digital and the sound that I used was also generated digitally but, I tried to get my analogue delay pedal working and it is f***ed. It is quite old and it was in a desperately poor condition when I got it. If anything the characteristic of an analogue delay pedal and spring reverb would make the sound more like the original than the digital one. So I think I have done quite well in getting it to sound the way it does.
I can explain more about the tonality of the sound to you in person if you wish but theoretically the equipment I have used is very simple and easily obtainable in them days for a low cost, and/or easily makeable with a soldering iron, a screwdriver, a tape deck, a big spring and a couple of induction coils (a knackered microphone or speaker would suffice).
Even if you completely dislike the sound and don't think it is even close to the original, you have to agree that it shares some shockingly similar characteristics.
See what you think."
My response to Dan:
"Hi Dan,
Thanks for your email and the sound. Not a bad effort but still miles away from the complexity of the original sound which pauses and stops at times and changes frequency and modulation much more than your sound, which did not stop at any time and only produced one tone. Your sound does not replicate the original sound so I think you've failed in terms of the challenge even with the use of modern PC's and digital technologies. Your attempt only validates the authenticity of the original to me.
Please click on the link below for more information about the witnesses to the sound recordings and the sound analysis and you will see what I mean. I think you'll find it interesting:
http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/Beamship_Sounds
Matt |
Mattopenminds
Member
Post Number: 31
Registered: 11-2008
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 10, 2010 - 02:53 pm: |
|
As Dan has further responded to my email and brought in backing in terms of another engineer's analysis of the 80's Beamship recording, which I will post below, I feel it is right to give the forum a chance to help me answer some of these questions they pose. It may be beyond the scope of members here and may need to go to the Core Members like Christian.
However it is assumed by these doubters that the 4 - 2170Hz was impossible to record on tape recorders at that time as described in the engineers report.
There are direct accusations that the witnesses to the event are involved in a scam. (This is convenient cause unless you know them you are free to assume the worse about their character).
The suggestion, in the email below, is that the recording is of delayed feedback and that the tapping noise sounds like a microphone being tapped with delay effect. Versions not close to the complexity of the Beamship recording but similar in overall style are being produced to undermine the mission.
However here are the sonograms Dan's talks about below in his email and I think it says it all.
Billy's Beamship recording's Sonogram:
(image resized reposted)
Dan's Sonogram (to be found at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESil--9l6gM
(image resized reposted)
Here is the email from Dan (unedited):
I know my sound was not quite the same as the original sound but for me that experiment proved that the sound you played me could quite easily be created with feedback, a delay and a spring reverb. It would be virtually impossible to recreate the exact same noise unless you had exactily the same equipment as billy did when he made the sound.
The noise I created would sound better if I had used analogue pedals as they would have had more character to them due to them having more imperfections and tones for the feedback to interact with and producing more resonating frequencies. I only used the digital effects because that is all I had available to me. If you can imagine what that sound would sound like if recreated multiple times using the same effects from from all different manufacturers you would get a whole different selection of similar sounding noises that were not the same even if you used the exact same process.
You have to admit that there are some fundamental characteristics of my sound that are exactily the same as the sound billy Meier's produced. for example:
The beating sound, This was caused by the delay time on the delay effect.
I know you said that my sound didn't have different tones in it but actually that is another characteristic that I think both sounds share. When the delay is feeding back the sound has a tenancy to shift and transform in to various different tones, this can also be heard in my sound and you can encourage the shifts by tweaking a tone control or a filter of some description.
Also if you listen to the beginning of Billy Meier's sound you can hear a knock that echo's repeatedly and gets slightly quieter each time it echo's. This is the exact nature of a delay effect, and it is a bit dubious if you ask me, it sounds like a microphone that is plugged in to a delay pedal being knocked.
Although the two sounds are not exactily the same, after experimenting with feedback, a delay and a spring reverb I am convinced that that is how the sound was created. It is too similar to just be a coincidence, and billy Meier's sound just isn't alien enough, I am very familiar with the sound's that he was making and I have never heard the sound of a beam-ship before.
I have just read the analysis that gave me a link to, and here are my thoughts.
"There were at least thirty or more discrete frequencies in a random and constantly shifting mix that ranged from 4 to 2170 Hz, but varied on average between 470 and 1452 Hz."
I disagree with this, I have produced a Sonogram of the recording (See attached files) and you can clearly see that the different tones fall on specific frequencies. They are far from random. My explanation for this is that they are different harmonics or modes of the feedback and the delay and they would be predictable by knowing the time delay of the feedback and/or the time of the delay on the delay effect used. In other words the tones represent different resonant modes of the feedback and the delay. The Sonogram illustrates this by displaying lines across the sample. In other words the tones have a tendency to stick to those frequencies only and are not random. It might be worth mentionning that on the sonogram for Billy's ound there is a lot of low frequencies visible at the bottom of the graph, this is the wind in the recording and is not part of the space ship noise.
I don't think Sonograms were available in the 80's as it would be difficult to produce one without a computer. Just to explain the sonogram (in case you don't know what it is showing): The vertical axis represents the frequency (pitch) of the sound, the horizontal axis represents the time position of the sample and the colour represents the amplitude (volume) of the frequency, the stronger the volume the louder the frequency.
The different resonant modes illustrated by the sonogram can also be seen in my UFO sound, although there are less modes, the pattern is remarkably similar.
"The amplitude of these frequencies was also constantly changing, whereby the dominance alternated."
This effect is also very characteristic of the feedback patterns explained above. The dominant frequency will fall in a resonant mode of the feedback and the delay.
Robin L. Shellman's analysis: "The demodulation showed that one must be dealing with a rotating device-249.6 U/min. modulated at 4.16 Hz".
I think I am right in saying that there is no way you could get the characteristics illustrated in the sonogram by any one thing speeding up and slowing down in a spin. The nature of a spinning device speeding up and slowing down consequently would create frequency patterns that clearly speed up and slow down with it. The evident lines in the sonogram show that whatever is producing the sound is jumping from frequency to frequency. The gaps in between the lines show that nothing is progressively speeding up or slowing down at all. If that was the case the lines you would see on the sonogram would be curved and covering all the in between frequencies.
"Two other sound engineers and a synthesizer sound specialist joined the analysis team, and the sounds were reexamined, this time for possible duplication. All of these specialists agreed that the character of the sounds was unique and that any type of synthesis, if in fact such was possible, could produce only portions of the recordings we had examined and that duplicating only part of the sounds, even in a short linear segment, would be impossible. The number of traveling and constantly shifting discrete frequencies and constantly changing amplitudes, which were shifting in relative dominance, exhibited duplication problems that exceed the abilities of a current state-of-the-art device!"
The above analysis of the sound is fairly accurate as this sound would be very hard to produce on any synthesizer. What is being overlooked is that the the sound wasn't produced on a synth at all, as I have demonstrated, it is feedback.
I cant explain the witnesses, nor how the sound was propergated without people finding the speakers. However I was not there and there is alwayse the possibility that they were all lying.
I have found another persons analysis of how the sound was produced and it is quite similar to mine and it sounds extremely feasible. The guy also adds some other inconsistencies that I have over looked. It was from this web page:
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message133474/pg1
and here is the analysis:
acid
12/8/2005 10:13 AM
--if you listen to the audio of the ufo sound , in the very first second you hear a click - this click is echoed
this shows that a delay unit was used , this sound is an unmistakable sound of a mic being tapped - if the sound was not processed in any way then why would the mic tap echo ?
-- the ufo noise is played over sounds of animals and wildlife.
try rcording the sound of birds over the sound of a power drill - you cannot do it. the db range difference is far to great
the engineer report stated -
quote: there where 30 or more discrete frequencies in a randomly constantly shifting mix that ranged from 4hz to 2170hz,
<<
this is impossible as the recording was created on magnetic tape - you would not be able to to record anything under roughly 24hz(for a top line cassette) so how did they manage to record 4hz ?
>>also the engineer report also stated "unheard sounds above and below the threashold of hearing"<<
this is mangetic tape - it cannot record beyond our threashold of hearing - anybody with a clue about audio equipment will tell you that.
and now ill explain how he created the sound - you can try this out yourself if you want.
equipment needed are :-
microphone
amplified speaker
tone controls or filter
recorder capable of multispeed recording
echo unit
plug the mic in to the delay unit and then plug the delay unit into the amp and create feedback from the loudspeaker
adjust the tone control/filter to take away the really high pitched screaming sounds (different effects will happen depending on the type of filter/tone controls you use)
slowly control the sound by moving the mic and tone control
then play it back at half speed - that is the billy meiers ufo sound
think back to when the recording was done - 1980īs
- hi speed dubbing was on cassette records
- some amstrad models have reverbs/echos inbuilt
- tone controls and not equalizers where the in thing on most stereo equipment
now i worked this out in about 5 minutes - i have an audio background. any studio engineer worth his salt should have spotted how to make that.
the simple thing is - he used words that you dont use when describing sound , he demonstrated zero knowledge of what he was talking about by saying false things and the way he didnt know it was feedback slowed down was pathetic
hope this helps you
Right I think that is enough for you to think about for now. Id be interested to here your thoughts on the subject. I hope you have enjoyed reading my analysis.
See you soon,
Dan #=O)
Salome,
Matt
(Message edited by badr on October 08, 2010)
(Message edited by badr on October 08, 2010) |
Badr
Moderator
Post Number: 538
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, October 08, 2010 - 03:33 am: |
|
Image reposting after editing size from the post:
Posted by Mattopenminds on Tuesday, August 10, 2010 - 02:53 pm
Billy's Beamship recording's Sonogram:
Dan's Sonogram
Peace,
Badr |
Michael_horn
Member
Post Number: 314
Registered: 07-2009
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 10, 2010 - 05:12 pm: |
|
Another simple, established fact is that the sounds could be heard for many miles. There were something like 17 witnesses at one of the events, including a plainclothes policeman.
Having walked in the area of one of the recordings, many times, I failed to notice any electrical outlets in the trees or in the meadows, as did any of the witnesses. They also failed to note any speakers that could broadcast such loud sounds.
Of course there were none but people who haven't quite thought everything through, let alone really scrutinized all of the evidence, spend their time deluding themselves.
One would have thought that by now they would have moved on to actually contemplate the importance of the case and its information.
Also, on another note, please see THE CRIME AGAINST ALL LIFE at www.theyfly.com, for some very unpleasant news. |
Mattopenminds
Member
Post Number: 31
Registered: 11-2008
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 11, 2010 - 02:43 am: |
|
Further correspondence is listed below.
Hi Michael - in terms of contemplating the case - we all have to start somewhere. My friend has taken a first interest, albeit a sceptical one. He saw my desktop image of Billy's UFO image and begun asking questions which I answered. He's now looking further into it but he's also suggesting that I am being duped which I feel I have to respond to. I was a sceptic once too and had it not been for people on the forum answering my queries I may too have dismissed the whole thing so I feel I must do the same. That is not to say that I am only involved up to the point of just answering questions about the evidence. Anyway to the current correspondence:
Dan's message:
Alright Matt its me again.
Here, I've been looking in to that Billy Meier thingy a bit more and I have found a large amount of evidence in support if it all being a hoax. You said that no one had managed to recreate the images that he has taken but I have found recreations of almost all of them. Some people have gone a long way to created replications of his UFOs. You can see most of the recreations here:
http://www.thebiggestsecret.org/home/index.php/photo-galleries
Also I found this guy who is clearly getting annoyed with the stubbornness of Billy Meier's supporters who has some very technical evidence disproving the photos. Here's a link:
http://www.thebiggestsecret.org/home/index.php/articles/ufo-et/meier-hoax/60-meier-hoax/76-meier-smoking-gun
Now if even one of those photo's or UFO recordings can be proven to be a hoax, and its looking to me like most of them are, you have to ask your self why he would he need to do that if he really is being contacted by aliens and being allowed to photograph their space craft.
I have had another go at recreating the UFO sound. I tried something slightly different this time I used a microphone pointing at the speaker to produce the feedback and had that running in to a delay and through a spring reverb. It is still miles away from the original but it is going to be virtually impossible to make the exact same noise. As you will be able to here my new noise is much more complex, perhaps even a little bit too complex compared to the original. Any way I am convinced that Billy Meier produced his UFO noise in a similar fashion and I also am convinced that the UFO photo's are a hoax. There's detailed descriptions of how they are produced and the equipment used.
Follow all the links on the above website, have a good read, I would be concerned if it doesn't change you mind just a little bit.
Any way I'll hope to see you soon, take care.
Dan.
My response to Dan:
Hi Dan,
You seem very keen on trying to change my mind but I have seen and read this all before. I also don't like the implied judgment that not to agree with you should mean 'concern' on your part. Why so personal? If you were so sure that it is all a fake then this kind of attempt would not be necessary because the counter claims would be strong enough to stand on their own. What you actually have is clear; the fakes aren't as good, complex, tested or as believable as the originals. That is the sounds and photos. If you really look at the fakes you refer to you can see that to replicate anything even close to Billy's evidence takes money, time and a lot of help and even then they only come close, not equalling, the originals when it comes to being tested as Billy's photos and sounds have been. Not that that should sway you but it's the fact that even when presented with these efforts from people who spent thousands of pounds and hundreds of hours on producing the fakes to undermine Billy's evidence, they cannot produce anything as close to what a one-armed man living on a self-sufficient farm on a disability pension can produce. It is also noteworthy that no witness has ever come forward to say, "Yes I was there, I helped Billy make these faked pictures" after 30 years. If greed is the reason for all this then you can bet that someone would sooner or later become disgruntled at not getting enough for their part in all the fakery and reveal all but this has not happened. Also, if you're going to undermine Billy's evidence, where's the fake 8mm footage, the fake metal sample, the fake witness accounts from Police officers (present at the recordings) and others and the fake predictions and prophecies? I mean if you're going to claim its all fake then at least go all the way. The simple truth is that even with the best efforts of discrediting types they can only recreate fake looking and sounding evidence which can be discounted time and time again. They also seem to focus in on things that just aren't provable or scientific.
Take your Sonograms. You boast repeatedly about how close your sound is and that it is undeniable and yet dismiss what is in front of your very eyes: your sonogram looks flat and mechanical and does not stop or pause. Billy's sonogram looks VERY different. Even with this evidence before you, you ignore it and concentrate on the overall sound which as I have said is nothing more than an imitation. Why? You dismiss the fact that your sonogram looks nothing like Billy's or that the faked photos look fake and don't stand up to analysis (size of objects can be determined through pixellation counts, spectrum analysis, etc) or that the WC UFO in Billy's photo is behind the car or that the witnesses are credible. The doubter also dismisses evidence right before their eyes because it is easier and more convenient to do so than dealing with the fact that the case is real and is the most important UFO case in history. On a basic rational level you should ask yourself this: How was the electricity generated to make a noise that could be heard miles away? Where were the speakers that independent witnessess could not find? So all the witnesses are liars then? Including Police officers, independent witnesses and locals who have nothing to gain by signing their witness accounts in affidavits?
However, if you do more research into Michael Horn's and FIGU's responses to these claims of fakery, which would take more time than one simple read of a website, you will see that none of the counter claims stand up to scrutiny. Billy's material does. It basically ends up in a situation where its one word against anothers. In a court of law situation you are then left to look at the characters of the people involved. Karl Korff has been trying to character assassinate Billy and FIGU for years for what ends? He simply ignores the facts. Billy on the other hand has not been made rich by all of this and is bringing a message of peace and hope to everyone despite threats on his life, illness and the constant accusations of him being a fraud.
As for the photos, I have read claims by Karl Korff before and there have been claims and counter claims going on for years. What he is providing is not proveable evidence that the photos were faked but that he is unreasonable. When you look at the man's character, he is an angry and confused man. Please remember to stay scientific in all this. The evidence pushes you to ask questions and that is good but don't take a position just because you may be wrong. That is how delusional people become fanatical. Billy has had people visiting him for years and testing out the evidence with noone but Korff coming back and saying Billy and his followers are all liars, without evidence. Korff even visited the centre and found no evidence to support his claims that Billy's evidence is fake. Billy's character and that of the witnesses have never been refuted. He has even taken lie detector tests and passed them. Also, noone has been able to recreate any metal samples or 8mm footage close to Billy's. I admit that with loads of time and money you can get some close results but why can't the doubters ever get it spot on or realise that Billy just does not have access to those kinds of resources? They have the luxury of time and money to do it! If Billy was setting up similar fakes someone would have noticed. I've been to Switzerland and you can't do anything on someone else's land without them noticing. That would be a good question to ask Phil Langdon. How many times did someone ask you what you were doing whilst making these fakes?
No equipment other than the equipment that was stated was used has been found on the farm.
Here's a link about Phil Langdon and Michael Horn's response which contains further information sources:
http://forum.figu.org/us/messages/863/11289.html#POST51040
Do the research. Don't just look at a few web pages and say, "There... I am now satisfied that the case its all wrapped up and a fake" just because that's the position you jumped on. Check out all the stuff on Karl Korff and Phil Langdon and you will see that there are massive gaping holes to their argument.
I'm sorry Dan but I just don't agree that your sound is anything like the original. Rory Bremner can do a pretty decent Tony Blair but it doesn't make him Tony Blair so don't jump to conclusions before researching it all out. I know it all seems unbelievable at first and so that is a convenient postion to jump on (avoids embarrassment) but the rational person will look at all the evidence before passing judgment. So be open minded enough to follow this thing through if you can.
All the best,
matt
Salome,
Matt |
Michael_horn
Member
Post Number: 315
Registered: 07-2009
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 11, 2010 - 09:23 am: |
|
Matt, Good response. I'll add a little more ammo.
I have corresponded with Phil Langdon in a polite and friendly way and I respected his efforts because he at least went as far as humanly possible to try to duplicate Meier's evidence. Below is an excerpt of an email he sent me recently, followed by a response from me. I had told him that I was including FIGU (Christian Frehner) in my response to him and I think it's fine to share this on the forum.
I include it because I think it shows his honesty, as well as my own observation of some obvious points. It should also be mentioned that any photos by Phil or anyone else would not reveal the same characteristics under examination and analysis as Meier's did. The Photo Analysis and Sound Analysis documents are freely available at my site as well.
PL: You certainly have respected my efforts and I commend you for the honesty. There is no more to go up so what you see is it really. I could do a version of the pendlum film with the attachment to the side of the model but I'm kinda tired of it all. Out of all I've produced the pendulum film was the hardest thing by far even though it looks like it should be easy. In fact the opening sequence of it is the least like Meier's of all the films I've made. Your critique is right on. The specific movements, I mean the details at the beginning of the film, are not the same. I tried for a while to try and get those movements with the attachment at the top of the model but could not. Likewise the speed changes during the film are impossible to recreate by attaching to the top of the model because you get jerking everytime.
I'll try it once with the side attachment in the near future but if that doesn't work then I have to hand it to Billy I'm afraid. I'll show you the result first and if it's no good then the points go to Billy. It cannot be generalised as it has been in public before. I mean people have said "well it looks like a simple pendulum thing going on there" but it's not that simple. It is only when you do these things for yourself that you realise what it takes and whether something really is impossible to recreate. I don't think it would be impossible but it certainly is much more difficult than people have suggested over the years. Of course these are the people that never tried it. As I understand it that's the first film Billy made? If that's the case then I'm very impressed!
MH: I actually want to say a good bit about the Meier films, now that you've mentioned the tree-circling one. Yes, that was the first one Meier did and it was filmed on a cold, snowy and rainy day. That isn't insignificant because of the obvious additional degrees of difficulty that working in the wet and cold for a one-armed man would pose, especially if he was to try to pull off a "hoax" with the actual complexity in the movements that you do acknowledge. The behavior of, and ability to control, a model under altered weather conditions such as those present would also add to the difficulties.
But there is another overriding element that one should consider, i.e. that we would have to believe that Meier, with no known experience, was doing all sorts of serious planning and calculating on how to create visual effects that were very sophisticated for the time and circumstances (even without the weather challenges thrown in). Indeed, you yourself spent some time "figuring out" not only how to make your models but also how to create the various scenes with rigging, etc., and in the execution of the films themselves. That would have been far more likely - especially for those times - for people who were using better technology and/or who had a far more sophisticated knowledge, even mastery of photography, filmmaking, etc. Remember, a leading special effects expert of the time, as well as various other experts, were definitely impressed with Meier's evidence. And of course we're not even yet discussing the abundance of corroborated scientific evidence in the case (which is really an even higher standard of proof, in my opinion).
The likelihood is very small that a man who was at the time basically a farmer, full-time father and husband, trying to build a home, going on (witnessed) contacts, transcribing the reports, etc., suddenly develops the interest - and ability - to make pretty seamless UFO models, photos and films. Logically, that is also a huge risk for someone who would want to claim contact with extraterrestrials; any obviously hoaxed evidence ends his efforts right there. While people claimed that Meier must have hoaxed his evidence, obviously they never proved it and you came along, over three decades later, to make the best effort to duplicate it.
I'll also point out that when you look at some of Meier's WCUFO and tree photos, a careful examination shows a significant size difference between the craft and the tree branches. Now if Meier had indeed made a model, for which there's no evidence, we'd have to believe that he went about calculating what the size relationship between the branches of the tree and his model would have to be in order for the craft to appear to be a large size. In addition to the complexity of such hypothetical machinations, the actual known realities and demands on Meier and his time, credible witnesses, the known lack of resources, etc., absolutely negate such possibilities for him. My essential point is that, as you have shown, one can make a very good facsimile of an object and mock up a very good presentation of it. That in itself does not mean that is how the actual photos, films, video, etc., came into being.
To be even more specific, think of model railroads, airplanes or even excellent reproductions of everything from buildings to towns, by model makers for films. While they can make visually nearly identical versions of objects and entire scenes, they are not the same objects and not necessarily even made of the same materials as the ones they are modeled after. This takes nothing at all away from their work and, as I emphasize in your case, one must really give credit to great workmanship. And the more actual effort that one has put into the recreation, the more one must consider the originals in terms of the quantity and quality of perfect (in terms of not being obviously flawed) clear, consistent evidence that was produced at the time. |
Sitkaa
Member
Post Number: 337
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 13, 2010 - 08:16 pm: |
|
My confession:
I was talking with a rather uninformed friend this morning, and in the course of trying to explain the origin of a particular observation, I wanted to refer to the Plejaren understanding of things. In so doing I consciously (if quickly) decided that the best way to refer to them was by couching the expressable idea in terms of belief.
I said, "You know I believe in aliens, right? Well, [here is where this idea originated]."
I could have said that the idea originated from aliens whom I have determined probably exist, or something else more concrete, but instead I consciously decided to refer to the Plejaren in terms of belief, simply because I figured that religious belief was something this person would relate to. I figured that she would NOT understand something more concrete. It saddens me to have had to do this.
Again, let me point a link to someone who experienced an NDE beyond religion,and yet fell back into religious fervor in order to express what the insights they gained from the experience. It is a both a cute music video and a beautiful expression of life.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgBr1pt9r44
But having to explain things so simply, so remedially, engenders a loneliness in me. And this, is my confession.
Love is always the way
|
Eddieamartin
New member
Post Number: 3
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Sunday, August 15, 2010 - 10:34 pm: |
|
I have had great success with the few individuals that I have shared some intriguing information with.
Considering the magnitude of this,
I focus on honestly asking;
..."have you heard about the Billy Meiers investigation?"
I simply tell them about my
"impressions
on the 'nature' of the evidence
and most importantly
the results of the analyzes
and the technology that was used."
When they ask me "well, what is it?"
I say "oh, you need to see the investigative documentary." "I can't do it any justice, you need to see this with your own eyes."
Then I proceed to either play it on my computer or email the link to them.
In my humble opinion,
we should refrain from saying too much
and we should consider not saying anything at all.
Eddie  |
Eddieamartin
New member
Post Number: 4
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Monday, August 16, 2010 - 08:28 pm: |
|
EXPERIENCES.
I'm finding myself sharing the Billy Meier story with people I feel a calm impulse to tell. The interesting thing is, that I'm realizing that there has been a mysterious common thread between them.
I have noticed that their experiences have triggered memories or light-bulbs both in me and anyone I repeat the conversations to. For example, my cousin who is a priest. Relating my experiences caused him to remember one of his experiences in Greece with a friend. When I related that story to another friend, she remembers an experience very similar to his. In relating one of my experiences the other day with an old friend, he relates an experience he had, which he never told me. When I relate his story to the others, they recollect that there was another experience it reminds them of. You need to see the calm excitement (light-bulb) that starts to over take them and they seem to be getting more and more receptive. At a certain point I can say something like "you know, 'if' Billy Meier really is..." -they immediately go into "well it has to be real because..." and we are a different person; on many levels.
I'm finding that as I'm sharing this with people, as I relate other people's experiences, somehow, those experiences stir up memories of their experiences. You can literally see the light bulbs turn on.
I give very little, if anything, in regards to details of any kind. I get them excited and intrigued and then they want to view the contact documentary. I have found this approach to be very effective. I think I'm beginning to understand what the Plejarens meant.
I start everyone with the "CONTACT: Extraterrestrial Experiences of Billy Meier (1of10).
Eddie |
Phi_spiral
Member
Post Number: 535
Registered: 03-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 06:29 am: |
|
Hi Eddie
I must say your sharing approach sounds very healthy in its' non-threatening simplicity. This, I think, embodies the expression, "Silent Revolution of Truth."
Welcome to the FIGU forum.
Regards
Bob |
Eddieamartin
Member
Post Number: 5
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 04:19 pm: |
|
Thank you Bob,
For welcoming me; it is a pleasure and an honor to be amongst like-minded individuals.
Not to mention the incredible amount of knowledge and everyone's enthusiastic endeavors to share.
With deep respects,
Eddie |
Ramirez
Member
Post Number: 503
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 11:04 pm: |
|
Greetings Eddie.
Cheers.
|
Eddieamartin
Member
Post Number: 6
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 11:34 pm: |
|
Hello Ramires(!)
Thank you for the greeting, I really appreciate it.
I see your smiley has had some light-bulbs himself!
I'm impressed.
Best regards,
Eddie |
Ramirez
Member
Post Number: 504
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 07:49 am: |
|
Hi Eddie,
Your welcome .... another illuminated smiley 
This place can be like finding the cosmic candy store .... lot's of reading, research, sharing and potential for finding those elusive personal jigsaw puzzle pieces lies ahead.
After a while the initial excitement starts to wear off but never a sense of amazement & appreciation for the opportunity to discover the real stuff.
Cheers.
|
Eddieamartin
Member
Post Number: 7
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 04:14 pm: |
|
> > > > Ramires, thank you for sharing that bit of encouragement. I can feel you > are genuine and the fact that you have gone through the trouble of replyi= ng > to me and sharing some thoughtful insight, intent on being an encourageme= nt, > to keep seeking knowledge speaks volumes of you. I can say the same for B= ob > whom also had replied. Be assured that every day I am filled with the > intrigue and the curiosity of an eager child as I learn from the contact > notes and the forum. Thank you for going through the trouble, and for th= e > encouragement as well as the inspiration, to continue to seek > With kind regards, Eddie. >
> > |
Indi
Moderator
Post Number: 530
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 06:11 pm: |
|
Back to the topic please! |
Eddieamartin
Member
Post Number: 9
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 06:57 pm: |
|
Indi, please forgive me.
 I now know replies to the emails
get posted. Thank you.
Respectfully, Eddie.
In my recent experiences in sharing,
the following has come to be confirmed:
*Allow something else or someone else
to "do the talking" for me
and the importance to wisely consider
that infants need milk
and babies are fed baby-food.
And in as much as we can not hold a conversation with them
we should refrain from saying too much
and consider not saying anything at all.
Let them see it with their own eyes.
Kind regards,
Eddie |
Eddieamartin
Member
Post Number: 15
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 25, 2010 - 02:30 pm: |
|
EXPERIENCES:
NOTE: It is important to remember that failure on our part
to listen to, pay attention to and consider a person's deeply rooted belief programming
will result in failure.
For we ourselves will be in the dark
as to how to use the knowledge they posses
to steer and guide them through the dark fog
with the "iron rod."
"IF" -a powerful word.
An interesting progression and development and my confirmation of using the 'tools' we have.
After viewing the links I sent a friend,
a few days later he calls me and asked the following;
"So are they saying there is no God?"
Ah(!) Here is our dilemma
Deep within the voice I found wherein lies his frustrations.
The resistance that we feel from those we share this information with,
is actually the 'pains' (as explained by Quetzal) that we as the highest evolved species here must 'feel.'
Perhaps this pain is part of the initial means whereby we evolve consciously.
How we 'handle' things are exemplified by Sfath.
Before going into that, I found the following important to consider when 'stimulating' a person's consciousness:
Contact Report 1 Translation
21. In reality we are human beings just like the earth humans but our knowledge and wisdom are far superior than theirs, also in technical respects.
40. An additional task is aimed at the sects and religions, along with the related underdevelopment of the human consciousness.
41. Above everything there remains but one that possesses the power of life and death over all creatures.
42. It is Creation alone, which has laid its laws over everything; Laws that are irrefutable and have eternal validity.
43. Man is able to identify them in nature if he makes the effort.
44. They show him the way of life and the path to spiritual and consciousness-related (1) greatness, which embodies the goal of life.
(1) Development of all aspects related to the consciousness.
45. When Man indulges in his religions, i.e. malevolent, erroneous doctrines, his consciousness wastes away more and more and ultimately leads to a bottomless abyss.
46. Man may recognize that a god can never assume the role of Creation or decide over Man's destiny.
47. A god is only a governor as well as a human being who powerfully or dictatorially reigns over his fellowmen.
48. God is not Creation but only one of its creatures, like all creatures who are dependent upon Creation.
49. But Man follows his erroneous religious beliefs and claims that God is Creation itself.
50. He goes even further and claims that a normal human being by the name of Jmmanuel, who has also been called Jesus Christ through conscious error, is God's son and Creation itself.
51. There are various New Age sectarians who go further still and assert things that approach delusion.
Keeping the above in mind, I have found much success in
'taking the weight off Billy' and putting it on the 'claims'
that 'these extraterrestrials' have made.
Subconsciously, I've found, this makes a person shift their focus on the message and not the messenger.
Afterward, they seem more receptive to Billy and can accept him as 'our own' and that he is no threat to 'what defines us.'
I believe Sfath explains this best.
Sfath's Explanation Translation
34. Yet also, for them, be only like a mirror that they look into, and can only see you, yourself, and indeed just as you are and as you present yourself to them, so that they see that you are also only a human the same as them and not a higher being placed above them who only looks down on them.
35. But, in spite of that, be like a fire, and do not stay too far away from them with the warmth of your love, so that they can come to you at any time and feel your warmth, security and love as well as your peace, your freedom, poise and harmony. 36. But do not get too close to them with your knowledge and with your wisdom and with all your powers, so that they do not burn themselves.
The key word that 'eases the pain' is "IF"
-very powerful word; I've found it demands thought, evaluation and follows with cognition.
I said to him;
So far, this is what I have learned. These extraterrestrials had explained that the religions of this world.... you know the rest.
I continue with;
I then tell him that I happened, in my personal research, to come across a gentleman who made some intriguing discoveries on his own that shed much light on this topic and then I send them the link. YouTube the following;
Michael Tsarion - Future of Mankind (1 of 19)
I told him to view it later as it is a three hour long presentation.
To my friend I then say:
"IF" these extraterrestrials have indeed visited this planet
and "IF" they indeed have revealed information which they claim,
should we rise above and become cognitive with,
that we will find ourselves endowed with some rather amazing cognition
of which in our present state, we would never find.
Imagine "IF" this were actually true?
Tell me; "IF" this were to be true,
what does this impress upon you?
I continued with;
For example, they claim that we as humans, which they themselves claim they are,
can attain specific levels of conscious development
that further proves what quantum physicists have known about for many years now.
I tell about Dr. Emoto's work with projected
thoughts and their effects on water molecules.
(See "What The Bleep Do They Know...").
I tell him that this is a very minor example,
and, that what they claim for us is amazing. But we can go over that later.
I continued with;
More importantly, I found the words from one of the extraterrestrials
to be very convincing towards being honest by nature,
very 'wisdom-exhibiting', thought provoking
and startling to say the least.
He of course, wants to know what Sfath said. ...
I then send links of Sfath's first visit and teachings with Billy. Asket's explanations and then Semjase's explanations
and tell him we can discuss it after he has digested that information.
Please share your experiences,
what you learned works and perhaps any "lessons learned-wisdom earned"
that we would all benefit from; thank you.
Salome,
Eddie |
Dan_c
Member
Post Number: 7
Registered: 02-2010
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 05, 2010 - 08:04 pm: |
|
Well I don't know where to bring this up, but I can't imagine that this case would be any easier to share with my friends if Wendelle Stevens had not directed the research in the way he did.
I just want to take the opportunity SOMEHOW since there seems to be very little opportunity on this forum to say it, Rest In Peace and THANK YOU SO MUCH Wendelle for doing such an amazing job!
A lump formed in my throat when I heard he'd passed away. You will always be a hero of mine.
With sincerest regards,
Love always,
Your friend and fellow student of the universe, Daniel |
Apasid
New member
Post Number: 1
Registered: 07-2010
| | Posted on Friday, October 08, 2010 - 02:14 pm: |
|
I'm new here and have been waiting to join for awhile, it seems that my actions and time have allowed a window to open up for me to do so, thank The Creation!
I'll share a little about my experience introducing information about Billy, The Mission, FIGU, The Goblet of Truth, The Silent Revolution of Truth, among other items, to my family, friends and others. When I first discovered the "truth", the wealth of information I was seeking my whole life, I was immediately enamored by the substance and wanted to share it with the world and have them believe it no matter what.
I believe that first emotional reaction/instinct is unfortunately human and is hard to contain. Nevertheless, it is containable and wisdom kicked in (Truth comes via wisdom, not faith). I've been a firm believer that there is no blueprint for anyone or anything in life. Do the best you can with who you are, with who/what you know, with the best of intentions and be responsible for your actions instead of shifting responsibility onto someone or something else.
Not everything is going to fit for everyone so take what you need/want and leave the rest. Some were captivated by the information I had to share and delved deeper than their comfort zone normally allows, and some turned a blind eye which further proves my point, let people make their own decisions, allow them to discover the truth for themselves and simply be a spectator if graciously allowed to audit their journey.
One Love to all and to all, One Love!
Salome,
Charlie |
Eddieamartin
Member
Post Number: 241
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 05, 2011 - 06:03 pm: |
|
Perhaps this is the best place for my post of gratitude.
Throughout my life, spirituality has always been naturally important to me. Since I can remember, I have found myself discussing matters of spirituality with priests, bishops, rabbis and have had the opportunities to speak with heads of religious organizations. All in all, there were always stupors of thought, conflicting doctrines and such; not to mention teachings that often either didn't add up, contradicted themselves or just did not make sense, making my personal search for spiritual growth limited or encumbering.
I was wise enough to seek people with a sweet spirituality about them and I was never at a loss. Never the less, I take it very seriously and would ponder, study, analyze, evaluate and ultimately would put the doctrine to the test.
Upon discovering the TJ and the Goblet of Truth, I took steps to acquire these works for personal study. Reading them has caused a flood of mind opening experiences. Everything in the GoT resonates with clarity, sensibility and what I call "true spirituality." That's what was so interesting to me; something I could never find tangible in any of my previous studies and searches. I had to get a pack of multi-colored highliter pens for my studies.
I have put the teachings and principles to the daily test by adjusting my thoughts and way of living (conducting myself) accordingly; to my astonishment, I have never felt this sense of peaceful inner harmony (as I can best describe it). I have been so enriched that it would require a book to itemize it all. People I interact with seem more at ease and trusting and those who know me best have noticed my paradigm shift and it feels good all around. For the life of me, I cannot articulate the full scope of this phenomenon.
I have used the principles in the GoT and the TJ [mostly the GoT] to advise friends & martial arts students, acquaintances & strangers and my nephews and nieces. Their parents are now themselves coming to me for advice regarding all sorts of issues. I have been impressed on how the principles I have learned in the GoT have provided the answers they needed. I have applied them with how I address the Billy Meier debunkers on YouTube and have had success in getting them to consider what I say and even to take a different look at the Meier material; all because I applied the principles in my exchanges with them.
My own life has been transformed and I have a road map [it resembles a circuit board] that materialized in my mind during one of my studies. It has allowed me to structure my thoughts and goals, identify the requirements, time lines, resources required or research necessary to bring it into fruition. All my goals are being met. Obstacles, set-backs and murphy's law seem to enhance something I have studied and actually gives me better cognition or insight. I can make adjustments where necessary and can actually make projections of potentialities. I can also recognize (sense/perception) from statements, something I come across, etc and realize it/he/she is beneficial to my objectives.
I would like to express my gratitude to Scott and Robyn for their patience with me and doing their best to steer me in the right direction as I can recall posting things which had their religious influence; yet something they would reply with made me stop and think and would send me on a quest to find the answer. I would like to express my gratitude to Jacob for his generosity and willingness to share unselfishly; I should add that his posts have been of immense help to me in this time of my life. His posts have been especially helpful in some recent insights and cognitions regarding goal setting and accomplishments and such. To the forum, I can not fully list all that has enriched me. Because of a post, I have sought insights which have enriched me.
Last but not least, to Billy and the efforts and work of all those at FIGU. If not for the prophet and folks at FIGU going through the troubles to make these works available, I would not be in the positive and progressive state in which I presently find myself and am certain my life would be heading in a further downward spiral which stopped when I began to understand as I studied.
I would encourage everyone to earnestly study, search and ponder these incredible works, put them to the test by incorporating them into daily life; even if it is just to see what happens. None will be disappointed.
With profound gratitude to you all,
Eddie
[7:-)
|
|
