| Author | Message | ||
    Eddieamartin Member Post Number: 635 Registered: 08-2010 |
Andyv24 FIGU does not qualify as a cult. Please see definition of this word. The "scriptures" (as you put it) I quoted contain certain insights and wisdom, which if indeed were written by a person with the alleged spirit form of the alleged Nokodemion, then it will contain discernible evidence within the verses. Have another careful look and scrutinize what I quoted. No belief on my part. I have vigorously and thoroughly scrutinized the Goblet of the Truth and proven it by testing and applying its alleged wisdom with my own personal life and personal circumstances. Take care, Eddie | ||
Michael_horn Member Post Number: 936 Registered: 07-2009 |
> There's absolutely nothing wrong with being critical, skeptical and digging into the info and claims. If only logic did rule in this so-called investigation. But it doesn't. Let's take one item. I first read the "new" discovery that atom bomb testing was tied to ozone depletion in 1988 (http://theyfly.com/PDF/Horn_Proof.pdf). I'd already read it - in 1986 - in Meier's 1975 info. Since it was treated as a "new" discovery by science and the news media it seems clear to me that this info was provided to Meier well in advance of "official discovery". So now I'll wait for the "explanation" of why this isn't so. But people should be clear on what is really being asserted here by the skeptics. They're effectively stating that Meier falisfied ALL the contact reports and/or backdated information within them. They are effectively stating that ALL of Meier's CRs are fiction, concocted by him. THINK about it. Either Meier did or didn't have these conversations and record the information accurately (which doesn't mean that someone couldn't have later accidentally or purposely altered some things…but hardly all of them). It really is about that black and white. After all, if Meier actually had those conversations, are we to believe that - in addition to everything else he accomplished - he took the time, energy and intention to selelctively go through them and insert information that he then credits the Plejaren with providing him? Talk about a genius! He'd have to weave this information in and do it so well that the rest of the conversations not only didn't contradict it but in many case contiuned it…and sometimes were referred to and discussed in later contact conversations. And it would have to be - if we are to believe the skeptics - a real work of genius because he'd have to in some cases be slipping in information that of course was only "discovered" well after (years and decades) he'd already transcribed the conversations. And he'd somehow have had to hypnotize the Plejaren to go along with this deception, which is exactly what the skeptics are saying it is. As I said, as far as investigators go, these people are barely qualified. At no time up until the present have they ever responded to, or asked for clarification of, my pointing out that old "means, motive and opportunity" problem that haunts their fancy, sleight-of-hand charade. Now lest I be accused of being "negative", heaven forbid, let's have them address "means, motive and opportunity" and quite specifically the overall points raised above and even more specifically the atom bomb-ozone information...for starters. I will say it again,. When people have ZERO understanding of how real life, and real life investigation works, when they sit at their computers and "solve" such puzzles without really giving an ounce of actual thought to the matter, it's really comical to anyone who's had to seriously consider the factors at play. Make no mistake about it, they are asserting that Meier has hoaxed all of his contact information, which would require an effort so laborious, as well as brilliant, as to stagger the imagination. So let's see just how they…IMAGINE he did it . And let's finally have a discussion about real investigation and not just fancy, computer age sophistry. Means, motive and opportunity, please address it NOW , my skeptical friends. | ||
Michael_horn Member Post Number: 937 Registered: 07-2009 |
> P.S. Unfortunately, Andy is helping to make my point about the inadequacy of…THINKING. Regarding the films made about Meier, he didn't make them, initiate them, etc. And what other people initiate and do has nothing to do with his motives. He wasn't looking for a movie deal in 1948, 1951, 1958, etc., etc., etc. Also, you state, "Mahigitam has found evidence of slipping things into the writing after the fact, presumably, so as to appear that he was publishing specific details before their occurrence." Why did you not say, "evidence of his slipping things in"? After all, isn't that what he and you are implying…without providing any substantiation for it? | ||
Mahigitam Member Post Number: 578 Registered: 02-2009 |
"And since the internet didn't exist, I couldn't go and search out further - or previously published - information. Obviously, to anyone with half a brain, neither could Meier." The following link clearly refutes your assertion: http://www.billymeieruforesearch.com/prophecies-predictions-probability-calculations/#Meier_has_no_access_to_Scientific_Information "Let's take one item. I first read the "new" discovery that atom bomb testing was tied to ozone depletion in 1988 (http://theyfly.com/PDF/Horn_Proof.pdf). I'd already read it - in 1986 - in Meier's 1975 info. Since it was treated as a "new" discovery by science and the news media it seems clear to me that this info was provided to Meier well in advance of "official discovery". So now I'll wait for the "explanation" of why this isn't so." You have already seen the counter-arguments to it published by Ike here: http://billymeierufocase.com/ike42.html#15 and also from my site here: http://www.billymeieruforesearch.com/prophecies-predictions-probability-calculations/analysis-of-contact-reports-1-100/#Atom_Bomb_CFCs_Bromine_Ozone_Hole What are your objections to the above links ? And the simple reason why the popular news articles are not reliable is clearly explained here with an example, which you were also made aware many times by Stuart Robbins: http://pseudoastro.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/how-astronomers-are-according-to-popular-press-constantly-discovering-the-same-thing/ "But people should be clear on what is really being asserted here by the skeptics. They're effectively stating that Meier falisfied ALL the contact reports and/or backdated information within them. They are effectively stating that ALL of Meier's CRs are fiction, concocted by him." Nope. We are just arguing that the material which is being treated as "strong evidence" of the case & also being promoted as "IRON CLAD" does not meet the scientific criteria. "And it would have to be - if we are to believe the skeptics - a real work of genius because he'd have to in some cases be slipping in information that of course was only "discovered" well after (years and decades) he'd already transcribed the conversations." Can you provide any examples ? Re. "means, motive and opportunity". Just because we cannot show with clear evidence for any "terrestrial"-hypotheses, it doesn't automatically mean that every claim made by Meier is true. Everything should be based on evidence, just evidence alone. Let us first focus on individual pieces of evidence and when everything is over, we can discuss on the possible BIG picture hypotheses. www.ufoprophet.blogspot.in "..covers the media archives from 1970's about the most controversial Swiss UFO Contactee - 'Billy' Eduard Albert Meier." | ||
Vincent Member Post Number: 212 Registered: 06-2013 |
"Eddiemartin, You do nothing to dispel the myth that FIGU is a cult --quite the opposite-- when you quote "scripture" in defense of your belief." Hi Andy, I see nothing wrong with Eddie (or anyone) always quoting things from the GOT or any of Billy's books. I'm actually glad he does that. | ||
Simon_cg New member Post Number: 3 Registered: 03-2011 |
Is this the same Mahigitam that shows up in the credits of 'As the time fulfills' and on several pages on TheyFly and even gets called the 'ever resourceful Mahigitam' on TheyFlyblog? Curious that when Mahigitam finds more evidence and finds out his previous conclusions were wrong or unsupported he suddenly degrades to a 'barely qualified armchair investigator'. And what about Rhal Zahi and Chris Lock, do they travel to Switserland all the time to interview Meier and the core group members and look around at the real locations? Aren't they also armchair investigators? Yet, their work is gladly promoted by MH, as was Mahigitam's work when it still served his case. Could it be more obvious that MH simply promotes everything that is pro and bashes everyone and everything that even dares to suggest some of his claims are invalid or unsupported, regardless of any arguments and evidence at all? | ||
Historeed Member Post Number: 28 Registered: 09-2008 |
Simon_cg, I'm not saying there should be a forgone conclusion in the Meier investigation, but Mahigitam clearly states he wanted the material to "study & share", not to critique and debunk. In my opinion, Mahigitam has every right to critique and debunk, but not to pilfer other peoples Meier material on false pretenses. It shows a lack of honesty and undermines Mahigitam motives of investigation. Matthew Reed | ||
Earthling Member Post Number: 887 Registered: 05-2008 |
I'll join the fray-fun here. First of all, from what I know, Billy has never been permitted to release events cited in the contact reports before they happened, so there is nothing new there. There were a few instances of info leaking out before the events happened, as cited by Wendelle Stevens, which Mahesh has not yet gone into but which was addressed decades ago through investigations of Lee Elders & co. Mahesh has found evidence of the altering of words or sentences from initial release to align them with facts coming out over time. He has also found out, for ex, that the Soyuz docking pictures, purported as photos Billy took in his space journey, were not taken in outer space and he brought that to the attention of FIGU after they instituted a policy of no longer dealing with defending material UFO-related evidence, as so much of it had been falsified over the years and in order to focus on the sole task of the mission to bring the true spiritual teaching to the earth human, in order that they shall finally create for themselves, in complete self-responsibleness, on such a lovely planet, peace, harmony, happiness, equality, freedom, joy, truth, knowledge, love, wisdom, etc. I'm all for Mahesh digging into everything in an unbiased manner if that's what he wants to do with his time. Nothing he has uncovered as yet has altered my opinion one iota of the veracity of the case and the importance and truth and raison d'etre of the overall mission. We all know that there is much material evidence that has long ago been verified but means nothing to the know-better-than-all know-it-alls. As well as more recent material evidence proofs done by Zahi & Lock, for example. http://beam2eng.blogspot.com/ Bruce | ||
Historeed Member Post Number: 29 Registered: 09-2008 |
Andyv24, You think quoting information that is logical, coherent and wise smacks of a cult? Why? Matthew Reed | ||
Melissa Member Post Number: 131 Registered: 01-2012 |
When I started reading from Mahigitam's blog, I noticed his disclaimer. Disclaimer The purpose of this blog is not to take a pro or con stance on the case but just to archive all the pro and con material that has been published in the media since 1970's. Occasionally, I present some of the current research that has been done either by me alone or with the help of others. This disclaimer shows no bias, but rather just information, which causes me to think of Mahigitam coming from a neutral place. Which is awesome to do. In fact, Billy suggests it. Please read below for more of what Billy says about this. The nature of his teaching is based on the principle of self-knowledge, one's own search and research and their own intellectual work of the human being. and said with 'Billy's' words: “The human’s Will is his kingdom!” He also teaches that a human should never just believe something, but must seek the truth within themselves. Likewise also in regard to him no one simply believe a little, but to clarify all applicable facts thoroughly, and through reason, common sense and logic, for through their own reflection, through their own deliberations, findings and through their own internal and external experiences, their own experiences and through the council of conclusions find the of effective truth within themselves. • http://www.figu.org/ch/verein/wir-ueber-uns/die-stellung-billys-im-verein/artikel-1 To put Billy Meier on a pedestal of adoration demanding the sublimity he deserves, in every way and in every manner contradicts his own teaching. A teaching which speaks of reverence, charity, humanity and respect for all life forms, absolute equivalence of all creatures in this universe, this planet and the whole of Creation. • http://www.figu.org/ch/verein/wir-ueber-uns/ueber-billy-meier/weder-guru-noch-meister People should neither believe in a prophet’s or any other person’s words, and also not look upon them (the words) as a probability. The correct way is learn the truth from reality. There is only one form or kind of truth: reality! And of course each human being must find the truth him- or herself. There are not different forms of truth, as is erroneously assumed, because truth results from reality. • http://forum.figu.org/us/messages/12/12390.html Since each human being is different from one another regarding progress and evolution etc., there are differences regarding what will be the next step to learn. Depending on what a human being is thinking and feeling, and bearing responsibility, depending on the motives and motivation etc., different paths and steps etc. are taken. • http://forum.figu.org/us/messages/12/12390.html You don't learn real things by believing. • http://forum.figu.org/cgi-bin/us/discus.cgi?pg=prev&topic=12&page=12258 In my opinion, it is important to look at the positive as well as the negative, or else you will be unable to fully recognize and understand the truth. Billy teaches us this. -Melissa | ||
Simon_cg New member Post Number: 4 Registered: 03-2011 |
@Historeed What do you think Mahesh' motive is? What would be a wrong motive of investigation is to distort, make up, or cover up evidence in order to make it support a preconceived conclusion. The only right motive of an investigation is figuring out the truth about the subject of investigation, whatever that truth is. Do you think Mahesh has any other motive then this? If so, then you should be able to show where his investigation, conclusions etc. are wrong and why. If the evidence shows some piece of information from the Meier case is wrong, a photo is fake, or there is no evidence to support something (not everything that is true can be supported by evidence), what is wrong with saying that? Do you need a motive to critique and debunk, rather then a motive to find out the truth, to state that something is evidently wrong or unsupported by evidence? | ||
Eddieamartin Member Post Number: 636 Registered: 08-2010 |
Unfortunately, Mahesh himself is responsible for being suspect of ulterior motives and hidden agenda. On Facebook, in both the pro-fugu groups and the one he started, in which he did not allow Michael Horn to be a part of, he always started his posts with an attack on Michael Horn (there was nothing neutral about his posts). Myself and others brought this approach of his to his attention and his responses were vague and avoiding. In the Might of the Thoughts page 84 it states: They [emotions] are in no kind and wise based upon feelings, rather solely on internal or environmentally-conditioned external perceptions of situations, events, experiences and impressions, pertaining to the body or the consciousness. So Mahesh is now the recipient of the law of causality. Yes, there is reason to suspect him and he has caused these emotional-thoughts of distrust in others...himself. First Mahesh needs to work on himself, check and correct his methodology and approach, apply transparency and demonstrate good will and intent. Then it won't matter if he thinks the case is a hoax or simply presenting all that is relevant to the case in negative/positive form. Salome, Eddie | ||
Scott Moderator Post Number: 2505 Registered: 12-1999 |
This thread is not about Mahesh or anyone else. Lets keep that clear. | ||
Michael_horn Member Post Number: 938 Registered: 07-2009 |
> Mahigitam is very used to avoiding answering questions directly, as he reserves his still evasive comment about means, motive and opportunity for the end of his message. Since he is obviously unfamiliar with the huge importance of these elements in investigation, he instead throws his challenges and claims that my my use of ironclad is incorrect. It seems that the skeptics have focused on my often used, attention getting statement of Meier's information being "prophetically accurate". So let's simplify the matter and come back to my own example regarding the A-bomb and ozone damage. Because the skeptics are living in a bubble where they choose to not address just HOW Meier knew and published that information in 1975, they focus on pointing out that other people had some knowledge of it before. Their issue, obviously, should be with the scientists and news media who - so stupidly - called it "new" information! Of course they still neglect to really think about what THEY themselves are claiming. And it is exactly as I said. They are claiming that Meier lied, falsified, hoaxed - call it what you will - all of his CRs. Since we have listed dozens, into the hundreds of specific examples information Meier published, certainly before it was available on the internet, they set up a situation in which - if they were real credible investigators - they'd have to show that Meier indeed did obtain that information elsewhere…and then fabricated his "alleged" conversations around it. That's an inescapable demand if they are real investigators and not simply skeptics. It's beyond amateurish to say it doesn't matter. As I said before, it's now time that they address means, motive and opportunity. Because the simple FACT is that if they can't, then at the very least they are faced with the realization that Meier got the information the way he said he did. (Isn't it funny that the skeptics never say that THEY knew this information before Meier puvlished it?) Since this is for them all about whether the case is true or not, such a very mundane process - which requires real thinking and not "he COULD have gotten it this way" - would QUICKLY resolve this entire matter. So the question becomes do they WANT to resolve it or is this really just for show intentionally..or simply because they inept and amateurish in their approach? One more time…means, motive and opportunity. | ||
Historeed Member Post Number: 30 Registered: 09-2008 |
Simon_cg, Are you involved in the Meier investigation with Mahesh? Just curious... Matthew Reed | ||
Michael_horn Member Post Number: 939 Registered: 07-2009 |
Simon helps make my points. When people went online, like Mahesh, they found what was the most currently available information. When documents were LATER posted showing that someone had this or that theory, or even a specific piece of information that was the same as Meier's, it simply PROVED that Meier didn't have access to it - unless they can prove otherwise. As for Prof. Zahi and Chris Lock, Simon demonstrates that he certainly doesn't understand the distinction between EVERYONE being able to test a piece of evidence and even prove it to themselves: http://theyflyblog.com/2014/06/15/billy-meier-ufo-case-prove/ …and people going to do real investigative work as part of a comprehensive, complex process of investigation and determination of the facts from all the evidence. This where things like, oh, means, motive and opportunity figure into the equation. And as Corey mentioned, there are over 100 witnesses - of which I am one myself, as well as being the recipient of specific PROPHETICALLY ACCURATE information from the Plejaren that prevented Meier and me from falling into a nasty trap. Pardon me if I don't have much respect for this charade of an "investigation" by a couple of people who trivialize the very elements that have made the difference, not only for people's reputations, but also for people's LIVES. If they stubbornly insist on refusing to deal with real, respected investigative procedures then the likelihood that this is motivated by something other than the search for the truth becomes inescapably obvious. (Message edited by scott on December 19, 2014) | ||
Simon_cg Member Post Number: 5 Registered: 03-2011 |
@Historeed: "This thread is not about Mahesh or anyone else. Lets keep that clear." Guess it's not about me either... So do you think Mahesh' investigation is flawed on specific points or not? If not I don't understand your objection about his motive. If you exclude the possibility of critique then there's no point in researching something like the Meier case. You might just as well take it all as gospel. | ||
Michael_horn Member Post Number: 940 Registered: 07-2009 |
One possible line of questioning goes like this: A: Why do you think that Billy Meier falsified his information pertaining to damage to the ozone layer, etc.? B: Because I just found out that there were articles written about similar information four to five months before Meier published his information. A: Was it published on the internet then? B: There was no internet then. A: Did you find that information when MH first made those claims, based on the Contact Reports? B: No, as I said, I just found it. A: You hadn't seen or found it before? B: No. A: How did Meier get that information if not from the people he said gave it to him? B: He probably read it in the newspapers or magaizines, etc. A: Have you established that the information was translated into English, published and made available in Switzerland and that Meier obtained it that way? B: No, but he could have… A: Did you ever obtain that information yourself in newspapers or magazines in English at the time it was published, or anytime up until just recently? B: No, but I wasn't looking for it. A: And why would Meier have been looking for it? B: So he could make claims of contact with extraterrestrials. A: Are you aware of his claims - and his earliest UFO photographs - being published in 1964 in a country called...India? B: Yes. A: Are you aware of all of his other physical evidence that has been formerly and recently analyzed and authenticated by experts? B: Yes. A: Have you seen any credible, substantiated refutation of those analyses? B: No. A: Are you aware of the facts about his living conditions, resources, finances, associates, technology, eyewitnesses, etc., established during the time of the investigation by the professional investigative team, by Gary Kinder and subsequently by Michael Hesemann, Michael Horn and others? B: Yes. A: Was there anything in those investigations that revealed, or led you to believe, that Meier was a hoaxer, liar, etc.? B: No. A: So why would he need to make up stories about extraterrestrials giving him at least dozens of specific examples of accurate scientific information, in a wide variety of fields, and thereby risk the credibility that his other evidence has apparently satisfied for you? B: I don't know. A: Have you found any of the information he published to be inaccurate, so far as you can prove it? B: No, but it appears that somethings may have been added later. A: By whom? B: I don't know. A: So can you show that he had - and exercised - the actual means, motive and opportunity to obtain from strictly terrestrial sources not only the specific information under discussion, but all of the information that is now being called into question, and to then not only insert it into hundreds of Contact Reports, but to actually often make it the focus of discussion in those reports, which by definition then would reveal the case to be a hoax? B: I… | ||
Tat_tvam_asi Member Post Number: 153 Registered: 04-2011 |
I have now read a little more of M.’s many articles. Va bene, some differences in Asket’s predictions seem to be not right: -Violent war between Israel and Arabian countries at the end of the year 1976 -Prediction of the most violent earthquake for 900 years (part prediction – part prophecy) But for me these mistakes are actually proof that Billy wrote down what he was told before the event: If he was waiting for the event / information and then writing it down (as M. claims) this wrong information would not be in his contact notes. And yes, maybe there were some “discoveries” that were already discovered. But to me it does not matter much to find that in some instances the information was already known to others but Billy – being a normal human that does not know everything – assumed that it was not known and noted it down as new. Sample: Information about Jupiter There is no way that I would distrust W. Steven’s report that he received the sheets on 9 March 1979. If the information was found in American science journals “during March 1979” – then all of these reports must have been in circulation before 9-3-1979 - they must have been sent to Switzerland before that date - Billy must have had immediate access to these journals -all reports must have been translated by “I do not know who” into German – and Billy (one hand) must have scribbled them down very fast, indeed. This scenario is very, very unlikely. Sample: Mt Chimborazo Ifthe Nexus magazine reports “Finally, proof has emerged that validates Eduard (Billy) Meier’s claim that he was contacted by extraterrestrials from the Pleiades in the 1970s!” – well, if I was MH or Billy I would put this as well in the bulletin. No – I would not check it again – I would simply find it encouraging to see that others found a way to accept what I said all along. And if it later is found that this was already known to a select few – I may mention it. But to inflate it as if a Devil wittingly disguised himself as a God (“Publishing such a pro-biased, invalid and unsubstantiated article (authored by Meier and Christian Frehner in a FIGU Bulletin…”) – hey, we all are sometimes mistaken – especially if we are busy typewriting with one hand some 5000 sheets of information, 40 books, bulletins etc. apart from running a farm and have no time to check every little detail. Some articles refer to obvious typing errors. E.g. if in one report the distance to our galaxy’s central sun is 53,000 and in another it is 35,000 light years than this appears to be a simple typing error. I concur with M. that we should find out what the real value is. But it is not so important – it does not lead me to distrust Billy. Some articles are actually not controversial at all: E.g. Semjase mentioned that Otto Muck’s description matches their own investigations except for the date which is ca. 1000 years different then the Mayan Calendar date O. Muck used. Yes, the wings of the Soyuz capsule may have had a different shape. I tick that off as yet another falsification of the local photo developer. But there are many statements verified – e.g. I read today http://www.9news.com.au/world/2014/12/20/09/48/bizaree-ghost-fish-discovered-at-record-low-depths which reminds me of the P’s statement that there are many undiscovered species of deep sea fish which our biologists do not yet know. Like MH (post 940) I cannot see any proof that Billy knew / read all the sources M. quoted and wrote them down as his own finding to attract attention. Mahesh should understand that today it may be easy for him to find via Google whatever he wants to prove. But most of Billy’s information was delivered in a time without internet, Google Search etc. My view is of a man that was only a few years in school, lives in a secluded part of the world – far away from major libraries and bookstores. Hence the probability that he did not know what others knew is the much more likely alternative. It may be, though, that in some (or many?) instances the Ps gave out only information that our earthly scientists were about to discover, anyway. This would match the principle of Creation that humans should “search and discover" themselves. But my main argument remains - Billy does not want to gain from his publications. His books are not published to become money-making bestsellers. He is not out to show off. Neither is his major objective to predict the future or to teach humans science. He may want to raise awareness of alien beings or alien worlds but even this is not his major intent. Billy’s major objective is to spread the true creational teachings and the true teachings of Jmmanuel – removing the falsifications that selfish rulers and selfish “gods” have added. Falsifications that teach religious and political superiority/subordination and ultimately prevent humans to progress in wisdom. In some instances I find M.’s presentations exaggerated. Exaggerations express aggressions (“Publishing such a pro-biased, invalid and unsubstantiated article …) A calm mind is in oneness with the universe *), “All material things are prone to decay” (Buddha) And so are all material thoughts, too. What we discover with our material mind is a relative truth. What we call “new” and “right” today is “old” and “wrong” tomorrow: There is not even a hint - not one word – that all of Billy’s knowledge data serves only as a lead-on – a means to an end – the spirit teachings. Man’s self image of a poor sinner feeling guilty in front of a perfect god is wrong. We should free us of this “premature cognitive commitment” and recognize our oneness with the universe. I value the Spirit teachings much more than material proofs. Maybe that is why M.’s disputations cannot form the sinister assumption of following a hoax in my mind: Billy deserves a fairer appraisal. Salome, Bill *) "The pursuit, even of the best things, ought to be calm and tranquil." - Cicero | ||
Ramirez Member Post Number: 1090 Registered: 06-2008 |
On the balance of probabilities post 940 by Michael makes sense. Can Billy Meier be that good a novelist as to make up the content of all those contact reports and books ? ..... for someone who dropped out of school at age of 14 or 15 ..... Cheers. | ||
Simon_cg Member Post Number: 6 Registered: 03-2011 |
@Tat_tvam_asi Btw. About what you said earlier: (1) Billy, as we all know, was committed and had to keep the Plejaren’s directive to never to mention what he knew before the event. Yes – there is naturally the possibility that someone writes about the past and sells it as if he was told before the event. If that was so, then there would be no point in investigating if they were published before the events, discoveries etc. But here something completely opposite is said: FIGU Bulletin 51 (March 2005) Article: Predictions and Prophecies… “Conclusion: In the meantime, there are a wide range of prophecies and predictions that were fulfilled in the past or are yet to be fulfilled in the future and they have been verifiably written down by <billy> Eduard Albert Meier years before their fulfillment. Without the help of his extraterrestrial friends, this would not have been possible for him. A fact that once again proves that BEAM is neither a cheater nor a swindler, neither a charlatan nor an irresponsible conjurer, but simply a true contact person with members of the Plejaren Federation.” In a world full of lies, unsubstantiated claims and nonsense, wouldn't it be fair to check if this is true? Also it is claimed these prophecies are IRONCLAD evidence. In my book that means evidence that stands on itself, regardless of motives, circumstances etc. So what is it: A: Verifiably written down by <billy> Eduard Albert Meier years before their fulfillment B: Billy was not allowed to mention what he knew before the event | ||
Mahigitam Member Post Number: 579 Registered: 02-2009 |
@Michael Horn Your whole reasoning is this - 'Since Meier has no motivation, he would not have inserted stuff even though he could have access to such information'. Motivations/intentions are irrelevant and have no place in an objective, scientific investigation. I would be glad to address any issues that deal with the facts, logically & scientifically. ufoprophet.blogspot.com "..covers the media archives from 1970's about the most controversial Swiss UFO Contactee - 'Billy' Eduard Albert Meier." billymeieruforesearch.com "..researching and archiving both the pro & con evidence of the case." | ||
Historeed Member Post Number: 31 Registered: 09-2008 |
Simon_cg Your non-answer to my question is clear enough. Mahigitam, "Motivations/intentions are irrelevant"? Are your serious??? Matthew Reed |
