'End of Days' (April 30) and 'Real Astrology' (April 22 & 29) : Interviews with Michael Horn

End of Days:

We are then joined by our second guest Michael Horn who is best known for being one of the famous Billy Meier’s contacts for sharing information with Earth. We start the interview off by taking a call from Chefist, who proceeds to take over the interview and lambaste Michael with some hard hitting questions until Daniel steps in and puts a stop to things, Mr. Horn really stabs back at the skeptics by explaining the scrutiny that Meier has already undergone by some legitimate organizations. We then really dig deep into the Bill Meier case as Michael and Daniel as him everything about the Meier case under the sun which really opens some minds.

Listen/download: mp3 or youtube
Source: endofdaysradio


 Real Astrology:

Matthew Deagle is a long time Billy Meier supporter, and a self-proclaimed "expert in astrology, numerology and symbolism."

Note:
This 'Real Astrology' show won't be aired anymore on Jeff Rense radio. Reportedly the reason is that Jeff Rense objected to Matthew Deagle's decision to devote Billy Meier UFO case by inviting its the case representative Michael Horn every Friday onto his show that originally is dedicated to Astrology.

Listen: April 22 and April 29

As a Man Stealeth: Follow up and Rebuttal

This article contains the follow up and rebuttal to Meier and FIGU responses to our exposé of Meier plagiarizing virtually the entire book of – As a Man Thinketh – originally published by the British author James Allen in 1903. 

Read: BMUFOR

Rebutting Cheryl Costa's 'My Smoking Gun UFO Proof'

Cheryl Costa is a two-service military veteran, a retired aerospace security engineer and a published playwright.¹ When she served in the U.S. Navy, she was trained in physics, and more specifically electromagnetic physics. Later in college, she was trained to be a cinematographer and video editor.²

Cheryl Costa

Recently, on April 18, she published an article - My Smoking Gun UFO Proof - in which she recalls an event happened during one evening in 1990, while being the guest of a UFO media Bibliophile. While watching several UFO videos from Switzerland from 1970's, she came across Billy Meier's videos in which she noticed a subtle but momentary flash in the image illumination just before the UFO or Beam Ship darted away at great speed. She further writes:

"I slowed the video down to a crawl and measured the subtle flash effect to about 3/24 of a second, or three film frames. On video footage, I noted that the effect was 2/30 of a second, or two video frames.  I showed this discovery to my host and he was quite fascinated, but until I slowed the film and video sequences down for him he had never noticed the flash effect." 

Five years later, she witnessed the same "unusual" flash effect on TV that aired some footage from Space Shuttle mission STS-48. And she provided the following reasoning on why she thinks this STS-48 footage (which was thoroughly debunked by the American space journalist and historian, James Oberg) proves the authenticity of Billy Meier's beamships, and hence UFOs or Aliens in general:

"In the footage, an object is seen moving from right to left in the picture frame. Suddenly, it darts off to the right at great speed. Something that looks like a laser or particle beam is seen coming up from the Earth’s surface. When I saw the STS-48 footage, I witnessed the same flash effect I had seen in the Billy Meier footage years before.

 

For me, the Billy Meier footage from 1970s was genuine because I was able to see and examine a subtle physical effect on a couple of video frames. Later, I saw the STS-48 footage and observed the same physical effect before the object darted off, something that NASA attributed to “simple ice crystals.” I knew I had seen the smoking gun UFO proof that convinced me these things were genuine without a doubt." 

Having noticed this absurd reasoning, I have contacted Daniel Drasin - Media Producer/Director (Film, Video, Audio, Music, Radio, Writing) and Cinematographer/Videographer³ - to weigh in on Cheryl Costa's arguments. Earlier, Daniel Drasin has found several "tell-tale signs" and a "smoking gun" evidence in Meier's pendulum footage indicating that the footage has been fabricated. I wrote an email to Daniel on April 21 regarding Cheryl Costa's flash effect argument which is visible in these three videos shot by Meier at these locations - Berg-Rumlikon (1975) and Bachtelhörnli (1976).

https://youtu.be/tSjYVxCizck
https://youtu.be/v8X5POuq2JE
https://youtu.be/C6BI-EkjaJs

After reviewing those videos, he gave the following response on April 23, that reveals Cheryl Costa's spurious logic and lack of knowledge in film matters.

"Hi, Mahesh...

I just read Ms. Costa's article, and I must say that her personal threshold of proof seems rather forgiving. Equating the STS-48 flash with the flashes in Meier's film is a bit like equating Genghis Khan with Mohandas Gandhi because they both had two legs, and they both had an "h" in their first names and surnames. A bit of a stretch, eh?

The STS48 flash, (which preceded the entry of the unidentified object from the lower-left) was off-screen, so we don't know what caused it.

The discontinuities in Meier's film -- at least those that I've seen -- involve four observations:

1) With motion-picture film, when you stop the camera, the film physically stops running through the gate behind the lens. When you re-start the camera, it takes a fraction of a second -- a few frames' time -- for the mechanism to come up to speed. Therefore the first few frames are exposed for a slightly longer time, so they receive more light. This makes those first few frames brighter than the rest. They're called "flash frames" and are well known to anyone who has edited actual film (not video) on a professional basis.

2) There are two main methods of splicing motion-picture film:  a) You can use special cement, which requires a partial overlap of one piece of film onto the other. This produces a visible horizontal line across either the last outgoing frame or first incoming frame, depending on the splicer used. Additionally you'll see some some areas in which the image is distorted by the cement itself, some of which tends to be squeezed out of the joint before it hardens.  b) You can cut the film without an overlap, and join it with special clear Mylar splicing tape that is perforated to register exactly with the perforations ("sprocket holes") in the film. This tape is usually applied to both sides of the film. So the frames to which the tape is applied tend to be a bit fuzzy-looking compared with the rest. Additionally, this tape is physically softer than the film, so after several viewings it will tend to quickly pick up vertical scratches from having been run through the projector or other viewing device. What I've seen in videos of Meier's films, are exactly these two telltale signs of tape splices.

3) Additionally, frames adjacent to any splice will often have picked up specks of dirt and dust from having been handled in the process of splicing the film and not having been cleaned properly afterward. If you look carefully you can see this additional dust around many of Meier's splices.

3) Additional evidence of splicing can be seen in the sudden changes of position or appearance of certain elements in the frame. For example, in this video:  https://youtu.be/C6BI-EkjaJs ,  at the beginning, when we see the UFO, the foreground branch is being moved by the wind. Then at 0:06 suddenly the UFO disappears and the branch instantaneously shifts its position to a neutral one, as the wind has stopped. Had the wind died down naturally, the branch would have come to a more gradual stop.  At 0:43 (0.33) there is another hidden passage of time, which you can see in the reflection of the lake in the distance behind the branch. This lake is brighter before the splice and darker afterward, apparently due to an interim change in the light striking that part of the landscape  -- perhaps due to the shadow of a cloud or the setting of the sun. Note that the overall landscape is uniformly illuminated by a hazy sky so that if the sun had set in the interim the camera would automatically adjust its overall exposure in response. If you look closely you can see that the camera has, indeed, made an overall exposure adjustment to the different light level.

Please feel free to pass these remarks on to Ms. Costa, should you choose to do so.

By the way, for the record, I'm not at all a kneejerk UFO skeptic -- I've had a number of remarkable sightings and have experienced various other anomalous events. My position on the Meier case is that it may be partly true, but that it is being defended beyond all reason as being *entirely* true.

Best regards,
=Dan="

When another professional photographer⁴ (who wish to remain anonymous) with nearly 35 years of experience and also who has been studying the Meier case since 1977 was made aware of Dan's theories, he has the following the say:

"Hi Mahesh,

I generally agree with Dan's theories.

However, my experience with UFO hoaxers - without a single exception - is that none has ever gone to extreme effort to create a hoax.

For example, when they use UFO models, it is nearly always an already existing item or is made from a few or a number of existing items.  But rarely do you find evidence of an actual custom-made item. As an example, even such a complex structure as the WCUFO, Meier assembled it from various prefabricated parts mostly found at discount stores - as Phil Langdon has demonstrated.

So although Dan is correct that there are several ways this flash could have occurred, the most likely explanation is the simplest one, which is that he had mounted the camera on a tripod (as Meier himself has shown he has done) and then simply stopped filming, removed the model, started the camera again, stopped it, put the model back and started the camera again.

Dan's reference to flash frames being caused by the camera starting the movement of the film slowly however is something I had not considered.  This however would denote a problem with Meier's camera, as flash frames are not inevitable.  Otherwise we would see them at the beginning of ANY footage made with a cine-camera.  Yet I have a good quantity of family film footage shot with my father's cine-camera - even including some footage shot using the same technique of stopping and starting the camera and I don't recall seeing any such flashes.  I have the footage here so let me revise it before supporting such a claim.  Even though it is a possibility, Meier's camera would have to be examined to see if it possesses such a flaw.  I am aware however of another UFO case that featured many flashes in the footage and that was indeed caused by the fact the film camera had a defect that caused the film to get momentarily stuck in the film gate on a regular basis while filming.  Each time it occurred, it caused an overexposure on those frames.

My own theory in this regard is that Meier's camera may have had an auto exposure setting and that when the camera restarted it adjusted the exposure in the first fraction of a second when it started up again.  But to support this theory, we would have to know the exact model camera that Meier used to film the sequence.

Splicing is possible of course, but I feel that such a technique - requiring editing equipment - would have been far too time-consuming and difficult for Meier to contemplate.  Let us remember here that he has only one arm and that such editing would require a good amount of dexterity.  Even though it's possible, I still feel that Meier - like most UFO hoaxers - would have chosen the simplest way to do this, which is to just stop an restart the camera.

That too would explain the discontinuity in respect to the branch that seems to jump when the object reappears..."


References:

¹ International UFO Congress/Cheryl Costa
² 'My Smoking Gun UFO Proof,' Syracuse NewTimes, April 18, 2016.
³ Linkedin/Dan Drasin

⁴ This anonymous professional photographer has earlier debunked one of the FIGU's defences of Meier's Asket-Nera photos authenticity.

Facts for Stanton Friedman: Exposing Michael Horn's lies told during the debate on X-Zone radio show

This article is specifically written to inform the Physicist, Lecturer and UFO Researcher, Stanton Friedman (SF) regarding the many lies told by Michael Horn (MH) during their 2nd debate on Meier case on the X-Zone radio show, aired on November 11, 2015. I have chosen the word 'lies' for MH rather than 'inaccurate' or 'flawed' claims or arguments is because all of the facts that I am going to present below was known to him since last year and some even before that. Despite being aware of all the facts that clearly and demonstrably refutes his wild assertions, he chose to make so many of the same misleading and deceitful claims again and again, along with the deliberate suppression of some crucial information which we will see in a moment.

1. Prophecies and Predictions

Around 10 min. into Part 1 of the interview, SF (with a little help from me) points to MH about the fact that the original documents of so-called predictions doesn't exist and also that many of them have only been published after the events occurred. MH, then in response, points to the specific information that can be verifiably published by Meier on planets Mars and Mercury.

Mars:

On planet Mars, MH at 16:50 min. says (verbatim) about Meier's prediction made in 1976 (contact report 60) that:

"..scientists will discover that there is more water on Mars than they even can imagine; there are small fauna and flora life forms and the environment is hostile to life - 1976. We then in 2008 discovered why there is water, subsequently we discovered there is more water than thought. We discovered microorganisms and we discovered that the soil there has substantial amounts of perchlorate making it hostile to life."

The idea that there is or could be water on Mars has been around for centuries, see this Wikipedia page. Based on the data collected from satellites and ground based telescopic observations, several science papers and news articles that report some degree of evidence that supports the ‘Water on Mars’ theory were published decades before Meier wrote about it in 1976. Even the spacecraft Mariner 9 that reached Mars in 1971, 5 years before Meier "predicted," has 'spotted evidence of flowing water sometime in the ancient past,' which led to intense speculations that there could still be water on Mars today. Given this context, it is totally natural to expect water on Mars. It would only be extraordinary if Meier at that time were to say that there would be no water on Mars that later turns to be true (which it didn't).

Also predicting that Mars has much more water than imagined by scientists is like predicting - scientists would find more number of stars and galaxies exist in the universe than they imagined. Extremely vague.

MH says that Meier’s prediction of Mars harboring micro-organisms has been fulfilled. If it would have been found, it would be the greatest discovery ever and the whole world would go frenzy. But no such discovery was ever announced. Wonder what news is MH reading?

MH claims that the discovery of perchlorates that is detrimental to life in Martian soil corroborates Meier's prediction. But Meier never predicted that ‘perchlorates’ would ever be found in Martian soil. All he said (in CR 60, 1976) was that – ‘there are also surprises in the character of the ground and the nature of the microworld’ – which can’t be anymore vague than that. He also said that ‘faunic and floric forms of life are existing on mars, even though this planet destroys other forms of life by its contrary to life nature.’ So he essentially says that Mars environment provides only for some forms of life to survive and not every life. First, no life was ever detected or predicted with high likelihood by scientists ever on Mars because from the observations made through telescopes and orbiters, it has become clear that Mars is not in anyway similar to Earth regarding habitability. And second, isn't it how life generally evolves? Only species that can make it in the given environment survives. If the environment is not conducive, then no life would ever be produced.

For additional analysis, see BMFURO/CR 60.

Mercury:

After Mars, MH cites the so-called corroboration on planet Mercury. He says:

"But you go back to 1976 again and Meier asks why does the surface of planet Mercury contract- a specific scientific question pretty unusual for a so-called Swiss farmer in 1976 and the alleged ET woman says - because of the core of the planet. It may have been easy to her but it took 32 years until NASA 'discovered it.'"
I have already shown on my website BMUFOR/CR 66 that this fact has already been known 2 years before Meier predicted it. 

When MH was reciting this, Stan interrupted him and pointed to him what I have earlier pointed to Stan, which is that this information was already known before - which led MH quickly jump to a few other supposed corroborations.

Jupiter moon, Io:

MH says the following based on the information in the 115th contact report that supposedly occurred on October 19, 1978:

"Io is the most volcanically active body in the solar system. It's ejecta composed largely of ionized sulfur dust particles. It is a matter of projection of these particles up into the atmosphere, those that don't escape the moon result in covering the moon of Io in a very smooth surface. He described the speed of that."

On BMUFOR/CR 115, we have already documented rebuttals by the skeptical organization IIG and Stuart Robbins of Pseudoastronomy, that reveals that all of the above information has already been known several months before Meier supposedly predicted them. IIG even has shown that Meier's information on the speed and height of Io's volcanic plumes is erroneous.

Europa:

MH also says the following based on the information from 115th contact, Oct 19, 1978:

"He described that Europa was encrusted in ice."

The exact sentence that Meier spoke in CR 115 is this -  "If I remember correctly, you both told me; I don’t know any more whether you or Ptaah, that the moon Io is exactly the large opposite to the moon Europa, that namely there on the moon Europa, the masses of water had not evaporated and changed but have frozen into a gigantic armour of ice."

The fact that Europa is made of ice is already known at least since 1957. This 1973 science paper - Infrared Spectra of the Galilean Satellites of Jupiter - lists all relevant studies made on Europa's ice since 1957. Moreover Meier is incorrect if he means that the entire moon has frozen into ice. Because the scientific consensus for quite a long time is that there is strong evidence for a deep global ocean beneath Europa's icy crust, which Meier/Plejaren strangely never mentioned.

Neptune rings:

MH further said the following based on the information from CR 182, Feb 3, 1983:

"He also described that Neptune had rings."
In CR 182, Meier mentions that a ring exists around Neptune just like all the giant planets of the solar system.  Even though scientists after the discovery of rings around Uranus in 1977 were specifically looking for rings around Neptune, have only finally confirmed its existence around Neptune in 1989. 

But the obvious next question is - Did Meier first publish this before 1989?

As it turns out, based on the analysis I long ago presented at BMUFOR/CR 182, Meier only published this for the first time in 1993 in a book ‘Existentes Lebens Im Universum’ on pgs. 94-95.
 
Even though I have made MH aware of all of the above irrefutable facts, he chose to ignore them and is still trying to mislead people by claiming (at 19:12 min.) that - "..all of this was  published before the Voyager got there, verifiably."

Sulfur ring around Jupiter:

MH at 19:20 min. (Part 1) says the following after presenting the above "scientifically accurate" prophetic information:

"The skeptics at CFI-west/IIG tried to debunk this and they ended up corroborating it because they also show that one of the facts in there about a torus of Jupiter being composed of sulfur ions was not known until over a year after NASA had corroborated Meier's original stuff. We have this stuff. This is why the skeptics try to say - oh it was known - but they leave out something else."

What MH is pointing to regarding skeptics ended up corroborating Meier stuff is that IIG have cited a March 12, 1979 article that talks about a ring around Jupiter, which according to MH was 3 days after Wendelle Stevens was given this information by Meier on March 9. But MH, even after being made aware of the rebuttal provided by Stuart Robbins on the fact that this information was already known as far as in 1977, has deliberately chose to ignore it. For more on this, see BMUFOR/CR 115.

Atom bomb-Ozone link:

At around 27 min. (Part 1), MH talks about a "new discovery" on the link between Atom bomb explosions and ozone layer depletion supposedly made for the first time in 1988. However we have many times earlier have shown on BMUFOR/CR 7 that this information was already known in 1974, a year before Meier supposedly predicted it in 1975.

1958 and 1987 prophecies:

MH, in Part 2 at around 10:50 min., cites the following prophecies supposedly published by Meier in 1958 and 1987 as being fulfilled.

1958 -  Two Iraq wars by father and son US presidents, AIDS, fanatical islamicists bloody revenge

1987 - destruction of WTC, rise of fanatics of islam and their illegal immigration to Europe

However, he doesn't mention the fact that most of these were only published long after the events occurred in 2002 and 2005 respectively. And regarding the prediction of radical islamicists overtaking Europe and illegal migration, we have already addressed that nonsense here.

NSA-Microsoft:

At around 37 min. in Part 2, MH says the following:

"About NSA and all, I published it on my website before Snowden did. Meier and Plejaren explained the whole thing about NSA, Microsoft, the computers, 2 years before Snowden did. Again! it’s been up there, its dated and all that."

Here MH is referring to the information published by Meier in CR 440 (Jan 15, 2007). The fact of the matter is that this claim that NSA had backdoor access to Microsoft has already been made since 1997, a decade before Meier "predicted" it.

1.1 Meier has unlimited access to scientific information

Whenever skeptics point out that the prophecies or predictions, which Meier, FIGU and MH has been promoting as being fulfilled, are in fact have already been known or occurred before, the usual tactic of MH is to claim that since Meier is living in some rural part of Switzerland he can't have access to scientific literature from which he would have copied as has been suggested. He played the same card with SF at 19:50 min. (Part 1), where he says the following:

"I want to acknowledge something. It doesn't mean that Meier is always the first person to know something. But there are people that theorized. But Meier never had nor could he ever had access to the theoretical obscure stuff  that was published in a paper in a University without the internet, without search engine."
 
SF, at around 21:30 min. immediately responded by saying that there has been several people/followers around Meier since the beginning, who would have passed on the scientific information, to Meier, which they have access to. SF raised a very important and legitimate question, which rarely has been raised by the radio show hosts who interviews MH. As it turns out, the evidence (see below) I presented extensively on my website, beyond reasonable doubt indicates that Meier has unlimited of access to any kind of scientific information, even the most "obscure" stuff, as MH loves to call it.

• Meier himself states (verbatim) that he has been 'learning constantly through professional books, professional articles in newspapers and magazines, as well as through professional television broadcasts.'
• Meier and his group has been frequently visiting at least a nearby book store and has been purchasing several books related to 'space, science, history, photography, astronomy,.. .' 

Even though this information has been shared with MH long ago, he chose to ignore it and still denies that Meier has access to any scientific information, essentially contradicting the facts disclosed by Meier himself.

1.2 Sequentially numbered contacts 

Towards the end of the show (Part 2, 43:00 min.) SF, after listening to MH's claims on "fulfilled" predictions, has concluded his part of the interview by saying:

"I am not satisfied that’s completely true Michael! Look, I have been getting a lot of stuff. People  sending me stuff. And I am not at all satisfied about all this prediction stuff. You seem to be totally satisfied. Billy has never said anything that wasn’t true, I guess, you feel."

To which MH responded as follows:

"I don’t ever find that he lied, not to me and not anywhere in the material. A man after 60 something years of publishing material, he has never told a lie. We got cynics and skeptics, who want to tell you that he published things afterwards but they can’t figure out how it would have been possible for him to go back into every piece of paper disseminated throughout Europe and US and start to backdate it, before the internet. This is why these people are traitors to humanity. They sow seeds of ridiculous doubt and then when you look into it you would go - he couldn’t have done it. I mean, we have the copyrights, we got the documents. We can prove it."

MH, on this same topic, has earlier responded (23:47 min. of Part 1) as follows:

"What most people don't know is that a lot of what we refer to as the prophetic accurate information is included in conversations in sequentially numbered contacts, if you will, that now number over 620."

What MH is saying is that the SF's implication that Meier may have backdated information - inserting or editing information in old contact reports - is simply impossible because Meier has sequentially numbered each sentence published in his contact reports. So if Meier had deceitfully inserted any new stuff, one could easily trace it out by comparing that document with the older ones. So MH concludes that SF's implication 'isn't been substantiated by the facts' (24:45 min., Part 1).

Are the facts really so, as mentioned by MH?
Has there not been even one example of this form of seeming fraud where the predictions have been deceptively added in contact reports, there by giving them different verse/sentence numbers?

As it turns out, the facts are exactly opposite to what MH has been claiming for so long. As a matter of fact, we have documented dozens and dozens of such examples where new information with different verse numbers has been added. We in fact discovered that nearly 6,000 verses/sentences have been newly added in latest edition of contact notes, which are totally missing from the older editions.

As an example lets not go any further than MH's own website and his own claim of a fulfilled prediction - the 5,100 year old Iceman. The basic story behind this corroboration article is that MH claims that Meier has predicted (CR 239, 1991) the real cause of death - ARROW hit in the back - of a some 5,000 year old Iceman buried in Alps mountains, nearly a decade or at least 5 years before scientists discovered it in the year 2001. As evidence, MH cites the following verse spoken by the alleged ET Ptaah:

Ptaah:
574. His death happened at that time in such a way that he fell caused by an epileptic fit –and was severely injured by one of his own arrows when he fell on his back, just at the moment when a primeval ice storm started.

So according to MH, if we were to open the older edition(s), we would find this same unaltered information. But as it turns out, it has been fabricated. The above reference is from the 3rd edition contact notes Plejadisch-Plejarische Kontaktberichte 6 published in 2006 and also from the 2nd edition contact notes Semjase-Kontakt-Berichte volume 13, 2nd reprint published after 2001. Now, the following information is from older 2nd edition contact notes Semjase-Kontakt-Berichte volume 13, 1st print originally published in 1996:

Ptaah:
573. His death happened at that time in such a way that he fell caused by an epileptic fit, just at the moment when a primeval ice storm started.

As you can see 'ARROW' cause has been newly added after it was discovered by scientists in 2001.  This is just one example among many. Even though MH and FIGU have been made aware of this information in 2014, they still continue to claim the James Randi's $1,000,000 paranormal challenge because of Meier's "successful" prediction on the 5,100 year old iceman. More information on this sequentially numbered contacts, available on this page.

2. Photos

 

2.1 Space and Time travel pictures

In response to SF's claim made at around 34 min. (Part 1) that a lot of Meier's pictures turned out to be images from NASA and other sources, MH responded by saying that Plejaren/Meier have already stated in 1978 that these photos have been manipulated by third parties and should no longer be considered as Meier's originals. 

First, neither Meier nor Plejaren has ever claimed that in 1978. If MH argues otherwise, he better provide evidence of that documentation. I am most certain, he can't. Second, MH is deliberately lying and trying to suppress the obvious fact that nearly 40 pictures from Meier's purported deep space journey has been and still are being published TODAY in the FIGU co-founder and Core Group member Guido Moosbrugger's book Und sie fliegen doch!/And still they fly (1991, 2001, 2004, 2012) and also in the 3rd edition contact notes Plejadisch-Plejarische Kontaktberichte volumes 1 and 2, originally published in 2002 and 2003 respectively. These photos are likewise available for sale.

What is so special about these photos is that Meier, in 2005, has claimed that these photos have been verified and authenticated by the Plejaren ET Ptaah to be unfalsified and genuine. Of course, MH never mentions this fact ever as this would make him lose both his and Meier's credibility instantly.

Following are the scans of pages from Und sie fleigen doch! book showing 8 Meier pictures, which were defended by Guido in the book as genuine.

Und sie fliegen doch! (2012) - photos 67-69

Und sie fliegen doch! (2012) - photos 70-73

Following are scans, containing 31 pictures are from Plejadisch-Plejarische Kontaktberichte volumes 1 and 2.

On my website BMUFOR/Photos and videos, we have analysed nearly 20 of these pictures and found all of them to be images taken from NASA documentaries, illustrations, movies, TV shows, etc.

2.2 Beamship photos

MH at around 37:30 min. (Part 1) claims that Meier's beamships photos have never been shown to be fakes. But organizations like Ground Saucer Watch (GSW), ICUFON (Intercontinental UFO Galactic Spacecraft Research and Analytic Network) and others reportedly have found evidence of hoax.

Even Wendelle himself found that a couple of Meier photos (see above), where Meier's group members can be seen in the foreground with the UFO in the background, are double exposures. What is Meier's excuse? He claims that Semjase has accidentally damaged those photos by sending radiation from her mind. See UFO Contact from the Pleiades - A Supplimentary Investigation Report, pgs. 84-88, 1982. And of course the WCUFO.

2.3 Pendulum UFO

Around 52:50 min. (Part 1), MH claims that Rhal Zahi has concluded that beamship video where it moves around a supposed large fir tree in the distance in pendulum fashion to be a large object (in the order several meters), just as specified by Meier. MH further claimed that Rhal Zahi also proved that this craft existed in two places in one same frame(s).

As it turns out, filmmaker and researcher Daniel Drasin has already refuted Rhal Zahi's pseduo-arguments on beamship being in two places in one frame, which of course would never be mentioned by MH. Drasin has claimed that there is strong evidence that this film has been tampered by splicing and joining. Also, lets not forget that the video which Rhal Zahi analyzed is of very poor quality and is not original but several generations away which means that any evidence of hoax can in theory be erased. Also important is Bruce Maccabbe's extensive analysis done on this pendulum beamship video, where he concludes that a small model the size of a foot likely has been used by Meier. Also look into Phil Langdon's work on this video.

MH at around 55:45 min. (part 1) has claimed that it took many times for Phil Langdon to recreate Meier's photos while Meier only took his photos once. How does MH know that Meier only took the photos once? In fact nobody is sure that Meier took all the photos and videos only once. No one has ever seen him live taking photos and developing the same. The hoax theory, that has good supporting evidence, suggests that Meier along with his accomplices may have staged his shots several times on location and used dark room equipment to erase any signs of fraud. Meier then would claim a completely different date for his photo and video sessions and publish only copies that are several generations away from the originals, so no amount of analysis can detect any signs of fraud - which is exactly what has happened with the Lee Elders-Wendelle Stevens investigation.

The Crazz Files (Aug 4, 2015) - Interview with Michael Horn

Download: mp3
Source: TCF

The Generation Why Podcast - Episode 135, July 31, 2015

The Strange Case of Billy Meier. At 5 years of age it is said that Eduard first met an extraterrestrial human. It would be just the start. Contact with others beyond our Earth would continue for decades. He would go on to be considered a prophet, an author, a cult figure, a space traveler, & even a time traveler. Armed with videos of flying saucers, photos of aliens, planets, dinosaurs, & cavemen, he would claim to know where we were headed and what we should be doing to avert impending disaster. Is there something to his stories? Have his prophecies and predictions come true? Does he have irrefutable evidence of space women & of other worlds? Why have there been so many attempts on his life? Will the world ever listen to him?

http://billymeieruforesearch.com/
http://www.theyfly.com/
http://billymeierufocase.com/

Download: mp3
Source: TGY

BMUFOR - Billy Meier's Outer Space Pictures: Asket, Nera and Semjase

Photo #109, allegedly showing from left to right – Asket, Nera and Semjase (partly visible)

Photo #110 (image enhanced), allegedly showing Asket and a women on her left, not identified by Meier

Photo #111, allegedly showing, from left to right – Asket, Nera and Semjase (partly visible)

During Meier’s Great Journey in space described in Contact Report 31, which took place from July 17-22, 1975*, he allegedly traveled through the Universal Barrier (or Tunnel) to a parallel or twin Universe called the DAL Universe in a Plejaren mother ship called the Great Spacer. Once in the DAL-universe, together with Semjase he transfers to the giant space ship of the people of one of Meier’s former contact persons from the DAL-universe, the extraterrestrial woman Asket. There, according to the excerpts from CR 31, Meier was allowed to take some photographs of the extraterrestrial women Asket, Nera and Semjase.

It is not clear on how many photographs Meier actually shot of Asket, Nera and Semjase, but he published only three photographs which are indexed as #109, #110 and #111 in his photo catalogue book – ‘Verzeichnis – der Nummern und Legenden der FIGU-Photos (1991/1999)‘. These photos became some of the most well known and controversial photos of the Meier case.

The above pictures #109, #110 and #111 of Asket, Nera and Semjase have been sold to the public by Meier/FIGU probably from around 1975 onwards. They have also been promoted and published numerous times in various newspapers, magazines, TV shows, etc. since 1976.

Did Meier really photograph the three ET women?

Read More: BMUFOR/Asket-Nera-Semjase

Unknown Origins Radio (May 7, 2015) - Interview with Michael Horn

Listen: in new window
Download: mp3
Source: UOR

Fulfilled or Not? - Billy Meier's prediction on the impact of 'Red Meteor or Asteroid Apophis'

Is it just another pseudoscientific claim or a genuine prediction?

 

An artist's conception of an asteroid hitting Earth

On May 4, 2015, Billy Meier's American media representative Michael Horn has published an article titled - New Confirmation of Billy Meier’s Warnings about Apophis. Any person who is already familiar with Meier's prediction on Red Meteor or Asteroid Apophis, after reading Michael Horn's latest article title, one might get the impression that we were at least FINALLY provided some real, tangible, strong evidence that scientifically establishes Billy Meier's contacts with Plejaren extraterrestrials.

But as it turns out, there is nothing new in his article that adds any weight or credibility to the already invalidated 'corroborated' claims of Michael Horn and some Meier/FIGU supporters made on Red Meteor. Besides we hear the same old pseudo-scientific and fallacious arguments. Having said that, let us first analyze the "new" evidence brought forth in the aforementioned article and then address the rest later. The two main claims being made in that article are:

1. Meier published the Red Meteor prediction first in 1994 and not in 2001
2. Meier called it 'Red Meteor' in 1994, one year before the Torino scale was created in 1995

Important note: The main assumption made by Michael Horn that Red Meteor that was mentioned by Meier in his contact notes years earlier is indeed the asteroid Apophis - will be dealt towards the end of this article. For now we will just restrict our discussion with the two main claims made by Michael Horn in his latest article.

1. Meier published the Red Meteor prediction first in 1994 and not in 2001

Michael Horn in his original article on Red Meteor titled - Danger of Collision with the Red Meteor! - mentioned that the information on Red Meteor in CR 150 was first published in FIGU co-founder and core group member Guido Moosbrugger's 1991 book 'Und sie fliegen doch!.' On that he wrote:

"In order to immediately establish the fact that Meier published his warnings about the Red Meteor (known to us now as Apophis) long before "official discovery", I direct readers to the easily established fact that this warning (in addition to the referenced transcripts below) appears on pages 316 and 317 of Guido Moosbrugger's book, And yet...they fly! - first published in English in September, 2001...three years before Apophis was discovered by terrestrial scientists.
 
It also appears on pages 265 and 266 of And still they fly!, - published in 2004.
However, both of these books are the English language translation of the orignal German language book, first published by Guido Moosbrugger in 1991....13 years before Apophis was discovered by terrestrial scientists. It is, therefore, absolutely ironclad, copyrighted, published proof of the Plejaren's and Meier's prophetic accuracy and truthfulness."

After sometime he added the following correction to the above claim:

(CORRECTION: I found that the text was not in the German book in 1991, though it was first published in German in 1981 and, as mentioned below, available in English shortly thereafter. Ofcourse, the copyright in English, in 2001, is ironclad.)

Are the claims made in the above correction true?

I own a copy of Guido's 1991 book Und sie fliegen doch! (which Michael Horn above referred to) and on pages 392-394, Guido for the first time published information from Contact Report 150 under the heading - Der rote Meteor. I even shared this information along with the scans of the pages from the book to Michael Horn on June 26, 2014 and asked him the source for his correction. He responded on the next day as follows:
"I don't remember at this time. I have so much to do now that many things from the past are not in the forefront of my memory. I could have gotten it from someone else, Dyson, etc. Of course if it is in the book that's great."

This prompted me to contact Dyson on the same day (June 27), to which he responded as follows:

"I don't own, nor do I have access to, Und Sie Fliegen Doch .."

Who- or whatever the source may be, for some reason Michael Horn didn't make the amendments then.

2. Meier called it 'Red Meteor' in 1994, one year before the Torino scale was created in 1995

Michael Horn argues that since 'Red Meteor' information was published - for the first time in 1994 (1991 to be exact), a year before the Torino scale was created in 1995, 3 years before it was first appeared in print in 1997 and 5 years before it was officially adopted by participants of the June 1999 international conference for NEOs, held in Torino (Turin), Italy - this "new" information provided by Matthew Knight "supports Anton Hahnekamp’s theory that there could be a connection between referring to Apophis as the Red Meteor and the Torino scale." Michael however acknowledges that this connection "still remains speculative."

Michael Horn published the following in his original website article based on Anton Hahnekamp's "theory":

"People may wonder why...they would refer to Apophis initially as the Red Meteor.

But an Austrian physicist has suggested that, by doing so, they were giving our own scientists a hint as to the absolute certainty that the object will collide with Earth if not deflected. In order to appreciate the very real possibility that this is the case, please read this information on the Torino scale. This may be an indication that, occasionally, we have to use our own minds to not only figure things out but to appreciate the intelligence of those who wish to help us...to help ourselves. And it should be further noted that the Torino scale was created by scientists in 1995, again, years after Meier's information was first published.

(NOTE: Aren't scientists always wondering if extraterrestrials will be "smart" enough to recognize our radio frequencies, or refer to some common scientific or mathematical standard, to make contact with us? Well, do we think that they may have passed such a "test" by pointing to a color standard that our scientists would use to identify an object that would hit us with absolute certainty? And might we take notice of the fact that they did that years before that standard was even created?)."

To inquire what FIGU knows, I have framed the following related question (along with others on different topics) and sent it to a FIGU Canada passive member so that he can directly ask the FIGU core group member and SSSC faculty director - Christian Frehner who at that time (Aug 2012) visited Canada to give out a lecture on Meier's story and his spiritual teachings:

"Did Billy gave the reason why Apophis asteroid was called as "Red Meteor" ? Some are speculating that the RED in 'red meteor' indicates the danger level in the scale of Torino scale( a method for categorizing the impact hazard associated with near-Earth objects (NEOs) such as asteroids and comets). Even though, Apophis is considered an asteorid by scientists, Plejaren chose to call it a meteor. So, some say that since Apophis is similar to  LL chondritic meteorites, plejaren might have used that name but others reject that proposition. So was there any explanation given for why Plejaren used the name 'Red Meteor' for Apophis asteroid?"

Christian in response to my question however expressed that the 'Red' in 'Red Meteor' could be indicative of the color of the meteor rather than the danger level on Torino scale.

Concerning the speculations on the meaning of the color 'Red', the postdoctoral researcher in astronomy Stuart Robbins has responded as follows:

"Anyway, the first claim I want to address occurs at about 10:00-11:45 into the program (Ufoprophet Note: Hour 4 of the January 14 broadcast of Coast to Coast AM). The jist of what Horn states has to do with trying to do a post-hoc analysis/justification of why the alleged Plejarens call this object “Red.” He says he was contacted by an Austrian physicist who linked it to the Torino scale. Quoting the other person, Horn stated, “‘This could be’ – I’m not saying with certainty … – ‘their way, by naming it this, of giving us the ultimate clue we need’ – which this translates to, ‘this is going to hit your planet.’ … This just blew my mind. … Here’s the kicker: The scale wasn’t even developed until 1995!” (George’s response was, “Jeez! He was way ahead.”)

Hopefully, dear reader, I don’t have to point out how much of a retrodiction this is. But, just to name a few reasons: Meier could have picked “red” because historically it’s a color of destruction. He could have picked red because many people think that Planet X is red. He could have picked red just on a whim. He could have picked red because it’s a “danger” color and most scales use red for bad things – just look at the dashboard of your car. In short, entertaining this idea of the Torino Scale as the reason why an alleged alien allegedly told Meier that an object that will hit Earth is called “red” is one of the largest stretches of correlation that I’ve heard. (Source: Common sense.)"

---

Now let us move onto other claims made on Red Meteor by Michael Horn and others.

• Petale Prophecy
• Size of Apophis

3. Petale Prophecy 

Following is an excerpt from BMUFOR which invalidates Michael Horn/Meier's claim regarding the Petale Prophecy:

"The information about the Red Meteor has been highlighted since 2009 by Michael Horn as “an abundance of documented proof that Billy Meier has published specific, prophetically accurate information about Apophis.” Apart from the information from the contact reports (which will be dealt with later), his webpage also contains a Petale* Prophecy, received and typed down by Meier on Saturday, January 31, 1976, 01:05 AM (published in Prophetien, pg. 42-43, 1982 and Prophetien und Voraussagen, pg. 55, 1996):

A meteor from space – comet-like,
races close and crashes in the big pond,
the air it burns up as a glowing ball,
in the year of the three-value, with terrible sound,
with terrible howling, gigantic power,
as death-missile it crashes on the Earth.
As concentrated power racing through space,
it brings a deadly destroying seed.
Mountains, they crash and life, it dies;
a death-monster, which now spoils much,
loud cry the people all together in one voice,
their misery upward to Creation in heaven.
They scream and cry and plead to her,
for much blessing and love and help from now on
but they never thought about the great law,
about the love-request, which they broke.
They lived along, passing Creation by,
because all-the-while love was all the same to them.
Only the punishing power of the highest one,
allows a few to find their way back to the greatest One.

* Meier allegedly receives these prophecies from the highly evolved spirit level ‘Petale’ in a telepathically transmitted symbol language, which he then has to interpret and write down in German.

Michael Horn presents the above 1976 prophecy as follows:

"I am also now posting an even earlier warning from Petale, in poetic form, that was published by Meier in 1976 in the same document with the 1981 warning, which I first read in 1986"

Obviously, this prophecy is far too general and unspecific to be tied to any asteroid or comet in particular. Ironically this is illustrated by the fact that this prophecy was already earlier linked to an asteroid other than Apophis in an article by FIGU Core Group member Bernadette Brand in Stimme der Wassermannzeit, Nr. 78, pg. 23-27, March 1991 titled ‘Erfüllt sich bald eine weitere Prophetie?’ (Will another prophecy be fulfilled soon?). In this article the above Petale Prophecy was linked to the asteroid (4953) 1990 MU, discovered on June 23, 1990.

One reason she linked this asteroid with the Petale Prophecy could be because of the hint in the fourth line, which says that the time of impact would be “in the year of the three-value”. This means that the all digits in a year should count up to three, According to the articles mentioned by Brand published in the newspapers the Tages Anzeiger (Zurich) and Der Landbote (Winterthur) on August 20, 1990, it was initially speculated that it might impact with the Earth in 1992 (or several thousands of years later). When we add all the individual digits of the year '1992' we get 21 (1+9+9+2) and then if we again add those remaining individual digits of '21' we get 3 (2+1).

Of course, this would also fit with many other years, for example 2001, 2010, 2019, 2028, 2037 etc., so any asteroid or comet that would come dangerously close in those years would fit the prophecy, at least until it has passed and didn’t impact on Earth. This link lists all the predicted close encounters by Potentially Hazardous Asteroids (PHAs) within 0.05 AU of the Earth from 2014 through 2178. Many PHAs are listed there that will closely approach Earth in the years with a ‘3’ value. This renders the scientific validation of the Petale prophecy as null since it can be recycled again and again for many countless years.

Now back to Michael Horn’s claim.

On the radio show Coast to Coast AM on July 28, 2004 (just after 1:05:00 minutes into the show) Michael mentioned that the Red Meteor might come dangerously close or may impact the Earth in a year with a numerological value of '3' and gave two examples, 2010 and 2019, for illustration purposes. However, according to the information conveyed to Meier by the Plejaren in 2008 (CR 471), the years in which Apophis will come close to Earth are given as 2029 and 2036, which yields the values of 4 and 2 respectively, but not 3. The first year with a 3 value in which Apophis will approach Earth will be 2091, but for 2029 and 2036 this prophecy obviously cannot be linked to Apophis. Even though the information from CR 471 clearly contradicts the information from Petale Prophecy, Michael Horn/Billy Meier seems to have no qualms in promoting the information contained in both the CR 471 and the Petale prophecy together.

4. Size of Apophis

Following is an excerpt from BMUFOR:

"On January 14, 2013 Michael Horn posted on his blog that scientists corrected their size estimation of Apophis from 270 meters to 325 meters, which comes close to the figure of 350 meters Ptaah gave Meier in CR 475. This may seem remarkable, although technically 350 meters is still outside the range of 325 ± 15 meters (= between 310 and 340 meters) indicated by the measurements of the Herschel space observatory. However, Wikipedia reads the following:

“Based upon the observed brightness, Apophis’s diameter was initially estimated at 450 metres (1,480 ft); a more refined estimate based on spectroscopic observations at NASA‘s Infrared Telescope Facility in Hawaii by Binzel, Rivkin, Bus, and Tokunaga (2005) is 350 metres (1,150 ft).”

It’s remarkable that the size mentioned in CR 475 exactly matches an earlier size estimation of Apophis by terrestrial science. Later, the size estimate for Apophis was changed multiple times. Using wayback machine for NASA’s data page for Apophis we can see the history of Apophis size estimate. For this page wayback machine goes back as far as October 18, 2005. Below a list of dates on which the size estimate on the page was changed compared to the previous version of the page that was archived in wayback machine:

October 18, 2005 – 320 meters
October 24, 2006 – 250 meters
July 1, 2008 – 270 meters
February 27, 2013 – 330 meters

This doesn’t necessarily mean a new measurement was actually made on these dates, this could have been months before the value on the page was updated. For example the figure of 270 meters already shows up in this article from October 16, 2007, at least 6 months before the size was changed on NASA’s page. It is clear though that during the time CR 475 allegedly took place (November 26, 2008) and was published (2010) the latest size estimate was 270 meters. Does that suggest Meier indeed got accurate information from extraterrestrial source? Actually, no. It is not an unknown phenomenon that media are often very sloppy in checking their sources, and a figure that has been used during the time that something was a ‘hot topic’, like for example the possible impact of Apophis on Earth, will often be recycled over and over again in later articles, despite the fact that it has been corrected in the mean time. Since 350 meters was one of the early size estimates, it isn’t surprising that during the period CR allegedly took place and was published, both the figure of 270 and the 350 meters were available in articles referring to Apophis. Just a small selection of news articles in which both values are mentioned:

August 15, 2006 – 350 meters: Asteroid and comet impacts: the ultimate environmental catastrophe
October 29, 2007 – 350 meters: Protecting Earth Against Asteroids
April 15, 2008 – 270-350 meters: 13 Yr. Old German Corrects NASA’s 99942 Apophis Impact Probability Calculations
April 19, 2008 – 270 meters: How Big is Apophis?
November 3, 2008 – 270 meters: Astronomers hunt for Earth-bound killer rocks
December 30, 2009 – 270 meters: Russia May Head Mission to Deflect Asteroid Apophis
December 31, 2009 – 350 meters: Russia’s secret plan to save Earth from asteroid
August 1, 2010 – 270 meters: Odds of Earth Getting Slammed by Asteroid in 2182 is About 1-in-2000
October 27, 2010 – 350 meters: Apophis’ power surpasses all nuclear arsenals on Earth

To illustrate how long an obsolete value is still used by media, check this article from December 30, 2014, which still mentions a size of 350 meters, despite linking to a NASA page which mentions a size of 330 meters (325 rounded to 330). If one would have done a quick internet search during the period 2008-2010 period for the size of Apophis and accept the first value that shows up, one would most likely end up with either 270 or 350 meters. This doesn’t conclusively prove Meier got his information on the size of Apophis from news articles etc., but it also certainly isn’t clearly evident that he got it from extraterrestrials, to say the least."

---

Information from Meier's Contact Report 544 (September 2012) and CR 150 (October 1981) contradicts the scientific consensus on the origin of Apophis and also the most established fact in astronomy, which is the origin location of asteroids in our solar system.

5. Origin of the Red Meteor

Following is an excerpt from BMUFOR:

"According to Quetzal in CR 150 the Red Meteor "approaches from the depths of outer space towards the SOL-system and is a so-called stranger (German: Fremdling)" and it  "travels on a path, which leads it to the SOL-system for the first time." In CR 544 Ptaah confirms the Red Meteor is from the Oort cloud.

This seems to be contradictory, as the Oort cloud is considered as the outer boundary of the Solar System, still a part of the Solar System. Nevertheless one could also argue that the Oort cloud region is considered as ‘the depths of outer space’, since the border between the solar system and ‘outer space’ cannot be clearly defined. Or maybe the Red Meteor came from other systems and spent some time in the Oort cloud before entering the inner solar system for the first time. But does this information actually fit with Apophis?

Apophis asteroid belongs to a group known as Aten family. These do not belong to the asteroid belt and their orbits are at least for the greatest part within the orbit of the Earth, resulting in orbital periods of less than a year. The first illustration below shows the region where these asteroids orbit around the sun. According to the The SAO Encyclopedia of Astronomy, “although some are no doubt extinct cometary nuclei, it is now thought that the majority originate in the main asteroid belt.” The second illustration shows the orbit of Apophis. As can be seen its orbit is relatively circular and lies within the ecliptic plane.

Objects originating from the Oort cloud are typically long period comets (only roughly one to two percent of the Oort cloud objects are asteroids) with highly elliptical orbits which come from all directions, while Apophis is an asteroid with with a rather circular orbit in the ecliptic plane and an orbital period of less than a year. These facts speak strongly against an origin from the Oort cloud and that it would travel “on a path, which leads it to the SOL-system for the first time” as Quetzal states in CR 150.

The Aten asteroid group (shown in green). The Sun is in the center, with the planets Mercury (black), Venus (yellow), Earth (blue) and Mars (red).

Orbit of the asteroid Apophis around the Sun

When this was pointed out to Meier by Mahesh Karumudi aka Mahigitam on March 29, 2015 in FIGU Q/A forum, Meier responded as follows:

Billy,
According to your information (Contact Report 544) the Red Meteor/Apophis has an origin in the Oort Cloud.
http://futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/Contact_Report_544

Meier:
…Dazu dann auch gleich die Frage in bezug auf den prophetisch angekündeten Roten Meteor: Kommt dieser auch aus der Oortschen Wolke?
Ptaah:
Das ist tatsächlich richtig..

Typical characteristics for objects from the Oort Cloud, according to science are:

– They approach the inner solar system from all directions, not only within the ecliptic plane
– They are usually comets (only roughly 1 to 2 percent are asteroids)
– They have highly elliptical, long period orbits

Likewise according to science, Apophis has rather a short orbital period (less than a year) and rather circular orbit within the ecliptic plane. And it is referred to as a near-Earth asteroid belonging to ATEN group – broadly speaking asteroids that are inside Mars orbit. See the following link for Apophis orbital path.
http://www.daviddarling.info/images/Apophis_orbit.gif

How do you explain this apparent discrepancy?

Practical everything (all such objects) comes from the Oort Cloud / Kuiper Belt.
And regarding the Red Meteor it can be assumed that Ptaah is more knowledgeable in astronomical matters than terrestrial scientists.

Meier in his first statement apparently states that all objects such as meteors, asteroids and comets originate in the Oort Cloud or Kuiper Belt. Though it is true that the origin of comets is attributed to both Kuiper belt and Oort cloud, it is patently absurd and wrong to say that all the asteroids too originate in the Oort cloud or Kuiper belt since the basic astronomical science indicates that a vast majority of the asteroids originate in the inner solar system and primarily orbit in the asteroid belt between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter."

Now the answer to the sub-title of this article -  'is it another pseudoscientific claim or a genuine prediction?' - is obvious and strongly points to a pseudoscientific claim. For other pseudoscientific-claims on the Red Meteor's potential impact location and the most important one - the connection between Meier's 'Red Meteor' and the Asteroid Apophis, visit BMUFOR.