This is going to be a somewhat lengthy newsletter with a variety of items of information and, hopefully, interest. By now, those of you who’ve hung in and actually reviewed all of the material available in the Meier case (there’s still only a small amount in English, though it continues to increase thanks to Dyson Devine and Vivienne Legg of www.gaiaguys.net) understand that this is no “alien abduction” case or some dopey New Age channeled nonsense but rather a genuine case that’s been ongoing for 64 years and that has attracted some rather intense scrutiny as well as opposition.

While the harshest opposition has taken the form of 21 documented assassination attempts against Meier, and decades of attacks on his character and truthfulness, there is also an ongoing effort by professional skeptics and debunkers to maintain their small-minded view of reality and, rather than investigate in an objective, scientific manner to discover what the truth of the matter is, are heavily invested in discrediting the case at all costs and with nakedly inept, incorrect and outright dishonest attacks upon it, without either full knowledge of, or consideration for, the actual enormous amount of factual evidence and high-level research in the case.

Recently, the much discredited skeptical organizations associated with James Randi, IIG and CFI-West, mounted another attempt to put a different spin on their failure to meet the challenge that they accepted, in February 2001, to duplicate Billy Meier’s “easily duplicated hoax”, in the form of just one 35 mm UFO photo and one 8mm movie segment.

It took them until March of 2004 to post several photos of a model UFO that they claimed duplicated the “effect” of Meier’s photos. Now Mr. Derek Bartholomaus (DB), of the Independent Investigations Group, Steering Committee of IIG, has come forward to make some additional claims. I am reproducing some of his recent comments that he posted on an *online forum and my responses to them here, since I am not allowed to respond on that forum (note: emphasis added):

DB: “The first thing is the issue of calling something a hoax. ..

Personally, I have very strong suspicions that it is a hoax, but even if all of the physical examination points to the case being a hoax it is still not appropriate to call it a hoax until Billy Meier tells us that it is a hoax. I find it unlikely that he will do this.

“This leads directly into one of Michael Horn's misleading claims. He claims that when James Randi wrote ‘I never claimed it was a hoax’ that meant that James Randi declared the events to be what Billy Meier, and by extension Michael Horn, claimed them to be. That is simply not true. Randi simply stated truthfully that he personally had never called the events a hoax. There is a very long distance to travel between not calling something a hoax and saying that it is in fact what the claimant claims the event to be.”

MH: Regarding Mr. Bartholomaus saying that Randi “had never called the events a hoax”, here's Randi's own statement from:

http://www.iigwest.com/horn/04_15_03_Email_2.pdf

 "No one is 'stumped' by the case. A child can see through the farce, though some adults have a problem with that."

Now let me point out that the synonyms for farce include:

sham: something that is presented as genuine but is not, deception

deception: fraud

fraud: hoax

So, it’s clear to anyone who reads Randi’s actual words, and resorts to a dictionary and thesaurus for clarification, that Randi is indeed clearly calling the case a hoax in the above statement. That he chose to effectively retract that claim is obvious, as his own words, “I never claimed it was a hoax”, as accurately quoted here by Mr. Bartholomaus, confirm.And it’s a blatant act of deception for Mr. Bartholomaus to attempt to portray it otherwise.

Skeptics Demote Fellow Skeptic!

DB: “Unfortunately this issue also leads into the biggest disappointment the IIG has with the case. An employee of the Center for Inquiry-West told Michael Horn during an informal meeting several years ago that the Billy Meier photos and 8mm movies were ‘an easily duplicatable hoax.’ This individual never should have said this. This meeting took place 1-2 years before the IIG was founded. It wasn't until the first year of the IIG's existence that we even learned of this conversation, and we learned about it from listening to the Coast to Coast radio show with Art Bell. The CFI-West employee never told the IIG of his repeated correspondence with Michael Horn, and he kept no written records of his phone calls or email correspondence. Because of this, and other unfortunate situations, that employee has been removed from any contact with claimants at CFI-West and the IIG. Once the IIG learned about this situation we did what we could to lessen the damage done to CFI-West's reputation by this employee and also to try to acquire evidence from Michael Horn for testing of his claims.”

MH: The professional skeptics have had five years to duplicate Meier’s photos, film, video and sounds. Their response has been to demote Mr. Vaughn Rees, the hapless fellow who stuck his foot in his mouth and “never should have said this” in the first place, then to claim that I said I had evidence that I never said I had, as well as claiming that Randi didn’t call the case a hoax and then retract it, etc. So far, so good. What’s next, will they start in on the 120+ witnesses, like Phobol Cheng? Will they try to completely dismiss the credibility of the prophetically accurate info, such as is documented, and to be found, in among other places, Wendelle Stevens’ book “UFO contact from the PLEIADES –A PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION REPORT” copyrights 1978-1982?

Here are some excerpts from Stevens’ book, pgs. 87-89, that refer to specific prophetic information that Meier was given on October 19, 1978, and which was inadvertently given to Stevens during the same 115th Contact that contains the information on Jupiter, which we will also address later (note: emphasis added):

“Since the contacts began Meier has been given a series of events that mark important points in time. He has been strictly forbidden to reveal any of these events until after they have come to pass, which he has observed quite religiously since getting caught trying to report and record an earlier event before it happened. The aliens apparently do not want to be responsible for changes in destiny due to premature revelation of events in time.

“The case in point concerned a revelation about the nature and time of death of Generalissimo Franco of Spain before the fact. Meier wrote the information down, sealed it, and mailed it by registered letter to Mr. Hans Jacob in Wetzikon.

Jacob already knew of the prediction but the registered letter was to establish a time officially. The letter was sealed and registered on 28 October 1975. Franco died 22 days later, on 19 November 1975, exactly as predicted. The letter, although registered in front of witnesses and deposited into the Swiss postal system at the same time, in front of the same witnesses, mysteriously disappeared, in the Swiss postal system, for which nobody could account for 21 days, and then reappeared and was delivered the day of Franco’s death. The Swiss postal authorities could not explain the long delay, nor could they say where the letter had been misplaced or how it was found. Semjase later told Meier that she had picked it up because of foolish attempts to disobey the secrecy rule, and had held it until the event.

“Meier is occasionally given advance notice of a series of events which make up an ‘event clock’ by which he can tell the sequence of things to come and where we are at any given point in event time. The events will occur as scheduled no matter what we do. We can only advance or retard them in terms of linear time…and we can increase or decrease the effects of these events on us by our own actions. Events mark confluences in time which affect many other things. Some such events which have recently passed are, the overthrow of the Shah in Iran, The Chinese attack on North Vietnam, The Russian invasion of Afghanistan, The death of Marshall Tito, The abdication of queen Wilhemina of the Netherlands, the discovery of the 14th and 15th moons of Jupiter in 1980, etc. The next markers in event time are being closely watched. So far, all of the events I have been able to monitor have happened right on schedule and in proper sequence.

“I have had the contact notes for 19 October 1978 in my possession since 9 March 1979, since before many of the items just mentioned had occurred. During this time I showed them to two trusted people, Mr. Rudy Pestalozzi and Mr. O. Richrd Norton. This paper listed those events in their correct order and extends the predictions into our near future. We have promised to observe the ban on release of any information on future events until after they happen. The last predicted event marking a confluence in time, affecting many other things, was the predicted ‘ignominious death of the Shah’ closely following the death of Marshall Tito. That paper describes the next events in their approximate order of future occurrence. Their time may be accelerated or retarded by mass mind influence…They also observed that there are two more planets in our solar system still to be discovered, both beyond Pluto and one well beyond.”

Note: These are the remaining events that Stevens was referring to that subsequently occurred as predicted:

• Mount St. Helens eruption: May 18, 1980

• Terrorist attack on Iranian Embassy in London: Apr./May1980

• Iran Hostage Crisis: Nov. 1979/Jan. 1981

• Assassination of Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi: Oct. 31, 1984

The Jonestown massacre (Nov. 18, 1978) had already occurred one month after Meier received the predictions and several months after Stevens got them. And, as we all now know, two planets have recently been discovered beyond Pluto.

Would Mr. Bartholomaus, and all the various and sundry other skeptics, debunkers and magicians like us to believe that Stevens, Pestalozzi and Norton (and all the other scientists, experts and researchers) were all involved in some great conspiracy along with Meier? Or would they like us to believe that it was all lucky guesswork, including the information about the two planets beyond Pluto? Well, you don’t have to make up your mind yet, there’s plenty more to consider including the information regarding Jupiter farther down below.

DB: “I would like to point out at this time that neither Billy Meier nor Michael Horn has ever filed an application for the IIG $10,000 Paranormal Challenge nor for the JREF $1 Million Paranormal Challenge. I think it is important to mention this because Michael Horn has claimed several times that Billy Meier has won the challenges, but before anyone can win the challenges they must actually apply for the challenges. No application related to the claims of Billy Meier has ever been filed as it relates to the Paranormal Challenges.”

MH: I have to admit that I, rather naively, assumed that since IIG was unable to duplicate Meier’s photos, and never even tried to submit a film or a sound analysis, and in light of Meier’s now proven prophetic accuracy, the good folks over at IIG would simply want to admit defeat for themselves and victory for the truth and, thereby, award Meier their alleged $1 million award. I forgot that their escape clause in all this is a dog and pony show that effectively says that if something didn’t happen when they wanted it to, on command, it didn’t happen.

Of course, we also have the Meier Contacts DVD, wherein the warnings regarding the Paris riots, based on information Meier received and published in 1981 and 1987, was referred to and available to the public in February 2004, 1 1/2 years before the riots began. I think that since it can be proved – without any doubt – that the information was released on the DVD before the events occurred, it’s about as close to proof positive of prophetic accuracy as is humanely possible.

DB: “Now, on to the photographs.

“Michael Horn likes to repeatedly state that the IIG has not submitted our, admittedly non-UFO, photographs to the same testing that the Meier photographs were. There is a very simple explanation for this. The ‘PhotoAnalysis3.pdf’ document on Michael Horn's webpage is a copy of Wendelle Stevens' and Jim Dilettoso's photo analysis reports. The primary thing that these, and other reports touted by Michael Horn, claim to show is that there was no evidence of double-exposures, optical-printing, cutouts, paste-ups, etc. Mr. Horn then goes on to say that these reports prove that the photos taken by Billy Meier are "real" photos.

“If by ‘real’ photos Mr. Horn means that the photo examined is an original and unaltered photo then we would tend to agree with him. However, very few people state that the image in the photograph represents an extraterrestrial flying craft. The IIG has never claimed that the photos presented by Billy Meier are double-exposures or some other form of laboratory manipulation. There are many people out there that do claim there is evidence that shows that the photographs were manipulated, but the IIG has not.

“As it has been stated repeatedly, there are no original Billy Meier photographs available for examination. The reasons for this vary, but ultimately it doesn't matter because there is nothing to examine. The tests described by Mr. Stevens and Mr. Dilettoso raise some questions as to their usefulness. In addition to the tests searching for evidence of photographic manipulation (which would not be present if the photographs were created by a single-exposure using forced perspective) they describe tests that purport to reveal the size of the object by analyzing the grey scale, color shift, and the amount of blurring. The IIG has asked a forensic photography expert to analyze the analysis done by Stevens and Dilletoso and once a final report is completed the IIG will publish it on our website at www.iigwest.com. When asked if such an examination could be possible to determine the size of an object in a photograph he said that in theory it could, but that it could only be done in a controlled laboratory setting using a solid color background of which the color value is known and that the procedure was highly unlikely to achieve correct results in an uncontrolled outdoor setting where the color values were not solid and measurably known. Later this year the IIG will hopefully receive a final report from this forensic photography expert and his findings can be discussed in more detail at that time.

“The IIG's ‘UFO’ photos were all created with a single-exposure of a landscape with a ‘ufo’ in the image and there was no laboratory or digital manipulation of the image of any kind. The ‘ufo’ in the photos taken by James Underdown, Executive Director of the Center for Inquiry-West, was a Mr. Coffee coffee pot lid held on a fishing line hanging from a pole. Because we are tired of the circular logic demonstrated by Michael Horn and others the IIG has decided to allow anyone to download the high-resolution photographic images and run them through any test that they want. These are all 600 dpi scans and our photos are higher quality than anything ever released by Billy Meier, Michael Horn, or Steelmark.

 “Here are the viewing instructions:

 “Go to: http://www.iigwest.com/login.php

 Type in the username: meier

 Type in the password: meier

“This will take you to a page listing three folders: ‘Good James Underdown UFO Photos’ contains images of ‘UFOs’ that show no signs of how the shot was done. ‘Not Good or Setup James Underdown UFO Photos’ contains images where you can see the pole or the person holding the pole and the images showing how the shots were done. ‘Photoshop Filtered Images’ contains images that have been manipulated using various Photoshop filters. I noticed in reading the UFO Analysis document produced by Michael Horn that some of the tests described had the same name as some Photoshop filter effects. I decided to apply the filter effects to an image and see what happened. What happened is that the IIG photos showed the same visual characteristics as the Billy Meier photos run through the same test.

“Feel free to download as many of these images as you want and run them through any test that you want. Keep in mind that these are really large files. They range from 5 MB to 20 MB. Also keep in mind that these images are of better quality than any images ever released of any Meier photographs. Another thing. I am telling you that the object in the picture is a small object held by a fishing line. See if you can find the fishing line. I do not believe that you will no matter what tests you run the photos through. Now, using the assumption that Horn and others use when discussing the Meier photographs, if you cannot see the thread it must therefore not be a small object and must therefore be an extraterrestrial spacecraft. It is these leaps of logic that cause so much to be misinterpreted regarding the Billy Meier case.”

MH: There can be no question that Meier’s photos are far superior in quality, in detail, with the UFOs in close proximity to, and in comparison with, known large objects such as trees.

More photos and information at: 

http://www.tjresearch.info/moretree.htm

and

http://www.tjresearch.info/Wedcake.htm

absolutely put to shame any comparison between IIG’s photos, or those of Fortean Times, Jeff Ritzmann, etc. while they all can be said to be from fair to good quality model UFO photos. But, and this is as they say a big “but”, Meier's 1975 photos were taken with the focus stuck at a mark "one notch" short of infinity, which means at a focus setting somewhere around 20 to 30 meters, and that should also be a requirement for the equipment of all those attempting to duplicate his photos. Otherwise it’s far easier for them to take halfway decent looking photos that aren’t hampered by the handicapping condition of Meier’s camera.

Of course, the entire skeptical premise fails when one understands that, for instance, photographing a model of a 747 airplane is simply not the same thing as photographing an actual 747, no matter how good the “effect” is, the effect of Meier’s photos being what IIG originally claimed to have duplicated anyway.

I wonder if Mr. Bartholomaus is also saying that the tested photos of his models showed the same edge (and other specific) characteristics spelled out in the complete photo analysis protocols.

By the way, just what kind of “models” did Meier use when he took UFO photos, such as these two, in India in 1964, which were witnessed by Phobol Cheng, her family and the entire small community of people, including those waiting at a local train station?

What kind of an elaborate hoax was he managing to pull off – on the outskirts of New Delhi (not exactly the special effects capital in 1964 – that also warranted a newspaper article on him?

http://www.theyfly.com/images2/New%20Delhi%20Journal%20Article.jpg

And in addition to the comments regarding the photos, where is the film that was promised in February 2001? Surely it can’t be that hard for IIG to provide their version of this “easily duplicated hoax”…using the same 8mm type of movie camera that Meier did.

DB: “A few words about the audio recording.

“Michael Horn routinely says that he has an mp3 file of a ‘beamship’ sound that was recorded on an audio cassette tape that anyone can download for free to analyze and see if they can explain the inaudible wavelengths that were claimed to be discovered when playing the sound through an oscilloscope. The first thing to note about this is that even if the original audio file contained inaudible frequencies of an unusual nature they would no longer be present in the mp3 file. When converting an uncompressed audio file into a compressed mp3 file ALL inaudible information is deleted. It is this deletion of inaudible material that allows the mp3 file to have a smaller file size than an uncompressed audio file. Basically, performing any tests on the mp3 file is useless because the special nature of what is claimed to be on the audio recording no longer exists in the mp3 file.

“As has been mentioned earlier in this thread it is actually impossible for the original recording equipment to even record the frequencies claimed to be a part of the audio recording. The audio was not recorded using professional audio recording equipment that has a wider frequency response range. The audio was recorded with a consumer audio cassette recorder. Audio cassette recorders manufactured today only have a frequency range of 30 Hz to 16 KHz. Here is a link to the technical specifications for a modern JVC audio cassette deck:

http://reviews.cnet.com/JVC_TD_W254_dual_cassette_deck/4507-7865_7-30402905.html?tag=sub

This deck is also for a stereo system component. It is more likely that the audio recorder used was similar in nature to this portable audio cassette recorder from Sony:

http://www.mineroff.com/nature/tcm5000.htm

This portable audio cassette recorder only has a frequency range of 90 Hz to 12 KHz.

It is safe to assume that audio cassette decks manufactured over twenty years ago had a narrower range of frequencies that could be recorded than audio cassette decks manufactured today.”

MH: Nice try but the skeptics have far bigger problems on their hands than just the inaudible frequencies. What Mr. Bartholomaus fails to note, either out of ignorance, ineptitude or deliberate attempts to obfuscate the facts of the situation, is that there are two documented components here, the sound recordingsand the witnesses. Regarding the sounds, the witnesses were unanimous in describing them as so loud that they attracted their attention from as far as one-half mile away…and there was no sound equipment, or any kinds of speakers or amplifiers, anywhere to be found in the open field where Meier and his wife were recording the sounds of the UFO…on four occasions.

Leaving the inaudible frequencies aside, IIG should definitely put its money where its mouth is and duplicate just the audible sounds, in an open field, under the same conditions, with the same equipment Meier used, with the sound source seeming to come from all around and above, and it should be so strong that it's considered (by 15 impartial witnesses present) to be loud a half-mile away, with no sound equipment or amplifiers anywhere, as was absolutely the case, when and where Meier originally recorded the sounds of the UFO. Let’s remember that none of the sound experts could identify the actual source of the (audible) sounds, nor did they have the ability to duplicate them without the possible use of a bank of synthesizers such as were available at the time.

In order for Mr. Bartholomaus to have an idea of just what results his fabrication of the sounds such effectively duplicate, in addition to all of the specific information provided by Stevens regarding the testing of the sounds, I would direct him to page 447, where Stevens first mentions that sound engineers Nils Rognerud and Steve Singer worked on analyzing a three-minute segment of the UFO sounds recorded in front of 15 witnesses and discovered unique and unexpected characteristics. Then:

“Two other sound engineers and a sound synthesizer specialist joined the analysis team and the sounds were re-examined with a view to possible duplication. These specialists all agreed that the sounds were unique in character, and that any synthesis, if at all possible, could only reproduce parts of the whole soundtrack we were examining; and that duplication of any part of the whole sound, even in a short linear segment may be impossible. The number of discrete frequencies, constantly shifting, and the migrating and constantly changing amplitudes, shifting in relative dominance, presented problems in duplication beyond the capability of present state-of-the-art equipment.

“…After some four hours of testing these sounds it was generally agreed that they were truly unique and that the were not produced by any mundane source.”

Considering all of the above, it would appear that IIG, despite its attempts to evade the issue and the challenge, certainly has its work cut out for them – if they wish to establish any credibility. Who here would like to bet that there will be yet another round of excuses, delays and “reasons” why IIG cannot, or will not, even attempt to duplicate the sounds under the original conditions?

DB: “A brief discussion about the prophecies of Billy Meier.

“The primary discussions about Billy Meier today concern his ‘prophecies’ he claims are told to him from the Plejarans. As Ike42 has detailed, the information that Meier predicted had in fact been published prior to Meier's publishing. Horn routinely states that if just one of Meier's photos is proven to be of an extraterrestrial spacecraft then all of Meier's other claims must therefore be true. Well, using that form of logic, if just one of Meier's prophecies is proven to be a retelling of information previously published in another venue then all of Meier's prophecies must therefore be false. More than one, in fact many, of Meier's prophecies have been proven to have come from previously published material. Mr. Horn says that the skeptics have to prove that Meier read these previous publications in order for Meier's prophecies to be false. This is simply untrue.  It cannot be a prophecy if the information is available prior to the prophecy being made. That is not prophecy. That is simply a retelling of information. Ike42 only examined a small portion of Billy Meier's predictions. I have been in contact with Ike42 and he is planning to examine other Meier predictions. When his follow-up report is completed it will be made available on the IIG website.”

MH: I recall that Ike said that Meier was wrong about the rings of Jupiter being composed of ionized sulfur. Therefore, please read this from:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=1980Sci...207..181P&db_key=AST&data_type=HTML&format=)

 "Images of the ring of singly ionized sulfur encircling Jupiter, obtained on two successive nights in April 1979, show that the ring characteristics may change dramatically in about 24 hr."

Here's Meier's quote:

"Now I am still wondering, if regarding the volcanic action on the moon Io, I remember correctly. If I am right, then you explained that the volcanic eruptions there would occur with primordial power and resemble monstrous explosions, which would thrust up their ejected material like atomic mushrooms, whereby sometimes heights would be reached up to 180 kilometer. Principally, it involves dust particles, gasses, ashes and some magma, but which would reach ejection velocities up to 2,300 kilometer per hour and beyond, as due to the lack of atmosphere of the moon, only minute resistance power is present. But you also said that the largest portion of all ejected material again falls back on the moon, as I already mentioned before. The rest, you explained, would be pushed out into space, while a part of it is drawn by Jupiter and very slowly densifies in its ring to a heavy sulphur-ion-combination. Is that correct?"

Please also note that while Meier published this in October 1978, Stevens already put his March 9, 1979 date on having the document and then having the other two men read and sign off on it. So it appears that Ike was indeed wrong...unless you want to start creating far reaching conspiracies involving Stevens, the two other men - and some parties having been very “psychic” to even concern themselves with the potential importance of fine, ultimately accurate details, of Meier's varied scientific information - decades in advance.

I also recall that Ike may have criticized Meier regarding the speed and height of the eject, so please note that, as Meier says above, "...ejection velocities up to 2,300 kilometer per hour and beyond..."

And please also confirm the info here regarding the surface of Io:

http://www.nineplanets.org/io.html

And then compare it with what Meier reported:

"Aha, and will then perhaps also be discovered, that the ring around Jupiter, for the most part, consists of particles catapulted outward by large volcanoes of the moon, Io, which partially are captured by Jupiter while, however, the largest portion of all the outward catapulted material again falls back on Io, and practically closes all volcano openings again, but also the gigantic plateaus and mountains, which this moon, in contrast to the other moons of Jupiter, proves to have no carter landscape, but a fantastic evenness, despite the many craters?"

As Columbo used to say, "one more thing". I recall that Ike also said that Meier was wrong about Amalthea being the closest moon to Jupiter. However, when you look up the dimension for the so-called moons you get the following:

METIS

Metis is 25 miles (40 km) in diameter and orbits 79,500 miles (128,000 km) from Jupiter, within its main ring.

ADRASTEA

Adrastea is 12 miles (20 km) in diameter and orbits 80,000 miles (129,000 km) from Jupiter, within its main ring.

AMALTHEA

Amalthea is 145 x 91 x 83 miles (232 x146 x134 km) in diameter and orbits 112,700 miles (181,300 km) from Jupiter, within the faint Gossamer ring.

THEBE

Thebe is 68 x 56 miles (110 x 90 km) in diameter and orbits 138,000 miles (222,000 km) from Jupiter.

As you can see, Amalthea is more than twice the size of Thebe, the next largest "moon". But the Plejaren made it clear to Meier, when they spoke of the actual number of Saturn's moons, that certain objects are too small to be considered moons, and some are just asteroids, etc. In that light, the Plejaren may also be correct that Jupiter has only 17 actual moons (as they told Meier in 1978, when there were only 13 known moons of Jupiter), the rest being satellites that don't qualify, by their definition.

Considering that Io, the third largest of Jupiter's moons, has a diameter of 1,942 miles, Amalthea may well be considered the actual moon closest to Jupiter.

Now, if people here are intellectually honest, they will start wondering HOW Meier knew and reported all of this and WHY this case - with its volumes of information - is being made available to people of earth. Hint: It has to do with our future survival.

DB: “And finally I want to discuss the alleged sample of extraterrestrial metal alloy.

“As others have previously stated no matter how brilliant Marcel Vogel may have been he was not a metallurgist. He was a chemist. And as far as I know no metallurgist has ever examined a piece of the metal that Billy Meier has described as being of manufactured extraterrestrial origin. At one point Michael Horn mentioned the metal alloy during his emails with the IIG and JREF. This is the ONLY piece of evidence that is testable for either Paranormal Challenge. The photographs, sound recordings, and prophecies are all ineligible for a variety of reasons, some of which I have stated above. However, it is very easy to test a piece of metal for evidence of extraterrestrial manufacturing origin. Just to be clear, if the metal were proven to be of extraterrestrial origin that would not be enough. There are several pieces of extraterrestrial metal that fall to Earth every year. These arrive in the form of meteorites. This is a natural occurrence. None of these pieces of extraterrestrial metal show any signs of being manufactured. If Billy Meier's metal were to show evidence of extraterrestrial manufacturing then he would win the Paranormal Challenges. Originally, Michael Horn said that he had access to the metal. Then when the IIG and JREF said that this would be acceptable for the Paranormal Challenges he said that he did not have access to the metal and that it had disappeared and that the report by chemist Marcel Vogel would have to suffice. It doesn't suffice. In order for a claim to be tested the evidence for that claim has to be tested.”

MH: A couple of problems here. Apparently Mr. Bartholomaus hasn’t seen Marcel Vogel’s analysis of the metal alloy samples, since he makes no specific references to any incorrect conclusions drawn by Vogel during that analysis, and he fails to note that Vogel did indeed report on the clearly manufactured nature of the alloy. Since Vogel had a far, far higher level of scientific credibility and accomplishment than Mr. Bartholomaus, simply attempting to attack Vogel as a substitute for specific, credible criticisms of his analysis is a rather transparent bit of nonsense.

And apparently Mr. Bartholomaus is unfamiliar with any of the examination of the metal samples that was done by the Swiss metallurgical laboratory Eidgenossische Materialprufungs und Versuchsanstalt in Zurich, and their report of March 17, 1978. On page 420 of his book, Stevens wrote, “A copy of this report is attached. It is unfortunate that this analysis did not show quantities of constituent parts by percentages. One item of interest is the presence of Chlorine in alloy with the heavier metals. This indicates a cold synthesis process unknown on Earth at the present time because Chlorine turns to a gas at a temperature well below the melting point of the other metals, and Chlorine is electrically inert and cannot be synthesized with other elements by an electrolytic process.”

On page 424, Stevens writes about some of the unique, and previously undetected, aspects of the metal samples such as Vogel’s observation of mechanical micro-machining, probably with a laser, visible when the specimen was examined at 500 diameters. At a later time, more of the specific and unique characteristics that Vogel attributed to (still unknown to us) non-electrical cold fusion processes will be discussed. All of this information has been available in Stevens’ book since 1982 and only adds to the significant weight of credibility of Meier’s claims and exponentially reduces the likelihood of a hoax that would even warrant the time of metallurgical laboratories and high-level scientists.

Well, if all of that is indeed true, it sure seems like quite an accomplishment for a one-armed farmer to pull off, wouldn’t you say?

DB: “This is the biggest problem with the Billy Meier case. All of the evidence is circumstantial. There is no hard evidence to examine. If this was a court case and Billy Meier was the prosecution the case would be dismissed due to a lack of evidence. That does not mean that the case would be proven to be a hoax, only that there is not enough evidence for Billy Meier to prove his case.”

MH: This has to be one of the most absurd of all the statements made by Mr. Bartholomaus. First, the sound recordings are indeed testable, as are the seven-fingered handprints on the car hood. And the reputations, credentials and credibility of the scientific experts and independent investigators, who examined all of the evidence while it was still available, absolutely cannot be dismissed. To attempt to do so is to suggest that they were all either incompetents or complicit in an elaborate, still impenetrable, hoax. Mr. Bartholomaus offers nothing but innuendo to attempt to convey this already long disproved conjecture.

To put it all in perspective, he is effectively (and ridiculously) saying that there’s virtually no substantive evidentiary difference or distinction between insufficient evidence and Meier’s abundant evidence, including:

1,200+ clear, daytime UFO photos of up to four of the craft

8 8mm film segments of up to three of the craft

1 daytime video

4 separate sound recordings, daylight, outdoors, 15 witnesses

Metal alloy sample analysis by IBM scientist Marcel Vogel and others

Scientific experts unable to duplicate the evidence

Seven-fingered handprints etched into hood of car

120+ witnesses (15 took and passed lie detector tests)

1 former UN diplomat witness

5 other photographers

Volumes of specific prophetically accurate information

As far as not being able to “prove” the Meier case, I suggest that millions of people worldwide now would contradict that statement. And they have IIG, CFI-West, James Randi and Mr. Bartholomaus to thank for putting their collective feet in their mouth with their public failure to deliver on their claim to be able to duplicate any of Meier’s evidence. I’m sorry if Mr. Vaughn Rees, by making the claim, accepting the challenge and being unable to meet it, has caused them some (well-deserved) public embarrassment in the process.

I guess that when you represent a magician (James Randi) you may also want to make clear and abundant evidence, as well as common sense…disappear.

DB: “Remember, Billy Meier, and Michael Horn, are the claimants. They are the people making extraordinary claims. Therefore they are the people that need to provide extraordinary evidence to prove their claims. They have repeatedly shown that they are either unable or unwilling to provide such evidence. Michael Horn, and by extension Billy Meier, are reduced to arguments based on logical fallacies and ad hominem attacks against those that simply ask them to provide the evidence necessary to prove their claims.

“As skeptics we are the ones with the open minds. Our minds are shaped by the quality of the evidence provided. I might personally believe that Billy Meier is not in contact with extraterrestrials, but if provided with sufficient evidence showing that Billy Meier is in contact with extraterrestrials then my thoughts would have to change.

Thank you.

Derek Bartholomaus

Independent Investigations Group

Steering Committee”

MH: No, thank you for once again showing that you simply don’t know what you’re talking about and that a whole army of pseudo-scientific skeptics are simply ignorant of, and incapable of duplicating or debunking, the abundant, factual evidence and truly broad scope of the investigation into the stunningly amazing, and monumentally, historically important Meier case.

Considering the five-year run up to this momentous occasion, when Mr. Bartholomaus finally hits us with his best shot, it’s really rather pathetic and disappointing. The skeptics think that they can isolate and separate the component parts of the Meier case into neat little parts that they can then dissect and/or dismiss. They completely fail to take into account the real life nature of the situation, even failing to note that the sounds were made not in a garage or recording studio but in the vast outdoors, drawing witnesses from a considerable distance away, in what is essentially farm land.

Their problem, plain and simple, is that they want to prove that the case is a hoax rather than to discover, as any real scientist would, just what the truth is.

I will be presenting a lecture on the Meier contacts at 10:00 a.m. on Saturday, February 11, at the Conscious Life Expo in Los Angeles, being held at the LAX Hilton. For more information:

http://www.consciouslifeexpo.com/daily.html

*Posted and owned by derekcbart; a member of AboveTopSecret.com and AboveTopSecret.com, LLP; “Billy Meier called the New Nostradamus!?!?”; http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread183213/pg1.