'Flying saucer' filmed in Turkey

“The sound barrier was very real given the aerodynamics of aircraft at that time.”

It was an aerodynamic problem, not a physics problem. There was no law of physics that made the speed of sound a limiting speed. Bullets can break the sound barrier so we knew it was not some impossible wall to cross.

SOME MORE respite/distraction from the election noise . . .

Gleanings from ATS . . .

recent UFO video captured by decent equipment and a trained videographer . . .

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread408462/pg1

++++++++++++

Another night video . . . with conventional craft lights and sounds also in frame . . . UFO seems to remain stationary and copter or whatever with conventional lights traverses right laterally then flies back up toward UFO . . . up and down toward UFO a few times . . .

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4796126332685436835&hl=en

BILLY MEIER PREDICTIONS 2008 AND FORWARD:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread326219/pg1

INFORMAL REPORT ON THEM BY INDEPENDENTINVESTIGATIONS GROUP:

http://www.iigwest.com/investigations/meier/ike42report.htm

intro stuff. More at the link above:

Research Into Billy Meier’s Predictions

An Informal Report by Ike42 on April 21, 2004
Download PDF of Original Report
Contents

INTRODUCTION
Background
Investigation Approach
Research Notes

SECTION 1: JUPITER INFORMATION IN THE 115TH CONTACT
1. 115th Contact: Jupiter features
2. 115th Contact: Miscellaneous facts
3. 115th Contact: Composition of ring
4. 115th Contact: Amalthea
5. 115th Contact: Io’s ocean
6. 115th Contact: Eruption info
7. 115th Contact: Io plasma torus
8. 115th Contact: Source of Jupiter’s ring

SECTION 2: OTHER PREDICTIONS
1. 7th Contact, 25 February 1975; 35th Contact, 16 Sept 1975
2. 31st Contact, 17 July 1975
3. 45th Contact, 25 February 1976
4. 1978, Hubble and Toutatis
5. 249th Contact, 13 June 1994

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

Introduction

Background

“Billy” Eduard Meier is a man from Switzerland who claims that he has been in contact with extra-terrestrial people (ETs) called Plejarens for most of his life. He says that he has seen their spacecraft, taken numerous pictures and movies, recorded the sound made by one of the flying saucers, met the aliens in person, and communicated with them (often telepathically) on a wide variety of subjects. The body of evidence includes hundreds of photographs of UFOs, a handful of short movies of UFOs, the sound recording, a sample of metal claimed to be of alien manufacture, and thousands of pages of transcripts (called “Contact Notes” or “Contact Reports”) of Meier’s conversations with the Plejarens. Meier’s supporters say that all of the evidence has been scientifically scrutinized and validated by highly qualified researchers and investigators.

I first heard about the case when I read James Randi’s March 26, 2004, commentary. I did some reading about it at

www.billymeier.com

and other sites around the web. At first, the case sounds too well investigated and documented to be any kind of hoax. If it was true I wanted to know it, and if it was a hoax I was curious about how it might have been perpetrated. So, I started reading about the case in earnest. I have only been aware of the case for about a month, but I have probably read a couple of hundred pages of text on the subject.

I didn’t find irrefutable proof of the claims. I started getting suspicious when I heard some stories that sounded contrived. For instance, it is said that the aliens “eliminated” a tree that appears prominently in one set of photos because they didn’t want people to be able to prove the size of the UFO that is next to the tree in the photos. Another problem was that the more I read the more it seemed that real scientific analysis had not been done. The sound analysis report and the excerpts of the photo analysis which are available on the web did not strike me as reports of methodical, detailed, repeatable experiments. Then I came across several documents which argue that Billy Meier had written some scientific facts before anyone else on earth, and Meier could not have known the information when he did unless the Plejarens had told it to him just as he claimed. The evidence offered for those claims was inadequate, so I undertook a project to research a small sample of those “predictions”.

Investigative Approach

My hypothesis is that Billy Meier’s source for the predictive information he wrote in his Contact Notes was newspapers and magazines, not ETs.

After approximately two weeks of part-time research (about 42 hours total, I would guess), I did not find any information that is inconsistent with my hypothesis. In fact, I discovered some information that is better explained by my hypothesis than it is explained by contact with ETs.

It has been reported that the Plejarens will go out of their way to discredit Billy Meier

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

It is possible that Plejarens exist and have deviously only given Meier information which is consistent with a hypothesis such as mine. However, for the purpose of this document, I am going to presume that none of the information I examined is misinformation. First of all, all the items I consider here have been offered by Meier’s supporters as evidence that his claims about ETs are true. And second, if a person believes that any error can be explained away by assuming the faulty item was misinformation, it would be pointless for him to care about my research into the prediction claims.

In this document, I only examine specific, detailed facts that are claimed to have been written by Billy Meier before terrestrial discovery of the same information. Vague predictions like “a new epidemic will arise” have to undergo a different kind of analysis, and they are not considered here.

The date on which a given Contact Notes document was written is open to question because it cannot be verified by an unbiased source. Billy Meier writes a date on each contact, but only the date on which a work is widely published is proof that it existed at that time. If a person (like Meier) really wants to provide dated proof for a piece of information, he easily could buy a small personal ad in a newspaper containing the information. That would be an inexpensive way to prove that the information actually was written on that date: anyone who doubted could go into the newspaper archives and read the original text for himself.

Many of the Contact Notes have been published in book form. The publication dates of those books are the best “confirmable” dates that I am aware of, but there might be other confirmable dates. In this document, I mostly ignore the creation dates claimed by Meier’s supporters. I list the earliest terrestrial reports that I could find for the information and sometimes mention that the date is before the confirmable dates. Establishing the date that Meier first wrote his information is a separate problem.

Research Notes

My research resources were the internet and the Marriott Library at the University of Utah. I located most of the historical information using these databases:

JSTOR (Science journal)
LexisNexis Academic (major newspapers and magazines)
ProQuest (New York Times Historical archive)
EBSCO (others)

In the text, I refer to articles with the publication name and date along with a citation ID in square brackets (e.g. [NYT1]). The full citations are listed in the Reference section at the end.

All of the articles I refer to were published in English in the United States (except The Guardian). I make no attempt to show that Billy Meier had access to the particular publications I reference. All of them are well-known, established publications: New York Times, The Guardian (London), Newsweek, National Geographic, Aviation Week & Space Technology, and the journals Nature and Science. The information I reference was generally available and likely was reported in a variety of publications worldwide.

The earliest publications that I found are not necessarily the earliest anywhere. I hope that I have provided detailed enough information to allow any future investigators to pick up where I left off in researching Billy Meier’s claims.

PDF FILE OF REPORT:

http://www.iigwest.com/investigations/meier/emails/ike42report.pdf

DAYLIGHT UFO PHOTO IN UK

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread408372/pg1

GRAVITY MACHINES NON-ALIEN TYPE ARE COMING SOON:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread320828/pg1

SOURCE:

http://www.borisvolfson.com/index.html#anchor_2055

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

HONEYWELL SURVEILLANCE DONE:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread318621/pg1

It was an aerodynamic problem, not a physics problem.

You are splitting hairs.

Is is more rational to believe that thousands of credible witnesses and instrument readings are mistaken, or that there might be something we don't know?

You are splitting hairs.

Is is more rational to believe that thousands of credible witnesses and instrument readings are mistaken, or that there might be something we don’t know?

WELL PUT.

THX

“Is is more rational to believe that thousands of credible witnesses and instrument readings are mistaken, or that there might be something we don’t know?”

Thousands of people have seen UFO’s but that doesn’t mean what any of them saw were flying saucers from another planet. It is much easier for me to believe that what people are seeing is natural phenomena that can be explained easily, or is the result of phenomena that we don’t yet understand, than it is for me to believe aliens have traveled the distances that would be required to reach earth. Credible evidence of visiting aliens is non-existent.