# Billy Meier, whats the verdict? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 16, 2013, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000 "2013-09-16T20:03:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 32
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/621 "2013-09-29T16:11:24Z")
> [@newinitiation](#): > > Look at the date of the copyright not to mention the fact that if you copyright it you need to do so through copyright office which makes your material official No you don’t _have_ to register the copyright. Copyright is created at the time of creation. And the date doesn’t prove content. the actual material proves content. ---
**Author:** ![newinitiation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/278dde/32.png) [@newinitiation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newinitiation)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/622 "2013-09-29T16:12:45Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > I think I see how this works. First, some charismatic idiot makes a prediction, like “The Earth will be hit by a giant asteroid within one year, causing half of the planet’s people to perish.” > > Next year, since everyone is going about their business as usual, someone says, “Your idiot is a fraud.” > > “But it did happen! His prediction came true! _Everything he says come true_, you are just to blind to see it! Here’s a YouTube video that proves it. If you don’t watch it, _you’re ignoring the evidence._” > > Etc., etc… > > cf. [Cognitive dissonance](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance) Charisma is not one of Billy’s forte If you read the prophecies and predictions you will come the the inevitable conclusion that all that Billy has stated so far has turned out to be true but those that have never read it will inevitably come to such a conclusion as you have > **[Prophecies & Predictions](http://www.theyfly.com/prophecies-predictions)** > > The Henoch Prophecies from the Billy Meier Contacts So many of the prophecies and predictions written by, Swiss UFO contactee Billy Meier, and/or given to him by the Plejaren extraterrestrial/alien human beings, have come true that we'd be wise to... ---
**Author:** ![newinitiation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/278dde/32.png) [@newinitiation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newinitiation)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/623 "2013-09-29T16:18:03Z")
> [@runner pat](#): > > No you don’t _have_ to register the copyright. Copyright is created at the time of creation. > And the date doesn’t prove content. the actual material proves content. That is an absurd statement you make as even if you don’t have to register for a copyright Meier’s work is published and sold in the international market in book bound form therefore precluding any backdating ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/624 "2013-09-29T16:19:51Z")
Care to quote where Randi retracted his claim of a hoax? ---
**Author:** ![mystic7](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecccb3/32.png) [@mystic7](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mystic7)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/625 "2013-09-29T16:54:31Z")
There’s evidence to indicate the prediction about Meier’s work being accepted by 2029 is ALREADY accurate. Ten years ago the number of proponents of the Meier case was much smaller than today. New realizations like Meier’s are hotly contested at first, but when 5-10% accept it the debate cools off. Then at some point the Truth breaks through at an exponential level. I’ve discussed the Meier material on other forums and I can see the numbers of the conscious growing steadily. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/626 "2013-09-29T17:45:33Z")
> [@mystic7](#): > > Ten years ago the number of proponents of the Meier case was much smaller than today. Probably because he is such a silly bit of woo that most people don’t bother with him and his laughably sad UFO pictures. UFOs have undergone massive drops in interest in the woo community (as [XKCD explains](http://xkcd.com/1235/)) in the past few couple of decades - given the level of energy needed to debunk more serious and sinister issues Billi-Boy gets tossed behind the back burner. ---
**Author:** ![newinitiation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/278dde/32.png) [@newinitiation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newinitiation)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/627 "2013-09-29T19:28:40Z")
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#): > > Probably because he is such a silly bit of woo that most people don’t bother with him and his laughably sad UFO pictures. UFOs have undergone massive drops in interest in the woo community (as [XKCD explains](http://xkcd.com/1235/)) in the past few couple of decades - given the level of energy needed to debunk more serious and sinister issues Billi-Boy gets tossed behind the back burner. Geezz how do you know for sure!? you aren’t an expert at anything and your views certainly don’t matter one way or the other as you are wrong ---
**Author:** ![newinitiation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/278dde/32.png) [@newinitiation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newinitiation)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/628 "2013-09-29T19:30:10Z")
> [@runner pat](#): > > Care to quote where Randi retracted his claim of a hoax? > **[horn29.3.04](https://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/meier/gaiaguys/horn29.3.04.htm)** ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/629 "2013-09-29T19:43:07Z")
> [@newinitiation](#): > > [horn29.3.04](http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/meier/gaiaguys/horn29.3.04.htm) That says nothing of the sort. And you know it. ---
**Author:** ![newinitiation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/278dde/32.png) [@newinitiation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newinitiation)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/630 "2013-09-29T19:53:15Z")
> [@runner pat](#): > > That says nothing of the sort. And you know it. All I know is that Randi has retracted his claims Which part of ‘Randi has retracted his claims’ don’t you understand ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/631 "2013-09-29T19:53:49Z")
> [@newinitiation](#): > > [horn29.3.04](http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/meier/gaiaguys/horn29.3.04.htm) So where is Randi’s quote calling Meier a hoax? Since you failed to include that. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/632 "2013-09-29T19:54:50Z")
> [@newinitiation](#): > > All I know is that Randi has retracted his claims > Which part of ‘Randi has retracted his claims’ don’t you understand He very clearly stated he never called him a hoax in the first place. Now you need to prove he did. Provide the quote. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/633 "2013-09-29T20:22:17Z")
> [@newinitiation](#): > > Geezz how do you know for sure!? I’ve been in the skeptical movement for quite some time and I can say that I have not heard anyone bother with Meier in ages. It comes up on forums like this now and then but most of the work was done decades ago. Declaring that fewer people are taking on Meier is like declaring victory for little winged people because nobody debunks the Cottingly fairies anymore. > [@](#): > > you aren’t an expert at anything and your views certainly don’t matter one way or the other as you are wrong Could you pack some more sour grapes into that sentence? I think I might have a fermented sugar overload! ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2013, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/634 "2013-09-29T20:26:40Z")
> [@runner pat](#): > > He very clearly stated he never called him a hoax in the first place. Now you need to prove he did. Provide the quote. Add in the classic declaration of victory in the 1,000,000 challenge despite obviously not even getting past the “filling the application” phase. I note the email Randi was replying to is suspiciously absent from that webpage. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/635 "2013-09-30T00:55:28Z")
> [@mystic7](#): > > New realizations like Meier’s are hotly contested at first, but when 5-10% accept it the debate cools off. Then at some point the Truth breaks through at an exponential level. You’ve got this backwards. When silly claims like this are first made they are generally ignored. After a small minority of devotees crank up the crazy long enough, people bother with rational rebuttals. The nuttiness subsides to low-level background muttering punctuated by small bursts of renewed looniness when a crank writes a new book or discovers new “revelations”, followed by rational folk pointing and laughing. The odds of there being an “exponential” breakthrough of this or similar nonsense are nil. ---
**Author:** ![Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b38774/32.png) [@Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/636 "2013-09-30T06:04:03Z")
> [@newinitiation](#): > > A one armed Swiss farmer with meager financial means pulling off such a grand hoax of the millennium in anybody’s standard is just impossible and ludicrous. I’ve seen the pictures. I’ve considered the evidence. I’ve applied Occams Razor and concluded… …it’s just not that good a hoax. ---
**Author:** ![newinitiation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/278dde/32.png) [@newinitiation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newinitiation)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 7:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/637 "2013-09-30T07:54:09Z")
I’ve been in the skeptical movement for quite some time and I can say that I have not heard anyone bother with Meier in ages. Gee its no wonder The skeptical movement is another cult religion in and of itself These skeptic aren’t interested in finding out the truth in as much as wanting to maintain the stutus quo. Its all belief oriented but never bsed on reality although they get some things right sometimes. The only reason why you think that people are less inclined to bother with the Billy Meier case with their skeptical inquiry is that some of them actually woke up out of their matrix of limitation and had the sense to be sensible about it and saw the truth for what it really is. You will find that your position is getting very narrower by the day as people learn of the truth of the Billy Meier case as being genuine all along. It comes up on forums like this now and then but most of the work was done decades ago. Yes most of the professional work to verify Billy’s claims through the impeccable evidence presented was done and with unbiased professionism by the experts. The skeptics on the other hand are still stuck some several decades back going around their merry-goround of irrationalism and illogicism having made no advances nor improvements in their method of inquiry failing to upgrade their thinking to the level required to fully understand and appracite the Meier contact case. Declaring that fewer people are taking on Meier is like declaring victory for little winged people because nobody debunks the Cottingly fairies anymore. Wow that says it all, well perhaps now that you’ve mentioned that nobody debunks the ‘cottingly fairies’ anymore, you guys might be on the right track to quit chasing fairies and start focusing on a real and sure thing like the Billy Meier case. You may make some inroads. Could you pack some more sour grapes into that sentence? I think I might have a fermented sugar overload! Well how can I take you seriously when you don’t present a good argument based on reason and common sense (which is not so common these days) based on real research but instead spout off condescending and derogatory remarks that even a preschooler can do ---
**Author:** ![newinitiation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/278dde/32.png) [@newinitiation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newinitiation)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/638 "2013-09-30T08:05:47Z")
> [@Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](#): > > I’ve seen the pictures. I’ve considered the evidence. I’ve applied Occams Razor and concluded… > …it’s just not that good a hoax. William of Ockham must be turning in his grave for his methodological priciple or rather maxim to be gratutitously despoiled by people who least understand it. If you had applied this maxim properly to the Meier case, the simplest of explanation is usually the most correct and thus because the contact case is real, the complexities arising out of them was needlessly generated by the skeptics because they have failed to apply it themselves. ---
**Author:** ![newinitiation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/278dde/32.png) [@newinitiation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newinitiation)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 8:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/639 "2013-09-30T08:19:05Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > You’ve got this backwards. > > When silly claims like this are first made they are generally ignored. After a small minority of devotees crank up the crazy long enough, people bother with rational rebuttals. The nuttiness subsides to low-level background muttering punctuated by small bursts of renewed looniness when a crank writes a new book or discovers new “revelations”, followed by rational folk pointing and laughing. > > The odds of there being an “exponential” breakthrough of this or similar nonsense are nil. Ghandi, Arthur, Churchill and Budda said it best about the truth of the Billy Meeier’s contact case. Truth is by nature self-evident. As soon as you remove the cobwebs of ignorance that surround it, it shines clear. Mahatma Gandhi An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it. Mahatma Gandhi Truth stands, even if there be no public support. It is self-sustained. Mahatma Gandhi There are only two mistakes one can make along the road to truth; not going all the way, and not starting. Buddha All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. Arthur Schopenhauer The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. Winston Churchill ---
**Author:** ![newinitiation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/278dde/32.png) [@newinitiation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newinitiation)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 8:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000/640 "2013-09-30T08:29:36Z")
> [@runner pat](#): > > That says nothing of the sort. And you know it. James Randi owes Billy $1,000,000 > **[Horn.challenge29.3.04](https://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/meier/gaiaguys/Horn.challenge29.3.04.htm)** [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000.md?page=31) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/billy-meier-whats-the-verdict/669000.md?page=33)