The Billy Meier UFO case

[CoderGuy]

Well, these were from before photoshop, in the 70's. I suspect they are models, but some shots look hard to do with a model in the 70's. Of course I want to believe, and I tend to think most hoaxes are part true, and part not. But if one aspect is faked, then does that mean the whole thing is fake? I mean, take that viewpoint, and look at the verboten topic, the moon landing, 911...... We know faked aspects of all these, so does it mean the whole thing is fake? I tend to think it's a mix.

I think what you are referring to are embellishments. Someone sees what they "think" is a UFO so they mock up some photos to corroborate their story (risking discrediting themselves completely). So I agree, just because some of the facts are manufactured doesn't mean the entire incident didn't happen. I have personally had two incidents I would have classified as UFO encounters (one was very UFO-y), but UFO just means unidentified flying object, doesn't mean they were aliens.

[tom502]

http://royalsociety.org/extra-terrestrial-life/

[truthwolf1]

Quality photos is and always has been an issue. Though I have seen some very quality footage, especially of these massive flocks of orbular craft in the sky. Of course things can be faked, especially in today's CGI and photoshop world. I think maybe, also, these craft may not be the solid metal mass of matter like what we know of, so maybe they are of a different material, maybe even inter-dimensional. But, of the probably millions of pictures and video, there is a lot of good clear stuff too.

Most people just point and click without usually even thinking about low light and the speed of a object. It is pretty much like giving a camera to your Mom and telling her to go outside to take a picture of that f-15 Fighter Jet that is passing by.

[sgreger1]

Well, these were from before photoshop, in the 70's. I suspect they are models, but some shots look hard to do with a model in the 70's. Of course I want to believe, and I tend to think most hoaxes are part true, and part not. But if one aspect is faked, then does that mean the whole thing is fake? I mean, take that viewpoint, and look at the verboten topic, the moon landing, 911...... We know faked aspects of all these, so does it mean the whole thing is fake? I tend to think it's a mix.

I don't mean literally photshop, they did have ways of doctoring photos, and this is definately doctored. I mean relal it looks like something out of your garage pasted on there. Doesn't even match the shadows or the color or anything. The video was very interesting and I would like to see the rest, but the pics on this thread are 100% fake without question, I can guarantee that. The guy does sound really legit though, I mean look at his beard.

[Premium Parrots]

didn't he used to work for Hitler?

[tom502]

I think, whether fake or not, what sets this case apart from others, is there is no comparable case like it. I guess the George Adamski one is most similar. But the photos, films, contacts, and messages, and being relatively recent(70's and I think to the present, though I think the photos stopped in the 80's, or late 70's), is such a bulk of material, that makes it stand out.

[sgreger1]

The pictures and video in the youtube clip you posted are pretty convincing, but let me also note that the resolution avilable back then makes faking things extremely easy, as things are naturally blended at such low resolutions. For example, filming avatar in the 70's would have been easy, blending fake things with real things is all too easy at those resolutions. However, nowadays with blue-ray technology, it is extremely hard to make CGI look real because you can see all of the detail that would have been blurred out in 70's style low-res technology.

I could easly produce pictures that looked identical to the ones in his video with nothing but freeware post-editing programs, assuming I published it all in 640x480 resolution blown up to 1024x768 like in this video.

[tom502]

Well, we only have 9 days till contact. I bought that guys book, eh, $20. It's a topic that interests me even if it doesn't happen, though he says it's a tentative date, but will happen before the year is up.

[sgreger1]

Tom, while I would love for that to happen, the reality is that I doubt aliens would contact this dude and be like "Yo dawg, we heard you like first contact, so on Oct 13 we're gonna give you some more first contact, so you can first contact while you first contact".

(curious if anyone will get that reference)

Anyways, I doubt they came here and told just this one guy of the day they were coming. We should start a snuson pool to bet whether or not it will happen before the end of this year. Betting starts at 10^87897897689778978979 to 1 that it will not happen.

[tom502]

Well, I'm sceptical, yet hopeful.

[Bigblue1]

At those odds I'll throw buck on it just to be safe......

[CoderGuy]

Well, I'm sceptical, yet hopeful.

+1