mgeng
New Member
Posts: 28
|
Post by mgeng on Jan 20, 2009 9:14:54 GMT -5
I wanted to create a separate thread for John so that we can find him easily throughout this forum. I hope John agrees with me.
Here is my question John:
From Billy Meier's contact with Semjase (ET from Pleiadians) from Feb 3rd, 1975 10:10 pm, Semjase said that George Adamski is a fraud. Let me give an excerpt from this contact (I downloaded from his web site at FIGU, 2nd_Contact.pdf):
"Billy: First of all, I would be interested to know about Kenneth Arnold. Am I correct that he was not a fraud ?
Semjase 59. Certainly, this man was not a fraud, for he really had seen our beamships. 60 Many other pilots have encountered our beamships or alien ones as well. 61. The greatest fraud, however, was the man who called himself Karl Michalek. 62. And on the same level was the man who became world-famous by the name of George Adamski. 63. His so-called colleagues or friends belong in the same category also. 64. This means those around him who pretended having had contact with us. 65. Other names are lesser known, but are of certain importance because they are frauds: Haruski Tsukamoto, Jerrold Baker, R.O. Schmidt, C.A. Anderson, Angelucci and many, many more."
What do you think John ?
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by johnlear on Jan 20, 2009 14:00:22 GMT -5
I wanted to create a separate thread for John so that we can find him easily throughout this forum. I hope John agrees with me. Here is my question John: From Billy Meier's contact with Semjase (ET from Pleiadians) from Feb 3rd, 1975 10:10 pm, Semjase said that George Adamski is a fraud. Let me give an excerpt from this contact (I downloaded from his web site at FIGU, 2nd_Contact.pdf): "Billy: First of all, I would be interested to know about Kenneth Arnold. Am I correct that he was not a fraud ? Semjase 59. Certainly, this man was not a fraud, for he really had seen our beamships. 60 Many other pilots have encountered our beamships or alien ones as well. 61. The greatest fraud, however, was the man who called himself Karl Michalek. 62. And on the same level was the man who became world-famous by the name of George Adamski. 63. His so-called colleagues or friends belong in the same category also. 64. This means those around him who pretended having had contact with us. 65. Other names are lesser known, but are of certain importance because they are frauds: Haruski Tsukamoto, Jerrold Baker, R.O. Schmidt, C.A. Anderson, Angelucci and many, many more." What do you think John ? Thanks. As have said many, many times, I believe the Billy Meiers case to be real as far as Billy having met aliens, having ridden in their spacecraft, having taking pictures of actual craft such as the so-called and much maligned 'wedding cake' and having taken pictures of dinosaurs. I try not to comment on too many other aspects of the Billy Meiers case as it has been contaminated beyond all possible belief. This contamination is brought forth in photos and stories that would tend to cause inconsistencies or fraud in the Billy Meiers case.
|
|
|
Post by spacevisitor on Jan 20, 2009 14:38:10 GMT -5
I wanted to create a separate thread for John so that we can find him easily throughout this forum. I hope John agrees with me. Here is my question John: From Billy Meier's contact with Semjase (ET from Pleiadians) from Feb 3rd, 1975 10:10 pm, Semjase said that George Adamski is a fraud. Let me give an excerpt from this contact (I downloaded from his web site at FIGU, 2nd_Contact.pdf): "Billy: First of all, I would be interested to know about Kenneth Arnold. Am I correct that he was not a fraud ? Semjase 59. Certainly, this man was not a fraud, for he really had seen our beamships. 60 Many other pilots have encountered our beamships or alien ones as well. 61. The greatest fraud, however, was the man who called himself Karl Michalek. 62. And on the same level was the man who became world-famous by the name of George Adamski. 63. His so-called colleagues or friends belong in the same category also. 64. This means those around him who pretended having had contact with us. 65. Other names are lesser known, but are of certain importance because they are frauds: Haruski Tsukamoto, Jerrold Baker, R.O. Schmidt, C.A. Anderson, Angelucci and many, many more." What do you think John ? Thanks. Hi mgeng, just to inform you, at the bottom of Meier’s “AGE 5... The first meeting and awareness” are some interesting comments written, I don’t know by whom or what the real value of it is.
I am looking forward to John’s view on it.
|
|
mgeng
New Member
Posts: 28
|
Post by mgeng on Jan 20, 2009 15:22:13 GMT -5
Thanks, John.
Hey, spacevisitor thanks for the info comments. At least, Billy has some amazing videos hard to be faked, but in our case 3D human beings is very hard to discern the truth. As long as we don't experience ourselves we won't find it. The power is to know not to believe.
|
|
|
Post by spacevisitor on Jan 20, 2009 16:17:14 GMT -5
Thanks, John. Hey, spacevisitor thanks for the info comments. At least, Billy has some amazing videos hard to be faked, but in our case 3D human beings is very hard to discern the truth. As long as we don't experience ourselves we won't find it. The power is to know not to believe. mgeng , perhaps you find this interesting to. And if you has read this already I assume it could still be of some value for those interested in how for example Meier’s work was surely contaminated and therefore making it looking being a fraud like John said. It is just a part of the whole letter. Source; The book “UFO CONTACT FROM THE PLEIADES” from Wendelle C. Stevens.
|
|
mgeng
New Member
Posts: 28
|
Post by mgeng on Jan 20, 2009 17:06:52 GMT -5
Thanks, spacevisitor.
Very interesting, indeed.
|
|
|
Post by johnlear on Jan 21, 2009 0:45:31 GMT -5
I am looking forward to John’s view on it. As I said before: contaminated.
|
|
mgeng
New Member
Posts: 28
|
Post by mgeng on Jan 21, 2009 8:39:37 GMT -5
Hi, John. What is your view on gravity ? What is it ? Where is it coming from ... Sun Does it consist of particles with mass ? Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by pats2cats on Jan 21, 2009 19:36:05 GMT -5
Hi John Lear,
Heard you Monday nite on the Kevin Smith radio show. Great balls of fire, as usual. Wish you had your own show! My moon story: I worked at the NAZA Michoud Assembly Facility where Boeing designed/built the Saturn V/S-IC booster.. One time Werner VonBraun toured our office building waving a baggie of "genuine light grey moon dust/pebbles" for us all to ooh and aah over (don't remember which mission it was alledgedly from). He urged us to keep up the good work. Guess the only thing real about it is the $48 a month retirement check I get from Boeing for my 12+ years there and my name in the Apollo Lunar Roll of Honor Book. Wonder how much longer even the $ is going to be real. Thanks for all your input.
Pat
|
|
|
Post by johnlear on Jan 22, 2009 1:16:06 GMT -5
Hi, John. What is your view on gravity ? What is it ? Where is it coming from ... Sun Does it consist of particles with mass ? Thanks. We don't know what causes gravity. It is not caused by gravitons and there is no basis for Newton's assumption that the gravitational force is due to and is proportional to the quantity or density of matter. Therefore computations using Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation to determine the gravitational force of the moon, the planets and satellites of those planets are invalid. Kepler suspected that gravity was caused by the magnetics of a planet. Gravity does not come from the sun. Its possible that what causes gravity is known by a secret scientific group within the government but it is certain that they would never allow that information to become public. It is also certain that Einstein's Theories of relativity both special and general are wrong and there was never any scientific basis for either. Physical action faster than the speed of light is possible using anti-mesons, super-luminals and the Cerenkov effect as 3 of many examples. In spite of this evidence it is obvious that mainstream science continues to promote its validity. Current research and test data for experiments validating relativity are continually skewed and test data that doesn't support it is discarded. Why? For the same reason that the truth about our solar system and its inhabitants are hidden from the general public. And this reason was best stated by Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Bara in their book "Dark Mission" that the original and continuing core of NASA who they identify as ‘Freemasons, SS (Nazis) and magicians’, and who they call “ritual elitists”, have ‘literally stolen the entire space program for themselves from the rest of all Mankind’. They go on to say that “Space” is destined to ‘remain the sole possession of only those with (these) proper bloodlines and perspectives’…but not for any of the rest of us.
|
|
|
Post by johnlear on Jan 22, 2009 1:20:28 GMT -5
Hi John Lear, Heard you Monday nite on the Kevin Smith radio show. Great balls of fire, as usual. Wish you had your own show! My moon story: I worked at the NAZA Michoud Assembly Facility where Boeing designed/built the Saturn V/S-IC booster.. One time Werner VonBraun toured our office building waving a baggie of "genuine light grey moon dust/pebbles" for us all to ooh and aah over (don't remember which mission it was alledgedly from). He urged us to keep up the good work. Guess the only thing real about it is the $48 a month retirement check I get from Boeing for my 12+ years there and my name in the Apollo Lunar Roll of Honor Book. Wonder how much longer even the $ is going to be real. Thanks for all your input. Pat Thanks Pat, Well at least thats 6 cups of coffee at Starbucks. I'm stuck with 711 coffee.
|
|
|
Post by spacevisitor on Jan 22, 2009 5:30:58 GMT -5
Hi, John. What is your view on gravity ? What is it ? Where is it coming from ... Sun Does it consist of particles with mass ? Thanks. We don't know what causes gravity. It is not caused by gravitons and there is no basis for Newton's assumption that the gravitational force is due to and is proportional to the quantity or density of matter. Only because we don't know so far what really causes gravity, as John said, I post here a briefly-worded [scientific???] explanation from Semjase to Billy about gravity. Could this be of some value. Is it perpetrate a fraud. But therefore nevertheless interesting in my not scientific opinion. ;D Fourth contact - Saturday 15.feb 1975 Gravity is explained to Billy. Gravity is of electromagnetic nature with two unitary but contrary forces. It works to attract as well as to repulse. It is connected to the mass itself. The Earth exercises the coherent and the second factor is itself the generation and use of what we call gravity. Gravity and electromagnetism exist at the same time and appear as attraction and repulsion. Different factors which were not elaborated on include the warmth of the planet and the coldness of the cosmos, the solid center of the planet and the atmosphere. These factors are important for the rise of the gravity and the anti-gravity. In other movie footage we can see the ship flying in a circle around a great fir tree over a house. At first it appears hung on a string because of the upward camera angle. However, close examination shows the ship actually moving over the top of the tree. In one section of the movie we see the ship moving left and right and then coming to a stop. Here we notice the ship seeming to wobble as it moves. It is explained that the ship is riding a wave of electromagnetism we call gravity. It appears to float on this wave much like a boat on water. The Pleiadians point out that gravity varies at different points on the Earth. Communication on the ships is by a process similar to our radio but the signal moves in a different way. The signal is attached to tachyons and moves through null-time so it arrives at its destination instantly. Gravity. Gravity is electromagnetic in nature with two unitary but contrary forces. It is connected to the MASS itself The Earth generates the gravity. The cause of the Gravity can be found in the self warmth of the planet and the "cold" of space. Also the "solid" density of the core of the planet is a contributing factor.
|
|
|
Post by johnlear on Jan 22, 2009 9:13:54 GMT -5
Only because we don't know so far what really causes gravity, as John said, I post here a briefly-worded [scientific???] explanation from Semjase to Billy about gravity. I would respectfully request that you don't use my thread here to dispense Billy Meier information. While I think his story is true and that he went for a ride with ET's and that the photos of their craft are legit I don't want to have to read information that may have been contaminated. Another thing is that I don't like reading "Semajase says.." info. Also tachyons are fictitious particles which do not exist. Your understanding is appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by spacevisitor on Jan 22, 2009 15:29:14 GMT -5
Only because we don't know so far what really causes gravity, as John said, I post here a briefly-worded [scientific???] explanation from Semjase to Billy about gravity. I would respectfully request that you don't use my thread here to dispense Billy Meier information. While I think his story is true and that he went for a ride with ET's and that the photos of their craft are legit I don't want to have to read information that may have been contaminated. Another thing is that I don't like reading "Semajase says.." info. Also tachyons are fictitious particles which do not exist. Your understanding is appreciated. Well John, I am really glad you finally have your personal thread here, therefore I jumped at once in the discussion. Nonetheless, I can’t say I really understand your reply this time but I respect your request and won’t post anything of Meier again in your thread. You said; I absolute understand that, but there is the problem, because where can I find Ufo, ET, Nasa, or for example Meier information of where I can be shore of that it isn’t false or possible contaminated in any way and 100% true? You must understand that the big problem for me as well as I suppose for others is, who in those fields really knows and therefore tells the 100% truth. I am convinced that all those by me highly respected UFO/ET/NASA insiders/whistle-blowers of where you are one, have the same goal. To bring to all who wanted to know the truth as they are convinced of what they know and therefore say it is the truth. But despite there best intensions, my experience so far is that many of them have still remarkable differences of opinions about certain parts of those issue’s. So again that makes it not easy to make a solid opinion. I wonder if there are members here who also have the same experience? Well John, my post was very serious and surely not sarcastic meant in any way. You said; How can you be so 100% shore of that? Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
Post by johnlear on Jan 23, 2009 13:26:23 GMT -5
Well John, I am really glad you finally have your personal thread here, therefore I jumped at once in the discussion. Nonetheless, I can’t say I really understand your reply this time but I respect your request and won’t post anything of Meier again in your thread. Thank you spacevisitor. This I would appreciate.The Billy Meier issue, as I said before, has become so contaminated that the discussion you are trying to bring on board here are is useless because we don't know its origin. I prefer to stick with lou and what he brings to the table. . I assume you are joking. Again, I assume you are joking. Is this a joke? I would have to agree with you here. Apparently you have not read many of the questions on this forum. But the short answer is, 'of course'. I believe that. Tachyons were invented to rationalize the existence of superluminal velocities within the special theory of relativity and was initially advanced by O.M.P. Bilaniuk in 'Meta Relativity'. Gerald Feinberg suggested the name 'tachyon' for particles having a velocity greater than c (the speed of light). The relativity equations implied that tachyons would possess the following properties: (a) their proper length and proper time would be imaginary. (b) their mass would be imaginary; the square of their masses, a negative number. (c) their energy and momentum would be imaginary numbers: their speed would decrease as they absorbed more energy, and vice versa. Their total energy when moving at infinite speed would be zero. Whereas an ordinary particle upon loss of momentum stops with zero velocity, a tachyon upon loss of energy would attain an infinite velocity. (d) A force acting in the direction of motion of a tachyon would cause it to slow down. According to Pari Spolter in 'Gravitational Force of the Sun' experiments to detect particles with these peculiar properties have been carried out with negative results (Torsten Alvager and Michael N. Kreisler, "Quest for Faster-Than-Speed-Of-Light-Particles" Physical Review 171 1968 pp 1357-1361). Michael B. Davis, Michael N. Kreier and Torsten Alvager, "Search for Faster than Speed of Light Particles," Physical Review 183 1969 pp. 1132-1133. And C. Baltay, G. Feinberg, N. Yeh and R. Linsker, "Seach for Uncharged Faster-than-Light Particles" Physical Review D1 1970 pp.759-770) This is why I say that generally, people who use the word tachyon do not know what they are talking about. They throw it out as if it is a real particle or concept which it is not. And thanks for your understanding in this matter.
|
|