Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:34 am Post subject: John Greenwald's bogus claims and the demise of the skeptics
This will be one of only a couple of posts. Thought it would be as good a place as any.
I heard that John was on George Noory the other night again saying that the Billy Meier UFO photos were fakes. How quaint that no one, John and George included, have even the slighest clue as to how they were done.
But since I'm no longer needing to "debate" this on internet forums, I will take this opportunity to delight in the collapse of the professional skeptical attack on the case.
What, you say, how could that be?
Well, see the two new articles at http://www.theyfly.com and read with awe and amazement just how faMaus professional skeptic Derek Bartholomaus, to whom we gave ample time to humiliate himself in our new film, The Silent Revolution of Truth, has taken it one step further by RETRACTING his foundational claims about "model trees and Model UFOs"!
It's truly a thing of beauty. Of course, if you're still hung up chasing lights in the sky, please, don't let me disturb you with anything real, substantial and...PROVEN.
I have my doubts about Billy but admit I haven't studied it closely enough to make a call. I think John is qualifies to make the call. Though I don't know what work he's done on the phenomenon, either.
Did he give a reason?
_________________ "The pioneers of a warless world are the youth that refuse military service."
Joined: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 13684
Location: With JRZGRL
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2008 2:14 am Post subject:
I disagree, it isn't a light switch.
Oh it's a fake alright, but it's actually a part of the handle from the can lid it's made from.
Oh, and wasn't one of Meier's aliens actually a dancer from the Dean Martin Show?
Michael, you insist on continuously saying that no one has ever explained these ridiculous images, but you know that, just like Meier's claims, it's all lies. The images are soundly dismissed, over and over again. If anything, you have yet to prove they are real. A clear red flag regarding authenticity, is when someone refuses to make scientific attempts at proving they are being truthful, and try to get others to prove a negative.
This isn't even a case of them being too good to be true, because they are really horrible fakes.
What is really sad, is that people out there fall for this crap, and some of them end up killing themselves as a result of the ridiculous beliefs that arise from these lies.
It should be noted, and mentioned to the mods of this forum, that the link Mr. Horn provides, is to a video he is selling, which makes this thread of his nothing but spam, and it should be deleted.
_________________ "You can't trust freedom when it's not in your hands, and everybody's fighting for their promised land"
Blues...you crack me up...Ha! Ha! We don't have to go there, but it's too bad with all the good cases, which are in the vast minority, we have this one to deal with...where there's money to be made...SM.
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2008 11:38 am Post subject: Hey
Well im 50/50 cause I have never talked or seen pics from Meiers himself. There are other pics and vids that no one talks about , that are not that easy to disprove. I have no idea where the pics u guys are talking about come from..or even if they are intended to be shown by meiers. The others I have seen...are a little more difficult to disprove. I have yet to see anyone replicate the fan or the lid..just ppl saying they dont need to cause it s so obvious. Well in the scientific world, that just does not cut it. I do not know the answer, however, I know the answer has yet to be given.
Joined: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 13684
Location: With JRZGRL
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2008 2:26 pm Post subject:
Oh please, people point out the obvious fakes? There shouldn't be any fakes if Meier was a man of honor.
I seriously question the sanity of anyone who believes these images are real. It is way more pathetic than even the English guy that was taking pics of all the planes, OBVIOUS planes, and believed they were UFO's, and sat argueing that they were.
You bring the scientific world up... In the scientific world, people who make claims or theories, whatever, they don't make others disprove something, until they've proven it... Michael Horn, as the mouth piece of Meier, uses as proof the "fact" that no one has disproved the Meier photos or video's, which is not just a lie, but is a completely bogus way of claiming something has been proven.
_________________ "You can't trust freedom when it's not in your hands, and everybody's fighting for their promised land"
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:02 pm Post subject: Hey
I have no clue as to the person speaking for meiers...however, meiers himself has yet t obe questioned. I lack the proof to disprove wha tmeiers has given. I have no idea who this person who speaks for meiers is or if he even is speaking the truth about meiers.
But simply saying its fake is not proof. And no, it has yet t obe disproven. Or if it has, show me where and the test results.
Joined: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 13684
Location: With JRZGRL
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 1:53 pm Post subject:
An Email From Mr. Michael Horn...
Michael Horn wrote:
Hi Rob,
I read your comments on the BV forum which, not unexpectedly, won't
allow me to post responses to the nonsense there. So I'll forward to
you a copy of some comments that I was going to post and add that I'm
not a "mouthpiece" but an authorized, and well qualified,
representative for Meier, a "job" that I do voluntarily, as in for
free, no pay, gratis, etc.
Of course you're free to have your opinions about whatever you want
but I'd suggest that you really do some serious research (you did use
the words "scientific world") before making shallow comments about a
matter that you apparently know nothing about.
Finally, if you did know even the slightest bit about the case, and
the man, you'd know that there were NO fakes (other than the ones
deliberately made at MGM studios and photographed by the investigators
- and which we show in the new film)...and that Meier is a man of
honor at a level you can only hope to aspire to.
1. John ISN'T qualified to make the call. He's never investigated the
case, researched thoroughly the 1,300+ pages of investigative
reporting, interviewed Meier or any of the many witnesses, etc., etc.
And he's never talked to me, a person qualified and authorized to
inform him about some of the thnigs of which he's plainly quite
ignorant. And, considering the German speakers who have access to all
the Meier material, I too am ignorant of much of it. I'm just light
years beyond John because I've done the work. He hasn't.
2. 99.99% of people "debating" the Meier case on internet forums are
doing so as a part-time hobby, out of boredom, etc. They demonstrate
little knowledge, comprehension or thinking skills. Nothing personal
intended, it's just demonstrably true.
3. The professional skeptics who've defamed Meier and his evidence,
such as the people at CFI-West/IIG, all failed to meet a challenge
that they accepted in 2001, i.e. to duplicate one of Meier's films and
one of his photos. Other skeptics like Jeff Ritzmann, David Biedney,
etc. have likewise fallen by the wayside...though they like to think
and say otherwise, with NOTHING to back it up.
4. Skeptic Derek Bartholomaus, on behalf of CFI-West/IIG completely
blew the opportunity to make a prepared case against Meier...had there
really been a case to make against Meier, which there isn't. As far as
the skeptics go, they all have ZERO credibility.
5. There isn't one person on this forum - or any other - who can make
and photograph a model of the WCUFO (or ANY of Meier's other UFOs),
let alone a film or video, sound recording, etc. - or it would have
been done by now, of course. Meier took 63 photos of it and one video.
6. For the opponents, here and elsewhere, it's simply armchair
theorizing. I've done the research, made a great film on it and am
qualified to point out the failings of the know-it-alls. And NONE of
the skeptics here have the credentials of the owners of Uncharted
Territory, the Academy Award-winning special effects company for
Independence Day. They saw Meier's photos and films and said that they
AREN'T models, hubcaps or garbage can lids so ,please get that through
your heads. If you still think otherwise, contact them and tell them
that they don't know what they're talking about.
7. The real pity of the whole matter is that people who claim to think
outside the box, who are interested in the UFO area, etc. are often
stuck on phenomenon, lights in the sky, "aliens" and "abductions" and
never even contemplate WHY a more advanced race would contact someone
and WHAT the CONTENT of the contact would be.
8. The Dean MArtin dancer issue is no issue at all. Why? FIrst, Meier
was forewarned of something like this happening because of two look-a-
likes...about 23 years BEFORE the incident occurred. And we have it in
a dated, copyrighted, published book for all the world to see. Also,
please note that the photograph of the Dean Martin dancers not only
aren't exact doubles of the women in Meier's photograph but the
dancers' photo was taken off of a TV screen, with the telltale marks,
and Meier's wasn't. So explain that...if you can.
9. Again, no personal offense meant but it's obvious from the kind of
erroneous information and nonsense that gets posted that the skeptics
are ignorant about the matter. And no, it isn't a commercial for
anything. I've posted tons of free info at my site, including the two
latest articles, that anyone with a genuine interest could use to
begin to educate themselves, if they are interested in doing so.
MH
P.S. Uh, did I mention that John ISN'T qualified to even discuss the
case? Gee, I hope so.
So let's break this down...
Quote:
Hi Rob,
I read your comments on the BV forum which, not unexpectedly, won't
allow me to post responses to the nonsense there. So I'll forward to
you a copy of some comments that I was going to post and add that I'm
not a "mouthpiece" but an authorized, and well qualified,
representative for Meier, a "job" that I do voluntarily, as in for
free, no pay, gratis, etc.
Well, by definition, if you are the authorized representative for Meier, than you ARE his mouthpiece.
Quote:
Of course you're free to have your opinions about whatever you want
but I'd suggest that you really do some serious research (you did use
the words "scientific world") before making shallow comments about a
matter that you apparently know nothing about.
Well I have looked at the Meier footage for years, his footage is possibly the most famous UFO footage ever... I've seen the evidence debunking it, and I'm sorry to say that UFO's probably shouldn't have can lid handles on the sides of them, which the WCUFO clearly has.
Quote:
Finally, if you did know even the slightest bit about the case, and
the man, you'd know that there were NO fakes (other than the ones
deliberately made at MGM studios and photographed by the investigators
- and which we show in the new film)...and that Meier is a man of
honor at a level you can only hope to aspire to.
Sure.
Quote:
A few quick points.
1. John ISN'T qualified to make the call. He's never investigated the
case, researched thoroughly the 1,300+ pages of investigative
reporting, interviewed Meier or any of the many witnesses, etc., etc.
And he's never talked to me, a person qualified and authorized to
inform him about some of the thnigs of which he's plainly quite
ignorant. And, considering the German speakers who have access to all
the Meier material, I too am ignorant of much of it. I'm just light
years beyond John because I've done the work. He hasn't.
Sorry Horn, I've heard John in other interviews not comment, when asked to, about topics he hasn't investigated, so something tells me he has in fact looked at the Meier evidence, if he called Meier's stuff fake.
Quote:
2. 99.99% of people "debating" the Meier case on internet forums are
doing so as a part-time hobby, out of boredom, etc. They demonstrate
little knowledge, comprehension or thinking skills. Nothing personal
intended, it's just demonstrably true.
99.99%? Is that a factual number?
Quote:
3. The professional skeptics who've defamed Meier and his evidence,
such as the people at CFI-West/IIG, all failed to meet a challenge
that they accepted in 2001, i.e. to duplicate one of Meier's films and
one of his photos. Other skeptics like Jeff Ritzmann, David Biedney,
etc. have likewise fallen by the wayside...though they like to think
and say otherwise, with NOTHING to back it up.
Yeah so you've said numerous times. They have proven the stuff fake, you just refuse to acknowledge it. I can't see why you would, what with you selling videos about the Meier case, at 20 bucks a pop.
Quote:
4. Skeptic Derek Bartholomaus, on behalf of CFI-West/IIG completely
blew the opportunity to make a prepared case against Meier...had there
really been a case to make against Meier, which there isn't. As far as
the skeptics go, they all have ZERO credibility.
They have 0 credibility? Hey Horn, it's people in the Meier camp that are making money off the videos.
Quote:
5. There isn't one person on this forum - or any other - who can make
and photograph a model of the WCUFO (or ANY of Meier's other UFOs),
let alone a film or video, sound recording, etc. - or it would have
been done by now, of course. Meier took 63 photos of it and one video.
Oh please, the WCUFO is the most ridiculous thing ever seen, and the most obvious hoax. I'm actually interested in seeing the footage you say was faked by MGM if you claim the WCUFO is real.
Sorry buddy....
The box is not considerably smaller than the WCUFO!
And this photo gives scale to box in comparison to a human being...
... You unwittingly proved the Meier photo is a hoax!!!! You show how small the box really is next to a person, yet how huge it is in relation to people and the house when the people are in the background, and the box is close to the camera.
If anything, the box is larger than the base of the WCUFakeO!
And here is a quote from your own site regarding those photos...
Quote:
I am not a professional photographer or photographic expert but it certainly appears
So let's get this straight, YOU can attempt to make uneducated claims, but others can't? I'm pretty sure John is far more educated on the Meier case than you are about photography!
Back to the email...
Quote:
6. For the opponents, here and elsewhere, it's simply armchair
theorizing. I've done the research, made a great film on it and am
qualified to point out the failings of the know-it-alls. And NONE of
the skeptics here have the credentials of the owners of Uncharted
Territory, the Academy Award-winning special effects company for
Independence Day. They saw Meier's photos and films and said that they
AREN'T models, hubcaps or garbage can lids so ,please get that through
your heads. If you still think otherwise, contact them and tell them
that they don't know what they're talking about.
As is your above photographic assessment. And sorry again, but a special effects company isn't an expert on this. And for the record, their movie was not made entirely with CGI, some of the ships were scaled models, the sceens with the Empire State Building and White House blowing up, those 2 were done with scaled models, yet it all looked seamless... Their own movie is evidence that they are wrong!
Quote:
7. The real pity of the whole matter is that people who claim to think
outside the box, who are interested in the UFO area, etc. are often
stuck on phenomenon, lights in the sky, "aliens" and "abductions" and
never even contemplate WHY a more advanced race would contact someone
and WHAT the CONTENT of the contact would be.
Yes they DO ask those questions, it's because of these questions that Meier's claims don't make any sense. Aliens going to a farmer in the Swiss Alps, with all this information, is the equivelant of a top scientist finding a cure for AIDS, and going to Siberia to tell a Siberian janitor, and telling him to spead the news. I'm gonna go to butcher, and tell him to tell my doctor that I'm having back pains!
Quote:
8. The Dean MArtin dancer issue is no issue at all. Why? FIrst, Meier
was forewarned of something like this happening because of two look-a-
likes...about 23 years BEFORE the incident occurred. And we have it in
a dated, copyrighted, published book for all the world to see. Also,
please note that the photograph of the Dean Martin dancers not only
aren't exact doubles of the women in Meier's photograph but the
dancers' photo was taken off of a TV screen, with the telltale marks,
and Meier's wasn't. So explain that...if you can.
Well let's see the comparison, post them.
Quote:
9. Again, no personal offense meant but it's obvious from the kind of
erroneous information and nonsense that gets posted that the skeptics
are ignorant about the matter. And no, it isn't a commercial for
anything. I've posted tons of free info at my site, including the two
latest articles, that anyone with a genuine interest could use to
begin to educate themselves, if they are interested in doing so.
MH
Quote:
P.S. Uh, did I mention that John ISN'T qualified to even discuss the
case? Gee, I hope so.
Did I mention he has more qualifications discussing UFO's, than you do discussing photography?
_________________ "You can't trust freedom when it's not in your hands, and everybody's fighting for their promised land"
Joined: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 13684
Location: With JRZGRL
Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 8:10 am Post subject:
More email from Horn...
LMAO
Quote:
Re: Your post,
Well, by definition, if you are the authorized representative for Meier, than you ARE his mouthpiece.
MH: No, I am contractually his authorized representative, you use the term "mouthpiece" as a pejorative, as in the slang way it's used to describe a lawyer for criminals. So you have a blatant, and unsubstantiated, prejudice. You show disrespect for people without know ing anything about them, or knowing them. So you yourself will be the object of disrespect. Of course, if you had the good sense to state, "I don't know", you might be worthy of respect yourself.
But like most other shallow thinkers (and that's a complement) in this area, you prefer to attack, perhaps thinking that someone is trying to con or fool you, take your money, or whatever other low level, probably subconscious motivation you have for approaching something like this so foolishly and cynically.
Quote:
Of course you're free to have your opinions about whatever you want
but I'd suggest that you really do some serious research (you did use
the words "scientific world") before making shallow comments about a
matter that you apparently know nothing about.
Well I have looked at the Meier footage for years, his footage is possibly the most famous UFO footage ever... I've seen the evidence debunking it, and I'm sorry to say that UFO's probably shouldn't have can lid handles on the sides of them, which the WCUFO clearly has.
MH: "Clearly has"? I see, and you're telling us that it's a (presumed) garbage can lid...with what evidence for it? Can you take a garbage can lid and make this object? Neither can anyone else.
Quote:
Finally, if you did know even the slightest bit about the case, and
the man, you'd know that there were NO fakes (other than the ones
deliberately made at MGM studios and photographed by the investigators
- and which we show in the new film)...and that Meier is a man of
honor at a level you can only hope to aspire to.
Sure.
MH: Cynicism from a man who offers no evidence to the contrary, and who demonstrates his own lack of honor by questioning the honor and integrity of someone he doesn't even know, is both telling and unimpressive.
Quote:
A few quick points.
1. John ISN'T qualified to make the call. He's never investigated the
case, researched thoroughly the 1,300+ pages of investigative
reporting, interviewed Meier or any of the many witnesses, etc., etc.
And he's never talked to me, a person qualified and authorized to
inform him about some of the thnigs of which he's plainly quite
ignorant. And, considering the German speakers who have access to all
the Meier material, I too am ignorant of much of it. I'm just light
years beyond John because I've done the work. He hasn't.
Sorry Horn, I've heard John in other interviews not comment, when asked to, about topics he hasn't investigated, so something tells me he has in fact looked at the Meier evidence, if he called Meier's stuff fake.
MH: "Something tells me" is not exactly the standard of knowledge that I tend to rely on.
Quote:
2. 99.99% of people "debating" the Meier case on internet forums are
doing so as a part-time hobby, out of boredom, etc. They demonstrate
little knowledge, comprehension or thinking skills. Nothing personal
intended, it's just demonstrably true.
99.99%? Is that a factual number?
MH: A lot closer than your "lid handles".
Quote:
3. The professional skeptics who've defamed Meier and his evidence,
such as the people at CFI-West/IIG, all failed to meet a challenge
that they accepted in 2001, i.e. to duplicate one of Meier's films and
one of his photos. Other skeptics like Jeff Ritzmann, David Biedney,
etc. have likewise fallen by the wayside...though they like to think
and say otherwise, with NOTHING to back it up.
Yeah so you've said numerous times. They have proven the stuff fake, you just refuse to acknowledge it. I can't see why you would, what with you selling videos about the Meier case, at 20 bucks a pop.
MH: Please direct us to the "proof" and be sure to read the article about Bartholomaus' retraction, which contradicts your own statement of course. And please let us all know what is wrong with selling a product that I produced through my own efforts, at my own expense...and which I haven't even asked you to purchase. Now, unless you're some parasitic form of life, I assume that you find ways to be self-supporting, so show me the difference.
Quote:
4. Skeptic Derek Bartholomaus, on behalf of CFI-West/IIG completely
blew the opportunity to make a prepared case against Meier...had there
really been a case to make against Meier, which there isn't. As far as
the skeptics go, they all have ZERO credibility.
They have 0 credibility? Hey Horn, it's people in the Meier camp that are making money off the videos.
MH: Perhaps I have stumbled upon someone who is not only illogical and uneducated but also a latter day hippie, pre-occupied with distorting the legitimate rights of people to disseminate their information in the customarily accepted means of exchange of the day. And, since Meier and his associates have a legitimate non-profit organization (operating under strict Swiss laws)...exactly what's the problem?
Here's a hint: The weakest "argument" you can make is to criticize someone for earning a living. It's even weaker when the person you attack, like me, has a website that is full of free info, carries no outside ads and isn't advertised anywhere else either.
Quote:
5. There isn't one person on this forum - or any other - who can make
and photograph a model of the WCUFO (or ANY of Meier's other UFOs),
let alone a film or video, sound recording, etc. - or it would have
been done by now, of course. Meier took 63 photos of it and one video.
Oh please, the WCUFO is the most ridiculous thing ever seen, and the most obvious hoax. I'm actually interested in seeing the footage you say was faked by MGM if you claim the WCUFO is real.
MH: You were far too quick to try to respond to me, really. Again, "...the most ridiculous thing, etc." simply identifies you as someone so unfamiliar with standards of proof that, well, I must chide myself for even writing you, let alone responding here. And please, read more carefully, so you know what you're responding too. And, I'm sorry to have to tell you, you can't see the MGM model footage because it's in the film I produced and, well, we can't have you actually going and spending money to see it and, can we?
(This is where the brilliant skeptics usually say, "If it's really true then you should give it all away for free, etc." So I know you will resist the burning temptation to repeatit.)
Sorry buddy....
The box is not considerably smaller than the WCUFO!
And this photo gives scale to box in comparison to a human being...
... You unwittingly proved the Meier photo is a hoax!!!! You show how small the box really is next to a person, yet how huge it is in relation to people and the house when the people are in the background, and the box is close to the camera.
If anything, the box is larger than the base of the WCUFakeO!
MH: Truly painful to have to point out the obvious: When the box is close to the camera it is far, far shorter than the WCUFO - the same object that is in this video (http://www.steelmarkonline.com/media/Wedding_Cake_ship.mpg) and some 300' from the camera. Even the man in BOTH photos, nearer and farther from the camera, is shorter than the WCUFO. And when the man is holding the box, and he is appearing taller but still only about 3/4 of the height of the WCUFO, he and the box take up only a fraction of the space that the WCUFO does.
Real nice try. And speaking of tries, please add to your list of why you won't and can't make a nice little WCUFO for us, genius that you are.
And here is a quote from your own site regarding those photos...
Quote:
I am not a professional photographer or photographic expert but it certainly appears
So let's get this straight, YOU can attempt to make uneducated claims, but others can't? I'm pretty sure John is far more educated on the Meier case than you are about photography!
MH: You're, uh, did you say, "...pretty sure..."?
Back to the email...
Quote:
6. For the opponents, here and elsewhere, it's simply armchair
theorizing. I've done the research, made a great film on it and am
qualified to point out the failings of the know-it-alls. And NONE of
the skeptics here have the credentials of the owners of Uncharted
Territory, the Academy Award-winning special effects company for
Independence Day. They saw Meier's photos and films and said that they
AREN'T models, hubcaps or garbage can lids so ,please get that through
your heads. If you still think otherwise, contact them and tell them
that they don't know what they're talking about.
As is your above photographic assessment. And sorry again, but a special effects company isn't an expert on this. And for the record, their movie was not made entirely with CGI, some of the ships were scaled models, the sceens with the Empire State Building and White House blowing up, those 2 were done with scaled models, yet it all looked seamless... Their own movie is evidence that they are wrong!
MH: I'll be sure tell Marc and Volker that they're NOT experts on this! Unfortunately, being out of your league and anxious to debunk (which is typical of the skeptics) you refute your own case. Since they ARE experts in models, as well as CGI, when they said that the Meier UFOs are NOT models because they KNOW models, I think it trumps your, obviously, amateurish and illogical nonsense here.
Quote:
7. The real pity of the whole matter is that people who claim to think
outside the box, who are interested in the UFO area, etc. are often
stuck on phenomenon, lights in the sky, "aliens" and "abductions" and
never even contemplate WHY a more advanced race would contact someone
and WHAT the CONTENT of the contact would be.
Yes they DO ask those questions, it's because of these questions that Meier's claims don't make any sense. Aliens going to a farmer in the Swiss Alps, with all this information, is the equivelant of a top scientist finding a cure for AIDS, and going to Siberia to tell a Siberian janitor, and telling him to spead the news. I'm gonna go to butcher, and tell him to tell my doctor that I'm having back pains!
MH: So presumptive, assumptive, illogical and unsubstantiated...not even worthy of further comment.
Quote:
8. The Dean MArtin dancer issue is no issue at all. Why? FIrst, Meier
was forewarned of something like this happening because of two look-a-
likes...about 23 years BEFORE the incident occurred. And we have it in
a dated, copyrighted, published book for all the world to see. Also,
please note that the photograph of the Dean Martin dancers not only
aren't exact doubles of the women in Meier's photograph but the
dancers' photo was taken off of a TV screen, with the telltale marks,
and Meier's wasn't. So explain that...if you can.
...oh yeah, then be sure to substantiate your counter claims, which are certain to follow.
Quote:
9. Again, no personal offense meant but it's obvious from the kind of
erroneous information and nonsense that gets posted that the skeptics
are ignorant about the matter. And no, it isn't a commercial for
anything. I've posted tons of free info at my site, including the two
latest articles, that anyone with a genuine interest could use to
begin to educate themselves, if they are interested in doing so.
MH
Rolling Eyes
MH: Perhaps that's your American Indian name but it's hardly a competent commentary. You are, of course, free to offer specific commentaries and criticisms. I didn't use words such as "substantiated", "logical", etc. since that would be too limiting for you.
Quote:
P.S. Uh, did I mention that John ISN'T qualified to even discuss the
case? Gee, I hope so.
Did I mention he has more qualifications discussing UFO's, than you do discussing photography?
MH: Yes, but you didn't support it. And he has no perceptible knowledge about the Meier case. UFOs per se only mean unidentified flying objects, which are actually not that important to me. The ones that have ben identified, i.e. in the Meier case, are.
Is this freak for real? I have an internet stalker!
Anyone without $$ signs in their eyes can see that the above photo equals the Meier WCUFO in ridiculousness.
Maybe one day, when I don't have more important things to do, I will recreate that ridiculous model Meier made. I'll just need some costume jewelry and some hardware supplies. But don't hold your breath, cause I know you'll not accept it, regardless of how perfect it is, and I have more important things to do to prove something that most people already know about you con artists.
_________________ "You can't trust freedom when it's not in your hands, and everybody's fighting for their promised land"
