PDA

View Full Version : Michael Horn, American Rep. for Swiss UFO-Contactee, Visits My Blog



stu
2010-Jan-30, 06:39 AM
Over the last week or so, I've done three blog posts about Michael Horn, the "Authorized American Media Representative" for Swiss alleged UFO-contactee Billy Meier.

My first post was about Horn's Coast to Coast AM interview where he claimed that Meier predicted Apophis because he said it would be "red" and a "meteor." (http://pseudoastro.wordpress.com/2010/01/19/asteroid-apophis-and-the-michael-horn-claims-of-billy-meier/) Sigh. But, that has attracted over 50 comments (HUGE for me) with over half of them Horn ranting and posting sections of his website. It's a mildly humorous read before it gets annoying.

The second post was two days later addressing the actual timeline for Meier's supposed prediction of Apophis. (http://pseudoastro.wordpress.com/2010/01/21/follow-up-on-apophis-and-michael-horn-billy-meier-documented-claims/) I fairly conclusively show that Meier did not predict it, rather he retrodicted it 4 years after Apophis was discovered. Interestingly, Horn has not replied to that post.

The third post was one I made two days ago and covers my interview on The Conspiracy Skeptic podcast where we talked about Horn (http://pseudoastro.wordpress.com/2010/01/28/another-the-conspiracy-skeptic-interview-update-on-t-pyx-and-apophis-concerning-billy-meier-and-michael-horn/) (and T Pyx and that vampires actually will die in the universe's heat death ... you'd have to listen to the previous podcast episode to get that last one). Again, Horn replied with more ramblings, and it was there that I directly challenged him to "put up or shut up" (effectively, I phrased it more nicely in the post) and directly respond to the timeline of the Apophis prediction and the evidence, otherwise he's just full of it.

Anyway, it's a somewhat interesting progression, and the series has (in part) been picked up by the IIG of the Center for Inquiry Los Angeles for their page on Meier. Feel free to comment on the blog (but please don't egg Horn on, I'm kinda getting sick of him) or here to let me know what you think.

Halcyon Dayz
2010-Jan-30, 07:56 AM
Is there any point in arguing with the proponents of what is basically an UFO-cult?

To quote Noclevername: "You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief."

(It seems your fingers typed Swedish while you were thinking Swiss.)

gzhpcu
2010-Jan-30, 08:01 AM
Why do Americans often confuse Switzerland with Sweden?:confused:

stu
2010-Jan-30, 09:01 AM
Sorry! It's really late here ... it's been corrected.

gzhpcu
2010-Jan-30, 05:05 PM
Billy Meier's credibility factor is zero. Among his many statements:

- that he traveled into the past and photographed dinosaurs (were shown to be photos from a book on prehistoric animals by Zednak Burian..)
- that he was in contact with a beautiful extraterrestrial (photos from a TV actress)
- his famous ufo photos, including the "wedding cake ufo" (models were found in his barn...)
- tons of predictions based on his contact with an alien race

tbm
2010-Jan-30, 05:08 PM
Why do Americans often confuse Switzerland with Sweden?:confused:


After the "Sw" part, sometimes we just get lazy..................

vonmazur
2010-Jan-30, 05:23 PM
Fellows: It is worse in the Gun and Military Antique business....All the time we see "Swiss Mausers", and other anomolies.....(The Swiss never adopted the Mauser, they had their own unique design, The Schmit Rubin....) It is worse with the leather gear and such....If it has a Cross in a Shield it is Swiss, Three Crowns, it is Swedish....I repeat this over and over like a Mantra to the collectors.....

Dale

tbm
2010-Jan-30, 06:14 PM
Fellows: It is worse in the Gun and Military Antique business....All the time we see "Swiss Mausers", and other anomolies.....(The Swiss never adopted the Mauser, they had their own unique design, The Schmit Rubin....) It is worse with the leather gear and such....If it has a Cross in a Shield it is Swiss, Three Crowns, it is Swedish....I repeat this over and over like a Mantra to the collectors.....

Dale

Righto!

THEN there are the SWISS Vetterlis and the ITALIAN Vetterlis, the Greek Mannlichers, the Steyr Mannlichers, Russin Mosin-Nagants, the Finnish Mosin-Nagants, the Mausers, Yugo Mausers, Hungarian 98/40...........

tom

BigDon
2010-Jan-31, 04:16 PM
Righto!

THEN there are the SWISS Vetterlis and the ITALIAN Vetterlis, the Greek Mannlichers, the Steyr Mannlichers, Russin Mosin-Nagants, the Finnish Mosin-Nagants, the Mausers, Yugo Mausers, Hungarian 98/40...........

tom

My friend bought a Romanian Mauser last year built in '47. Still in the cosmoline. It looked pretty good until my other friend who has been collecting since the late sixties brought over his mint German mauser made in '43.

The difference was like looking at your favorite movie star, then looking at her replica at a wax museum. (The replica always looks either mentally disabled or just flat out ugly.)

Abaddon
2010-Jan-31, 11:06 PM
Gosh I thought the whole Billy Meier thing had gone the way of the dodo.

Surely there are no more out there who believe?

Swift
2010-Feb-01, 02:37 AM
On the chance that this thread will return to topic, let's drop the discussion of firearms and countries that begin with the letter S.

stu
2010-Feb-01, 02:53 AM
Thanks, Swift. I was kinda hoping it would get back on topic which is why I hadn't replied.


Gosh I thought the whole Billy Meier thing had gone the way of the dodo. Surely there are no more out there who believe?

Check out the blog and look at Horn's comments. It's fairly apparent he still believes. And there are at least two others who were posting who seem to have drunk the Kool-Aid®.

BertL
2010-Feb-01, 03:06 AM
First you plug your blog, then Kool-Aid... what's next? ;)

This makes for an amusing read at first, until you realize this man seems to be dead serious with his claims and beliefs. From that point on it gets slightly sad. Still, it's an interesting read.

Has there been any progress in the 'discussion' since your original post of this thread?

Gillianren
2010-Feb-01, 03:13 AM
Actually, the fine people at Kool-Aid would like us all to know that it was an off-brand version used at Jonestown. This message brought to you by the Kool-Aid Awareness Council.

A little critical thinking goes a long way, especially when coupled with a little investigation. Of course, we know that a lot of both is better.

stu
2010-Feb-01, 03:16 AM
Nope. Horn still has neglected to respond directly to my refutation of the timeline of the retrodiction of Apophis. Feel free to comment on the original (first) post I made about it, though, 'cause I'm guessing that's the one he's watching as opposed to the others for some reason -- ask him why he hasn't addressed that timeline I show yet still maintains that Meier predicted it.

BigDon
2010-Feb-01, 03:39 AM
I cruised your sites, Stu.

One, sorry about rainmanning your thread.

Two, I really liked the infrared picture of that waterfall.

Three, I didn't know anything at all about that isotope issue mentioned in your blog. Thanks.

Van Rijn
2010-Feb-01, 11:04 AM
Apophis wasn't discussed, but that looks very familiar. Michael Horn has been at BAUT:

http://www.bautforum.com/conspiracy-theories/88839-regarding-tunguska-etc.html

I see many of the same claims repeated there that he made here, with similar issues about lack of specificity and suspicious timing of claims. Unfortunately, Michael answered few questions and tried to set conditions to answers. At one point, he told questioners to call in to his radio appearances where, I expect, there would be put downs and sound bites, but no good answers.



'cause I'm guessing that's the one he's watching as opposed to the others for some reason -- ask him why he hasn't addressed that timeline I show yet still maintains that Meier predicted it.

My guess is that he is watching the others, but he can't directly address the timeline in a way that would be favorable to Meier or himself.

vonmazur
2010-Feb-01, 10:27 PM
Guys: Is that Retired USAF Colonel still promoting this stuff? IIRC It was Wendell Stevens or something similar. I believe he was the first American promoter for Billy Meier....and he had some kind of run in with Jacques Vallee. It was regarding the habitability of the Pleiades Cluster or something like that......Am I remembering this correctly??

Dale

JayUtah
2010-Feb-02, 01:46 AM
...

Billy Meier's credibility factor is zero. ...
- his famous ufo photos, including the "wedding cake ufo" (models were found in his barn...)

Meiers' photos are not only fakes, they're not even especially good fakes. They're quite amateur.

stu
2010-Feb-02, 04:23 AM
My guess is that he is watching the others, but he can't directly address the timeline in a way that would be favorable to Meier or himself.

It's still amazing to me, though I guess it really shouldn't be, how he still maintains (as in posted a new comment less than 4 hours ago) that Meier has predicted accurately all this stuff, and if only the skeptics would look at it ... and yet in the case where I have directly challenged him and actually did look at his evidence, he has remained remarkably quiet.

Cavorite
2010-Feb-02, 05:22 AM
He consistently refused to address any rebuttal to points he raised in his thread here on BAUT. His usual response was to post a wall of text restating the debunked claims, usually appended with an appeal for the truly open minded to come over to his site in order to avoid all the rampant negativity here. The closest he came to acknowledging anything was to say "let's put that in the negative column" (in other words, let's never examine or mention it again).

The biggest jaw dropper was when he asserted that the aliens knew that some people weren't emotionally capable of dealing with their existence and so structured everything, from the photos to the content of their predictions and revelations, so that the unready has "plausible deniability", while the enlightened could see past the inconsistencies, factual errors, and UFOs held up with fishing line to see the real truth. At that point you have to accept that if you choose to respond to his posts you aren't trying to engage him in debate, but to inform any onlookers who may possess a shred of rationality.

stu
2010-Feb-02, 05:33 AM
Interesting ... that's pretty much exactly what he's done on my blog. Just re-state stuff that I sure hope was copy-pasted (otherwise he has way too much time on his hands) that included links to more claims on his website and calling skeptics names.

gzhpcu
2010-Feb-02, 07:10 AM
The biggest jaw dropper was when he asserted that the aliens knew that some people weren't emotionally capable of dealing with their existence and so structured everything, from the photos to the content of their predictions and revelations, so that the unready has "plausible deniability", while the enlightened could see past the inconsistencies, factual errors, and UFOs held up with fishing line to see the real truth. At that point you have to accept that if you choose to respond to his posts you aren't trying to engage him in debate, but to inform any onlookers who may possess a shred of rationality.
He is just parroting Billy Meier, who first came up with these points...:rolleyes:

JayUtah
2010-Feb-02, 08:30 PM
...

His usual response was to post a wall of text restating the debunked claims...

Certain proponents seem unable to distinguish between stating the claim and supporting the claim. Claims are taken as articles of faith. One believes Billy Meier as a matter of implicit faith, hence stating the proposition is tantamount to establishing it.

...an appeal for the truly open minded...

Yes, where "open-minded" naturally means bereft of critical analysis skills. Oddly in his tenure here, Michael argued that we should try thinking for ourselves. This is a common mantra among such folk: they urge open-mindedness, but they generally aren't pleased with open-mindedness that considers the proposition to be suspect. You can think for yourself as long as you don't question the proposition.

The biggest jaw dropper was when he asserted that the aliens knew that some people weren't emotionally capable of dealing with their existence...

Yeah...

When you start arguing that legitimate interests will start masquerading as falsehood, you're truly into the realm of taking things on faith.

"Yes, our investment plan only looks like a Ponzi scheme; we do that to scare away immature investors who aren't ready for our level of investing."

Again there is the common mantra that anyone who disputes the farfetched and unsupported claims (even if on a factual basis) is somehow emotionally immature and fragile. That ties into the elitist aspect of conspiracism: people like to think they occupy a higher social stratum because they know something everyone else doesn't. The "sheeple" can't emotionally handle the Billy Meier "truths," but the true believers can.

Abaddon
2010-Feb-02, 08:34 PM
Meiers' photos are not only fakes, they're not even especially good fakes. They're quite amateur.

I must admit that this is one of the most fascinating aspects to me of the whole Meier thing.

The photos are so amateurish, that I fail to see how anyone could be taken in.

I may be an engineer, but I also have hobbies, to wit, photography and model railways.

Now many of the more extreme model railway enthusiasts judge their efforts by how convincing a photo of their model looks. The more the uncertainty as to whether the photo is real or not, the more points you score. It is a measure of how well built the model is.

Meiers productions fail at a first glance, without any analysis needed.

ETA: yes I realise thats all a bit nerdy, but it remains true nonetheless

JayUtah
2010-Feb-02, 11:11 PM
...

The photos are so amateurish, that I fail to see how anyone could be taken in.

Some are so obviously models it's indeed hard to see how anyone would take them seriously. But as has been noted, the Meier camp has an innovative (if completely circular) method for dealing with that: anything that's blatantly a forgery has been perpetrated by skeptics to discredit Meier. In short, the Meierites simply disavow (affirmatively, but speciously) anything they don't feel like explaining.

Meiers productions fail at a first glance, without any analysis needed.

Right; some of his models are reasonably convincing, but others are decidedly amateur. And part of the realism is being able to take the photo properly, which usually means very carefully controlling the line of sight, depth of field, and projective distortion. Mistakes made along those lines results in photos that "just don't look right" to the casual observer. A photographic analyst can usually go further and tell you what specifically is wrong.

I've mentioned this before, but one of the most ironic tell-tales in Meiers' work is the uncanny ability of the space aliens to fly or park their vehicles in relation to the surrounding objects in a way that begs verification. The spaceship is always obviously in front of the "distant" tree or behind the "full sized" car. It's as if the aliens have an uncanny understanding of just what earthling photo analysts would use to decide the question of authenticity, and they pose for Meier most accommodatingly.

Of course professional photographic analysts realize that authentic happenstance photography never provides that wealth of evidence. Hence the evidence is suspicious for its unusually high quality. It's as if an accused man supported his alibi with every ticket stub, receipt, cocktail napkin, personal recollection, and surveillance video that would be possible to obtain on a trip away from the crime scene. Ordinary people just don't retain all that workaday flotsam.

Spoons
2010-Feb-03, 12:08 AM
You almost expect to see a lighter sitting next to the spaceship to give the scale. :D

Van Rijn
2010-Feb-03, 01:39 AM
Interesting ... that's pretty much exactly what he's done on my blog. Just re-state stuff that I sure hope was copy-pasted (otherwise he has way too much time on his hands) that included links to more claims on his website and calling skeptics names.

A lot of that stuff is either copy/pasted or at least based on a standard script. He posted many of the same claims here, but, naturally, is ignoring problems noted here. It does look like he's being a bit nastier there, but that's about the only real difference I can see.

Joe Boy
2010-Feb-03, 02:06 AM
Actually, the fine people at Kool-Aid would like us all to know that it was an off-brand version used at Jonestown. This message brought to you by the Kool-Aid Awareness Council.

A little critical thinking goes a long way, especially when coupled with a little investigation. Of course, we know that a lot of both is better.

I think you made that up--I demand you cite your sources immediately!!

Gillianren
2010-Feb-03, 07:17 AM
I think you made that up--I demand you cite your sources immediately!!

I know you're kidding, but for the curious, here's information about that first statement. (As usual, going the quick-and-dirty route in "sources for information you got from a dozen or more sources.") http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown#Deaths_in_Jonestown Third paragraph down.

Joe Boy
2010-Feb-03, 02:47 PM
I know you're kidding, but for the curious, here's information about that first statement. (As usual, going the quick-and-dirty route in "sources for information you got from a dozen or more sources.") http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown#Deaths_in_Jonestown Third paragraph down.

DRAT!!!!

CJSF
2010-Feb-03, 03:33 PM
There was a show on cults on History International (or some similar channel) recently that mentioned Flavor Aid, too.

CJSF

Fazor
2010-Feb-03, 03:47 PM
There was a show on cults on History International (or some similar channel) recently that mentioned Flavor Aid, too.
CJSF

What a marketing opportunity! "Sure, you've heard of Kool-Aid, but 'Flavor Aid' is soo good that you'll want to drink it even if it kills you!"

It's all about the spin. Sorry. [/derail] [rail] . . .

CJSF
2010-Feb-03, 07:08 PM
I should clarify. The show was about the Jonestown tragedy and specifically mentioned that it was poisoned Flavor Aid used to kill the cult members.

CJSF

stu
2010-Feb-04, 06:42 AM
Well, tonight was hopefully my final foray into the dregs of Meier and Horn. I listened to two old Paracast interviews of Horn from 2006 and posted an analysis that really spoke to two things - first, that Horn refuses to answer direct criticism but rather just dodges it, and second that in science it doesn't matter how many times something is "verified by experts," it just takes one solid refutation to destroy it, which Horn seemed to completely disagree with.

So, I posted it under the title, "<a href="http://pseudoastro.wordpress.com/2010/02/03/how-could-a-simple-one-armed-farmer-…-a-bit-more-on-billy-meier-michael-horn-and-what-scientific-falsification-means/"> “How Could a Simple One-Armed Farmer …” A Bit More on Billy Meier / Michael Horn, And What Scientific Falsification Means</a>." Just over 2 hours later, he posted a treatise in the comments section, STILL MISSING THE WHOLE POINT.

But, on the bright side, he ended with, "Gentlemen, I beg you, permanently reject me as a member of your little pathetic little club here, as belonging to it could seriously tarnish my own reputation." I'm wondering if I should hold him to it and block all future posts by him.

He's also big on the name-calling. In a single paragraph, he calls me: “obviously incompetent, inept poseur,” “half-assed, pretentious, presumptuous,” “achingly self-important nobody,” “pathetically low levels of intellectual ability,” and “orifice of academia that burped him out.”

A fascinating read, really, into how a 5-year-old may argue.

Oh, and I'll say it again, he still didn't refute my original claim.

Spoons
2010-Feb-04, 06:59 AM
achingly self-important nobody

That'd make a great t-shirt! If this UFO gig falls apart he could go into that business. Emo fashion.

Garrison
2010-Feb-04, 08:03 PM
But, on the bright side, he ended with, "Gentlemen, I beg you, permanently reject me as a member of your little pathetic little club here, as belonging to it could seriously tarnish my own reputation." I'm wondering if I should hold him to it and block all future posts by him.

He's also big on the name-calling. In a single paragraph, he calls me: “obviously incompetent, inept poseur,” “half-assed, pretentious, presumptuous,” “achingly self-important nobody,” “pathetically low levels of intellectual ability,” and “orifice of academia that burped him out.”

A fascinating read, really, into how a 5-year-old may argue.

Oh, and I'll say it again, he still didn't refute my original claim.
Well according to cracked.com asking to be banned is a common tactic for avoiding admitting you've lost an argument, and he'll probably just come back later.

Joe Boy
2010-Feb-05, 02:10 AM
I think it's funny how long he has milked that "Billy" show. Especially when you consider how ridiculous and absurd most of the ufos look. And then consider the fact that apparently a model of one of those ufos was found in his attic not to mention the fact that he is only representing this crap by proxy. Monty Python seems more realistic than these guys. The "cake theme" really floored me the first time I saw one. They give nice woo woos like myself a bad name--or wait, maybe I did that. Oh well . . .