From: david@edenroad.demon.co.uk   
      
   On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 01:57:29 +0000, Your Name Here=Harvey wrote:   
      
   > In article ,   
   > david@edenroad.demon.co.uk says...   
   >>   
   >>On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 09:54:32 +0000, Your Name Here=Harvey wrote:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> Who is Billy Meier.   
   >>   
   >>He's a fraudster. They're not even particularly good fakes: the near ones   
   >>are clearly models suspended using wires.   
   >>   
   >>--   
   >>=======================================================================   
   >>= David    --- If you use Microsoft products, you will, inevitably, get   
   >>= Mitchell --- viruses, so please don't add me to your address book.   
   >>=======================================================================   
   >   
   >   
   > If you would check out the details yourself - the pros and cons   
   > presented - you will clearly see that no one has ever produced anything   
   > hoaxed, that can be said to rival the quality of Billy Meier photographs.   
   > Hence authencity.   
      
   But you can see it's a fake!  That's hardly "quality", is it?   
      
   >   
   > a. You can't do it in the original physical locations - because it's   
   >    impossible to have some kind of elaborate set up or set it physically that   
   >    it can be photographed by a man with one arm.   
      
   You mean THIS MAN HAS NO FRIENDS.   
      
   Why weren't we told!   
      
   Besides.  Man arrives with camera on string tound neck, fishing rod with   
   saucer attached in hand.   
      
   Embeds rod in pre-dug hole, pointing up.  Saucer goes "whizz" in little   
   lissajous figures, just like in the movie.   
      
   Man removes camera from neck, takes picture.   
      
   Ta da!   
      
   >   
   > Even then the result would be obviously a model on a string/etc - if   
   > a camera is used, such as Billy Meier's. One that was broken, such that   
   > it could not focus on close objects (note how close objects are out of   
   > focus).   
      
   Your sentence doesn't really make sense to me - you seem to be sguuesting   
   that Meier's camera is broken because it does not show everything in focus   
   at once.   
      
   This is normal behaviour for a camera.   
      
   >   
   > The photographs are only one aspect - there's the sound recording to   
   > explain,   
      
   I heard the recording, there's nothing about it that couldn't easily be   
   reproduced using a synthesiser, despite the claims on the site.   
      
   > then the mass of information that is released from the Plejarens.   
   > No one can make so many predictions, nor provide such a wealth of information   
      
   All rubbish.   
      
   > that remains convincing.   
      
   The "predictions" are either hopelessly generic or obvious.  A ten year   
   old with a current newspaper could do better.   
      
   > Billy Meier is not another Adamski.   
      
   You'd just better hope he's not another "Heaven's Gate".   
      
   --   
   =======================================================================   
   = David    --- If you use Microsoft products, you will, inevitably, get   
   = Mitchell --- viruses, so please don't add me to your address book.   
   =======================================================================   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)