The Billy Meier case, and related hoaxes.

Posted in Uncategorized on August 3, 2014 by alienresspace

Note: This section on the Billy Meier hoax has been fully updated.

To find many new articles, videos, and tons of pictures about this hoax, click here!

During the 1970s, a Swiss farmer by the name of Billy Meier produced some of the most startling pictures and films of flying objects ever. But over the years, various research has shown most of these can be proven to be fakes.

Nevertheless, this is still one of the most enduring yet probably also one of the most complex hoax cases ever, especially because it can not be entirely excluded some extraordinary events occured at the Meier farm in Switzerland, as it is alledged by various persons who say to have witnessed strange activity in the skies, and other. Since we don’t hold the belief everyone is a hoaxer, we think these witnesses may be taken serious and taken on their word. You can read about some of them here.

On the other hand, it can’t be entirely excluded at least some of these witnesses have made untrue statements due to being under influence of the sect like Meier cult-community. We also note that in many (other) cases, witnesses describe UFOs that are very different from the objects that can be seen in Meier’s pictures and film footage.

Whatever the truth about these witnesses and possible UFO activity in the region where Meier lives, the deception of most of Meier’s picts, films, and other material speaks for itself, while it must be noted that the pictures that are generally available online, or published in videos and books, are the “creme of the crop”, where it is the least obvious that strings have been used, or that other manipulations have been applied.

According to researcher Kal Korff, Meier made his first fake UFO photograps already when he spent time in India, in the 1960s and early 1970s, long before coming out with the famous pictures of the mid 1970s. It’s fair to say that by the time Meier made his pictures public, his fakery skills were of a pretty high level for his time, and that he must have worked hard and long at perfecting them. Also, we believe Meier must have had help to make some of his fake “evidence”, in certain instances from professionals (as for instance for the sound sample alleged to be from a spacecraft, which required particular sound equipment and know-how).

Our view is that the only reason why there is still a so called Meier “controversy”, is simply the fact that making fake pictures of UFOs and other such material, and claiming they are genuine, are by itself not punishable by law, while certain governments have too much to hide to bring the subject of UFOs in the open, in order to allow genuine public scrutiny of it…

However, when considering certain aspects of this case, the question should be asked if the Meier hoax is merely a set-up by conmen without any scrupules, or in fact a kind of psy-op/disinfo operation to discredit the subject of UFOs in general, and/or to divert attention from more genuine cases. We consider it a very real possibility… Study the links and the presentation on this website and make up your own mind!

For the following picts, those that have been made by B. Meier, the sources are (ultimately)
* billymeier.com Official Billy Meier website.
* theyfly.com Website of Michael Horn, B. Meier representative.

More relevant info on the Meier case, many videos and tons of pictures can be found here!

 

Billy Meier classic.
Billy Meier classic, but fake…

This is one of the best known picts made by Billy Meier. Much of his picts and videos look remarkably real and are quite difficult to be proven fake. However, even this classic Meier pict is fake, as the following analyses shows.
Billy Meier's classic exposed.
Billy Meier’s classic exposed.

On this photo analysis by the researcher and UFO debunker Peter Brookesmith it can be clearly seen that the UFO is simply a model hanging on a string…
Billy Meier fake UFO.
Billy Meier fake UFO on string.

Although it makes a nice picture, when you see the film footage of it, this “ET craft” is clearly moving as hanging on a string (notwithstanding the waving tree tops). You can find a clip of it here. You get the best result when viewing the clip 2x its normal speed! Bear in mind that this is a relatively LARGE model, which is why it looks relatively real, in particular when taken against the tree which is not necessarily as big as it seems (think of Bonsai trees!). When you view the other clips on the link mentioned, note that the wobbling left to right, is also typical for an object hanging on a string, and not the result of some “unstable magnetic field”…Billy Meier classic exposed
Billy Meier classic fake exposed.

A verification of the previous photo analysis of the Meier fakery, although for a slightly different version of that pict.
Billy Meier fake UFO.
Billy Meier fake UFO.

The same fake craft as on the previous pict. 

Billy Meier classic.
Billy Meier classic fake.

The previous UFO, in higher resolution.

Billy Meier fake UFO.
Billy Meier fake UFO, reconstruction by K. K. Korff.

This is a reconstruction of one of the picts of a model very similar to the one seen in the previous picts, done by Kal Korff. He uses a simple plate, photographing it aproximately at the same height (albeit a little lower) of exactly the same hill Meier photographed his pict. Korff’s full investigation can be found in his book on the Meier case.

Billy Meier fake UFO.
Billy Meier fake UFO and proof of deception.
Billy Meier fake UFO.
Graphic reconstruction.

 

According to Meier’s ex-wife, as reported by Kal Korff, he made this fake UFO (above) with the cover of a garbage can and kitchen utensils, then photographed it from nearby. This pict offers IRREFUTABLE proof of a deliberate deception, without any special equipment or software needed to reach that verdict. All we have to do is look andthink about what we’re seeing. We see a “craft” that is in focus (“sharp”) while the house on the background is out of focus (“blurry”). This means the house is a lot further away from the camera than the “craft” is. We can estimate from the size of the windows that the house is at aprox. 12m to 18m (39.4 to 59 feet) from the camera. Since the house is so much out of focus, while the craft is in focus, the craft must be at most at 1m to 2m (3.3 tot 6.6 feet) away from the camera. The craft is therefore at most +/- 1m (3.2 feet) large! It MUST just be a model, albeit a relatively large one. In fact, further analysis shows the model is in reality +/- 60 centimeters large (+/- 2 feet, or 23.6 inches). (Note that the above link leads to a slightly enlarged version of the pict available, which causes everything to be slightly more blurred than the original, but it still shows clearly that the “craft” in the foreground is much more in focus than the house in the background, plus some other flagrant discrepancies. This means the house is a lot further away from the camera than the “craft” is. We can estimate from the size of the windows that the house is at aprox. 12m to 18m (39.4 to 59 feet) from the camera. Since the house is so much out of focus, while the craft is in focus, the craft must be at most at 1m to 2m (3.3 tot 6.6 feet) away from the camera. The craft is therefore at most +/- 1,5m (4.9 feet) large! It MUST just be a model, albeit a relatively large one. (Note that the above link leads to a slightly enlarged version of the pict available, which causes everything to be slightly more blurred than the original, but it still shows clearly that the “craft” in the foreground is much more in focus than the house in the background, plus some other flagrant discrepancies. You can find the original pict here).

 

Billy Meier fake UFO.
Graphic reconstruction as according to J. Deardorff.
James Deardorff is one of the Meier-clan “researchers” who claims these picts of the “Weddingcake craft” are authentic, according to his “scientific analysis” as posted on his website. On that page, he states that: “It is quite revealing to notice in Fig. 1 [ed: the pict of the previous analysis] that not only is the wedding-cake craft in good focus, but the main residence beyond it is in fairly good focus, too.” But clearly, the craft is much better in focus (sharper) than the house, so there must be a considerable distance between them, according to my estimates: 10m to 16m, which is a fact Deardorff clearly tries to obfuscate… After his initial misleading statement, Deardorff claims:“For a wedding-cake craft of 7m diameter, the camera equation indicates it was situated about 13.5m from the camera.” When taking into consideration Deardorff’s calculation, that means the camera would be at least at 13.5m + 7m + 10m (to 16m) from the house, i.e. at 30.5m to 36.5m. This is clearly not what can be seen in the pict, as taking a picture from such a distance would show much more of the house, there would be more of the horizon to be seen, and there would be more space visible above the house (the roof line would be relatively lower). Deardorff’s analysis is very clearly bogus, and can only be understood as an attempt to deceive…Note about the camera-lens used and focal depth: we can’t be really completely sure what camera-lens Meier used, but according to Meier’s own saying, and according to the specifications mentioned by Deardorff, with a 35mm film, a lens focal length of 55mm, and a selected f-stop of f/11, with the subject being at 2 meters, then the near and far limits of acceptable sharpness would be at respectively 1.64 m and 2.56 m, with a hyperfocal distance of 8.97m, which is perfectly compatible with the calculation that the “craft” is in reality +/- 1.5m in diameter, and at +/- 2m from the camera, and which fully explains why the “craft” is significantly sharper than the house in the background.On the other hand, if the camera would be at 13.5m of the “craft”, as Deardorff claims, then the hyperfocal distance would still be at 8.97m, and when focussing on the craft there would simply have been NO noticeable difference at allbetween the sharpness of the “craft” and that of the house, which is clearly not what can be observed…
Also see Understanding Depth of Field in Photography, Hyperfocal Distance Guide, examples of hyperfocal distance settings 1, 2, 3, and this online depth of field calculator. To get a feeling of what one can do by playing around with lenses, depth of field and lens focal length, see these examples.

 

 

Billy Meier fake UFO.
Billy Meier fake UFO and proof of deception.
Billy Meier fake UFO.
Graphic reconstruction.

 

This pic (above) is another example of IRREFUTABLE proof of a deception, without any special equipment or software needed to analyze it. Since the “craft” is perfectly in focus (“sharp”), while the car is completely out of focus (“blurry”), to know if this is a hoax or not, all that we need is to answer the following question: is the “craft” in front of the car, or is it behind the car? If it is behind the car, it is definitely a big object. This is the impression Meier intended to create… But if the “craft” is in front of the car, it is definitely a relatively small object, much too small to carry a humanoid of normal size. The object can definitely not be above the car, and be aprox. twice the size of the car, since in that case both the object and the car would be perfectly in focus, which is not the case. With two objects, one being in focus (“sharp”) and the other out of focus (“blurry”), while neither shape overlaps the other, it would, with all cirumstances being neutral, be impossible to tell which is in front of the other. However, here it is the light that allows the viewer to determine that the “craft” is really IN FRONT of the car. The reason for that is that the light source is slightly behind the camera, at its left, yet it is the object and NOT the car that is the brightest, and receiving the most light. Therefore, the object MUST be in front of the car (hanging slightly above eye-level), and be significantly smaller to be so much more in focus (“sharper”) than the car, and brighter at the same time. There is simply no way to refute this fact… The car is aprox. 4,3m long. We can estimate from the size of the car that the camera is aproximately at +/- 10m distance. Therefore the craft must be at most at 1m to 2m (3.3 tot 6.6 feet) away from the camera. The craft is therefore at most +/- 1m (3.2 feet) large! This is in complete accord with the previous analysis, and a perfect corroboration of our final conclusion that it is in fact +/- 60 centimeters large (+/- 2 feet, or 23.6 inches).

 

Billy Meier fake UFO.
Billy Meier fake UFO and proof of deception (enlarged).

Original pict can be found here
Billy Meier fake UFO.
Previous pict with highlight.

Billy Meier fake UFO.
Previous pict with model cut out.

Click here to read article with full analysis, including that of matching the model to a garbage can lid!This pict (above) comes from the same series as the previous picts. If the previous analyses didn’t convince everyone yet, then this pict should to the job. It’s surely the ultimate “smoking gun”, proving willful deception by Billy Meier, as it can clearly be seen that the object shown is hanging in front of the car!! Ooops…It’s a fact that due to the bad (i.e. low) resolution of the available original picture, and due the confusing lighting of object and car, one could easily oversee this fact. But after enlarging the pict several times, it becomes blatently obvious when looking at the area indicated by the red line, that the craft is with 100% certainty in front of the car, and is therefore much smaller than the car! Consequently it must be of similar dimensions as those calculated for the previous analysis! This pict was posted with the photo-“analysis” by James Deardorffmentioned earlier (page has been saved by us in its entirety in case it gets modified), which should be an indication of how “qualified” he really is to confirm the “authenticity” of these picts…

 

Billy Meier fake UFO.
Billy Meier fake UFO.

Same fake UFO as previous picts. Note the completely unrealistic feel of this pict.
Billy Meier fake UFO.
Billy Meier fake UFO.

Same fake UFO as previous picts. Same trick with the trees as for the first pict.Billy Meier fake UFO.
Billy Meier fake UFO.

Same fake UFO as previous picts. Same false perspective trick as for the extensive analyses above. Notice that while the car projects a shadow to its left, no shadow can be seen coming from the “craft”, even though this is precisely what should happen if the “craft” was hanging above the car, and not far IN FRONT of it, close to the camera… We also see the same focus discrepancies as for the previous picts. (The above link leads to a slightly enlarged version of the available pict, find the original pict here).
Fake Pleadians.
Fake Pleadians, Asket & Nera

Never being out of ideas, Meier even endeavoured to make fake picts of his mythical Pleadian visitors. When people noticed a reflection and a strange curve in the pictures, Meier tried to make believe that he took the photographs from a large videoscreen on board of a ‘beamship’…
Fake Pleadians.
Michelle Della Fave, on the Dean Martin Show

In fact, Meier simply took pictures off a very earthly TV screen. The “Pleadian” he called “Asket”, was in reality proven to be a dancer on the Dean Martin show, called Michelle Della Fave (not Susan McIver, a.k.a. Suzan Lund, as mentioned in the past on this page), who was part of the dance-group “the Golddiggers”. Once this became known, Meier then claimed he was set up by the “Men in Black”, and that they stole the original photos, replacing them by these. Sure, Billy…
Billy Meier's and Adrian's beamships.
Meier’s and Adrian’s “beamships” compared.

In the 1990s another “Pleiadean contactee” appeared, by the name of Adrian. He claimed to have photographed ET crafts of the same type as Meier’s. When comparing these picts, Adrian’s pict would seem to confirm the authenticity of Meier’s picts of the same type of craft.
Adrian's beamships.
Pict by Adrian of several crafts on a row.

But this pict by Adrian clearly pushes things too far, as it shows 3 Meier type crafts, and an Adamski type craft (on the left), perfectly on a row, just right to be photographed through a patio railing.Adrian's beamships exposed.
Adrian’s pict exposed.

One doesn’t really need any special software to see some of the strings, as shown in this enlarge

Billy Meier fake UFO.
Billy Meier fake UFO.

Same fake UFO as previous picts. Here it can be clearly seen the “craft” is actually a small model, since it hangs in front and onto some of the branches of the FRONT tree, even though the Meier clan (i.e. Deardorff et al) claims it hangs “between” the 2 trees that can be seen… (The above link leads to an enlarged version of the available pict, find the original picthere).

Billy Meier UFO model.
Model in Meier’s barn.

This is a picture of a model of a “Pleadian craft”, which was allegedly found in a barn at Meier’s farm, and photographed by the researcher Kal Korff. Meier has admitted that he owns such models, but claims they are only for his kids…

Fake UFO for demonstration.
Fake UFO for demonstration.

Here’s a rather good example of how easy it is to fake a UFO pict like those made by Meier. Note in this pict the extra difficulty of using clouds on the background, instead of a crystal clear blue sky, which appears in most of Meier’s picts, and which make it easier to copy and paste objects. Read the full story and find more examples here. Other examples of Meier-type fake UFOs can be found in this interesting forum thread(scroll down).

Adrian's beamships exposed.
Adrian’s pict exposed.

A particular photo analysis shows that in fact the 3 Meier type crafts are hanging on a string. The same could be the case for the Adamski craft, or it could be a montage. The pict is a hoax, and obviously the work of someone who tried to benefit from Meier’s initial hoax. Source:ufowatchdog.com

Mystery robot-bringing UFOs sighted by Indian troops on Tibet border

Posted in ufo post on June 1, 2013 by alienresspace

‘Not necessarily from outer space’, reports paper

By Lewis Page • Get more from this author

Posted in Science6th November 2012 10:54 GMT

Free whitepaper – Windows 7 Migration: An industry view of application compatibility

Mysterious UFOs have returned to a remote region on the Tibetan border, according to sightings by Indian troops stationed in the area. The UFOs, which have been reported for years, are said to have included a strange “robot like” figure seen by Indian scientists in 2004 walking along a mountain valley – which then “rapidly became airborne” and flew away.

We learn of the latest military sightings through the trenchant journalism of India Today, which says that Indian army troops and gendarmerie units of the Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force (ITBP) have been submitting reports of strange luminous airborne objects since the summer above the Ladakh region. Ladakh is a remote, mostly uninhabited but heavily militarised zone along the border with Tibet and China.

It seems that the Indian army has checked carefully and the UFOs in question are not manned or unmanned aircraft: these are routinely sighted in the area but can picked up on radar – unlike the UFOs. Indian army radars have been unable to track the strange shining objects. An unmanned aircraft despatched towards one UFO did sight it, but then “lost sight of the object”.

According to India Today, the Indian government – stimulated to curiosity by the frequent reports from the military – despatched a scientific expedition to the region in September. The Indian boffins saw the UFOs but were unable to establish what they were.

The paper reports, magnificently:

Scientists say the mysterious objects are not necessarily from outer space.

(In fact the sense of the boffins interviewed by IT was that there is no reason to think they are from outer space, but this is much better.)

We also learn that UFOs have been reported in the Ladakh region for many years, with the best of these reports coming from a group of Indian government scientists who were in the area in 2004 studying glaciers:

A five-member group of geologists and glaciologists led by Dr Anil Kulkarni of the isro’s Space Applications Centre in Ahmedabad were on a research trip through the barren Samudra Tapu Valley. They filmed a four-foot tall ‘robot-like’ figure, that ‘walked’ along the valley, 50 m away from them. The humanoid object then rapidly became airborne and disappeared. The encounter lasted 40 minutes. It was seen by 14 persons including the six scientists.

Though Dr Kulkarni’s report was comprehensive, it appears to have been mysteriously ignored by the Indian government. A clue as to just why can be found in the IT report; we note that Kulkarni’s description – in addition to its submission via scientific channels – was also supplied to unnamed “intelligence agencies … the matter was buried soon after.”

I think we all know what happened there. The excellent IT report can be read here courtesy of Yahoo! ®

Bootnote

It may also be worthy of note that a Nazi expedition brought back a small statue from Tibet in the 1930s which has since been confirmed to be of extraterrestrial origin.

 

CROP CIRCLES

Posted in CROP CIRCLES on January 10, 2007 by alienresspace

WHAT ARE CROP CIRCLES

Crop circles are large circular depressions or patterns that appear overnight in the middle of grain fields (mostly wheat and corn) when the crop is quite high. The phenomenon has spawned its own science: cereology. Crop circles is also part of the UGM category (Unusual Ground Markings), which also include “tripod marks”, saucer nests,burn marks, etc. 

Most crop circles have been found in the southeast of England since the early 1980s, but others have been reported in the United States and
Europe. Some have been exposed as hoaxes, but others remain unexplained. Crop circles range in diameter from as small as 3 metros (10 feet) to over 100 metros (315 feet). They appear overnight, and no tracks leading up to them are found, suggesting some external force from above is responsible. Visually, the stems are partially flattened, and entangled or intertwined. The plants are all bent and face the same direction, clockwise or counter clockwise. The crops are never damaged, broken, or show signs of forced bending. The plants continue to grow normally throughout the rest of their growing cycle. UFO sightings, moving orange lights, “whooshing” or warbling sounds usually preceed the formations of circles.
 

For the UFO crowd, the circles are signatures left behind by visiting spaceships. For mother-earth mystics, they’re the manifestations of deep waves of natural energy. For psychics, they’re the conscious results of remote-viewing experiments. For fringe physicists, they’re the tracks of ionized plasma whirlwinds. But the most likely is that the pranksters or circlemakers are human that take fun in building such weird circles. As yet no conclusive evidence has been found for any of these theories

CROP CIRCLES HISTORY

One of the earliest reports was in Lyon in 815AD, and a late 16th Century woodcut depicts the devil mowing a field into patterns. They began to appear in significant numbers in the fields of southern
England in the mid-1970s. Early circles were quite simple, and simply appeared, overnight, in fields of wheat, rape, oat, and barley. The crops are flattened, the stalks bent but not broken. 
As the crop circle phenomenon gained momentum, formations have also been reported in Australia, South Africa, China,
Russia, and many other countries, frequently in close proximity to ancient sacred sites. For the thousands reported every year, the vast majority go completely undetected. Most of the complex formations occur in the
United Kingdom and they are also more likely to be detected because of the country’s smaller land mass. 

Over the last 25 years, the formations have evolved from simple, relatively small circles to huge designs with multiple circles, elaborate pictograms, and shapes that invoke complex non-linear mathematical principles. Since the early 1990s, however, the phenomenon has grabbed world attention, as the formations evolved into enormous, increasingly mathematically complex and perfectly executed shapes appearing in fields, often near the sacred sites of Wiltshire. 

The largest to date, a perfectly formed spiral formation 244 metres in diameter, composed of 409 circles covering almost the entire field, appeared overnight on a rainy night at Milk Hill in Wiltshire Aug. 12, 2001. 

The movie Signs, starring Mel Gibson, while universally scorned by serious crop circle researchers, nevertheless renewed interest in crop circles after years of the phenomenon being dismissed in the media as a sophisticated hoax, following the announcement of two elderly landscape painters named Doug Bower and Dave Chorley who confessed in 1991 that they had been making crop circles in English grain fields since the 1970s after reading about the Tully, Australia Saucer Nest of 1966. The truth is that they were both unable to draw a decent crop circle in daytime and to remember the exact location of their exploits.

WHERE TO FIND CROP CIRCLES

 Each year more than 100 formations appear in the fields of southern
England. About 10,000 crop circles have been documented worldwide since records began to be kept in the ’70s. Not including this year’s formations, England tops the list with around 1,784, followed by the U.S. with 228, Canada with 135, Germany with 105, Australia with 71, the Netherlands with 62, Hungary with 23 and Japan with 19, most of them appearing in rice paddies. Dozens of other countries on every continent have also reported small numbers of simple formations. 

Wiltshire County, UK is the acknowledged center of the phenomenon. The county is home to some of the most sacred Neolithic sites in Europe, built as far back as 4,600 years ago, including
Stonehenge, Avebury, Silbury Hill, and burial grounds such as West Kennet Long Barrow. Some pretend that crop circles are usually aligned with ley lines, so you may discover new crop circles by following the lines

.  .

THE CROPPIES

In 1991 two retired lanscape painters Englishmen, Doug Bower and Dave Chorley, proclaimed they were responsible for all the crop circles in
England since 1978, starting as a joke to make people think UFOs were landing. 

They demonstrated their technique for the cameras with a 1.2-metre board attached to a rope they hung around their necks. One held one end of a string in the centre to determine the radius while the other held the other end and stomped down the plants with the board. Newspapers and TV stations around the world trumpeted the solution to the crop circle mystery. 

Since Doug and Dave’s “retirement” in 1991, another generation of hoaxers has appeared. The only group to go public calls itself the Circlemakers (http://www.circlemakers.com). They have not taken credit for any one formation in particular, except a few commercial exhibitions (Mitsubishi, Weetabix) and a couple of television programs (History Channel, …), saying that revealing which circles they’ve created would ruin the mystery and appreciation for what they call their “land art.” To date, they have not responded to numerous challenges to reproduce any of the complex formations in front of witnesses. 

John Lundberg leader of the Circlemakers, considers their practice an art. Lundberg estimates that there are three or four dedicated crop circle art groups operating in the
United Kingdom today, and numerous other small groups that make one or two circles a year more or less as a lark. Two phenomena appear to be pushing the evolving art. 

To combat a widely promulgated theory that the circles were the result of wind vortices—essentially mini-whirlwinds—crop artists felt compelled to produce ever more elaborate designs, some with straight lines to show that the circles were not a natural phenomenon, said Lundberg. The other impetus is true of all art forms: Artists influence one another, and designs evolve in response to what has been done before. 

 The crop circle season extends from roughly April to harvesting in September, although the best time to make a circle is in mid to late June. When still immature, wheat rises back toward the sun, making a circle look brushed rather than flattened, said Lundberg. 

While the relationship between crop artists and cereologists is uneasy, the relationship between artists and farmers is mutually beneficial. Farmers provide the canvas, the artists bring in the tourists. The circles are a major tourist attraction, spawning bus tours, daily helicopter tours, T-shirts, books, and other trinkets. The circles draw people who believe the formations have a unique energy. They visit the formations as a sort of spiritual
Mecca, to meditate, pray, dance, and commune with worldly spirits. Farmers frequently charge a small fee or have a donation box for people who want to enter the circles. In 1996 a circle appeared near
Stonehenge and the farmer set up a booth and charged a fee, collecting 30,000 pounds (U.S. $47,000) in four weeks. The value of the crop had it been harvested was probably about 150 pounds ($235). 

  

HOW TO MAKE CROP CIRCLES ?

Anybody can make a crop circle with simple tools. The only tools you need are rope, boards or metal pipes and a willing crew. Here is a common way of making crop circles. 

1 A stake is hammered into the field at the center of the area where the circle will be created. 

2 A rope is tied to the stake and stretched to the edge of the circle. 

3 A crew member at the end of the rope makes a perimeter by walking in a circle around the stake. 

4 Boards or heavy pipes are then dragged over the crop to flatten plants within the space. 

5 Outside the new circle, rings can be made by leaving sections of the crop undamaged.

ALIEN TYPES

Posted in ALIEN TYPES on January 10, 2007 by alienresspace

           

 

 

 

ALIEN TYPES  

VARIETIES OF ALIEN BEINGS KNOWN TO “INTERACT” WITH HUMANS AND SUPPOSEDLY INVOLVED IN INFLUENCING HUMAN AFFAIRS. ALIEN TYPE 1: The Greys. 

Of this type there are several sub-types. All tend to appear greyish in color and for this reason are referred to as “greys.”  

GREY TYPE A: 

This is the type most commonly referred to as the greys. Also known as Zeta Reticuli from the Zeta Reticulan star system (the Bernard star) neighboring the Orion area. They function in a mode that is apparently military in nature with a rigidly defined social structure that holds science and “conquering worlds” to be the prime movers. They are normally about 4.5 ft tall with large heads and black “wrap around” eyes. They have limited facial features, slit mouth and no nose to speak of. They have evolved beyond the need for reproductive systems or digestive systems and reproduce by cloning. Their genetics are partly based on insectoidal genetics. Their science deals largely with the study of other life forms and genetic engineering. They have supposedly had a part to play in the alteration of human genetics over thousands of years. It seems that they may be trying to cross breed with humans in order to create a “mixture race” that would be better than either. (I’ve read that they are a dying species, that have cloned so much that now, with each successive cloning, the species grows weaker. They are trying to infuse new life into their species by creating the mixed breed.) There seem to be two main social classes. One is the more hawkish and is more abrupt, crude and blunt. The more dove-like ones are more refined and capable of a more business-like behavior towards humans, and prefer to use more “diplomatic” behavior to gain control over human’s. This type of Grey is what I believe is being referred to as the “
Orange” class of Greys.
 

They seem to be emotionless (by human standards) and therefore are seen as cruel in their treatment of human beings. They are able to take human lives without any regard for that individual. They apparently can use certain substances of the human body for their sustenance and therefore appear to be carnivorous in regards to humans. (I also read that they extract fluid from some part of the human brain during intense emotional response [fear] and are able to use it like a recreational drug.) These greys are actually servants to a master race of reptilian-type aliens and are trying to prepare the earth for their arrival by gaining control over the earth through many means. They tend to enjoy the feeling of freedom they have on earth, away from their masters and would desire the help of humans in confrontations with the reptilians…which appears to be a consideration for the near future (mid 90’s.) These greys have their best known bases in New Mexico and
Nevada but are also known to have bases in many countries of the world.
 

GREY TYPE B: 

Tall Greys from Orion. Usually about 7 to 8 ft. tall (reports often exaggerate their height as being 9 to 12 ft.) with facial feature somewhat similar to grey type A with the exception of the large nose found on type B greys. These greys also have technologies that allow them to perform certain actions that appear “miraculous.” These greys are less viscous towards humans than type A greys (but are still considered “hostile”.) They tend to influence more through political controls and negotiated agreements with those in power. Their main bases seem to be in the
Aleutian Islands. These are the type seen not long ago in
Eastern Russia.
 

GREY TYPE C: 

These are the shortest of the greys and tend to be about 3.5 ft. tall. Their facial features are very similar to the Zeta Reticuli greys and are of the same “root race.”. They are just as hostile to humans as the Zetas. They are from a star system near the shoulder of Orion called Bellatrax.  

ALIEN TYPE 2: 

THE REPTILIANS: A genetics akin to reptiles, these are highly advanced entities but viewed as being of a negative, hostile or dangerous disposition since they regard humans as a totally inferior race. They would perceive us much the way we would perceive a herd of cattle. They are carnivorous in regard to humans. There is supposedly a “driven” planetoid or asteroid inhabited by 30 million of these lizard-folk that is to enter our solar system in the mid 90’s if the present schedule is kept.  

They consider earth to be their own ancient outpost and would expect to have complete control of the entire planet upon their return. Their own planet is becoming unable to adequately support life and they need somewhere else to live. These are the aliens who are served by the type A greys.  

ALIEN TYPE 3: HUMAN TYPE ALIENS 

HUMAN TYPE A: 

These are of a genetic base similar to humans of earth. They appear of “normal” height (5-6ft?) and tend to be fair-skinned with blonde hair. These entities have been abducted by the greys or are the offspring of abductees and have been trained by the greys as servants. These entities are totally subservient to the greys. HUMAN TYPE B: 

These are aliens of similar genetics to earth humans and also, it seems, of the humans that serve the greys. These are from the Pleiades and are also of the blonde, fair-skinned appearance. This type is of a genuine highly evolved, spiritual, benevolent variety and have a kinship toward humans and are the only aliens to be truly trusted by earth humans at this time. They had at one time offered to be of assistance to earth leaders in dealing with the alien situation here but were rebuffed and so have taken a kind of “hands off” approach for the time being. These aliens are supposedly the forefather race of humankind. These are apparently not on earth much at this time due to serious problems in the area of their home.  

HUMAN TYPE C: 

Very little is known about these. They are supposedly another of the highly evolved, spiritual type of great benevolence to earth humans. I understand that their appearance is similar to other human-type aliens. They are from Sirius and don’t appear to be much involved with earth happenings at this time other than being concerned about the Grey scenario. They could desire to be of help to humans. There are other known human type aliens of this “more highly spiritually evolved” nature that are apparently aware of the situation on earth and considering some possible course of action. These are from Arcturus and Vega. The following article appeared in the summer 1993 edition (vol. 3 no. 2) issue of UFO Universe magazine.  

[GROUP A] 

Non Earth-Born Humans This GROUP consists of three peoples from three distinct colony zones, namely Sirius, Pleiades and Orion. Genetically, they are nearly identical to Earth-born humans with the following exceptions. Abductees refer to these beings as the talls. Males average up to approximately seven feet in height; females, six and a half feet. They are extremely fine featured, pale in complexion. Eyes are almond shaped, slightly slanted with a natural black liner, much like the renderings of ancient Egyptian royalty. There are three hair colors apparently related to colony origin: blonde (Pleiades), red (Orion), and black (Sirius). The insignia of these combined human races is a triangular arrangement of three spheres. This symbol has deep significance, and is found throughout Earth history. History records these beings as goddesses, gods, devas, etc. A subgroup of GROUP A females is in command of most Terran projects. [GROUP B] 

Earth-Born Humans These are Homo Sapiens whose origin is the planet Earth. They can be divided into two separate classes.  

[Class A] (Ancient) 

These humans were the companions and house servants of a GROUP A military mining and occupation force. When this force left the Earth sometime between 1,000 BC and 3,500 BC, it was decided to remove all humans that had been in close proximity with them. It was felt that leaving them would only further disrupt normal human development. Class A humans are on an equal level with GROUP A and cooperate fully in all Earth projects.  

[Class M] (Modern) 

These humans are working on the same cooperative level as Class A. They were taken from the Earth in modern times. During some abduction projects, twins (either identical or fraternal) are induced in a female subject. During the first trimester, one of the fetuses is removed. It is then grown to maturity by GROUP A. Abductees will meet their twins during some abductions. Very limited contact has been made by these humans.  

[GROUP C] 

Genetically Modified Earth-Born Humans  

These humans are comprised of two classes and should not be confused with GROUP D Greys.  

[Class W] (Workers) 

- This class is the smallest in physical stature. They are described as approximately three and a half feet in height, large head and eyes, pale white in complexion. These workers were created by GROUP A through genetic modification of Earth human fetuses. Their function is to perform menial tasks requiring limited reasoning abilities. In mental capacity, they are equivalent to a five year-old child. They are incapable of violence and, in some cases, are kept as companions by GROUP A individuals.  

[Class T] (Technicians)  

- These humans are basically the same as Class W. they are slightly larger, at approximately four and a half feet in height. Their complexion is tan or yellowish. Their reasoning and deductive abilities are higher. This allows them to perform more complex operations. They are often seen operating ship controls and in transport activities. Both Classes W and T are telepathically camouflaged to appear as Greys to abductees. This is done to conceal the true nature of GROUP C. It is felt that perception of GROUP A maintaining a human slave population would hinder future contact efforts. This point will undoubtedly be a source of much heated debate in the near future.  

[GROUP D] Greys  

Of the six groups discussed in this paper, the Greys appear to represent the only non-human contingent. The following data should be considered tentative at best. Height is approximately five and a half feet. The head is large; eyes large, black and very slanted. Skin color is dark grey and non-porous. All data so far indicates that they may be a cetacean-based life form. On Earth, this comprises the species of whales and dolphins. Descriptions of Greys’ skin color and texture closely match that of dolphins. The stare and stun effects approximate that performed by dolphins on potential enemies, such as sharks and barracuda. Human and dolphin fetuses are nearly identical, up to a certain development stage. Some say they share a common genetic ancestor. If so, then this makes the hybridization of humans and dolphins theoretically feasible.  

[GROUP E] Human/Grey Hybrids  

One of the main ET projects, now in the completion stage, is the hybrid program. The goal of this project is to produce a being combining the best physical and mental qualities of both races. The following description is of a hybrid female, approximately fifteen years old. Height is five feet, three inches; skin color is pale white/grey. The head is slightly larger and rounder than normal. Hair is dark, high above the forehead, and worn in a very long ponytail. The face is very fine-featured, and attractive. Like all the beings discussed in this paper, her main method of communication is telepathic. This has allowed a deeper understanding of her intellectual and emotional make-up. They consider themselves human, not Grey, in almost all respects. They care about the Greys, as any child would a parent, but find them agonizingly boring. The desire for human contact is greater than all others. Their capacity for emotion is as great, if not greater than, humans. Any physical attribute more human than Grey is a great source of pride. Their intellectual capacity is well above human standards. It is very likely they will exceed the capabilities of both races.  

[GROUP F] Sasquatch 

These have been seen both near, and on-board, UFOs. Little is known about them. Some have speculated that they are the original pre-human species from which Homo Sapiens were derived.  

ufo sighting classifications

Posted in ufo sighting classifications on January 10, 2007 by alienresspace

The main classification of UFO reports in use is based upon one used by
Dr J. Allen Hynek in his book “The UFO Experience” (Aberlard-Schuman 1972) It should be noted that many other classification systems have been devised by other researchers. Briefly the Hynek system (with the most commonly used
extensions) is :

NL (nocturnal light)
A simple visual sighting of a unidentified flying light seen at night.
This group contains 35 to 40 percent of all UFO reports.

ND (nocturnal disc)
A simple visual sighting of a unidentified flying extended or structured
light source seen at night. (This is an extension to Hynek’s system).

DD (daylight disc)
A simple visual sighting of a UFO with distinct shape seen during the day.
 Radar Cases

UFOs detected by radar alone.  In more recent years fewer cases involving
radar have hit the press.  This could be because of a number of factors,
for example the government is better at suppressing these reports, or there
has been a change in the nature of the phenomenon which makes it less
detectable or that many of the early reports were the result of spurious
events and false positives which are handled better by more modern
equipment.

Radar Visual Cases

UFOs observed visually whilst being simultaneously on radar. From Hynek’s
study these make up 1 to 2% of reports.

Close Encounters of the first kind (CE1, CEI)

As first defined by Hynek, a CE1 is an observation of a UFO within 150
yards.

Close Encounters of the second kind (CE2, CEII)

A UFO which leaves some form of physical evidence

Example: A burn where the UFO appeared to touch the ground or the finding
of material of unknown makeup.

Close Encounters of the third kind (CE3, CEIII)

A visual sighting of an occupant or entity associated with a UFO. An analysis by Hynek of 650 reports found only 1% to be CE3. These entities are sometimes called UFOnauts.

As well as entities seen inside a craft, entities have been described as sampling soil, rocks and plants or might communicate with the witness.

These witnesses are sometimes referred to as contactees. As well as communication, the witness may report that they were invited on board a craft or even taken for a trip.

Although included with UFOs, when dealing with contactees the researcher
is dealing with a case of something clearly identified by the witness as
some form of craft (without specifying the origin of that craft).  Strictly
speaking the object is no longer unidentified.

(Close Encounters beyond the third kind are extensions to the basic Hynek
system.  Different authors have used the same designation to mean different
things.)

Close Encounters of the fourth kind (CE4, CEIV)

An abduction of an individual by an alien being or race. The most famous of these being the abduction of Betty and Barney Hill in September 1961. (Hynek included this case in his CE3 category.) Although in recent years abductions have, because of their spectacular nature, received a great deal of publicity, they constitute only a small proportion of all UFO reports.

Close Encounters of the fifth kind (CE5, CEV)

Sometimes used to represent a direct contact or communication with alien being or race. For example: Billie Meier with the Pleiadians, U.S.Govt. with the Greys, or channeling.

Other researchers have used this classification for strange beings that have been reported, but without the obvious presence of a ‘craft’. These beings are generally seen in the witnesses house at night.  Their description is similar to the beings seen associated with UFOs in abduction and contactee cases.  Sometimes they are called ‘bedroom visitors’, the same set of reports have been classified as CE0 (zero) and CE9 by other groups of researchers.

It must be remembered that, after careful investigation, over 90% of UFO reports can be reasonably explained as manmade or natural phenomena. The late Charles H. Gibbs-Smith (aviation historian to the Victoria and Albert Museum in London) had something he called Gibbs-Smith’s rule which is worth keeping in mind when studying UFO reports. It states that “the strangeness of a case increases in proportion to the distance, in either time or geographical distance, between the investigator and the location of the report.”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.