The indefatigable Michael Horn, one of us yet to entirely discredit himself it appears, goes a little further out on that limb than I can, presently. He identifies himself as Billy Meier's media rep in the United States, and he's making some startling claims regarding Meier that seem to, one, have some support, two, are not conclusively refuted by the garden-variety skepti-bunky, and, three, are provoking dodgy, inconsistent, and fallacious (...and so, therefore, suspicious...) behavior from same! And over a period of years, too!

His claims, as rationally (and logically) detailed in his (not too pricey...) DVD ("The Meier Contacts"), feature highly specific predictions and prophesies made decades earlier in extant works and books... subsequently revealed recently in mainstream science news?! Meier foretold the future?

They include detailed photos and films which have not been duplicated or otherwise conclusively shown to be fakes?! They feature pieces of metal purported to be irreproducible and compellingly alien?! They include clear sound recordings made of a *beam ship* close by... equally irreproducible, with alien intimating and peculiar harmonic properties?! Put all this together with the documentation of the double digit attempts on Meier's life, place it alongside a consistent and well documented journal of ongoing alien contact, and what do you have?

Some would argue a continence of ufological buffoonery and the degradation of same! Others would argue that the preceding could be citations of verity. Still others would swear by it! The larger remainder are distractedly aware... or unaware because of the aggregate distraction.

I only want non-canted answers to a few questions myself: What is the verity of the evidence? Are the predictions Mr. Horn outlines with regard to "ozone depletion" and the asteroid Toutitis (among ~significant~ others) legitimate and bona fide? Are the photos, video, and film footage vetted and genuine? Is the aforementioned sound recording significantly indicative of a sound that could not be easily fabricated as examined by competent and unbiased aural authority? Does a similar condition exist for the bit of strange metal mentioned; does it withstand the scrutiny of an unbiased metallurgist? Is there credible evidence that the attempts on Meier's life number in the high teens?

Michael Horn has indicated, in his DVD presentation and on the radio, that all the aforementioned evidentiary bits conclusively pass these un-conflicted examinations and appear to provide convincing evidence that Billy Meier is the genuine article. What is the rebuttal of the opponents to Mr. Horn, beyond the reflexive and therefore discountable conclusions based only on citations from the work of the pecu-liar triple"K" and others?

If there are problems with the vetting of the evidence, then there are problems with the vetting (!), but I am unimpressed with proclamations, irritated by innuendo, and righteously angered by baseless and reflexive acrimony! Moreover, treat me like a rube or dismiss me as a mere believer, regarding this query, at your peril... Get testy, terse, or disrespectful with me on this, and I'll eat your literary face! I won't be taking any crap. I insist upon reflection over reflex.