A couple of days ago I had some time on my hands and strolled over to Michael Horn's website theyfly.com. One article in particular caught my attention and Horn goes off in a tantrum against Exopolitics and Michael Salla (among others). Now I realise that the Exopolitics field is by no means perfect and is made up by diverse characters who have their own take on the field, and personally I disagree with some of their conclusions but the general essence of the movement is based on democratic principles. Everyone can have their say. Exopolitics, right or wrong, uses a wide range of sources to make their case. Of course there is some internal disagreement about those sources but that is mostly set aside for the greater good - informing the public about UFOs, their possible ramifications and creating a political movement.
Michael Horn however seems to have such a low, and in my view, unfair opinion about Exopolitics that I felt the need to respond here. For those that don't know him, Michael Horn is the U.S. representative and spokesperson for the Billy Meier case. The more experienced internet surfers stand a good chance having met Mikey on forums (regarding UFOs) or ran across some of his articles since the guy doesn't shy away from any media attention. Aside from the fact that he sells Meier products, and I wont set my sights on that, the guy seems to truly believe every bit of information the Meier case forwards. In that lies his Achilles heel and from my perspective also shows his position in the ufological 'political spectrum'.
Lets take a look at some of the things Mr Horn writes;
And what is the last refuge of scoundrels who can’t find it in government or academia? Well, it’s the new safe harbor of “exopolitics”, the latest self-serving, cobbled together alliance of wishful thinkers, fantasists and conmen who share a common interest in, and an even more enormous lack of knowledge about, UFOs.
Is it my imagination or are people lumped together and dismissed with extreme prejudice? Michael Horn's 'charming' personality radiates through this excerpt, and it is the same Michael most people came to know on forums. What Mikey also points out in his article is that a number of Exopoliticians don't seem willing to collaborate with him. There are some perfectly good reasons for that. First, you can see what kind of person he is just by reading the excerpt above. He's rude, vicious, demanding and wants to be an authority. Secondly, most Exopoliticians came to the realisation that the Meier material is egocentric. It's exclusively based on Meier, his findings and conclusions, and no one elses. In fact other sources are dismissed. So why would Exopoliticians promote a case that wont promote them or their findings? There lies the catch, which Horn neglects to mention.
Let’s also give a dishonorable mention to Alfred Webre, who, along with Salla and Bassett, unashamedly promotes the completely unsubstantiated (to say nothing of illogical and moronic) notion that there are “benevolent extraterrestrials walking among us”. That’s right, ETs are strolling around everywhere, presumably taking a vacation from eons of boring, peaceful existence and traveling in space (and perhaps even time) in order to enjoy our overpopulated, polluted, warlike, greedy, self-destructive world, which is obviously amply populated by fools and idiots, with too much time on their hands, who invent such scenarios.
The "extraterrestrials walking among us", which is so easily dismissed by Horn, has its origins in other contactee material but also from individuals who experimented and experienced strange matters. There are literally dozens, if not hundreds of accounts where people claimed to have met ETs (or where they thought they were ETs). When you're an objective investigator it's not so easy to arbitrarily dismiss this aspect of Ufology, yet Michael Horn manages that with great ease. But here comes the real kicker.
Eventhough Horn denies that ETs could walk among us, in the Meier case the exact same thing is reported and there Horn accepts and supports the notion. Billy Meier's human looking ET contacts apparently are real enough, although practically no one has seen them besides Meier. Now isn't that a classic example of hypocrisy? And Michael Horn wonders why hardly anyone wants to collaborate with him? Maybe he doesn't realise that the approach he is taking is one of conflict and double standards, but I doubt that.
Why else do we perpetually encounter people and tactics designed to divert us from finding and seeing the complete, real truth about UFOs? The truth about UFOs and extraterrestrials absolutely should be known but you won’t find it with exopolitics, or its very self-serving “leaders”.
The text above comes very close in showing Horn's real agenda, he just needs to explain what the "real truth about UFOs" is. I can tell you that. The real truth about UFOs. . . can be found in the Meier case, according to Horn. That's what it boils down to. And there are no other sources because Billy Meier and his ET friends said so. That is what Horn is constantly working on, promoting the Meier case and presenting it as the only genuine source for UFO and extraterrestrial related information. Exopolitics, by its very nature, uses many sources, so there's an inherent incompatibility which Michael Horn neglects to expand upon. Meier's word is the gospel for Horn. Exopolitics are an obstacle (when they don't help his cause).
If I had to put Horn's methodology in a political spectrum it would be the far right. His views are radical, authoritarian, uncompromising and rely on a single (questionable) source. Decide for yourself then if Michael Horn is a delusional con man, a New Age Fascist, or maybe. . . both.
P.S.
(In the last sentence above I employed a tactic from Michael Horn's article, giving the reader a choice between two negatives. Nice try Mikey.)
No comments:
Post a Comment