User talk:J-Truthseeker

Thanks.[edit]

I admit that I am self-centered enough to visit your Yahoo Meier group to see what you're saying about me. Especially after the theory that I was TerraX (whoever). You wrote there

Jesse Hughes apparently is a person who is not out to slander us, but rather is a member of Wikipedia attempting to bring various subject matters such as Billy Meier's into a NPOV.

Exactly right. As Meier goes, I'm a fairly disinterested party (though, I should admit that I am strongly skeptical on such matters). But Wikipedia has certain aims that don't fit well with advocacy. Now, as advocates go, I think you've tried to be somewhat neutral, but the results still show a natural bias in the presentation.

I hope that I would react just as readily to an overly skeptical argument regarding Meier, but of course we all have our blind spots. As you say, that's one reason Wikipedia is editable by anyone. Hopefully, our biases wash out (though, in practice, things are obviously not so neat). Phiwum 21:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Thanks.[edit]

No problem, over the last number of years of really looking into the Meier case thus far, I've also come across extremes from both sides. Even when at times I've supported the case for my own personal reasons, rather then because of what various people have said about it, and the same is also also true with the skeptics. As much of an anti-skeptic as I've become with a certain select group of people because of their destructive criticism, the same opposite is also true of people I've found with good healthy constructive skepticism, which is a good thing because these people usually don't buy into all the other non-sense from various religions and new age cults alike. And of course they tend to be reasonable people, even if they don't believe in UFOs because they've never seen one in their life. As a further note: I think you'll find the Meier case unique in the sense that it's most certainly the most debated UFO case in history that I know of, because I always found it odd that so many skeptics will debate the Billy Meier case a lot, yet give little or no attention to debating other UFO cases like say; George Adamski's Adamski foundation, George King's Aetherius Society, Claude Vorilhon's Raëlian Movement, Ernest and Ruth Norman's Unarius Academy, or even someone like Helena Petrovna Blavatsky's "Theosophical Society", who has achieved quite a significant number of followers of new agers today like perhaps no other.

Perhaps the best book written about the Meier case controversy is "Light Years" by Gary Kindler". I think you'll enjoy this book if you've not read it yet all ready, which is the only one of it's kind with more a neutral perspective. If you haven't read it then enjoy the read.--J-Truthseeker 06:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:MainFlag1.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:MainFlag1.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)