Occam's Razor:

Among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected.

(In other words: the most logical explanation is normally the right one)

Occam’s Razor is a philosophical statement, not a principle from physics. It sounds logical and help us to find the truth. And it is commonly used, by skeptics, to explain that the most logical explanation about Meier case evidence is that he fabricated it, instead of demonstrating Plejaren from outer space visited him. For example, skeptics claim Meier used a food container-lid, Christmas balls and other household items to create a little model to photograph (the WCUFO), instead of showing a real space ship. So, for skeptics, the most logical explanation is that Meier case is a hoax, not a demonstration of the existence of alien races around us.

On April 3, 1981, Billy Meier took a series of photos of the WCUFO during daytime. The sequence of photos #840 to #844 were taken by Billy while he was walking towards the WCUFO static in front of a tree. Here we present two of these photos, #841 and #844, and the evolution of the comments from skeptics showing how complicate is to find a logical explanation. We will see how the most logical explanation is becoming too complex.

The figure below shows photo #841 (right column), and photo #844 (left column).

Skeptics explanations: Photo #841, top-right figure: It is a little model, half a meter size, supported very near to a very small tree (a bonsai). The photo is taken from the distance, so it looks like a real tree and a real UFO but they are both miniatures. Photo #844, top-left: The tree in the background is real. It is a real tree. The WCUFO is a little model, half a meter size, closer to the camera. Here Billy used the trick of false perspective, so a little object looks closer to a distant big tree, but they are not close to each other (tree and WCUFO).

Branches Analysis: Looking at the branches of both trees in both photos we notice they are the same. It is the same tree, not two different ones. So the distant bonsai (photo #841) is in reality the same big tree shown in the background on photo #844.

Skeptics explanations: Fine. It is the same tree. So the distant bonsai little tree (#841) is in reality a distant real tree. The WCUFO is still a small model closer to the camera and the tree, that is real, is farther away. It is the same false perspective trick in both photos.

Image Enhancing: (bottom row on the figure) Increasing the brightness of both photos, we notice there is shadow casted by the WCUFO on the tree branches. If the WCUFO cast a shadow (both photos), it means it is very close to this tree, which is a Norway Spruce, around 15 meters tall. If the WCUFO is close to this tree, we can compare the size of the UFO with the size of the tree, and we conclude this WCUFO is around 7 meters in diameter.

Skeptics explanations: It is still a false perspective trick. The UFO is a small model, and the tree behind, a real tree, was painted in black by Meier (He climbed in a latter, and with a spray painter, he turned black some of the leaves and branches simulating the shadows). So it is a false perspective trick, with a big, black painted tree in the background (!!!).

More analyses: Reflections underneath of the WCUFO and reflections on most of the spheres show the tree. If this tree is reflected, it means the WCUFO and the tree are close to each other. If the WCUFO is a half a meter model, at one meter from the camera, and the tree is 30 meters away, the tree could never be reflected on the spheres, and the dark reflection underneath the WCUFO could not be present.

Skeptics explanations: May be Billy Meier also painted the spheres and the base of the WCUFO? If it is complicated, maybe he used a 7 meters model and somehow he hover it up there while he took his photos? (!!!)

So, here we see how the simplest explanation is becoming too complex. At the end, we will find the simplest explanation is that it is a space ship.