PDA

View Full Version : David Wilcock



Swami
8th May 2010, 19:21
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q5MkjpT7r4

Vidya Moksha
9th May 2010, 00:54
A few minor niggles aside, (he jumps to a few strange conclusions).. i thought this was excellent and well worth a watch. A very upbeat message, and this forum is lacking upbeat often.

Templeton Peck
9th May 2010, 02:51
he gives me the creeps

truthseekerdan
9th May 2010, 03:29
he gives me the creeps

Maybe he's the real Face...:p :lol:

stardustaquarion
9th May 2010, 10:16
There are a lot of unsupported theories, I saw nothing that supports humans leaping like frogs :laugh: Well theories are just that, theories will have to wait and see in the meantime it is better to be prepared for other more plausible escenarios

Joslin
9th May 2010, 10:56
David wilcox has some great ideas and theories, but i think this video is a great example of over thinking..... everything.....

What ever happened to simplicity, and its principles...

Though saying that, David Wilcox used to lecture like a spiritualist, but now he is most definately begining to come across like a "theist"... and that i find extremely disturbing.

Regards
Joslin

Decibellistics
10th May 2010, 00:40
I specifically enjoyed the part where he said that the ships sucked out the moisture from the crops and fields in order to keep them from catching on fire.........UH DUUUUH?????????? Sucking out the moisture would cause them to catch on fire Dave.

Other than that he has some good points on evolution.

HORIZONS
10th May 2010, 01:29
Was the background music really necessary? Maybe he could add some visual special effects and really make us wow. After all, he is the father of the white race :-)
Oh yea, it was a Camelot production.

SteveX
10th May 2010, 01:58
Looking at the gesture above he clearly exaggerates.

shiva777
10th May 2010, 02:56
as usual way to simplistic...some good info but still very surface level stuff ..as a result the mainstream new-agers will lap it up and Wilcocks ego will inflate further...leading to even more wild conclusions and misleading ":revelations" from the self-styled edgar cayce of the 21st century....

he fails to consider that we had a more precise alignment to the galactic center in 1998..look it up,nothing much happened then...doesn't even mention HAARP and the time rips,how the suns activity is completely beyond any kind of prediction,especially from the sources he quotes and ,the many,many benevolent and malevolent ET groups tinkering with things,damaged DNA in most people,not to mention DNA seals,massive distortions in the earths grids and disconnected sacred sites,chemtrail effects,pharmaceutically corrupted biologies of most humans...and a million other factors..I'm sure a lot of us could sit down with Wilcock for a half hour and he would just sit there with his mouth open...I'm amazed he doesn't give any creedence to the many other presenters theories which invalidate his at the many conferences he attends...he has a very narrow minded focus,no time to consider the many holes in his theories

The future is bright but if you think there will be no earthchanges after 2012 ,like he says and that 2012 will result in almost instant and dramtic cosmic rescue you will be sorely mistaken and Wilcocks "I told you so party" will be tragic...

again...listen to Ashayana deanes interview soon to be released at proj camelot and I can guarantee it will make you think much more than Wilcocks spiritual opium supply till 2012 will

leavesoftrees
10th May 2010, 07:51
David wilcox has some great ideas and theories, but i think this video is a great example of over thinking..... everything.....

What ever happened to simplicity, and its principles...

Though saying that, David Wilcox used to lecture like a spiritualist, but now he is most definately begining to come across like a "theist"... and that i find extremely disturbing.

Regards
Joslin

I have only watched half way through the 2nd video and find it difficult to watch. Rather than coming across as a theist, to me he comes across as a motivational speaker. I had to turn it off and think about why he is doing this. Maybe that is the audience he wants to attract to his message, in the hope that a percentage might find their way to the Law of One

Scott
10th May 2010, 08:45
Wilcock: "I'm your Daddy"

"Medic !!!"

Did anyone else hear the radio interview with David where he shared a dream he had in which Michael Jackson told David that he would be more famous than Michael Jackson himself?

Merlin
10th May 2010, 09:29
Love to David Wilcock.
He is a highly intelligent man who has brought alot of things to peoples attention.
Tho I do think he is going off on a bit of a ego trip at the moment and some of his theories do seam a bit shallow and opinionated, with out any real evidence to back them up.
He has been going on about the planet warming up for a while now, which evidently isn't true!!
We have had the coldest winter for a long time and the temperatures in the UK for May are below average.
Don't get me wrong I really like David and the work he is doing, but I do think he would benefit from slowing down or stopping for a while on things, to see where he really is!!

Peace

:confused:

Sunny d
10th May 2010, 09:58
IMHO Wilcock has lost it a while back, when he started saying he was the incarnation of E.C. He should take while off to get things on track and together again

john.d
10th May 2010, 15:45
I used to really like David Wilcock but i have to agree that his ego has got the better of him . He has been promoting this video for months saying there was lots of new material , but its all the same stuff he's been saying for a while . His earlyer work was inspiring but this i found to be mildly irritating .

John

rosie
10th May 2010, 19:06
All I know, if it wasn't for David's website, I probably would have blown a few corks in the past. :eek:

As with all info we decide to take in, I take David's calm reasoning as a beacon in these crazy times. No one has all the answers, we all just have a piece of it, and sometimes his pieces seem to fit mine much better then all the other sites out there.

His words have helped to take any fear away that might have been lingering around me, while his inspirational messages just seem to come at the perfect time. :thumb:

He has a knack for telling it like it is, but with good healthy doses of spirituality sprinkled within.

He may come off goofy to some, but I bet he is a hoot to party with! :party:

yiolas
10th May 2010, 19:27
All I know, if it wasn't for David's website, I probably would have blown a few corks in the past. :eek:

As with all info we decide to take in, I take David's calm reasoning as a beacon in these crazy times. No one has all the answers, we all just have a piece of it, and sometimes his pieces seem to fit mine much better then all the other sites out there.

His words have helped to take any fear away that might have been lingering around me, while his inspirational messages just seem to come at the perfect time. :thumb:

He has a knack for telling it like it is, but with good healthy doses of spirituality sprinkled within.

He may come off goofy to some, but I bet he is a hoot to party with! :party:

You took the words right out of my mouth Rosie.

tone3jaguar
10th May 2010, 20:30
I think he brings some good things to the table. On the other hand I was annoyed after watching this video for good reason. I would have to agree that he totally misrepresented this video in order to bring attention to it. He clearly released multiple times that this would be all new information that was previously only available through his paid seminars. It was not only not all new information. None of it was new.

It will be a great video to watch for someone new to his research. However, he said things like "I have never released any of this info before because I only had it available at my conferences." and "now we are getting to close to 2012 and I must share this information for free now". Based on these types of statements I was fully anticipating some really new ground breaking material. However, I sat there for over three hours getting a consolidated review of all of the same stuff he has been talking about on internet radio shows and videos for the last few years.

Why didn't he just say that it was a homogenized version of his research and that we should watch it? Why did he have to lie about the content of the video? Does not make any sense to me.

LeeEllisMusic
10th May 2010, 21:05
I've got to agree with several of the previous posts, on both sides of the spectrum...

David's positivity and spiritual bent has been particularly inspiring and uplifting to me, and DivineCosmos.com has some great information on it. His perceptions largely fit with my own take on what's going on, (or what I *hope* is going on) and has helped me steer clear of the mountains of "fear porn" that's out there, and return again to the peace and wisdom within my own being....

That said, I do have to agree that this video is mostly a very well put together rehash of his regular shpiel, and the hype of this particular video, as well as the self promotion of his singing, his upcoming book, the conferences, the movie... - well, it *does* seem to smack a bit of inflated ego, ~ and that's sad because he has a great deal to say, and is, IMHO, a significant voice in these perilous times. It's not *new* material, and should not have been promoted as such. I hope he can get a handle on the recognition he is receiving, and focus on his work. Leave the hype and promotion to others.

For me, the best pat of this particular video was the last ten minutes or so, where he urged the listener to connect to your OWN Higher Self / Soul for all the answers and comfort and intuition that we need at the moment. THAT was well spoken, and shows me that his heart is indeed in the right place... And after all, which of us has not had to do battle with the dragon ego from time to time :)

I, for one, am cutting him some well deserved slack!

truthseekerdan
10th May 2010, 21:44
For me, the best pat of this particular video was the last ten minutes or so, where he urged the listener to connect to your OWN Higher Self / Soul for all the answers and comfort and intuition that we need at the moment. THAT was well spoken, and shows me that his heart is indeed in the right place... And after all, which of us has not had to do battle with the dragon ego from time to time :)

I, for one, am cutting him some well deserved slack!

Hi Lee, I totally agree with your statement about D.W. :thumb:

BTW, like your website...:)

Love and light,

Dan

Curative
10th May 2010, 21:52
:).............

Curative
10th May 2010, 22:00
David has simply placed his cards on the table for all to see.

Meditate to communicate is the short message I took from his video, specific guidance on how best to accomplish this was all that it lacked.

Still all that and for free, deserves a more positive response than some have shown here.

IMO he gives a much needed positive message to take forward into the coming changes instead of the fear based variety some others keenly promote.

Well done Wilcock :clap2:

K626
10th May 2010, 23:59
He's right about the white skin, blue eyed thing he talks about near the end. Blue eyes is the most recent on the planet and originated from space. (40min onward). The dna reprogramming thing also is a very interesting idea that he plays with...

Etherios
11th May 2010, 00:59
Meditate to communicate ....


Anyone able to give some pointers on how to do it or pass anykind of links or something? cause i cant seem to make it work or i dont know what i should be looking... (ofc i dont expect to communicate straight away but any help to see the path...)

Humble Janitor
11th May 2010, 03:22
He tends to get a lot of undeserved hate on here but I will say that he makes sense to me about 95% of the time.

onawah
11th May 2010, 04:07
DW helps me also to remain positive, and I could definitely use more of that.
Like most people in this field, his information is a mishmash, but he has interesting connections and makes good use of them, and gets it right enough often enough to keep my interest. His narcissism is certainly evident, but he's young and hopefully will outgrow it. I would rather listen to someone who is overly positive than overly negative, and there are too many of the latter broadcasting fear, even when they don't mean to.
Just to be able to remain positive when faced with even half of what is going on, is something of an accomplishment, and if he does get fearful, he seems to deal with it himself and doesn't infect others with it.
I hope he improves with age, but meanwhile, I'm glad he's in the circuit.

CetaceousOne
14th May 2010, 04:29
Just finishing the fourth video....

Haven't heard anything new yet that has blown me away like in the past....

Perhaps it has all been said?

The ego of the messenger doesn't detract from the message, but it can
distract....

onawah
28th May 2010, 04:36
A new feature on Divine Cosmos from DW, a video featuring Graham Hancock at
http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-here/davids-blog/838-settinghistoryfree

MargueriteBee
28th May 2010, 04:56
Perhaps in past lives he has suffered from an enflated ego, and in this life he is experiencing it again in order to overcome it.

KaliMagic
30th May 2010, 10:52
David has simply placed his cards on the table for all to see.

Meditate to communicate is the short message I took from his video, specific guidance on how best to accomplish this was all that it lacked.

Still all that and for free, deserves a more positive response than some have shown here.

IMO he gives a much needed positive message to take forward into the coming changes instead of the fear based variety some others keenly promote.

Well done Wilcock :clap2:


i totally agree... i actually find it quite refreshing that someone is going all out to put out a positive message. i think that people are getting too caught up in the negative goings on in the world which, in my opinion, is just fuelling the fear!
i'd like to believe that an enormously large proportion of the population are beautiful, good souls (if somewhat a bit misguided sometimes) and there is only a tiny fraction of evil. all this endless discussion on negative and controlling issues, although very valid information to know, just increases the power of these "bad guys". i think if we put as much energy into spreading a positive message, even if it's not a flawlessly scientific one, can only be a good thing.
thumbs up to DW :)

with love x

ZZZ
31st January 2011, 21:31
I've got to agree with several of the previous posts, on both sides of the spectrum...

David's positivity and spiritual bent has been particularly inspiring and uplifting to me, and DivineCosmos.com has some great information on it. His perceptions largely fit with my own take on what's going on, (or what I *hope* is going on) and has helped me steer clear of the mountains of "fear porn" that's out there, and return again to the peace and wisdom within my own being....

That said, I do have to agree that this video is mostly a very well put together rehash of his regular shpiel, and the hype of this particular video, as well as the self promotion of his singing, his upcoming book, the conferences, the movie... - well, it *does* seem to smack a bit of inflated ego, ~ and that's sad because he has a great deal to say, and is, IMHO, a significant voice in these perilous times. It's not *new* material, and should not have been promoted as such. I hope he can get a handle on the recognition he is receiving, and focus on his work. Leave the hype and promotion to others.

For me, the best pat of this particular video was the last ten minutes or so, where he urged the listener to connect to your OWN Higher Self / Soul for all the answers and comfort and intuition that we need at the moment. THAT was well spoken, and shows me that his heart is indeed in the right place... And after all, which of us has not had to do battle with the dragon ego from time to time :)

I, for one, am cutting him some well deserved slack!

As a physics major, I appreciate David's scientific references and thoughts. I enjoy hearing his lectures as the one on youtube, and likewise, think that the best part of the video is at the end, where David urges one's own HigherSelf contact. That resonates a lot with me because many people will have their stories and conjectures and for me, appropriate discernment comes with my HS. I try to hear the message beyond the man. Thanks, Lee

Icecold
1st February 2011, 02:56
Megalomania at its finest. If you look up the definition of Megalomania in the dictionary it says D.Wilcock.

People tend to bite down on the 'completely bloody obvious stuff'. Its a great trick isnt it?

Jonathon
1st February 2011, 05:11
Regardless of where you stand on David's work, realize that he truly is on your side. He's following his own destiny like the rest of us. He's just a man doing his best. Does everyone realize he actually makes a real effort to answer all of his emails? He get's thousands!!! Good marks in my book.

Not one of us would pass the microscope test... which is precisely why it is so attractive to the naysayer. Furthermore, the need to destroy what someone else is trying to create does nothing but inhibit many others who fear the same ridicule or worse, feel too dishonored to grant their help. Do we REALLY wonder why more people aren't waking up? Perhaps they're too scared of what it might make them in the collective eye of judgment?

You can't have it both ways folks. I know it's tough... we're conditioned to attack and that impulse is sneaky as a Beagle... but we need to try to hold ourselves to a higher standard. The division game has gone on long enough. If you see war, you have war within you. If you see deceit, ego, chocolate covered BS... you have that in you too. Learn to recognize when you judge others, you do in fact judge yourself. As the old sayings go, "the fox is the finder" and "spot it, you got it"... That's one thing many people here have helped to teach me, and I greatly appreciate it. I've been on both sides of it many times.

If you disbelieve, ask more questions. It doesn't take long to deconstruct a false presumption or lie. This is a good lesson. Learn to take fewer positions of your own.

Icecold
1st February 2011, 05:19
Not one of us would pass the microscope test... which is precisely why it is so attractive to the naysayer.

Couldn't agree more. But then most of us aren't saying we are, or we are going to become God. That's a call too far, if I can use that pun to bridge our thoughts.

Jonathon
1st February 2011, 05:29
Certainly no offense Icecold, but you and I both know that neither of us knows that. For some reason something struck you wrong. I think it's important to discover exactly why that surfaced for you by asking yourself all of the right, open ended questions. Once you get answers, revisit the issue and ask questions of the source. You may find that you were reacting from a place you could not see, possibly. The unconscious is a very deep, dark place.

PS -- I edited the post you replied to a few times (LOL sorry - indecisive) so check back if you like; further, I want you to know that it wasn't necessarily directed to you personally (I re-read and it wasn't fully clear).

JohnBlues
1st February 2011, 05:36
I have to agree with most people here about DW, don't know if he re-hashed the DNA and torsion field stuff from other alternative sources, but that content was new to me. Also most of his views are generally in-line with my own, except for the Fulford stuff, to me that's abit out there and he seems to like referencing Fulford alot lately.

+1 for his positive vibe, i found the Law Of One stuff through DW so for that i'm very grateful.

Icecold: I've watched plenty of DW's vids, don't ever recall him stating anything about becoming God (correct me if I'm wrong but it sounds like you meant DW said he was going to become The God), do you have a link to show where he's stated this himself?

Icecold
1st February 2011, 06:29
Certainly no offense Icecold, but you and I both know that neither of us knows that. For some reason something struck you wrong. I think it's important to discover exactly why that surfaced for you by asking yourself all of the right, open ended questions. Once you get answers, revisit the issue and ask questions of the source. You may find that you were reacting from a place you could not see, possibly. The unconscious is a very deep, dark place.

PS -- I edited the post you replied to a few times (LOL sorry - indecisive) so check back if you like; further, I want you to know that it wasn't necessarily directed to you personally (I re-read and it wasn't fully clear).

I appreciate your sentiment Jonathan. But what you are saying is......

Challenging a belief that a human is a god, or the idea that humans are or can become gods, comes from a very deep dark place. LOL

I don't think so. In fact I would think in the sense of rational or generally accepted thought, that the opposite would be true. Don't you think?

JohnBlue:

i found the Law Of One stuff through DW so for that i'm very grateful.

Well John, I had read that text several times before I'd ever heard of David Wilcock.
But I understand your gratitude. Cheers.

You do know that DW had nothing whatever to do with writing that text? Although you might think he did write it, by the tendency he has to lay claim to it. I have read that he claims to have channelled RA. I wonder what the original author(Carla L. Rueckert - channeller) or the entity RA thinks of that.

GoldenYears
1st February 2011, 14:13
Actually, David has spent time with Carla and knows her well.

LeeEllisMusic
1st February 2011, 14:53
Interesting coming back to this thread since most of the postings were last May. I'm glad to see the subject brought up again though, because I've been wondering where people stand on David's latest blog (http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-here/davids-blog/909-disclosurecriticalmass?showall=1) about ET's and the PTW.

I actually posted a question about this on one of the the Charles threads, but only got one reply that indicated the bird and fish deaths might be due to the shifting earth's magnetic fields.

I am curious if A) this information could possibly have some merit, and B) if it *does* have some merit, is there a connection as to why Charles appeared in our midst.

So, here are the links to my original post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?11154-Charles-comments-about-a-False-Flag-ET-threat-event-important-new-information&p=100095#post100095), the follow up post asking about the military bases (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?11154-Charles-comments-about-a-False-Flag-ET-threat-event-important-new-information&p=103042#post103042), David's latest BLOG (http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-here/davids-blog/909-disclosurecriticalmass?showall=1), and the particular piece of information from that blog that I find intriguing is here:


THE BACKSTORY -- AND NEW DEVELOPMENTS

Last summer, in one single day of coordinated effort, China delivered packages to the private palaces of every world leader of every country. They were ordered to open the containers on October 13th, 2010.

The leaders were told the packages would destroy everything within a six-mile radius if they were tampered with prior to this date, and / or if they were not opened soon after this date.

On that fateful day, the leaders were shocked to find working free-energy prototypes inside these packages, as well as detailed plans on how to build them -- along with many other amazing documents.

Every leader of every country in the world is now in possession of these materials. Someone will 'break ranks' soon enough. The negative factions were ordered to stand down and completely surrender. They did not.

They rushed over to China and begged them to reconsider over several days of tense, hand-wringing negotiations. China refused. The war started immediately thereafter.



A BRIEF RUNDOWN

Nine days after the packages were first opened, a brand-new British nuclear submarine, the HMS Astute, lost all power and crashed into the rocks on its maiden voyage -- as a dead mass of steel.

The very next day, the US lost fully 50 different ICBMs in a single, cascading failure -- the largest ever recorded in American history.

Eight days later, on October 31st, 2010, a French nuclear aircraft carrier completely lost all electrical systems while enroute to the Persian Gulf -- to beef up the US military presence there.

Three days later, the largest nuclear power plant in America had massive electrical failures and powered down for nearly a month.

The next day, Quantas Airlines had a massive electrical failure in an Airbus 380 flying over Indonesia, forcing them to ground all their Airbus 380 jets.

Then, the very next day, Quantas had electrical failures in a Boeing 747-400 -- forcing them to ground all of those planes as well.

Quantas is the official Australian airline -- and Australia is a very key player in this geopolitical battle.



AND THE LIST GOES ON...

Three days after the stunning defeat of Australia's airline fleet, on November 8th, we had four different significant events:

1. Quantas was forced to announce even more engine problems -- which now plagued their entire fleet.

2. Two American nuclear power plants shut down within a single hour of each other.

3. Carnival's premiere cruise ship, the Splendor, lost all propulsion and communications systems and became dead at sea.

4. Time Warner lost all their cable channels in Cleveland, Ohio for 90 minutes -- during the exact time George W. Bush was on NBC, followed by the next episode of the Disclosure drama "The Event".



THE VISIBLE, PUBLIC FINALE

The very next day after all these things happened, November 9th, a huge missile was launched off the coast of Los Angeles -- another highly embarrassing moment for the crumbling Old World Order.

A rocketry expert confirmed it was a solid-propellant missile on CBS News. This missile launch occurred three years to the day after the Chinese surprised US forces with a nuclear sub.

Then, only one day later, on November 10th, a strange "line of fire" was seen in the sky off the coast of New York City.

As a sign of the positive intentions of whomever did this, not one death was associated with any of these events.

The missile and 'line of fire' was basically the peak of publicly-visible events. There were some oil refinery failures in Texas, Kansas and Louisiana after this, but not a whole lot else.

The systematic destruction of classified military assets continued after this -- even as the more obvious, public displays stopped happening.

In the 'normal world', nothing blatant or visible was going on to suggest this war was still in progress -- but all of that changed when the birds and fish started dying in mass numbers, beginning on New Year's Eve.

This sudden, worldwide use of HAARP defense shields appears to have been in direct response to a new, deeper escalation in the ETs' campaign against these classified military assets.

Again, I'm interested in how this relates to the massive bird and fish deaths, the strange happenings at military bases, and the possibility of increadsed benevolent ET activity.

And yes, I'm one of those that actually hope there are some benevolent ET's ready to help, after eons of negative off and on planet manipulations of humanity and the planet :)

Thoughts anyone?

Calz
1st February 2011, 15:12
Actually, David has spent time with Carla and knows her well.

Gonna throw in my 2 cents worth (after inflation is worth ...).

I have followed Wilcock's work for a long time ... it was his connecting with Camelot that first brought me here.

It surprises me to see the degree of negative reactions he elicits in some ... although I understand the basis for some of the criticism.

I have never heard him make any claim to the creation of the Law of One material. He supports it and had validated it based upon things that have come to pass since it's inception.

Many people rail about his claim to be the reincarnation of Edgar Cayce. Okay ... how do we go about proving or disproving that? His natal chart is quite similar as well as his facial features when you match ages (as well as doing the same with his circle of friends as compared to that of Cayce). Not making any claims at all ... just throwing that out there. He RARELY mentions it. If it is too much to accept then reject it without throwing the baby out with the bathwater and simply look at what he has done in this lifetime.

He seems to becoming obsessed with disclosure. Yep. Perhaps that is part of his "mission" in this lifetime. Who knows?

He has become more involved with relying on "insider information". Yep. That's true ... but Camelot/Avalon is based on whistblower/insider info ... if that bothers you then why are you here at this forum?

I have never heard him make any claim to be "God" ... many spiritual teachers/lecturers say we are all part of "the One". Up to you to sort that out.

People diss him since he channels. Yep he does. Most of what he presents is not based on that.

He does a lot of serious research to back up what he talks about and support/supplement what others have brought forward.

Someone mentioned "torsion fields" ... he has worked with Hoagland so why try to imply he is borrowing on other's ideas?

He was among the first to point out the energetic changes in our solar system. Don't get hung up on "global warming" vs "climate change" as it should be clear to anyone by now that something is amiss with the normal weather patterns.

There are some other things but no need to ramble.

David brings a positive spin to what is happening in the world. I sure find him of whole lot more credible than the "galactic federation" coming here to rescue us all.

Most all (if not all) spiritual speakers come under attack from some.

Have to make up your own mind if his work brings value to you or not ... if not then reject it and move on.

mountain_jim
1st February 2011, 15:24
I learned alot about 'fringe science' from David's books. Torsion fields, DNA transferrence, ZPE energy. I finally got an interest in grids and sacred geometry from his works. Certain research and scientists not 'appreciated' by the mainstream were introduced to me through his writings, freely accessible online.

I am sure I will not be paying for his seminars anytime soon, but if/when his latest book and possible movie come out I will be sure and pay for them - he has put a tremendous amount of energy into these projects. I appreciated his info about the pineal gland on his videos - did not realize how often that 'pine cone' appeared in art and sculpture and at the Vatican and such before then.

I enjoy his contributions to Ancient Aliens as well.

Jonathon
1st February 2011, 16:41
I appreciate your sentiment Jonathan. But what you are saying is......

Challenging a belief that a human is a god, or the idea that humans are or can become gods, comes from a very deep dark place. LOL

I don't think so. In fact I would think in the sense of rational or generally accepted thought, that the opposite would be true. Don't you think?

JohnBlue:


Well John, I had read that text several times before I'd ever heard of David Wilcock.
But I understand your gratitude. Cheers.

You do know that DW had nothing whatever to do with writing that text? Although you might think he did write it, by the tendency he has to lay claim to it. I have read that he claims to have channelled RA. I wonder what the original author(Carla L. Rueckert - channeller) or the entity RA thinks of that.

Language is far from perfect - we all have our own contexts and interpretations. Probably why it's called 'language arts' as opposed to 'language science' hehe. That is central to the point here. We bring ideas into our own context and once they filter up, they generally morph into our own understanding/misunderstanding - not that of the source.... which is why when you make a judgment/challenge, you are actually challenging your own understanding - not the other way around.

To use examples from you post: "challenging a belief that a human is a god... or may become gods" is full of personal context, ripe for misunderstanding. How you define "belief", "god" and "challenge" is loaded with personal-historical-educational background and likely dissimilar from my own definitions. Challenge, in my mind, means argument - taking a contrary position. That is definitely not what I mean. Belief, in my mind, means without sufficient evidence or reason. God, in my mind, means the infinite source of all that is, in which case you in fact are OF God, evolving toward the perfection of God -- in which case "ye are gods". However, this is not David's idea. This idea transcends space, time and certainly individual belief. It's as old as consciousness. Anyway, based on my definitions and context you are saying "create an argument about something I have no personal evidence for regarding something that is infinite and beyond my understanding". Hehehe... and see, that's probably not exactly how you felt about what you wrote... that's just how I define it from my own space.

David does not lay claim to the LoO - it is, as he states many many times, his philosophical underpinning. My impression is that you are not familiar with his material at all - that you may be going along with what the contrarian 'grape vine' has said. If this is the case, of course you must realize that you simply cannot have a valid opinion until you have thoroughly covered the work. In my opinion, his work is extremely valuable - I have covered all of it myself. Does that mean he is always right? How can he be? We are all of us behind the veil - we cannot know anything. We may get glimpses from time to time, but that's about the extent of it. That's part of the journey.

But to cut to the chase, what I wanted to convey in the above response:
When you have a reaction to something, you are being given a hint. This is a valuable tool. Don't misunderstand and believe it serves to tell you that you are right or wrong about something (for truly there is no 'right' and 'wrong' from a universal perspective). It is a signpost on a path of greater understanding. Delve into that without fear or judgment and see where it leads you. In my own experience, those paths tend to lead to the realization that I am either embracing someone as myself or acting out of the fear of, consciousness of, or memory of separation. Everything seems to be built on that concept alone - unity/harmony/understanding or anything that is NOT that.

Hope that helps to better convey my response. Thanks for the time and consideration Icecold... I really appreciate the opportunity to communicate ideas.

__________________________________________________ _____________________

@Lee

I definitely appreciate David's perspective. I find that he at least makes a real attempt to research and put pieces together. He helps me broaden my own perspective. In my own opinion, since we are in the process of collecting information, we need to embrace as much of it as possible before we begin to eliminate pieces. We, as a point of fact, do not know much of anything. We're out here doing guess work from the bottom up. The worst thing we can do, IMO, is to start believing we know enough to call someone else outright wrong. If you have a working hypothesis, I say do exactly what David is doing - work on it! If pieces don't fit for now, set them aside until you can confirm whether they work at some later time under a different set of lights. All information is good information as the saying goes - as it either confirms what the truth is or what it is not.

LeeEllisMusic
1st February 2011, 19:48
@Lee

I definitely appreciate David's perspective. I find that he at least makes a real attempt to research and put pieces together. He helps me broaden my own perspective. In my own opinion, since we are in the process of collecting information, we need to embrace as much of it as possible before we begin to eliminate pieces. We, as a point of fact, do not know much of anything. We're out here doing guess work from the bottom up. The worst thing we can do, IMO, is to start believing we know enough to call someone else outright wrong. If you have a working hypothesis, I say do exactly what David is doing - work on it! If pieces don't fit for now, set them aside until you can confirm whether they work at some later time under a different set of lights. All information is good information as the saying goes - as it either confirms what the truth is or what it is not.

Exactly, Jonathon!

I am very interested in seeing what people think of the info on David's latest blog. I don't believe I gave the impression that I was calling it wrong - quite the opposite. I'm doing exactly what you suggested! But perhaps that comment wasn't directed at me, but to the others who dismiss him? :)

Peace,

str8thinker
1st February 2011, 23:02
IMO David Willcock does a good job as a professional disinfo agent - a little truth mixed in with a lot of BS.

Jonathon
2nd February 2011, 01:40
Exactly, Jonathon!

I am very interested in seeing what people think of the info on David's latest blog. I don't believe I gave the impression that I was calling it wrong - quite the opposite. I'm doing exactly what you suggested! But perhaps that comment wasn't directed at me, but to the others who dismiss him? :)

Peace,

Hi Lee - no certainly not directed at you. I must have a real problem with my posting language. As a rule I don't direct my posts toward anyone in particular. I try to be as global and inclusive as possible (the "in general" sense). I try not to make judgments/take positions unless they are directed toward myself or are gross generalities that usually indicate a question more so than a position.

@str8 - do you have some evidence that David is a disinfo agent? Accusations are usually based in something more substantial than guesswork and opinion. What is your opinion based on?

Fury Ra
2nd February 2011, 02:04
he gives me the creeps

hA HA Templeton , why's that though?

str8thinker
2nd February 2011, 02:05
@str8 - do you have some evidence that David is a disinfo agent? Accusations are usually based in something more substantial than guesswork and opinion. What is your opinion based on?

My view has always been that unless one can produce evidence to back one's claims, it is better to shut up than to open one's mouth and muddy the waters even more by attempting to pass off speculation as fact. Here is a bit I just grabbed out of Wilcock's blog (http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-here/davids-blog/898-chinasurpriseiii):


DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT -- STUDY THE EVIDENCE

My intuitive data has been very, very consistent in telling me the "negative elite" will not succeed. Any apparent victory they may expect to have is not part of the grander script this planet is being led through -- by high-level angelic beings, for lack of a better term.

During the last three years I have had at least 200 different dreams all saying the Old World Order will be defeated in a very obvious and dramatic fashion. These dreams continue right up to the present and have not changed -- only gotten more intense.

I have had many years of experience in how accurate this guidance can be, particularly when you get 'clusters' of data that all point in the same direction.

The dreams have always said that Disclosure won't happen until we see a clear and spectacular defeat of the Powers that Were on the world stage first. The two must work in conjunction.

This is exactly what's happening right now. Open your eyes and take a look at what you see.

What evidence?

David seems privy to all manner of "insider contacts" and "angelic beings" who tell him things we as mere mortals are not. Now it's obvious David is intelligent and has featured on shows such as Ancient Aliens as well as various radio shows. So if he is telling us this stuff deliberately, in my book this makes him a disinfo agent. The PTB must be laughing their heads off at this. Certainly David is at no risk of getting death threats since the stuff he peddles is a perfect smokescreen.

One of his pronouncements that really gets up my nose is "China's October Surprise" now into part 3. While I'm sure China does have a surprise planned for us, it won't be anything along the lines Willcock has been preaching.

Compare this with Bill Ryan's painstaking and analytic approach, one of the reasons Project Avalon enjoys high credibility.

Jonathon
2nd February 2011, 02:23
My view has always been that unless one can produce evidence to back one's claims, it is better to shut up than to open one's mouth and muddy the waters even more by attempting to pass off speculation as fact. Here is a bit I just grabbed out of Willcock's blog (http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-here/davids-blog/898-chinasurpriseiii):



What evidence?

David seems privy to all manner of "insider contacts" and "angelic beings" who tell him things we as mere mortals are not. Now it's obvious David is intelligent and has featured on shows such as Ancient Aliens as well as various radio shows. So if he is telling us this stuff deliberately, in my book this makes him a disinfo agent. The PTB must be laughing their heads off at this. Certainly David is at no risk of getting death threats since the stuff he peddles is a perfect smokescreen.

One of his pronouncements that really gets up my nose is "China's October Surprise" now into part 3. While I'm sure China does have a surprise planned for us, it won't be anything along the lines Willcock has been preaching.

Compare this with Bill Ryan's painstaking and analytic approach, one of the reasons Project Avalon enjoys high credibility.

We all have our sources Str8. I have my own intuitive data, some of which I share occasionally and much of it I do not. My sharing that information and any perspective I may have (right or wrong) does not make me a disinfo agent, does it? David also makes it very clear that he is no different than anyone else - we all have the ability to receive this kind of information through various practices. I do some of that myself and I think I have some idea of where he is coming from. It's not perfect for certain - dreams and their symbols/metaphors can be extremely difficult to decipher and usually have layers of meaning. If that wasn't the case, your free will would be abridged.

Something inside of you is telling you that David is wrong. The question is, what exactly? Do you have some information that confirms your disbelief or are you simply unable to accept something outside of your own parameters of 'what is'? Important to seek these answers out IMO. In my own journey, some of these parameters have been extremely shallow and poorly constructed - based on essentially nothing. We have to test our own walls from time to time. 'Resistance' in the form of disbelief, anger, argument etc to some information or circumstance are keys to understanding/knowing the self. Follow the road and discover what your walls are built of and on... you may find that although they look thick and sturdy, they in fact are not. In my case this has been true at times.

Icecold
2nd February 2011, 02:41
Actually, David has spent time with Carla and knows her well.

Undoubtedly. That just lends credence to what I said. Its quite insidious. There is a process at work with David Wilcock, which will unfortunately for some, become clearer in time.

There is no doubt that a large sector of the alternative community carries baggage into the community from the old reality. This is to the advantage of 'soothsayers'.

It will end in tears.


The very fact that this debate is occurring should be setting off alarm bells.

str8thinker
2nd February 2011, 02:56
Well, maybe my pineal gland has ossified from all that fluoridated water I've been drinking over the years, but I see nothing at all to corroborate the conclusions David Wilcock has drawn from his "data", at least nothing that makes his conclusions stand out from the crowd of possible interpretations.

I appreciate your thoughtful response Jonathon but there are so many ways to join up the dots in this puzzle, and David's brand of optimism doesn't seem to be shared by many others. What does he know that you and I don't? He wouldn't get far working in a think tank, where several outcomes need to be entertained and ranked.

Information gained by channelling doesn't sit well with information gained from reality. I have very little time for people who channel, since each channels something different.

Billiam
2nd February 2011, 03:11
I think if you look at the bank accounts of some of those in the alternative media and what Charles said about certain people getting funded you will see the apple does not fall far from the tree in this case...

unplugged
2nd February 2011, 04:30
David is a brilliant, talented man with an over-inflated ego that often gets the better of him. His way of processing data is inductive, intuitive, and analytical. Bill's is more deductive, just-the-facts and analytical.

Once I got over minding how much David seems to admire himself I have found him entertaining, enjoyable and persuasive (for the most part).

str8thinker
2nd February 2011, 08:31
David is a brilliant, talented man with an over-inflated ego that often gets the better of him.

I have to agree with you there. Actually, I don't really care how brilliant or egotistical he appears as long as he gets it right. My jury is still out on that one.

Star Gazer
2nd February 2011, 09:22
Once I got over minding how much David seems to admire himself I have found him entertaining, enjoyable and persuasive (for the most part).

Couldn't have said it better myself.

write4change
2nd February 2011, 09:37
Why I know god is a woman. All written dogmatic heavens are boring. Only men find the concept of heaven being we praise you, we bless you, we give you glory, etc. etc. etc. 70 virgins who can make no comparisons about what love feels like?

God is out creating the next platypus to play with and make her smile.

Cayce was a very self effacing man. Ra seems to have been very contemplative. DW is their evolved combination? I make no judgment and I do find watching both thought provoking and entertaining. It takes real courage to display mental masturbation publicly. There may even be a need for it. I understand when the Dalai Lama was trying to learn about how to teach in the West there were no words for self loathing or low self esteem. It was one of his most difficult concepts.

I have seen a lot of DW works and find it all interesting. One thing I am not clear on: does he actually say he is one of the gods? At least he is not claiming to be the only god.

Gone002
2nd February 2011, 09:48
I have never been a big fan of david wilcock but he does come out with some interesting information that makes you think.

Erin
2nd February 2011, 11:23
He rubs me the wrong way, to be honest.

But I guess I can't hate if a lot of people are being helped by him. I just hope they aren't being duped.

Calz
2nd February 2011, 14:04
Why I know god is a woman. All written dogmatic heavens are boring. Only men find the concept of heaven being we praise you, we bless you, we give you glory, etc. etc. etc. 70 virgins who can make no comparisons about what love feels like?

God is out creating the next platypus to play with and make her smile.

Cayce was a very self effacing man. Ra seems to have been very contemplative. DW is their evolved combination? I make no judgment and I do find watching both thought provoking and entertaining. It takes real courage to display mental masturbation publicly. There may even be a need for it. I understand when the Dalai Lama was trying to learn about how to teach in the West there were no words for self loathing or low self esteem. It was one of his most difficult concepts.

I have seen a lot of DW works and find it all interesting. One thing I am not clear on: does he actually say he is one of the gods? At least he is not claiming to be the only god.


I can provide a couple quotes from the Reincarnation book (if you have it then (re)read chapter 6) that might shed light:


"The Edgar Cayce readings detailed Cayce's incarnation as an Egyptian high priest named Ra-Ta in 10,500 B.C."

goes on to say:

"According to the Cayce readings, Ra-Ta was a hybrid birth, a cross between the "gods from that area" (perhaps the "golden" manifestations of the Ra group in human form?) and a human mother."


So by extension ... *if* Wilcock is really Cayce reincarnate then that would include Ra-Ta as a past life for him (alledgedly a demi-god).

That is as close as I can come to finding or remembering any claim close to "being god or a god".

Hope that helps?

Calz
2nd February 2011, 14:23
Undoubtedly. That just lends credence to what I said. Its quite insidious. There is a process at work with David Wilcock, which will unfortunately for some, become clearer in time.

There is no doubt that a large sector of the alternative community carries baggage into the community from the old reality. This is to the advantage of 'soothsayers'.

It will end in tears.


The very fact that this debate is occurring should be setting off alarm bells.

Thank you ... that is an interesting choice of words (especially the "alternative community baggage" reference).

First off - hope you are not in harm's way with the cyclone.

2nd - I appreciate your ability to voice a diametrically opposing view point while still maintaining a constructive tone.

3rd - I always try to remain open minded and revisit my beliefs. My take on "reality" has been rearranged more than once and sometimes painfully so. IMO "reality" is not static so your belief system should not be either.

that said ...

"insidious" ... ouch.

"it will end in tears" ... owie.

In closing it would be interesting to hear from Bill in this thread. Yep he is *quite busy* at the moment so I don't know if that is possible. He is on record, on at least one of the video interviews Camelot did with Wilcock, that he doesn't necessarily have the same viewpoints as David. Do (or did) "alarm bells" go off in his head???

JoshERTW
2nd February 2011, 14:42
Exactly, Jonathon!

I am very interested in seeing what people think of the info on David's latest blog. I don't believe I gave the impression that I was calling it wrong - quite the opposite. I'm doing exactly what you suggested! But perhaps that comment wasn't directed at me, but to the others who dismiss him? :)

Peace,

Hey Lee,

I've had some interest in DW's material for a while now - I actually would like to see what Bill/Charles thoughts were on his latest - you might want to post it in the questions to Bill thread - Charles seems to obliquely confirm that something is indeed going down in China, and that the bird and fish deaths are related to the posturing by the factions of the 33.

I don't think DW is disinfo, at least not knowingly - I wouldn't be surprised if some of his sources are "compromised" - especially given his apparent relationship with Fulford who I can't stomach at all, that guy doesn't seem to have a shred of credibility, again, not necessarily through fault of his own, but probably because his supposed sources are leading hima round by the nose.

DW seems genuine to me and his writings usually resonate - latest blog included.

JohnBlues
3rd February 2011, 00:39
My view has always been that unless one can produce evidence to back one's claims, it is better to shut up than to open one's mouth and muddy the waters even more by attempting to pass off speculation as fact.

If that's the case what's your take on pretty much all of the alternative insider and whistleblower sources? Where have you seen hard evidence to back up any claims in our community? They are always someone with first-hand testimony or related by word-of-mouth to another alternative media person and then it is only "hearsay" (I don't mean this in a negative way), not evidence IMO.

Sure, some sources do say they have tangible evidence off record but it doesn't get released (for reasons I can completely understand) so it's just take it on their word again, i.e. faith.

Just to clarify, the word evidence to me means something tangible, irrefutable and shows outright that something is so. Maybe your definition of evidence is different str8thinker? Please let me know :D

I'd say 25% or so of DWs material doesn't agree with my gut-feeling on it, but for some of the material he covers he actually does try to show you as best he can there is some data from studies & scientists that correlates what he is saying, :

- planetary changes across the solar system:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STqkZR2PSR4

- pineal gland (3:45 mins in)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOpvMW2wVc0&feature=related


(go to ~2:00 mins in)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISMgQtkRvEs

- DNA transformation + crop circles (~ 7:30 mins in really blew my mind)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5b-kLvppdg&feature=related

- Just thought i'd mention this one caus i thought it was cool.. Crop circles showing snowflakes ( 50:15 mins in)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOpvMW2wVc0&feature=related

- Non-darwinian/spontaneous Evolution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qba5UMFNgT0

I'm not a DW fanboy :P But i think he has good information (which everyone should decide for themselves if it resonates or not) and also importantly a positive vibe.

str8thinker
3rd February 2011, 01:44
(str8thinker) My view has always been that unless one can produce evidence to back one's claims...


(JohnBlues) If that's the case what's your take on pretty much all of the alternative insider and whistleblower sources? Where have you seen hard evidence to back up any claims in our community? They are always someone with first-hand testimony or related by word-of-mouth to another alternative media person and then it is only "hearsay" (I don't mean this in a negative way), not evidence IMO.

If only one eyewitness testifies without any corroborative evidence, a jury is unlikely to find the accused guilty. But if five independent witnesses say much the same thing, a jury is far more likely to return a guilty verdict. So it is with this game. If only two people swear they have seen shapeshifting reptilians, this will not carry as much weight as if fifty are willing to testify. Comparison and association still remain our best evidential tools in this shadowy world.

I did not say "hard evidence", you did. I only used the term "evidence". Maybe I should have used the word "testimony" instead. However, I regard multiple testimonies as a form of evidence, particularly when there is strong agreement.

David Wilcock's style differs from mine in that I am far more cautious about drawing conclusions from the evidence available.

See also this post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?11300-SORCHA-FAAL...disinfo-agent&p=119476&viewfull=1#post119476) by Psychonautilus in a similar vein.

Icecold
3rd February 2011, 03:26
Couldn't have said it better myself.


Once I got over minding how much David seems to admire himself I have found him entertaining, enjoyable and persuasive (for the most part).

Two members believe that 'entertainment' is the justification for accepting BS. Well, they are certainly not alone there. The entertainment industry, the "the Oprah Winfrey" factor is an important need among humans that are still living the old reality.

unplugged
3rd February 2011, 04:15
. . . Cayce was a very self effacing man. Ra seems to have been very contemplative. DW is their evolved combination? . . .

Well, "self-effacing" doesn't exactly spring to mind with DW. :nono: And while DW is certainly contemplative I don't think his Ra persona had a band and self-promoted his music. So we might consider the DW incarnation an attempt to arrive at new equilibrium via exploration of the antithesis of Cayce or Ra.

As for "It takes real courage to display mental masturbation publicly." I imagine you're right if you're talking about normal folk. With DW I'm not so sure it requires any courage whatsoever. It's probably just pure, unadulterated pleasure.

Whoever DW is I'm glad he's around. He certainly adds flavor and spice to life with his avant garde personality.

unplugged
3rd February 2011, 04:35
Two members believe that 'entertainment' is the justification for accepting BS. Well, they are certainly not alone there. The entertainment industry, the "the Oprah Winfrey" factor is an important need among humans that are still living the old reality.

Actually, I am using "entertaining" more in the sense of Webster's definitions #3 and #4



3. To engage the attention of agreeably [1913 Webster]

4. To give reception to; to receive, in general; to receive and take into consideration; to admit, treat, or make use of; as, to entertain a proposal. [1913 Webster]


Though, admittedly, I also am using the word in its pure essence of entertainment. To be entertaining in no way -- in my opinion -- diminishes the power of truth if it is contained within the dialogue (or, in David's case, monologue).

Here, my use of "entertain" reflects Webster Definition #6. -- To keep, hold, or maintain in the mind with favor; to keep in the mind; to harbor; to cherish; as, to entertain sentiments. [1913 Webster]

On a more serious note, David's material is not just BS. I have been stimulated to think of life differently as a result of his input. He may not be right all the time but he is certainly a stimulant for thinking about things in new and non-obvious ways.

Icecold
3rd February 2011, 06:19
Actually, I am using "entertaining" more in the sense of Webster's definitions #3 and #4



3. To engage the attention of agreeably [1913 Webster]

4. To give reception to; to receive, in general; to receive and take into consideration; to admit, treat, or make use of; as, to entertain a proposal. [1913 Webster]


Though, admittedly, I also am using the word in its pure essence of entertainment. To be entertaining in no way -- in my opinion -- diminishes the power of truth if it is contained within the dialogue (or, in David's case, monologue).

Here, my use of "entertain" reflects Webster Definition #6. -- To keep, hold, or maintain in the mind with favor; to keep in the mind; to harbor; to cherish; as, to entertain sentiments. [1913 Webster]

On a more serious note, David's material is not just BS. I have been stimulated to think of life differently as a result of his input. He may not be right all the time but he is certainly a stimulant for thinking about things in new and non-obvious ways.

His material is not BS because its not his material. People continue to identify what is previously well known with a regurgitator of past knowledge. The fact that he entrances his audiences with spin is BS. That's the entertainment factor.

Star Gazer
3rd February 2011, 06:48
Two members believe that 'entertainment' is the justification for accepting BS. Well, they are certainly not alone there. The entertainment industry, the "the Oprah Winfrey" factor is an important need among humans that are still living the old reality.

I understand the point your making and I appreciate your feedback, Icecold; but I never stated that "entertainment" is justification for accepting BS--those are you words not mine.

If there is any confusion over any statement I make I would prefer being given an opportunity to clarify as opposed to being labeled as living in an "old reality."

Whiskey_Mystic
4th February 2011, 03:55
I like David. He always looks for the positive.

Ego? I wish I loved myself as much he loves himself. I don't see that as a crime unless it becomes arrogance and I don't see that in him. David is a compassionate soul and that extends to himself as well. Good for him.

Simplistic? That just means that you are not the target audience. Somebody should be out there giving the basics to people who are new to these ideas. Some people would find Nassim Haramein too simplistic or Wayne Dyer too complex. This does not devalue the teaching.

Jumps to wild conclusions? I think so too. He has a great imagination and runs with it. For me, that just makes him more fun. Doesn't mean I agree with him.

I like David. I think he has a good heart. He's not perfect. I'm not either.

Whiskey_Mystic
4th February 2011, 04:40
Fulford who I can't stomach at all, that guy doesn't seem to have a shred of credibility, again, not necessarily through fault of his own, but probably because his supposed sources are leading hima round by the nose.

I know this is not the Fulford thread, but I do want to weigh in here. I don't think the content of what Mister Fulford is saying is what shreds his credibility for me. Mister Fulford lost my ear after his interview with David Rockefeller where he told his audience that if he had wanted to to he "could have had him (David Rockefeller) brought to me tied up with a vibrator up his ass". This is simply juvenile unproductive gutter chi and has no place with me. I barely even know how to comment on it. I haven't listened to Benjamin Fulford since.

Time stamp 6:55

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JB9Pnr4oEU