Body Language Expert Does Steven Greer, Corey Goode

[AutumnW]

Betty198,

Many of these people you mention are entertaining but shouldn't be taken seriously. If they can't construct a very strong circumstantial case, I dismiss them. They shouldn't have to provide ironclad scientific proof, but basic rules of journalism should apply -- like providing two sources to verify their claims.

[sunwings]

Posted by AutumnW (here)

They shouldn't have to provide ironclad scientific proof, but basic rules of journalism should apply -- like providing two sources to verify their claims.

Well in the case of Corey Goode, there are two sources David wilcock confirmed Corey verified information which he had never released from other sources and now we have William Tompkins out there saying the Blue people exist and are helping humanity.

Now this leads us to a Merry go round whether we can trust William and David. On the other hand Corey with his experiences with Implanted memories and setting up a trolling department using sociopaths is never a rock solid cause to get behind and cheer-lead. But I for one am sitting on the fence and going to watch how this plays out over time!

[TargeT]

Posted by sunwings (here)
whether we can trust William and David.

Dunno about William, David's noise:reality ratio is so high it's not worth the attention IMO.

Willcock and Fullford are distractions. Not sure how they can be seen as anything but.

[AutumnW]

Sunwings,

Unless the sources are highly credible, beyond reproach and in a position to verify something they KNOW to be true, I don't care what their claims are, who they support. Running for mayor of Crazy town, doesn't qualify either. It's entertaining and there is a slim chance that some theorizing might have some basis in reality, but it would probably be accidental.

I don't believe every weird story I hear, not because it's weird but because I am very distrustful of people, of all media -- mainstream and alternative.

Not everybody who gains traction in fringe topics is a liar. Some are fantasy prone and some did have a few legitimately odd experiences. But once they start to leverage a career off of those experiences, their stories grow, become more elaborate and the conclusions they draw become more debatable. They have to come up with more material for the sake of their incomes too. So they start to make stuff up. Rather than this being a clear red flag, their followers seem to hang on for the ride.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by AutumnW (here)

But once they start to leverage a career off of those experiences, their stories grow, become more elaborate and the conclusions they draw become more debatable. They have to come up with more material for the sake of their incomes too. So they start to make stuff up. Rather than this being a clear red flag, their followers seem to hang on for the ride.

Way back in February 2006, 100 years ago , when I first spoke at a UFO conference, I was taken aside by a wise and kindly UFO veteran — whose name right now I cannot actually remember. He warned me about what he called UFO Disease.

I had no idea what he was referring to. He explained that it was endemic in the community, and that it described the phenomenon of someone who had had a genuine unique experience, and had gone public about it... and then, once in the limelight, and kind of addicted to all the attention, publicity and sometimes $$, sought to stay in the limelight by endlessly repeating and then embellishing the story, and often inventing new aspects to it. He was serious, and said it was a huge, known problem.

I listened very carefully — and later saw many, many, many examples of this. (I have to say, I do think we may possibly be seeing exactly this with William Tompkins now.)

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
I listened very carefully — and later saw many, many, many examples of this. (I have to say, I do think we may possibly be seeing exactly this with William Tompkins now.)

I filed Tompkins' story under 'interesting' - but with numerous problems. In my mental drawer he fits snugly alongside in fact many UFO luminaries, past and present, including Meier and Adamski, who I am convinced initially experienced something very real. Then went out of control. It's a theory that I first heard Tim Good put forward, and it was an 'ah-ha' moment for me. It was then, on looking back, I was finally able to understand a lot of the craziness of the contactee scene in the 50s and 60s. UFO Disease is a good phrase for it.

[Mike]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by AutumnW (here)

But once they start to leverage a career off of those experiences, their stories grow, become more elaborate and the conclusions they draw become more debatable. They have to come up with more material for the sake of their incomes too. So they start to make stuff up. Rather than this being a clear red flag, their followers seem to hang on for the ride.

Way back in February 2006, 100 years ago , when I first spoke at a UFO conference, I was taken aside by a wise and kindly UFO veteran — whose name right now I cannot actually remember. He warned me about what he called UFO Disease.

I had no idea what he was referring to. He explained that it was endemic in the community, and that it described the phenomenon of someone who had had a genuine unique experience, and had gone public about it... and then, once in the limelight, and kind of addicted to all the attention, publicity and sometimes $$, sought to stay in the limelight by endlessly repeating and then embellishing the story, and often inventing new aspects to it. He was serious, and said it was a huge, known problem.

I listened very carefully — and later saw many, many, many examples of this. (I have to say, I do think we may possibly be seeing exactly this with William Tompkins now.)

Oh yeah, absolutely this exists.

I think it exists in ordinary people telling what would be rather mundane stories too....like the husband coming home from work and slightly embellishing a story he tells his wife about something that happened that day on the job etc

Also, when something that unique has happened to an individual, and he or she is attempting to communuicate it to people that it hasnt happened to, exaggerations will occur in an attempt to bridge that gap. I see it all the time. And heres the thing: those doing the exaggerating *don't consider it lying or disingenuousness*. In fact, over time they may do it so naturally and casually that theyre only vaguely aware of it when it happens. Thus, the disease

I had a friend like that. He would retell a story I had told him(sometimes a story I told him that very day) to a group of people (usually to impress girls) , telling it in the first person while adding little twists here n there.....and never once look at me and wink or smile, or pull me aside and say "thanks for the story" or "thanks for letting me get away with that"...And even going so far as to claim it as his own when i'd call him out on it later! It was staggering! These types of liars (disinformers?) actually get sincerely offended when called out....and i'll bet Tompkins fits this bill too

[amor]

Dear Autumn: It is always nice to see you here on line. One interesting thing said by Dr. Greer is the story about spacecraft dealing in drugs. These craft have been flying very well since the 1940's and the Elite who control the military have access to them. They have traded in DOPE and the misery of others in order to increase their wealth and build underground bunkers, etc. I believe his story's are likely true. Men who try to build muscle are those who have insufficient confidence in themselves and those people can be as soft inside as they are tough looking on the outside. It might be doing them a disservice to view them as dishonest. Most of the time, we are trying to do the best for others as well as ourselves. Be kind to life. With love, Amor

[AutumnW]

Posted by Daozen (here)
Very few honest people in UFOlogy in my view. Lots of plants and governrnent agents.

The main aims of this operation:

- Setting up dragnets and honeypots for potential genuine contactees. Throwing out chicken-feed information that will attract them, and then tracking them.
- Focusing people on a 'disclosure' that will proabably never come.
- Searching and tagging potential social disruptors.
- Leading people round in circles.
- Spreading two extreme lies: 1) That the aliens will land and save us sometime "soon", or the opposite lie, 2) that there will huge disasters in the next few months. This knocks readers off balance.
- Cultivating a feeling of helplessness i.e. "Aliens need to land and save us". boutreality pointed that out.
- Focusing our attention up, up, up, and getting us to ignore the mystery under our feet.
- Making a shift in global government from West to East look like a white-hat coup d'etat.
- Discrediting the UFOlogy field by putting out false, laughable info.
- Keeping people in short term panic/hope/panic/hope/panic/hope/panic/hope/panic/hope, distracting them from their long term life mission.
- Focusing on fluffy New Age philosophy instead of practical action.

In short, turning warriors into beggars.

Is the US space command real, if ISS interior and lunar landing footage shows evidence of being doctored?

My personal favourites, "Aliens are eating people. I KNOW this, for sure!" Plus, the one you mention, "The space brothers will come down and save us...one day." Both are reworked religious archetypes and should be replaced with something where there is some solid proof.

David Paulides comes closest to describing something seemingly malevolent that might be the work of ET's but he stops short of that conjecture, which is wise. As far as humans being dessert after the fast food of 'loosh',or the main course is done and the screaming has stopped....boy, it would take a lot of hard proof, before I would buy into that belief.

Robert Monroe's idea of alien 'loosh' has served as an imaginative launch pad for many of the esoterically inclined. I love his books and I think that there is something to what he visioned, while astral travelling. But, I don't think Monroe saw ET's actually eating people, or torturing them to milk them of energy. That takes things to a whole different level -- and a really horrible one.

The profile of the typical ufologist is:

Eccentric
Cranky, irritable
Avoidant, introverted, or slightly autistic.
Highly principled and a bit fantasy prone

With this cluster of personality traits so concentrated in one area of study, there are bound to be problems with lack of cohesion, infighting, drama and people flying off in fits of pique at one another. There's probably a little human control behind the scenes but most of it is a self generated clusterf***.

There are slick liars out there too though and Greer is one of them. The odious chain smoking woman, currently residing in France, is another one. He's narcissistic. She is likely a borderline.

[AutumnW]

Posted by amor (here)
Dear Autumn: It is always nice to see you here on line. One interesting thing said by Dr. Greer is the story about spacecraft dealing in drugs. These craft have been flying very well since the 1940's and the Elite who control the military have access to them. They have traded in DOPE and the misery of others in order to increase their wealth and build underground bunkers, etc. I believe his story's are likely true. Men who try to build muscle are those who have insufficient confidence in themselves and those people can be as soft inside as they are tough looking on the outside. It might be doing them a disservice to view them as dishonest. Most of the time, we are trying to do the best for others as well as ourselves. Be kind to life. With love, Amor

"It might be doing them a disservice to view them as dishonest." -- Amor

Very true. It MIGHT be. You are here to defend him and that point of view. Steroid use is usually a function of ego. When the self requires a more dynamic projection into the social sphere, 'roids are the go-to drug. Insecurity and fear MIGHT be the underlying cause. Pure unfettered aggression, or, 'gotta have, wanna have, gimme some, go to Hell', can also be the underlying cause.

[AutumnW]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by AutumnW (here)

But once they start to leverage a career off of those experiences, their stories grow, become more elaborate and the conclusions they draw become more debatable. They have to come up with more material for the sake of their incomes too. So they start to make stuff up. Rather than this being a clear red flag, their followers seem to hang on for the ride.

Way back in February 2006, 100 years ago , when I first spoke at a UFO conference, I was taken aside by a wise and kindly UFO veteran — whose name right now I cannot actually remember. He warned me about what he called UFO Disease.

I had no idea what he was referring to. He explained that it was endemic in the community, and that it described the phenomenon of someone who had had a genuine unique experience, and had gone public about it... and then, once in the limelight, and kind of addicted to all the attention, publicity and sometimes $$, sought to stay in the limelight by endlessly repeating and then embellishing the story, and often inventing new aspects to it. He was serious, and said it was a huge, known problem.

I listened very carefully — and later saw many, many, many examples of this. (I have to say, I do think we may possibly be seeing exactly this with William Tompkins now.)

Though I enjoyed the book, "The Day After Roswell," and thought 99% rang pretty true, I think Philip Corso suffered from a bit of UFO disease, as well.

[ClandestineDisclosure]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by AutumnW (here)

But once they start to leverage a career off of those experiences, their stories grow, become more elaborate and the conclusions they draw become more debatable. They have to come up with more material for the sake of their incomes too. So they start to make stuff up. Rather than this being a clear red flag, their followers seem to hang on for the ride.

Way back in February 2006, 100 years ago , when I first spoke at a UFO conference, I was taken aside by a wise and kindly UFO veteran — whose name right now I cannot actually remember. He warned me about what he called UFO Disease.

I had no idea what he was referring to. He explained that it was endemic in the community, and that it described the phenomenon of someone who had had a genuine unique experience, and had gone public about it... and then, once in the limelight, and kind of addicted to all the attention, publicity and sometimes $$, sought to stay in the limelight by endlessly repeating and then embellishing the story, and often inventing new aspects to it. He was serious, and said it was a huge, known problem.

I listened very carefully — and later saw many, many, many examples of this. (I have to say, I do think we may possibly be seeing exactly this with William Tompkins now.)

Bill, for what it's worth, I'm aware of UFO Disease - it may be human nature, requiring diligence and intestinal fortitude to avoid its trap. Although I'd never heard that term, the definition offered here placed a finer and more specific point on embellishment. In our discernment of expereincers, abductees, etc. we know embellishment is possible. As you may be aware, embellishments are lies or the stretching of truth. Once uttered and recorded, they must be remembered. The truth is easier to remember. Discernment, for me, is in listening for inconsistencies in William's narratives, as he shares them with me over and over again. Yes, I do visit with Bill periodically; and, invariably, I'm hearing the same stories. While listening for inconsistencies isn't a foolproof method of discerning truth, it could serve as an indicator of off-the-cuff creativity, as I had seen repeatedly during my video recording of Billie Faye Woodard's story back in 2012.

I'm glad to see you use the word possibly. You wrote - "I have to say, I do think we may possibly be seeing exactly this with William Tompkins now.". It tells me you don't know and are open-minded. I am too. Still, neither one of us fell off the turnip truck yesterday. The question remains: How does one go about proving anyone's unusual experience? Unless we experienced it with them, providing third-party proof is difficult, if not impossible; after all, in William's case, how do we go about proving the existence of Nordic Extraterrestrials and Reptilians on the moon? As for the rest of his story, regarding his work history with NASA, Douglas Aircraft, the US NAVY, etc. we have proof in the form of many documents provided by Tompkins to Dr. Robert Wood, who also worked at, and ultimately retired from, Douglas Aircraft the same time Bill was there; and, Dr. Wood recognized those documents. He also recognized the names of people that William had worked with. Thanks to the FOIA requests submitted by Dr. Michael Salla, which proves aspects of William's work history with the US NAVY and Admiral Rico Botta. William's work narrative aligns with the documents produced by his FOIA requests.

So, what about the rest of it? What about all this ET stuff and the various conclusions he's drawn about the Nordic and Reptilian agendas? How did William come to know that information? Where did this information originate from? I've asked. When I did, he asked that I stop the recorder to answer those questions, stipulating that it's not for public consumption just now, due to his clearance. Would I be incorrect in assuming that you've been in similar situations - asked not to reveal data? That information belongs to William Tompkins. I honor our friendship; so, I won't be scooping his story. I hope, in due time, he'll share it with all of us.

I want to nip something in the bud; because, I can imagine the kinds of comments that may follow my making such statements about my conversations with William Tompkins. I have no interest in profiting from this information. All the work I've done has been sponsored by me. I have no hidden agenda. I'm no agent or handler or any of that woo-woo imagination conspiracy crap. My interest in William is rooted in friendship and my personal search for truth, which is inspired by my own contact experience with ET. People say they want to meet ET. I say, you have no idea what you're asking for. While an excellent eye-opening experience, it can be a lonely journey, even when the contact is welcome and benevolent. Anyhow, I have been freely sharing my journey of exploration on my YouTube channel in the form of video conversations with people I've befriended. Since 2010, I've been looking for someone who could understand and relate to contact; and, I'm still looking for others experiencers. William Tompkins is a friend; because, he's among the very few people I've ever met whose ET contact is similar to mine -- benevolent. As such, William and I are able to freely talk; and, for that, I'm grateful. On my YouTube channel, I urge all my viewers and subscribers to discern the truth on their own. Finally, you won't find me standing on a stage publicly sharing the details of my contact experiences for money. It's not worth the scrutiny and headaches.

In the meantime, I'll continue to capture and share as much information as I can - from William Tompkins and others. :-)