How Can Anyone Take David Wilcock Seriously?

For general discussion of topics that don't have a specific theme, questions or suggestions for research.

Moderator: daniel

User avatar
IrieLion
Inquirer
Inquirer
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 8:31 am

Re: How Can Anyone Take David Wilcock Seriously?

Post by IrieLion » Sat Nov 02, 2013 1:05 pm

deepfsh wrote:
IrieLion wrote:- Literally claims to be the 'Father Of The White Race'
daniel wrote:I missed that one; must be something new.
Watch his 2012 Event Horizon lecture, minute 42:49, and you'll find that quote ("I'm your daddy"). But you must take into consideration the context in which it was said, namely him maybe being Cayce's reincarnation and Cayce supposedly being the reincarnation of some Ra-Ta, a supposed hybrid (earthly mother, ET father) ... he was showing the article All blue-eyed people can be traced back to one ancestor who lived 10,000 years ago near the Black Sea.

Speaking about synchronicities ... if you look at the above mentioned article, you can see that among the famous blue-eyed people mentioned by the journalist there is also a picture of Daniel Craig. When Daniel mentioned that David looks more like Rasputin, I found a guy who wrote a very interesting article about this issue, and among other things he wrote is that Cayce has reincarnated as... guess who? Mr Bond himself! :) While Cayce's wife has supposedly reincarnated as Eva Green, the actress who played with Craig in Casino Royale in 2006.

What a ride ...

He also said in a camelot interview that he was 'The father of the white race.'

Isn't it interesting that people that talk about their past lives are always someone cool like Cleopatra, Caesar or I don't know... the Egyptian Sun god Ra. How come no one is ever a simple farmer, town drunk or blacksmith? :lol:

User avatar
deepfsh
Mage
Mage
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:30 am

Re: How Can Anyone Take David Wilcock Seriously?

Post by deepfsh » Sat Nov 02, 2013 3:16 pm

IrieLion wrote:He also said in a camelot interview that he was 'The father of the white race.'
Really, I don't remember that ... but I have to admit it's a good one! :) Somebody mentioned Russell Brand's ideas about a "revolution". I watched two interviews in which he expressed his views on certain topics and I thought that there's a good possibility that someday David will also be speaking like that to a much bigger (TV) audience. And Brand does also seem to be, as you wrote with regard to David, "articulate and intelligent".

To tell the truth, what attracted me most regarding David's work were the bits connected to the "insider Daniel". The time-space relationship related to the dreamscape, the river of time, Daniel's anecdotes presented in the 2012 Enigma lecture, the "Montauk chair" symbolism (Contact, The Last Mimzy, Total Recall ...) etc.

What surprises me most is that David didn't mention Daniel in his acknowledgements section of the SFI, although he referenced Larson's theory, which he learned about from Daniel, if I'm correct. Not to mention the "thousands hours on the phone with him" etc.
IrieLion wrote:How come no one is ever a simple farmer, town drunk or blacksmith?
Well, David said several times that Cayce ("him") was supposedly a sort of a "sexual maniac" in one of his previous lives ... what about that, huh? :o :)
"You talk the talk ... do you walk the walk?" Kubrick, Full Metal Jacket

Ilkka
Adept
Adept
Posts: 429
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: How Can Anyone Take David Wilcock Seriously?

Post by Ilkka » Sat Nov 02, 2013 5:08 pm

deepfsh wrote:What surprises me most is that David didn't mention Daniel in his acknowledgements section of the SFI
He had also stated that the SFI book would be "legit info" with background to the public eye.
I mean that we do have only Daniels word on those things about "secret" stuff that supposedly happened in that time around. Chemistry again is good analogy where you mix different substances together to form something else and you have proof when you do it yourself, this is the hard evidence I'm talking about. I know for a fact how I can make alcohol from sugar, water and some yeast, also how to distill it to be more potent, have done it many times.

PS. I do have the SFI book.

User avatar
-OM-
Inquirer
Inquirer
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2013 10:27 pm

Re: How Can Anyone Take David Wilcock Seriously?

Post by -OM- » Sat Nov 02, 2013 7:46 pm

Ok, let's suppose David was Edgar Cayce....
The first issues I have, is not with David, it's with those who read him and put him on a pedestal.(via him as a "lightworker" or his EC claims)

Careful reading of Edgar Cayce shows he was NOT a very evolved and spiritual person, in general.
He was simply extremely psychic, and that only happened in an altered, near catatonic, state.

However, most people automatically equate psychic abilities with spiritual development or advanced evolution when that's simply not the case.
Like a 8 year old who can play the piano like a world-class virtuoso... that is a highly developed, almost freakish, skill set, but no one wants or expects that 8yo to be the coming of a "savior" for mankind.

Now, again, let's assume David WAS Edgar Cayce.
Again, careful reading of EC own readings about himself shows that even when EC was "Ra-Ta", it was Ra-Ta's massive ego that led to his downfall.
(Sound familiar?)
Only his ego allowed the "evil forces" to set him up. No ego, no "scandals"

In fact, very early on in David's career, I reminded him of Ra-Ta's shortcomings,
and naturally that post was deleted and Im sure filed under his "only people with egos claims others(he) have an ego"

So, my point?

E.C. was psychic, and not very spiritual.
E.C. fell in consciousness so much from his Ra-Ta experience that his own life readings show a rather lower consciousness being working his way back up thru several lifetimes.
Psychic ability doesn't automatically equal spiritual development.
If one doesn't put David (or Edgar Cayce) on a pedestal, then there's really nothing to be bothered about.
He, may or may not, be a charlatan, delusional, someone with good intentions, or good intending with a ego that's fighting the same internal battle most people are.

Take what he says with a grain of salt, and realize that like all "channelers", even if the information was pure from "source", the ego does and is massively distorting the information anyways.

User avatar
Djchrismac
Adept
Adept
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:38 pm
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Re: How Can Anyone Take David Wilcock Seriously?

Post by Djchrismac » Sat Nov 02, 2013 10:49 pm

IrieLion wrote:I LOVE this site and your papers. It all really makes a lot of sense and RS theory is just beautiful at explaining how things really work.
Agreed!
IrieLion wrote:Isn't it interesting that people that talk about their past lives are always someone cool like Cleopatra, Caesar or I don't know... the Egyptian Sun god Ra. How come no one is ever a simple farmer, town drunk or blacksmith? :lol:
Hahaha well said!
deepfsh wrote:To tell the truth, what attracted me most regarding David's work were the bits connected to the "insider Daniel". The time-space relationship related to the dreamscape, the river of time...
Snap! :)
Jones: [looks at Sallah] You said their headpiece only had markings on one side, are you absolutely sure? [Sallah nods] Belloq's staff is too long.
Jones and Sallah: They're digging in the wrong place!

soldierhugsmember
Adept
Adept
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:32 pm

Re: How Can Anyone Take David Wilcock Seriously?

Post by soldierhugsmember » Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:23 am

When I was young, one of my favourite TV shows was Time Tunnel. It always seemed a bit strange that the time travellers always arrived at some historic moment in time. They never travelled back to a time when they merely met peasants of no significance in a nondescript locality during a period when nothing ever happened.

Ilkka
Adept
Adept
Posts: 429
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: How Can Anyone Take David Wilcock Seriously?

Post by Ilkka » Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:02 pm

soldierhugsmember wrote:When I was young, one of my favourite TV shows was Time Tunnel. It always seemed a bit strange that the time travellers always arrived at some historic moment in time. They never travelled back to a time when they merely met peasants of no significance in a nondescript locality during a period when nothing ever happened.
Maybe this is because of the cycles? Clockwork thing :D

User avatar
daniel
Professor
Professor
Posts: 885
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 6:33 pm
Location: P3X-774
Contact:

Re: How Can Anyone Take David Wilcock Seriously?

Post by daniel » Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:25 pm

soldierhugsmember wrote:When I was young, one of my favourite TV shows was Time Tunnel. It always seemed a bit strange that the time travellers always arrived at some historic moment in time. They never travelled back to a time when they merely met peasants of no significance in a nondescript locality during a period when nothing ever happened.
Did you know that the Air Force contracted Irwin Allen to do that series, as a cover for the Montauk experiments? A big, secret underground base with a time vortex generator...
TemporalVortexGenerator.jpg
The Time Tunnel
TemporalVortexGenerator.jpg (21.97 KiB) Viewed 10546 times
deepfsh wrote:What surprises me most is that David didn't mention Daniel in his acknowledgements section of the SFI, although he referenced Larson's theory, which he learned about from Daniel, if I'm correct. Not to mention the "thousands hours on the phone with him" etc.
Actually, David learned about the RS from Bruce, who had provided Carla with some RS explanations for The Wanderer's Handbook and introduce her to the concept of "time/space" being the metaphysical sector of the Universe (the Cosmic sector). I had asked David to leave me out of his published material, as well as the other RS researchers and Antiquatis folks (he did ask if I wanted to be included, along with the websites I referred to).

And yes, I did spend thousands of hours talking with him... about every topic you can imagine, from advanced psionics to Space Vampires! (An old, Buck Rogers TV series episode that scared the crap out of David when he was young--and I happened to have a videotape of.)
IrieLion wrote:Isn't it interesting that people that talk about their past lives are always someone cool like Cleopatra, Caesar or I don't know... the Egyptian Sun god Ra. How come no one is ever a simple farmer, town drunk or blacksmith?
My great-grandfather was a barber, so you can tell the Noble line I am descended from!
deepfsh wrote:When Daniel mentioned that David looks more like Rasputin, I found a guy who wrote a very interesting article about this issue,
That is a VERY interesting article... I particularly like this quote:
When we understand that Rasputin was the reincarnation of Vlad III the Impaler (Dracula) the dark conspiracy connected to the royal satanic bloodlines and the House of Draco comes more sharply into focus. The New Age is part of a dark mind control conspiracy and is part of the drive to create the New World Order that intends to enslave us all after annihilating 90% of the current world's population.
Maybe that explains his connection with Drake (aka LORD Dracos, where LORD = Loyal Order of the Royal Dragon) and the Dragon Family (which, according to a Chinese friend, is the title used for the Royal family).

But David did almost get it right with being the reincarnation of Ra... he just forgot the -sputin part!
IrieLion wrote:I wasn't talking about the torsion field research
The ONLY other Russian research that I have actually seen from David is the work of Viktor Grebennikov and his insect wing powered flying platform.
AGREED 100%. Daniel you are presenting us with revolutionary information. ... You on the other hand seem very humble and it shows.
Thanks for that. Guess that makes me the reincarnation of Underdog... humble and loveable! :) I have no interest in being a public figure; the best I can do is to share what I have discovered on my Path to Kheb.
Power out? Let's see if many hands can make the lights work.
Facebook: daniel.phoenixiii

soldierhugsmember
Adept
Adept
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:32 pm

Re: How Can Anyone Take David Wilcock Seriously?

Post by soldierhugsmember » Sun Nov 03, 2013 3:28 pm

Thanks for the tidbit on Time Tunnel, daniel.
No, I did not know that.

Ilkka
Adept
Adept
Posts: 429
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: How Can Anyone Take David Wilcock Seriously?

Post by Ilkka » Mon Nov 04, 2013 3:28 am

That Time Tunnel picture reminded me of this cancelled series Terra Nova where there was almost the same thing as the picture did "time tunnel" which was used to send people back in time. Too bad it was cancelled after 13 episodes.

Post Reply