Originally posted by stardust1955
I have listened to a lot of reverse speech. Every single one, either I don't hear what they hear, or, I hear something totally different. And, if you weren't told what was supposedly heard, is that what was really said reversed? Some of it is pretty good, but I feel that everyone hears something different if you can even understand what is said in reverse.

I personally have done my speech in reverse and it sounds very foreign languaged to me. Can't understand a single word in reverse.

Are you serious? Where are you listening to reversals? Try reversespeech.com and David Oates. They are VERY CLEAR in most cases. So I am wondering if you are even serious when you say this.

Anyway, back to the subject at hand. No, I do not feel David is a fraud, he is way too positive. Why would someone so positive be a fraud.

Again, are you serious??? Why would someone so positive be a fraud???? Do i really have to answer this? How many con men do you know that put up a negative front? Your statements frankly baffle me.

I have a book called 'You are wonderful and special' Its very positive and uplifting and shows you just how special you really are... And I also have a limited time offer where you can pick up a set of CDs called 'Becoming a light that you are' You can order the book and the CDs in this limited time offer for just $99.00. Call now.

You know, the validity of anything said in reverse speach is very easy to determine.

All you have to do is record yourself talking for a while, reverse it, and then listen. You will know if what your hear is true or not, and then you'll know whether there is anything to this or not.

Over and out
Twisted-Inside-Out

Not sure but if i recieve enough hours of audio from the OP i think i could find some reverse speech clip that says he eats babies. It's fun to play around with but i can't see how it could be taken seriously really. It's the power of suggestion.

does your mom know you are on her computer again? go play with your transformers little boy and leave the serious discussions to the adults.

Originally posted by Harman
Not sure but if i recieve enough hours of audio from the OP i think i could find some reverse speech clip that says he eats babies. It's fun to play around with but i can't see how it could be taken seriously really. It's the power of suggestion.

its a nice theory but

HOW the HECK do u know that this guy thinks in english

Even if Wilcock were a fraud, he cites enough real scientific evidence and very compelling sources, and his message is positive and in line with what I understand is occurring through my own research that to consider as much really flies in the face of logic and reason.

Conversely, Peggy Kane cites nothing but her own invention and presumed EVP experiences, all of which paint a horrid and terrifying picture of reality.

By their fruits ye shall know them.

If Wilcock’s a fraud, then I support him. And apparently so do many other credible and high level U.S. government scientists, astronauts, military and government personnel indirectly through their own testimony.

Please reconsider taking some backward tape recordings over the ocean of evidence supporting Wilcock’s work.

Harman your best bet is to just keep quiet. The more you type the more you expose your naivety. Though it does keep me mildly entertained.

But that does not give any more credibility to the reverse speach thing. If you really think you can give proof of his intentional or unintentional misguiding of his listeners please give it but reverse speach is nothing more than some red herring and a fun way to waste your time.

Reverse speach might be a waste of time like you say... I've never heard of reverse speach but if its anything like reverse speech before I pass judgement I'll do at least 15 minutes of research at www.reversespeech.com, study the subject and then write an informed opinion instead of just guessing what I think it is all about and spouting off at the keyboard with my incorrect illogical flat out wrong analysis of the phenomenon.

DW takes some scientific data points and then comes up with wild theories LOOSELY BASED on those data points. When I get back from my weekend trip if you really want, I'll take the time to show you how weak that correlation is. This is an example of DWs modus operandi for coming up with a DW theory.


The sky is blue.
Tropical water is another shade of blue.
The earth is covered with roughly 2/3s water.

Therefore:

The sky is blue because light bounces off the blue water and reflects into the sky diffusing and refracting through the air until the sky predominately appears blue. The light that doesn't get diffused back into the air from the water will mostly bounce off the top layer of the atmosphere like a greenhouse, keeping the light in, and further giving the sky the appearance of being blue.

If the earth were mostly covered with green fertile land the sky would be green.



So you see, I can start with all the correct scientific facts I want. But the conclusions I draw from those can be dead wrong as I have shown you with this example.

I'm sorry that you aren't taking the time to comprehend these concepts. But keep trying and if I see effort I won't resort to 7th grade tactics.



[edit on 18-9-2009 by insideNSA]

How can anyone take Wilcock seriously? He literally steals ideas and scenes from Hollywood science fiction movies and tries pass them off as real. My favorite is when he talks about the secret "jump room" to Mars that some insider told him about; it brings tears of laughter to my eyes. He describes it absolutely scene by scene as it's portrayed in "Doom" the movie. The terminology, the physical effects, the appearance, how you get there, everything.

Starship Troopers, The Matrix, Independence Day, Total Recall among others make up his tales of "insider connections".

Anyone who watches sci-fi films and listens to his radio interviews and presentations should instantly recognise that he's blatantly pulling events from movies.

Its a pity hes stuck in this whole reverse speech delusion.

i hope everyone who believes in his BS purchased his stuff. At least then your supporting darwinism.

Originally posted by insideNSA

This is to address you and the other poster that have their doubts about reverse speech. PLEASE PLEASE do your research before you make statements about something you know nothing about. If you do a little research you will be shockingly surprised.

Hi,

I stopped at this post in your thread with no intention in reading on. Having read other topics about David Wilcock that your starting here on ATS ive come to the conclusion that what your saying here ( ^ above quote ^ ) asking people to research before making statements they know nothing about is very contradictory and easly seen as falsifying. Here you are again making all these " Negative " claims about DW and not once have you went and researched the information relating to his subjects....or perhaps you have?, but your sure not presenting it here or anywere else ive read.

Like i said in another thread you started about DW, if you think he's wrong then prove he's wrong with credable and veriviable evidence.

There are plenty of other researchers out there that back up his claims ten fold, if YOU do your research you will be surpised that what DW is presenting may very well be true.

Incidently, alot of your questions ( namley about the frog em... ) have been proven if you were to take the time and read up on it. In addition to this, your questions and doubts will be answerd in his ( DW ) triology - Convergance movie.

How about a doing a bit of research yourself eh?

IP

i really hope this is not true man/woman

this Obama speech reverse is most disturbing!

I never really believed in reverse speech. Certain phrases will always say the same thing in reverse. This would preclude us from ever using those phrases or else being accused of 'meaning to say' the reverse words.

David Wilcock . Where should I start? He claims to be the reincarnation of edgar cayce. Is there anything beyond that required to make you question his validity? I mean is that alone not enough to make you say hey, wait a minute? For me it is . With all respect I don't need to hear his reversals to tell me that I don't trust him. Now, for you, OP, and everyone posting here:
As far as reverse speech goes, it is an unusual thing. I am a musician and linguist and I study NLP and I have always been fascinated with language and sound. David Oates, the founder of Reverse Speech, has an extraordinary autobiograpy called It's Only a Metaphor. Speech reversals happen every day according to Mr Oates. In fact one occurs once every ten seconds according to Oates. His work is based on the premise that there are multiple levels of meaning in all of our speech. It is too complex to sum it up here. But Oates worked with John Grinder in the early days of RS. Grinder is one of the cofounders of NLP and one of the worlds most gifted linguists. Grinder once shared all of David's work at a NLP conference without Oate's consent; thus ending their relationship. Even Richard Bandler, the other cofounder of NLP, has commented on the possibility of RS's validity. Bandler has a quote on the RS website. He's not saying it's real in the quote, only suggesting that Oates might have uncovered another level of meaning lying hidden in human speech.
Finally, Obama's reversal about satan which you mentioned is not that significant, OP. You told everyone here to research RS, but it's ironic what you missed yourself. RS has a baffling number of metaphors used by the unconscious. The word Satan in reverse speech is almost always a metaphor for very intense emotions. I'm not an Obama fan, and I'm not defending him. But having the word satan in a reversal only means that. A reference to intense emotions.