OMG, is this true!!! (hope not) David Wilcock Tells Us In Reverse That He Is a Fraud

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 07:05 AM
link   

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.




posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 07:59 AM
link   
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



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 08:14 AM
link   
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.



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 09:16 AM
link   
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.



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by insideNSA
 


Whatever, just give me 10 hours of audio and i'll 'prove' to the world that you are the antichrist. No probs. Have you watched youtubes of bollywood movies that has fake subtitles under it so that you 'hear' what the subtitles suggest that is said? Same thing.

Quick example.

www.youtube.com...

For more fun: Click here

Power of suggestion. But if you want to take it seriously, have fun. I won't stop you.

Edit: When i read in the title "OMG, is this true!!! (hope not)" i would think you are open for other options that suggest it is not true but gues not, shame really.

[edit on 18-9-2009 by Harman]



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by insideNSA
 


Unfortunately reverse speech is a hoax. Please do some real research on your own concepts.

Your thread fits right in here at ATS, so dont worry.



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
its a nice theory but

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



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 11:30 AM
link   
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.



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Wow. I am not one to usually bash or sink to the level of calling out people but the level of intelligence in this thread makes me think that I titled the thing 'If you rode the shortbus, come comment on this thread'

I sincerely hope that the majority of posters on this thread are kids because if they are grown adults your arguments and logic are pathetic. i think this thread is hovering around the IQ=70 for the average.



presumed EVP experiences,


For the LAST time EVP is NOT reverse speech.

Ok this made me laugh. Lets put these two quotes together...


By their fruits ye shall know them.

and


If Wilcock’s a fraud, then I support him.


Would you like to be known by your fruits in which one of them is to support people who are frauds?!?!

Question, if he weren't a fraud would you not 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.

Oh yeah, really! Show me then. What high level US government scientists, astronauts, military and government... (
did you really mean high level U.S. government government personel?) but which ones actually support him? name names please? and where do you see this evidence of support. that is total BS

quote from wertfagd


Unfortunately reverse speech is a hoax. Please do some real research on your own concepts.


have you done even 15 minutes of research before you spue out BS? go to reversespeech.com. btw are you 15 years old?

quote from Harwoman


Power of suggestion. But if you want to take it seriously, have fun. I won't stop you.


Please please kiddies. Do research before making comments about something over your head that you know nothing about.

reversespeech.com
www.reversespeech.com
this has nothing to do with suggestion at all.


Ok I'm done babysitting the kids. Please reverse speech researchers. Come here and school these kids properly. I am not responding to any more kiddie posts.

This was not a thread trying to prove reverse speech. It has already been proven. However I am making a call to all reverse speech researchers who are more versed in the field to come give these children a lesson.

I will not respond to unintelligent crap about reverse speech anymore. Also it was stated that I have a set opinion. Actually I do have a set opinion about DW but it has nothing to do with RS. It figures a guy like DW who has no idea of what a hypothesis is and how to back it up with scientific facts instead of using loose correlations at best would be applauded by the children on this board. you are the only ones dumb enough to be duped by this guy because you can not logically think for yourselves and rely on his 'feel good' factor as the only means to judge him.

you even said it yourself. YOU SUPPORT FRAUDS.




posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by insideNSA
 


You are the one trying to drag the rest of the posters down to a certain level of bashing, that you cannot see that makes it all the more regretable. trying to insult someones intelligence or questioning their maturity is ironicaly a very immature and not to smart way to convince other people, it does not do your credibility any good.

By the way, Wilcock could be deluded or intentionally misguiding people, why not? 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.

In short, try to grow up and discuss things in a grown up way to get your point across, screaming and bashing people doesn't work to well, well it may work on the ones watching FOX but then you have to have a monopoly on the media before that works and you do not have that.



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 04:01 PM
link   
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]



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by insideNSA
 


Oh deary me, i did a booboo typing reverse speech wrong that surely negates everything i say. No, not really, sorry about that. You attacking me on that just proves my point. I will do my best to remember to write speech right if you try to grow up.

Like i said you may be right that wilcock is wrong about a lot of stuff but reverse speech doesn't do anything other than connect a meaning on something meaningless like a reversed sentence. I looked into it a couple of times in the previous years and i was even convinced for a short while.

Until i saw the other things like the fake subbed bollywood movies where the (for us) unintelligable sentences were made into crazy persons english with the help of the fake subs and the workings of the mind and it's obsession to correlate sounds even if the correlation is totally bunk.

You have a linguistic matrix in your head and every human and even some animal sounds will be translated with the help of that matrix, the same goes for reverse speech.

Anyway, happy to keep you mildly amused and i will go to greener pastures now.

[edit on 18-9-2009 by Harman]



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 06:08 PM
link   
i am literally about to walk out the door and have little time to respond, so have at me when i'm gone this weekend. anyway a quick few points... Harmen your logic is so filled with holes and so illogical but i really don't have time to go through it all and show you how you are wrong... but anyway I never 'attacked' you for your spelling. But honestly speech is a 2nd grade level word to spell. i doubt too many people would mispell that. do you have a college education? just curious.

anyway you say you believed it for a while but then you didn't because you saw that it could a. be faked and b. your mind tried to interpret things and can easily be led.

a. anything can be faked. just because something can be faked doesn't mean the real thing doesn't exist. for instance, space can be faked. but after i watched star wars i didn't think that when I looked up in the sky the stars weren't real because i saw a great fake of them in a movie.

b. this is true that your mind does want to make something intelligible out of a garbled mess. and yes you can easily be influenced that what you are seeing, hearing or touching is something than what it is. but i have news for you. reversals in speech are VERY VERY clear, and though they can be faked the real thing does exist. and your mind isn't just trying to decipher garbled noise. you will hear VERY CLEAR phrases and even complete sentences that make sense and relate to what is being said forward. why is this important... because what is said in reverse is coming from the soul and will not lie, even if what is being said forward is a lie or deception.

how do we know this???

b.1. you can record your own conversations and be stunned at the reversals you will hear. they aren't in everything you say forward but they are more frequent than you'd think also.

b.2. tons of research has been done to verify this is the case. if you don't want to spend the time doing your own reversals, which can be done with the sound recorder that comes with windows, then go to the many experts that have done the research for you.

b.3. many intelligence agencies, including some in the US, use reverse speech for intelligence. i know first hand this is true. though they would never advertise this at all knowing it isn't well known to the general public, they use it all the time. the last thing they want is for this to become a widely accepted branch of science because once the cat is out of the bag you'll see that there will be a lot less public speeches being made by important public figures. also they will closely guard what they talk about.

so sorry to burst your bubble Harmen, but you are wrong



Originally posted by Harman
reply to post by insideNSA
 


Oh deary me, i did a booboo typing reverse speech wrong that surely negates everything i say. No, not really, sorry about that. You attacking me on that ajust proves my point. I will do my best to remember to write speech right if you try to grow up.

Like i said you may be right that wilcock is wrong about a lot of stuff but reverse speech doesn't do anything other than connect a meaning on something meaningless like a reversed sentence. I looked into it a couple of times in the previous years and i was even convinced for a short while.

Until i saw the other things like the fake subbed bollywood movies where the (for us) unintelligable sentences were made into crazy persons english with the help of the fake subs and the workings of the mind and it's obsession to correlate sounds even if the correlation is totally bunk.

You have a linguistic matrix in your head and every human and even some animal sounds will be translated with the help of that matrix, the same goes for reverse speech.

Anyway, happy to keep you mildly amused and i will go to greener pastures now.

[edit on 18-9-2009 by Harman]



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 06:33 PM
link   
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.



posted on Sep, 19 2009 @ 03:27 AM
link   
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.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 09:05 AM
link   

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



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 06:52 AM
link   
i really hope this is not true man/woman



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 06:43 PM
link   
this Obama speech reverse is most disturbing!



posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   
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.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join