Originally posted by dragonsmusic
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.
Originally posted by insideNSA
Forgive me as I thought reverse speech was so popular, borderline mainstream that I just assumed everyone knew what it was all about.
There has been vast amount of research done over the last 30 years and there is no denying that it is a real phenomenon. There are tons of reverse speech researchers in the field, the most famous being David Oates of www.reversespeech.com
Originally posted by insideNSA
Originally posted by Bravo111
Apologies - I assumed wrongly it seems that Reverse Speech was in actual fact a sub-division of the ELECTRONIC VOICE PHENOMENA genre.
Its not a sub-division. EVP is using electronics to pick of voices from the spirit world.
Reverse Speech is simply recording a person's speech and playing it backwards and finding phrases which the subconscious is thinking.
But you are 100% correct in the rest of your post. Reverse Speech IS appliied to many politicians which does expose their inner feelings. However it doesn't give concrete information and I'm sure its not admissable in court (yet? could be soon).
This is really getting off topic, but the scariest recent example of Reverse Speech is BO saying 'Yes we can', which consistantly in reverse, clearly states 'Thank you satan'
Obama, Reverse Speech, Yes, we can = Thank you satan
scary stuff, but i don't want to get off topic about reverse speech, I wanna concentrate on DW's reversals.
[edit on 16-9-2009 by insideNSA]
Originally posted by discountgenetics
Anyone who's followed wilcock for long knows all about his "ascension 2000" fail and how none of the Y2K meltdown occured that Wilcock predicted. That shut him up for a while because just before that he had moved to Virginia Beach trying his claim to fame by riding the coat-tails of the Edgar Cayce foundation until they kicked him out.
Then he moved up to Kentucky where Carla Rueckert was channeling Ra and the "Law of One" books, and decided he could channel Ra, too. Never mind the fact that the original Ra channelings said specifically that RA could NEVER speak through anyone but Carla. Then Carla threw him out and I thought we'd seen the last of him, but he just keeps popping up like a bad hair day.
So he wrote a couple of books, but no publisher would touch them, and he finally just put them on his site. Then he hooked up with Wynn Free and convinced him he was Edgar Cayce, because he knew that Wynn could get published. After that book flopped he started doing "dream readings" thru his website. Only problem was, he was so bad at it that everybody was asking for a refund; that's why he now has a strict no-refund policy. So after that nobody would pay him for his terrible work and he had to quit.
Then he hooked up with ET researcher and author Scott Mandelker; toured with him a bit; did some shows with Art Bell and Wilcock thought he'd made the big time. Trouble is that Scott got wise to Wilcock and kicked him to the curb...
And so it goes... everyone he's ever worked with has thrown him out, but he keeps trying to con new people, and unfortunately people who are searching are too easily conned, and DW has discovered and exploited this.
Originally posted by Asktheanimals
I've always thought DW to be "out there"
If he's really a fraud I don't want to know, he makes me feel better
which is more important to me than the truth.
Originally posted by NorEaster
David Wilcox knows that he's lying his ass off, and is smart enough to make a living off it. This is the only genius that he possesses.
You'd assume that anyone as articulate as he is, would never say the foolish things that he says, for fear of being bounced right out of the lecture hall. But, it's the ridiculousness of what he says that gives him plausible cover in the minds of people who are actually serious about the subjects he claims mastery of. Because they'd never dare make such fantastic claims themselves, they can't imagine that anyone else - other than some flea-infested street corner screamer - would ever do such things either. Unless, possibly, they were telling the truth.
Then, the kid simply piles on the small encounter details, such as a consistently defined diner meeting, or very specific physical descriptions of these freaks that he claims to encounter, and suddenly, it begins to sound as if he's absolutely serious, and maybe even credible. Toss in a few technical facts that can be slightly shaded to somewhat, tangentially support one small aspect of a much larger claim, and he's got the room hanging on his every word.
The guy's a huckster. Plain and simple. Not even a very good one, but with all this 2012 hysteria in certain circles, it doesn't take much to draw attention (and money) if you're okay with doing or saying whatever it takes to turn heads.