It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

David Wilcock: Full Disclosure and Introduction to ET by years end?

page: 27
143
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmokeJaguar67
There is also something else to consider that in the excitement of last night when I first saw the thread, I neglected to address.

If this news about an extraterrestrial disclosure turns out to be true and I hope it is, what will be the explanation for the many cover-ups and campaigns of disinformation by governments the world over?
Many people who have come forward have mentioned that they have been threatened and intimidated, there are even indications that there were some “accidents”.

On top of that are the countless people who suffered ridicule and even lost their jobs, relationships, became the butt of a thousand jokes and became socially excluded and written off? What about the human mutilation phenomenon that is very rarely talked about and yet does seem to have happened and possibly still is happening.

What about the many disappearances and how will the greys be explained to the public? Will the people who suffered greatly in the government’s decades long campaign to keep this squashed get a serious apology and some sort of restitution or will they just be brushed aside and ignored? I cannot see people allowing these issues to remain unanswered and the wrong answer could have a very detrimental effect on the human perception of this disclosure being a positive thing in our human history.

Thinking more on this it would seem to me that if disclosure was to come out then the major governments would have so much explaining to do that their credibility would be shot to pieces and trust would be a huge issue. Would a disclosure be worth the hit the governments would take in this regard?

I am trying to keep a positive perspective on this possible disclosure but the more I think about it the more it is starting to resemble a sealed can of worms.



This is exactly what I was thinking.. if this turns out to be true I wanna see some heads rolling!




posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by mysticus22
 


We're not going to get anything from the powers that be except enslavement and tyranny unless we STOP having faith in the system that is designed to enslave us. You think they want you knowing you do not need to be burning gas? Alien space crafts are not burning anything for energy... How would they be able to push their population control & carbon taxes?

The only 'disclosure' will be when project blue beam & the reverse engineered craft are pulled out to make a false flag terrorist attack on the world.

Wakie wakie, say no to snakie!

[edit on 14-10-2009 by Time=Now]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Has this been posted yet?

www.divinecosmos.com...



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by corusso
Has this been posted yet?

www.divinecosmos.com...


no it has not, thank you.

The above link is the addendum to DW appearance on c2c



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Has David Wilcock got his predictions right before in the past? I don't know alot about this guy. People seems to have faith in this guy. I do hope he's right, i would love disclosure. With what i see on ATS i would not surprise me if it happened on the 25th (-/+ 2). There seems to be alot of talk about the day.

Tsom87



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 01:49 PM
link   
David Wilcock doesn't claim to be a psychic. He's just trying to give a heads up.

Here's a video on the Blossom Goodchild starship prediction you'll all want to see.
www.youtube.com...

I'd love to hear from anyone who knows about that kind of technical stuff.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by Sargoth]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by rainfall
 


I love how you try to make me look like the bad guy simply because I get annoyed at people who exploit others with false hope and lies and basically take them to the cleaners. I wouldn't dream of doing such a thing, simply because unlike some of these people I actually have a conscience. There's nothing wrong with my personality and certainly nothing wrong with demanding evidence if someone is peddling extraordinary claims. I also happen to practise Buddhism and meditation and therefore don't need a lecture on where to find the truth, but thanks anyway. I also have enough common sense to know exactly when someone is spinning a yarn. You say all of David Wilcock's work is backed up with facts! Then prove it, let's see this factual evidence you speak of.
Sorry, but I'm not seeing it.

Love & Peace!

[edit on 14-10-2009 by kindred]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Sargoth
 


Yeah... I don't know about that video... someone is seeing what they want to see.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by kindred
 


But how many of his lectures have you seen? How many of his interviews have you listened to? How many of his blogs have you read? I'm not sure you even listened to the C2C interview from the way you are talking.

He never claimed to have proof that disclosure would happen before Christmas. He never even said for sure that would happen. He merely said that several of his sources were giving him this same information.

As for his theories, they are backed up by scientific evidence. If you did your homework on this subject you would know that. You might not agree with it, just because you read it, but you would know that he isn't just making this stuff up. Furthermore, since when does someone with a theory have the obligation to prove their theory to you? Most of his material is free. People who don't want to read/listen to it, don't have to.

And just what proof do you think is good enough to convince you of anything? What kind of proof could someone like me or Wilcock present to you, in order for you to agree that his theory has been proven? If you sit around waiting for others to prove things to you, you're not going to learn very much.

Why do you need to have something be proven anyway? What's wrong with listening to a theory and just considering it? I'm not trying to single you out to pick on, I just see this attitude a lot on ATS and I guess I missed the part where anything has to be proven to be discussed.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Toorop

Originally posted by Emerson4br
Nothing comes for free from US Gov...

ohhh, ok now "War on human look E.T.", so Ahmadinejad and Chaves are E.T. bomb the iran an take the Chile Oil. how can i dont think it before!? Osama dont hide him self, he go back home..


[edit on 14-10-2009 by Emerson4br]


Chile oil?

That's just how much you know. Hugo Chavez is the Venezuelan president.


You're absolutely right !, i made a mistake, thank you for correct me



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmethystSD
reply to post by kindred
 


But how many of his lectures have you seen? How many of his interviews have you listened to? How many of his blogs have you read? I'm not sure you even listened to the C2C interview from the way you are talking.

He never claimed to have proof that disclosure would happen before Christmas. He never even said for sure that would happen. He merely said that several of his sources were giving him this same information.

As for his theories, they are backed up by scientific evidence. If you did your homework on this subject you would know that. You might not agree with it, just because you read it, but you would know that he isn't just making this stuff up. Furthermore, since when does someone with a theory have the obligation to prove their theory to you? Most of his material is free. People who don't want to read/listen to it, don't have to.

And just what proof do you think is good enough to convince you of anything? What kind of proof could someone like me or Wilcock present to you, in order for you to agree that his theory has been proven? If you sit around waiting for others to prove things to you, you're not going to learn very much.

Why do you need to have something be proven anyway? What's wrong with listening to a theory and just considering it? I'm not trying to single you out to pick on, I just see this attitude a lot on ATS and I guess I missed the part where anything has to be proven to be discussed.


A few things... The guy is presenting his work in a manner that is made to have most people think that this will most likely happen when the exact opposite is true. He said and this is paraphrasing, "This will happen before christmas but after now." and "THERE IS ALREADY A TV SLOT RESERVED FOR THIS." how much clearer do I need to be really? The way he presents it is in a manner to get people who are easily influenced to buy into his idea without question. This will most likely not happen. And not because it will never happen but because as a human species we are not ready for it to happen. Look at us we are in constant conflict with each other, never seeing any true peace.

Another point, Idk why we started to talk about about scientific theory, I guess it has to do with his credibility. For me a persons credibility in this subject is only tarnished if they say something like he said and it doesn't come true. Now idk if he has done this because I do not follow him. But if he has then id say there is good reason not to believe this. Boy who cried wolf...

Now you're entire speech about proving things seems a bit far fetched and off base. Our entire civilization since the beginning of time required proof of something for people to believe it. No one believed Newton, Einstein, or any of those other scientists until they provided proof. If we believed every word that comes out of the mouth of most people we would be no better than those who choose to believe that god will save us and that the bible is 100% supposed to be taken literally. Theory is fine and all but theory without proof is still THEORY and therefore can not be taken as fact. Anyone who does take it as fact is delusional. I can already tell youre going to say something like "Blah blah blah theory of evolution." and yes while I believe in the theory of evolution I do not believe that it is 100% correct. Nothing without FULL PROOF is %100 correct, and even then there is room for change. Those who take theory without proof to be 100% true are fools.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmethystSD
reply to post by kindred
 


But how many of his lectures have you seen? How many of his interviews have you listened to? How many of his blogs have you read? I'm not sure you even listened to the C2C interview from the way you are talking.

He never claimed to have proof that disclosure would happen before Christmas. He never even said for sure that would happen. He merely said that several of his sources were giving him this same information.

As for his theories, they are backed up by scientific evidence. If you did your homework on this subject you would know that. You might not agree with it, just because you read it, but you would know that he isn't just making this stuff up. Furthermore, since when does someone with a theory have the obligation to prove their theory to you? Most of his material is free. People who don't want to read/listen to it, don't have to.

And just what proof do you think is good enough to convince you of anything? What kind of proof could someone like me or Wilcock present to you, in order for you to agree that his theory has been proven? If you sit around waiting for others to prove things to you, you're not going to learn very much.

Why do you need to have something be proven anyway? What's wrong with listening to a theory and just considering it? I'm not trying to single you out to pick on, I just see this attitude a lot on ATS and I guess I missed the part where anything has to be proven to be discussed.


Another thing, he isn't saying that this can not be discussed, ever. He is trying to save people from being let down. People blindly follow and are shown wrong all the time. He is trying to show those who can not see for themselves that without proof it is nonsense to take things as fact.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Kindred, have you seen his 2012 videos all parts? If not check it out and let me know what you think.

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 14-10-2009 by Sargoth]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Penumbra
*snip*
Now you're entire speech about proving things seems a bit far fetched and off base. Our entire civilization since the beginning of time required proof of something for people to believe it. No one believed Newton, Einstein, or any of those other scientists until they provided proof. If we believed every word that comes out of the mouth of most people we would be no better than those who choose to believe that god will save us and that the bible is 100% supposed to be taken literally. Theory is fine and all but theory without proof is still THEORY and therefore can not be taken as fact. Anyone who does take it as fact is delusional. I can already tell youre going to say something like "Blah blah blah theory of evolution." and yes while I believe in the theory of evolution I do not believe that it is 100% correct. Nothing without FULL PROOF is %100 correct, and even then there is room for change. Those who take theory without proof to be 100% true are fools.


You keep talking about believing things, but I'm talking about considering things. I don't have to believe in the things he says to enjoy thinking and considering them. Why is everyone so obsessed with making up their minds about what is true and what is not? Most of the time on this site we are discussing things that are practically impossible to prove or disprove anyway. I am simply pointing out that it is unreasonable to sit back and expect everyone else to prove things. I certainly didn't say that we should believe whatever we read.

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
-Aristotle

ETA: I don't need anyone to save me from thinking for myself.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by AmethystSD]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Maybe it will happen, maybe it won't. Since we are fast learning, thought has powerful effects ... what if he is simply attempting to sway the mass consciousness that we are purported to be?

Also, as an avid reader of channelings, the buzz in that sector is definitely picking up around this theme. I read one yesterday stating somewhere around Christmas / New Year.

Sure will be great if it happens, but I am not gonna hold my breath this time!



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by AmethystSD
 


Did YOU watch the OP's interview.
NO he did NOT say that "several of his sources" were giving him intel.

He said he had ONE source who told him it was verified by three OTHER sources.

This is hearsay four times removed by the time it reaches your ear.
So, have at it.
Whatever. If it happens good. If it doesn't. I hope it happens soon.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
This is a fanatastic prediction. Currently, my feelings on Wilcock lean towards flake. Now, if xmas comes and there's been no disclosure, my feelings will be confirmed. However, if there is disclosure, I'll have to actually start believing some of the stuff this guys got on the net and it is way out there.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   
************************************************************

The only way U.S. UFO disclosure will happen on a Presidential level is if pure immunity was granted to all who have taken part in the decades of cover up, lies, denial, and manipulation.

Unfortunately that's how it's got to be. If you think otherwise, you're wrong. No one involved in the cover up will risk their job, jail time, or worse in order to provide disclosure.

So you might want to ask yourself if you would be OK with granting immunity in order to get officially acknowledged disclosure. I think it's such an important and necessary thing, I would be willing to hold back any anger and just accept the reality...

************************************************************



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by AmethystSD
 


Did YOU watch the OP's interview.
NO he did NOT say that "several of his sources" were giving him intel.


Oh, I misheard him the first time I listened to it. To be fair, I didn't know there was going to be a quiz afterwards.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by blackcube

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by raul bloodworth
 


is there any evidence at all that these " sources " are real - not just his imaginings ?


Check the D.W. video at the beginning of topic. He heard from one source in particular who has heard from 3 different high placed sources in the intelligence community.

So D.W's source is third hand source of information.

From this video is clear the source is just Dr. Pete Peterson.



If you check Peterson claims in Project Camelot videos/mp3 you can make your own conclusion about if this guy is credible or not. IMHO Peterson is not a reliable source for anything.

Check the ATS topic about the interview
www.abovetopsecret.com...
the consensus is.. he is a fraud.

So my take is forget about this November 27 disclosure.



I will quote myself.
The source is the Pete Peterson... Check yourseft this guy if you want to decide to believe or not about this suposed disclosure event.

[edit on 14/10/09 by blackcube]



new topics

top topics



 
143
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join