I want to start a thread that will primarily discuss David Wilcock's new book "The Source Field Investigations", and also to hear your opinion
about him and his theories. The book is not yet purchasable but it is complete.
I've been following Wilcock's work for some time now and although i have heard the GOOD and the BAD opinions about him, i cannot say that i think he
is a fraud. On the contrary, i think he is a genuine person, a meticulous researcher that backs MOST of his theories with scientific proofs. He is not
a DOOM and GLOOM person and whenever you watch a presentation on YouTube or read his articles or books, you can feel the positivity of the words and
the person behind them.
I'm interested and am waiting for the book because David claims that he has finally compiled all the scientific proof that anyone would need to see
and prove to him/herself the reality of David's and many other researcher's theories.
I know you guys on ATS know all about Wilcock and have your opinions about him.
There's not a lot of love for David on ATS, it's said that he gets credit for others' research and hard work.
I personally can't get through his online lectures and blogs anymore, his ego and insecurity is beyond tolerable for me. Does anyone really believe
or care if he is Edgar Cayce reincarnated?
I don't think he's all that confident in his information basically because it's not his research for the most part. He also loves Richard
Hoagland, who in my opinion is a "conspiracy theory" incarnate.
I've always been interested in what David Wilcock has to say, but as to whether or not he and his information is genuine, I am on the fence and will
remain on the fence (at least until I give his book a good read).
Of course, everyone is going to come here spouting off "WiLcoX SAID disclosure was HAppeniN in NOvvember 2009 and iT didN'T HaPeNNN!!!!! He iz da
And although that event certainly doesn't add to his credibility, I don't think it writes him off as a hoaxer/charlatan either.
It does, however, underline the key problem I have with David: his trust, reliance, and interest in so-called "whistle-blowers", a la Project
Camelot. Anybody who relies on such whistleblowers to relay any kind of information, under the label of "fact", is setting themselves up for
failure. Plain and simple.
Besides that, I think Wilcock is very intelligent and a genuinely spiritual guy- He just tries too hard and goes too far to try and get attention to
his ideas. If he hadn't of cried wolf for disclosure, many people who have written him off would still be taking him seriously (although, of course
there are the people who have never taken him seriously who wouldn't change their opinion at all :lol. If he hadn't spouted off he was Edgar Cayce
reincarnated, I'm sure he would be about 20 times as popular as he is now.
I think the main issue here is that Wilcock lets his own personal beliefs and biases get in the way of his research and presentations- A vice that
many other researches and presenters have gone to great lengths to avoid displaying.
Some of his work has been truly mind-blowin: I read the article he wrote on all the different patches and insignias of government/military space
programs... and it really did blow my mind at how smart and true he put his information together.
He has done a TON of research on all kinds of phenomena- enough to get himself some serious air time on "Ancient Aliens". He also has a keen knack
for digging out scientific studies and findings that go generally un-noticed by mainstream science, but are very interesting and relevant
none-the-less (i.e., the research Wiclock found done by Russian Scientists that describe how people's emotions psychology completely change when they
sit in a pyramid).
Some of the science could definitely (and already is, has been, and will be) labeled off as fringe-science or just fake altogether. But it's not
Wilcock doing the research- he is just presenting what others have done.
Will I buy his book- Definitely.
Despite his shortcomings, his videos and articles have opened my mind to a lot of new ideas which has independently led me down my own personal
quests for enlightenment and knowledge. He has quoted books and websites which I have gone out and read, and have blown my mind and are considered by
me to be real hidden gems.
The book, in my mind, is going to be his main point- the summary of what he has to say, and everything that relates to it. I think it will be best to
judge him after such a presentation can be critically analyzed.
And to anyone who is claiming he is just a money-grabber and this book is his latest attempt: just shut-it. Don't pretend for a single second that if
YOU had spent years upon years of researching, put in countless hours putting together articles and presentations, that you would throw away getting
paid for such endeavors in the name of being "genuine".
Besides, his book is only $15 on amazon.
If that is too much, go to your friggin library.
And if you think that is too much work, I'm positive his book will be on countless torrent-sites for free before it even hits the shelves.
Well said, in long division format. I am as open minded as it gets and I can't bare to listen to his talks anymore, and it's not because of his
information, it's because of his personality. I rolled my eyes when I saw him on Ancient Aliens, I thought, "Of all people researching this stuff
out there, why have him on the show?" It looked like the B-list of researchers on that series.
Some genuine opinions here! I also think that the thing about Edgar Cayce was a mistake on his part - and i'm not saying that it is not true, it may
well be but he shouldn't have said that. However, my intuition has always been good about Wilcock. I do not know why but it has. I believe that this
bad opinion about Wilcock has something to do with his involvement with "The Law of One" and channeling as a whole. It does not matter if we agree
or not here on ATS, channeling has become pretty popular in the last 10-15 years and its growing.
Anyway, it is good to know what people here think of him as ATS represents a very specific portion of the population that is the most open-minded
Isn't it very ironic and paradoxic that they call Us "Conspiracy Theorists" but even here, in the best place for any alternative topic, we
don't have much love for one of the very popular names of Conspiracy Theorists or Alternative Researchers?
Anyway, i just want to say that i've been only observing ATS for almost 2 years and i started posting only a month or so ago.....
I decided to really try doing something about all those things happening in the world and decided to start by talking to people about what i think and
what i know on a more widespread scale. I have realized that this website is one of the best places to start doing that. And so it began for me here.
I have studied David's work to the nth detail, and for me he is a genius.
I have no taste for the UFO stuff or the whistleblowers, as I figure if the Gummint hired me I would make sure there were 200 extremely credible
'whistleblowers' on the payroll for every genuine one.... AND I have seen a real UFO with my own eyes so I do believe.
However, none of that is that important to me. If you strip all that away and just look at his science, he is clearly a genius on the order of Rupert
Sheldrake, Lynne Mctaggert, Nassim Haramein, Marko Rodin, etc. (Sorry if I omitted your favourite)
William Henry, who is easily in the ranks above, uses the FULL quote from Einstein in his presentations. This one:
'The same thinking that created our current problems will not be enough to get us out of them. In order to solve our current problems, the next
human will have to arrive."
Wilcox is using intuition to go where math and rationality cannot go, and that is IMHO what the next humans Einstein referred to above need to do.
Math has hit a limit. Math connot ever create a unified story of an infinite universe as it cannot deal with infinities. David's assembly of hard
core science that points clearly to a divine, living cosmos is incredible in scope and genius in creation.
As to the similarity to Edgar Cayce, I studied such likenessess for more that 10 years. In Quebec, Canada, there is a saying that everybody has a
Susy, that is someone who you are not related to but are very similar too in looks. I assembled over 200 such matches, and in every case there was
more than a little bit of similarity in all the phases, mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual. I don't actually believe in 1 for 1
reincarnation, but I have no doubt that he has a very similar energy and ability to Edgar Cayce.
Also, as a lifelong entrepreneur, I would ask everyone to give the guy a break on his 'personality' YOU try to do world class science and support
yourself the entire way without a single grant. People like David and William Henry and Graham Hancock are nearly superhuman in their ability to both
create awesome science AND support themselves with their work. It can be pretty stressfull to be completely on your own with only your own wits and
'personality' to make a living.
I have to disclose that my own work (Being prepared for publishing) backs up David's work 100%. Our cosmos has an inhenent consciousness that
creates life EVERYWHERE it can exist. It is inherint in the fabric on consciousness that creates all reality.
So, I will buy his book the day it hits the shelves. Ignore the parts you don't like and focus on the science alone if you want to know what the
cutting cutting cutting edge of science is saying.
One last thought. I attended David's Convergence seminar in Phoenix last year and was blown away by how much he pours out for his audience. He is a
believer and is earnestly trying to help nudge the world in a much more positive direcion.
Think about what he has done compared to an average, grant driven scientist who knows more and more about less and less. I mean no disrespect and
orthodox science has its own huge job to do and does it extremely well. But visionaries like David, despite occasionally being wrong. are our
collective lifebreath when it comes to growing as a species.
There is nothing special about wilcock.
he just had some experiences in his life which put him on a less material focus.
This is where it get's difficult for people.
Also, people that love conspiracy theories and such tend not to love word of self examination.
The self is a scary thing, you don't want to find out that you've wasted energy 'knowing' all these theories.
Wilcock talks about something else then exposing the powers.
He IS talking about disclosure and how tptb tie in with that because he believes there's a link between the supposed comming golden age and the
Now I must say, some psychedelic experiences and general thinkning throughout my life have brought me to A point where I can sympathise with
I can see what he is trying to do; he is trying to bridge the gap between 'science' and spiritual existance.(being a spiritual being more then a
temporary bag o'bones).
Or even better, subtly pointing you towards the idea that science has been limited on purpose......but the all knowing wisemen of ATS knew that
I have preordered the book a few weeks ago and am gonna give it a chance.
Alltough I think that the book may already be outdated by the time it is released.
I have been affected by the things Wilock showed me in a good way.
I have become a fuller person.. not that this wouldn't have happend without Wilcock but certainly it would have happened later.
One more I before its back to US again.
I am still on the fence when it comes to David's motivation.
Ofcourse, when you first find out about all these wonderfull scientific sstudies and facts you want to tell everyone.
he has been doing this for a while now and I wonder, this material leads you to a more quite, peaceful understanding of things if read correctly
So why is it that wilcock still seems to stress that much to get 'it' out.
I have learned that everything is oke and people can only find truth for themselves.
You can't tell them, you can show them where but that's it.
David must have figured out the reality of this 'zen-ness'.
Question remaines; why this active approach.
Perhaps he doesnt stand in this with a big sense of I as most people (naturally,and unnaturally strengthened ) tend to do.
I suggest checking out Project Camelot's first interview with David Wilock, this is in part about him in how he got where he is...and perhaps a bit
one more thing, as said above, there doesn't seem to be much love for (anything) Wilock on ATS, and a lot of talk about disinfo, a plausible
idea..seen the nature of the views wilcock shares.... let that wander 'round in that thick skull of yours !!!! ( love)
*link if i get it working*
Mind you; this is from 2007
edit on 12-5-2011 by TheFaceless because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-5-2011 by TheFaceless because: forgot sum
see that's the problem.
You guys obviously never really looked into him ( or any person I bet ) on a Human level.
He never said he is the reincarnation of Edgar.
The book he is involved in is not even HIS, somebody else wrote this seeing the similarity.
The realm wilcock speaks of is so far out of reach for most of you guys that you need not even apply...funny thing is that you're already there, you
think you dont....but that's what culture does for ya.
Don't feel sad, but also, don't attack something just because you are uncertain of something.
YES, I do think HE also likes money....gotta feed the monkey right?
Wilcock forms no threat, "he just talks dreamy jibber jabber no skull will believe"...right?
Gotta sak yourself, some of these public figures, how can it be that they still do what they do.
Aren't they supposed to be dead-ed.
DENY IGNORANCE JOIN THE HERD ON THE FORUMS NEVER LOOK BACK.
Forever alone...........love you guys
edit on 13-5-2011 by TheFaceless because: (no reason given)
that link ^.....don't click that link...it's really bad.....it's his music cd...it's 2 hours of music....and it can be yours for the low low price
of $99.99......i'm not kidding, go to the bottom of the page.
This particular thread has encouraged me to join your community, so welcome.
Without getting into to too much personal history that will bog down the response, I'd like to respond with some comments and observations about
DW's new book, the Source Field Investigations.
At first, DW's work seems pretty interesting. Some of it may even seem incredibly impressive. One thing that is remarkable is the sheer amount of
time he has spent on these works. However, upon real scrutiny his work falls apart in so many areas it is hard to take any of it that seriously.
He is extremely clever. The way he uses his phraseology and strings everything along and together is similar in skill to Alex Jones from the
perspective of creating favorable frames to what he is discussing. But, he has basically admitted, unknowingly in my opinion, that he is not doing
scientifically credible research. I believe he is on record ...
[paraphrase] You see, I kinda started with the answer, what I knew to be true. So, when you know the answer then looking for the pieces of the puzzle
and putting them all together is a little easier. So I've basically been working backwards from the answer to find all the supporting information and
putting it together. [end paraphrase]
That is essentially the definition of pseudoscience. Sorry, guys. That is just not how you can approach topics which ostensibly carry the gravity the
one's he's discussing do.
QUESTIONING IS NOT TOLERATED ON HIS WEB SITE
While I believe him, and others in the 'fringe' (which is a generous word for his work) have found gems, and could be on to some things, they are so
far off base on major pieces of the puzzle that the communities that surround these people MUST question their work and hold it to high standards.
I attempted to join the forums and start threads and leave comments calling some real things into question and really wanted to high-level scrutiny to
come down and refine the work.
I was moderated so heavily that I was essentially banned. The Mods pointed me to the Terms and Conditions that essentially say, [paraphrasing] Those
interacting with this site must do so under the pretense that DW has done so much work that his opinions are considered to be correct. We are trying
to keep things positive, so anything that claims his work is wrong is not permitted. [end paraphrase]
My faith and credit in DW ended right there.
His book will be read by the DW zealots and skeptics alike. There are so many books out there that have no credible standings that I'm not really
sure this will make any huge dent. What I'm hoping happens is that some serious Scientific players read and respond to the book.
DW will be forced to respond to Scientific evidence that runs contrary to his claims. This is something he's avoided for a long, long time and I
think it is time it happens. When cherry-picking information to support a preconceived theory it is easy to just leave out the info that runs
contrary. My hope is that him and the community take the criticism and use it to refine their workings.
What do I think will happen? He will claim there is a black operation embedded in the mainstream dedicated to discrediting his work. This will
preserve him in the eyes of his Zealots, and extend the life of his global for-profit conference tours.
I'm looking forward to interacting with this community a little more in the future!
I have the book.. It is interesting.. as it throws out his ideas of an intelligent source field.. He cites a lot of russian research on pyramids, and
says how pyramid technology could have remarkable healing potential ...
his book is truly the summary of all his work.. He also talks extensively about the precession of the equinoxes ,and how different prophecies point
towards time period around 2012 for the new " golden age " to arrive ..
AM just half way through .. And I don't care what kind of a person DW is .. but rather the facts or ideas he is putting forth .. I agree that he is
just compiling different ideas into one book in that book .. but all said and done, he still does a good job with them ..
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.