An open rebuttal to David Wilcock and his zero-tolerance policy

Greetings, ATS,

I'm sure a number of you are familiar with David Wilcock and his work. If you're not, some of this really does not apply to you.

This thread is to put on the record that I have called him out more than once, and in the chance that he never sees my hail, I'm reaching out to the ATS community to see if anyone has had similar experiences with this so-called "group."

Basic Drive: David Wilcock and his moderators do not tolerate any type of questioning or challenging of his work, or the work that he aggregates and speaks on.

I'm an engaging person. I like to become part of the process. I like to discuss, debate, and create a robust conversation with the goal of either eliminating the waste, or making the end result stronger. SO MUCH of this 'fringe material' desperately needs this type of intense engagement and less of the type who will just auto-believe what they are saying because they use words like "well documented" or "proven" a lot, or already have you believing that the information is "suppressed" and the only reason they have the information is because they are so much higher-level than you that insiders are spilling their beans to them.

I was actually told to "Go read the rules of our forum. You're in violation of them." by one of DW's mods. So I did. Here is the excerpt that essentially ended any and all faith I had in DW's intentions. I've been banned from his YouTube channel, my comments on his articles are moderated out, and the forum threads I've attempted on his site have been closed by the mods.

[emphasis added, and yes, the pun is intended]

2. Your presence in this group comprises a tacit acceptance of our core values and beliefs as set forth in Mr. Wilcock's work and the Law of One series from L/L Research Company. While skepticism and critical thinking are always useful in the pursuit of knowledge, we cannot have meaningful discussions if we must constantly defend our fundamentals against those who choose to disagree. If an individual cannot approach the material with an open mind and respectful demeanor, they will make others uncomfortable, and in turn may receive uncomfortable responses. Such skeptics will be unsubscribed from the group if their criticism hurts the community spirit of the group.

So, his latest video, "The Source Field Investigations," encouraged me to leave a comment. Of course, I'm blocked by the user. Ha. So, I wrote him a message in YouTube. Here it is ...

DW,

I am TimeSpiral, and I am another you.

I have been blocked from your YouTube channel, your forums, and any comment I leave on your articles are typically moderated out. I've called you on it in the past, and I'm calling you on it again.

Your world that you've created is without questioning. You say critical thinking is good, you promote that we should question the establishment, but when anyone questions you, *you shut them out, immediately*. It's classic.

Are you really that clueless as to how incredibly bad this makes you and your work look? Really?

You need vibrant opposition, and critical thinkers to hold your work to higher and higher standards. Blocking anyone who raises their hand and says, "I don't think you're right about this thing, and here is why," will permanently restrict you to the far edges of the fringe and pseudoscience, and maybe that is where you want to be ... I don't know at this point.

I've pulled this from the rules you post on your forum. How can you possibly stand behind such an asinine ruling for someone who is supposedly a leader and a researcher? *It's utterly ridiculous.*

"2. Your presence in this group comprises a tacit acceptance of our core values and beliefs as set forth in Mr. Wilcock's work and the Law of One series from L/L Research Company. While skepticism and critical thinking are always useful in the pursuit of knowledge, we cannot have meaningful discussions if we must constantly defend our fundamentals against those who choose to disagree. If an individual cannot approach the material with an open mind and respectful demeanor, they will make others uncomfortable, and in turn may receive uncomfortable responses. Such skeptics will be unsubscribed from the group if their criticism hurts the community spirit of the group."

I don't expect a response. Nor do I expect you even read this. Maybe I'll touch the mod who reads this ... who knows. If you're serious, you need to move through the shadows and actually come out into the light of day, instead of constructing walls around you and promoting a facade of openness.

We are all one? Love/light, light/love, and the path of teach/learn learn/teaching, yet if you're questioned that person is banned from your group?

Think about that, whoever it is that reads this.

(1) Has anyone else experienced anything similar when trying to interact with David Wilcock or his sites? I'd like to hear about it here.
(2) Feel free to come to his defense. I encourage it.
(3) I feel the fringe topics need passionate scrutiny, and from what I can tell, many of these so-called Gurus who take the grandstand refuse to actually support their claims to even the followers/supporters of the general drive of the work when they have questions or pose a challenge. They need the public testimony to be positive so they can sell more product. I hate to sound bitter, but that is certainly the scene they are painting.

Will I get a response from David Wilcock? No. Almost certainly not. Will I get a response from one of his mods? Maybe. Will they secretly, or openly, paint me with a broad brush, that I'm "confused" or "misguided?" Who the hell knows.

Thanks, ATS,
TimeSpiraling
I am another you.

I too have had a bad experience on his forum.

I posted something - can't remember what it was now - which they considered negative.

At the time I don't remember thinking that it was very negative, if at all.

I asked them how it was negative, and they flipped out.

D.W. is a con artist, and because he strikes a resemblance of Edgar C. people think he's soemething special.

He steals other people's work, and pawns it off as his own.

I find it difficult to give any credibility to someone who does not allow for criticism of their work.

reply to post by TimeSpiral


I am somewhat familiar with his lectures. I believe he is the one that claims to be the reincarnated Edgar Cayce...

So....you say you have called him out ....how so?

I take it you do not like him or is it his teachings?

All you're doing is trolling, whether you realize it or not. David Wilcock has the right to block any comments on his YouTube videos uploaded by him or on his website. You have the right to respond on a site that is not his, and he has the right to ignore you. You have the right to ignore the comment I'm making, and I have a right to ignore the comment you make to this comment.

It's as simple as that.

Originally posted by SonicInfinity
All you're doing is trolling, whether you realize it or not. David Wilcock has the right to block any comments on his YouTube videos uploaded by him or on his website. You have the right to respond on a site that is not his, and he has the right to ignore you. You have the right to ignore the comment I'm making, and I have a right to ignore the comment you make to this comment.

It's as simple as that.

I don't disagree with you, really.

Thanks for the feedback.

p.s. I'm actually serious though, so I don't think that qualifies as trolling. I'm a much better troll than this when I'm on fire, come on now.

David Wilcock is nothing more than a hoax himself. When he eventually comes to terms with being bullied during high school & then gets over the fact that he will die a horrid ugly virgin he may stop to think about how he wasted away his life dribbled and contained in his bubble of spherical intergalactic time warping madness, reciting lectures of times gone past, stealing thoughts and ideas from other individuals writings and the worst part, plagiarizing 1980 and 1990 films and passing them off as his own work.

Buddy, David, if you are reading this...Just because the braces are now off, doesn't mean we think any higher of you at all in any way!

Originally posted by MamaJ
reply to post by TimeSpiral

 

I am somewhat familiar with his lectures. I believe he is the one that claims to be the reincarnated Edgar Cayce...

So....you say you have called him out ....how so?

I take it you do not like him or is it his teachings?

I called him out, essentially asking why he has a zero-tolerance policy for questioning and challenging his work, and the work he aggregates. He made a passing mention of "censorship" in general in one of his articles after the fact (may have even been an update to the one I was censored on, idk). It could have been a response to my calling, but could have also been coincidental.

I have only ever received one response, and it was from his mods telling me I was in violation of the forum rules. Which is whatever. I'm just startled that his behind the scenes actions run in such stark contradiction to the ostensible drive of his work, therefore, I'm calling him on it again.

Does he have a right to censor, and heavily moderate, and do whatever it is he's doing? Of course he does. That is not the point.

reply to post by TimeSpiral


I stopped listening to him when I realized one of his works heavily detailed information that was 100% from the movie: Event Horizon, then i started to delve further into his bull$hit wormhole, and when i climbed the ladder back out to reality I concluded he is nothing more than an attention seeking w^*%re!

reply to post by TimeSpiral


I feel compelled to weigh in.

I like reading a lot of stuff on a lot of topics with no regard as to whether or not I "believe" in what is being discussed. I just like to have my mind stimulated and to then think for myself about ideas I may have never thought of before. Not unlike perhaps all of ATS, but I speak about me.

All I will say is, after being initially attracted to his material, I began to get a bad feeling about it. (To semi-quote an 80's movie.)

Now I stay away because I sense he and his content is toxic in some regard. As if there might be just enough good and true information to get you interested and then he starts slipping in the BS under your radar.

Just my experience, in brief, I am not expecting to sway anyone one way or another.

Oh goodness me!

I have a very dear friend, we've known each other for a few years and met through a shared UFO experience. He is my 'spiritual' friend, one that I find to be very experienced and knowledgeable, and I have come to enjoy our talks, which come to last at times for anywhere between 8 and 10 hours. No joke.

Anyways, he's your average sponge - he soaks up as much information as he can from as many sources as he can find, which makes for some very interesting conversations. One of the names, or sources, he's always, ALWAYS quoting is David Wilcock. I have personally never visited his site, though I've watched a few of his videos. My friend is always telling me to look him up, read about him, listen to what he has to say, HE KNOWS. So I felt like saying something, I find it interesting that he happens to be one of the sources my friend holds in very high regard. Though as I said, I don't think my friend really has any kind of filter with these things. He really is a fountain of information - but he gets it from all kinds of places.

.... Holy Moly I just looked at his site and you have to pay $77 to watch a video about accessing your higher self?? Gee Whiz.

reply to post by Cinquain


Friend:

Good to see you are always questioning!

There are those that will charge and there are those that will serve.

Regards and Nameste,

-Chung

Very much agree. Much like you I wanted to open the way for quite a bit of conversation and research - and when I did this and posted what I had, like you got told to read the Rules and Regs - and even told "You have been on here for sometime you should know what the rules are now".
From there I had a gutfull and no longer visited his forum.
Unlike other forums - you do NOT have the right to question him at all! He is doing what he tells others not to do - he is not allowing for your free thinking and right to reply and question.
He does need to get off his high horse and allow other to question his research - this will - as the OP stated, allow for a bit more credibility in what he is presenting (Maybe)

I do hope he responds as I would like to see what his excuse is for hiding

reply to post by misfitofscience


Interesting - You knew him? Sorry if you have said you did in prev posts...

Originally posted by misfitofscience
David Wilcock is nothing more than a hoax himself. When he eventually comes to terms with being bullied during high school & then gets over the fact that he will die a horrid ugly virgin he may stop to think about how he wasted away his life dribbled and contained in his bubble of spherical intergalactic time warping madness, reciting lectures of times gone past, stealing thoughts and ideas from other individuals writings and the worst part, plagiarizing 1980 and 1990 films and passing them off as his own work.

Buddy, David, if you are reading this...Just because the braces are now off, doesn't mean we think any higher of you at all in any way!

edit on 10-8-2011 by misfitofscience because: (no reason given)

I laughed out loud.

reply to post by Cinquain


Anf for like $150 he gives you some kind of private reading

Originally posted by The_Seeker
Very much agree. Much like you I wanted to open the way for quite a bit of conversation and research - and when I did this and posted what I had, like you got told to read the Rules and Regs - and even told "You have been on here for sometime you should know what the rules are now".
From there I had a gutfull and no longer visited his forum.
Unlike other forums - you do NOT have the right to question him at all! He is doing what he tells others not to do - he is not allowing for your free thinking and right to reply and question.

He does need to get off his high horse and allow other to question his research - this will - as the OP stated, allow for a bit more credibility in what he is presenting (Maybe)

I do hope he responds as I would like to see what his excuse is for hiding

edit on 11-8-2011 by The_Seeker because: Added last comment

This is precisely what I was expecting to find with this OP. Other people will naturally find there way here and say, oh, David Wilcock, yeah ... I was ostracized from his "community" because I questioned his material and the material he aggregates.

So far no supporters have come to his aid. They will, and hopefully they engage.

What will most likely happen is the search engines will index this page, and it will become relevant to those who start to get a weird feeling about David Wilcock, start to question, and search to see if other people have had the same experiences, they will land here, and they will see him for the charlatan he has become (or always was, who knows).

This is not intended to be a flame thread. I just want to make that clear.

If you are going to claim your work as scientific, which he does at every chance he gets, then you are required to recognize scrutiny. He simply blocks it out through censorship and moderation. Denying even the most basic forms of peer review - conversation - then you actually cannot be doing science. Which of course, he isn't doing. He is aggregating data from other people and forcing it into his own story.

It has become painfully obvious why he does not allow intellectual conversation and debate about his work - because he knows it crumbles under rigorous scrutiny. But that leads me to a point that I've been trying to make for some time:

People like David Wilcock, could have possibly stumbled upon some gems of real merit. Unfortunately they are aggregating these gems from other people and coercing them into their preconceived notion of the "answer," packaging it, branding it, and selling it. But, if the astute, and the fastidious examine the gems, and debate, and scrutinize, then maybe they can come to light and bear fruit.

But people like David Wilcock will almost certainly fall to the side once these gems truly are elucidated, because they have so profusely polluted the topics.

But, The_Seeker, he will not respond to this calling. I can guarantee that. Can you imagine? ATS would tear him to shreds ...

You have to think about this: Most of DW initial work was based on the Law of One series, which is channeled info. Starting a few years ago there is word out that all channeled texts were predesigned scrips for that part of humanity that ventured that far in the search for truth. Imagine if this is really the case (and I believe it is). It would take a lot of guts to admit that you might have been mislead and that the work you have been putting out for years may be just another, albeit involuntary, disinfo. I have questioned David in several emails about his opinion on the matter, but I've never got any response from him or his staff.
In the face of this possibility one has only two options: to admit they were wrong and move on or to shut down all ventures of scrutiny and cling on to what they've come to believe is the truth.

Those who followed DW work through the years might have noticed that lately he has steered the boat away from The Law of One in a sense that he's not quoting it as much as he used to, but as the OP has point out you are still required to abide by it in order to be tolerated among his followers. It's kind of a dictatorship if you ask me, which has nothing to do with a public forum.

Sad enough DW is not the only one holding tight to old paradigms. There are many like him and I suspect that this is the main reason for why they don't like their work being questioned. They've come to identify themselves with it. You really have to be able to let go of old ideas and embrace the new on a daily basis. It's easier for us, forums readers, to do that because we are more open to new ideas than the man that has put all his life's work in the service of just one. It may be harder to do than it looks so lets not throw stones.

reply to post by TimeSpiral


It's his site, so if he wants to ban the word "Chicken," he has every right to. End.

Originally posted by tangonine
reply to post by TimeSpiral

 

It's his site, so if he wants to ban the word "Chicken," he has every right to. End.

Thanks for you opinion. I think you're missing the point, but you have every right to miss the point

Originally posted by Fraam
You have to think about this: Most of DW initial work was based on the Law of One series, which is channeled info. Starting a few years ago there is word out that all channeled texts were predesigned scrips for that part of humanity that ventured that far in the search for truth. Imagine if this is really the case (and I believe it is). It would take a lot of guts to admit that you might have been mislead and that the work you have been putting out for years may be just another, albeit involuntary, disinfo. I have questioned David in several emails about his opinion on the matter, but I've never got any response from him or his staff.
In the face of this possibility one has only two options: to admit they were wrong and move on or to shut down all ventures of scrutiny and cling on to what they've come to believe is the truth.

Those who followed DW work through the years might have noticed that lately he has steered the boat away from The Law of One in a sense that he's not quoting it as much as he used to, but as the OP has point out you are still required to abide by it in order to be tolerated among his followers. It's kind of a dictatorship if you ask me, which has nothing to do with a public forum.

Sad enough DW is not the only one holding tight to old paradigms. There are many like him and I suspect that this is the main reason for why they don't like their work being questioned. They've come to identify themselves with it. You really have to be able to let go of old ideas and embrace the new on a daily basis. It's easier for us, forums readers, to do that because we are more open to new ideas than the man that has put all his life's work in the service of just one. It may be harder to do than it looks so lets not throw stones.

I appreciate your thoughtful response.

You and I, and many others who will find this thread, have followed (or at least kept an eye on him) him for years. Many turn a blind eye and say, "eh, who cares," but others, like myself, have felt compelled to act on some level.

I understand that most of his early work was inspired by the Law of One. I think the LoO is a fine read and can inspire all sorts of great, personal, experiences. I don't take exception to having a relationship with the LoO, or any spiritual work for that matter, and applying universal concepts to your own life.

I do take exception with actively working towards creating a following with the methods he has employed. They have become more and more nefarious over the years. He uses clever language and syntax, like they all do, to slip things through the crack and paint pictures that can easily be described as purposefully deceptive.

I think when you position yourself like that, claiming to be revealing hidden sciences that will change the world, and are charging TOP DOLLAR to hear and see all the "good stuff" you absolutely must be called out and held to a higher standard.

That is what I tried to do.

And when you actively censor any type of questioning or challenging you are just revealing yourself to the world as a charlatan. I don't think he truly believes half the stuff he sells, but he cannot back-peddle now, he is too deep and his new book is about to come out.

It's sad ... Anyone doing real science, and real research, would be overwhelmed with joy at such a robust community willing to contribute and debate in effort to create and uncover robust new discoveries and applications.

He would rather have a group of followers praising his work and spewing money at him.

Originally posted by TimeSpiral

Originally posted by tangonine
reply to post by TimeSpiral

 

It's his site, so if he wants to ban the word "Chicken," he has every right to. End.

Thanks for you opinion. I think you're missing the point, but you have every right to miss the point

Thank me for my facts as much as you want. It's his site. Period. You getting all vagina hurt over something doesn't really matter. He paid for the URL, he commissioned someone to write the code that lets you post here.

Flail about all you like. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter. It's like walking onto my lawn and doing an interpretive dance and me physically evicting you into the street.

Get. Off. My. Lawn.

There's your point.