The Source Field Investigations by David Wilcock

reply to post by Wolf Eyes

For example, in his new book he mentions that under hypnosis, people have the ability to look through object. A hypnotists puts a subject under.. tells them they can’t see a specific object. Then, under hypnosis, the subject is able to actual see through the object as if it wasn’t there. They are able to read things that are behind the object as if the object wasn’t there. He references everything in his book. Is that BS? I don’t know for sure… but it’s sure interesting.

If that were possible then there would be an instant winner of the million dollar prize. This is usually listed as clairvoyance. Clairvoyance has never been demonstrated to work in controlled experimental conditions.

I do not respect Wilcock. He makes money by misrepresenting. He doesn't do research. He makes things up as he goes along. Look at what he did with Montagnier's paper. He got it all mixed up and wrong. He even goofed with Hoyle and assigns DNA to Hoyle.

Here is another interview with Wilcock.
www.essexspiritguide.co.uk...

When you’re dealing with a gravity-shielding technology, one of the basic principles of that technology is that… Our gravity is actually a push-pull between two opposing forces — and this is one of the great secrets that most people are not aware of.

Gravity is the result of energy flowing into the Earth to create the Earth. It’s actually a fluid-like energy that’s all around us in the universe which creates physical matter by its vortex flow. And so, the larger an object is, the more energy is going to flow into it. But also, a great deal of the energy that flows into it as clean and fresh energy, then exhales simultaneously as the end result, the spoiled energy, so to speak, where it has to be reabsorbed.

So there’s a combination of gravity, which is basically the energy that is pushing down into the Earth from outer space, and levity, which is the energy coming back up out of the Earth to be reabsorbed. There’s a tug-of-war between those two forces, and the gravity force only slightly wins out over the levity force.

You can actually alter the properties of physical matter so as to either make it more opaque to the gravity force, or to make it more shielded to the levity force. What happens in so doing is that you still get the forces. They’re not always totally even, and so you get a little bit of a jittering movement or a wobbling movement when you have anti-gravity.

Where does he get any of this stupidity? It's a word salad that has rotted.

I have his book - 5 copies. I've seen a number of his videos and even him in person.

He is definitely an outside the box thinker, and that makes a lot of people uncomfortable. If that's you, tough - that's your problem.

His research and conclusions seem pretty solid to me. He does cite U.S. PHD researchers (frequently leading and Noble level) as much as he can. BUt a lot of the research delves into areas classified by te Government. So he does frequently use Russian researchers as references, mostly because they are publishing their previously classified stuff.

And he does a pretty good job of qualifying his sources. He did NOT use some DNA research that was cited in "What the Bleep do we know" because he thought, rightfully so, that the science was questionable.

And he frequently backs up his research by using insider and to some extent channeled material.

And a highly respected medical doctor was at one of Davids conferences and personally vouched that he had been unwittingly using some of Davids medical conclusions and they WORKED!

BUt the result to me is that he comes closer to discovering the mysteries of the universe (actually universes) and the way such forces interact on a scientific basis than anyone else to date.

I think his book will become one of the most important books in the world, if not overtaken by 2012 events. I STRONGLY recommend his book be read thoroughly by everyone.

And if you can debunk ANY of the material in his book, go for it! He says that too. Thai's how sure he is of his research.

But I do encourage you to keep as open mind. Much of what he says unfortunately cannot be proven, because scientific instruments are not capable of measuring spiritual and emotional processes, which are at the core of the 'Source Field".

If you don't want to read his book - here is the two hour video summary - for free - so you can't accuse him for just caching in: divinecosmos.com...

reply to post by fah0436

He is definitely an outside the box thinker, and that makes a lot of people uncomfortable.

Just because he says things that make no sense does not make him an out of the box thinker.

His research and conclusions seem pretty solid to me.

His research is pathetic and his conclusions are not connected to his bad data.

He does cite U.S. PHD researchers

More often than not he does not cite their work correctly.

So he does frequently use Russian researchers as references, mostly because they are publishing their previously classified stuff.

The reason he cites them is because they often publish off the wall material such as the nonsense he himself publishes.

And he frequently backs up his research by using insider and to some extent channeled material.

And there is the problem. It comes from ridiculous claims. Thanks for showing us what he is a nearly untrustable source.

I have pointed out many of his blunders in the few posts I made. Wilcock is at best a bad researcher.

And if you can debunk ANY of the material in his book, go for it! He says that too. Thai's how sure he is of his research.

That's the same vapid boast made by people like Harold Camping and Jim "purple punch" Jones and other kooks. I have already shown his massive failures in a my posts.

But I do encourage you to keep as open mind. Much of what he says unfortunately cannot be proven, because scientific instruments are not capable of measuring spiritual and emotional processes, which are at the core of the 'Source Field".

For Wilcock you have to keep a mind free of testing his nonsense ideas. Can it be proven? The question is can it be shown to be false?

His book is number 18 on the New York Times bestseller list.

Obviously a LOT of people think was he has to say as being very important.

If you fail to read the book or at least watch the video, the lost is yours.

Maybe you'll get to watch the Hollywood level movie that is gettingclose to production.

reply to post by fah0436


There are many people that think that think that Rush Limbaugh had something important to say when several of his books were #1 on the best sellers list.

Did you fail to read Rush's books that were #1. The loss is yours.

I admit to having written a spoof of 2012 threads in which I picked the Girl Scouts, an admirable organization, as some sort of scoundrel group. The point of the thread was to show ridiculous claims concerning 2012 actually are.

Did I post anything false in that thread? No. The Girl Scouts organization is turning 100 in 2012. I pointed out that many Girl Scouts have gone on to become important people in our society. I suggested that is how the Girl Scouts plan to take over the world.

None of my claims were as outrageous as those made by Wilcock who has a propensity for getting even the basics wrong.

reply to post by fah0436


I think you're right... I think stereologist might be "working" here.... he sure does spend a lot of time on ATS for someone who doesn't believe in.. well.. anything, from what I can tell by his posts.

Tell us stereologist, if you don't believe David's work... 2012...aliens... advanced ancient cultures... why do you spent so much time on ATS? I'm not a Christan, so I don't join Christian forums to go on there try to argue with them about their beleifs. Do you get your jolly's off trying to debunk guys like David? Or are you getting paid per post?

You still haven't debunked anything in David's new book - The Source Field Investigations. You keep pulling these radio transcripts out of your *** .... DEBUNK THE NEW BOOK. That's what this post is about. Quit going off topic. Debunk what he put down on paper in SFI.... not what he said during some radio interview.

reply to post by Wolf Eyes


So you think he changed his tune? This guy has been a nut who can't get hardly a thing right for years and now you think there is a chance with this book? That's just laughable. It's another book for the gullible.

Originally posted by fah0436
I have his book - 5 copies.

BAHAHAHAHA !!

stop it

your killing me, what do you need 5 for? Do they make good paperweights? How 'bout T.P. ?

Those poor dead trees.

Mayeb fah0436 is doing his part in sequestering carbon by buying books written by kooks and burying them in a clay bed to prevent the carbon from reentering the atmosphere?

I've just ordered the book though I'm already listening to it audio.

And its very very good. Also listing many scientific experiments that I've already heard of, that were conducted very well, but the typical things stereologist says, or that there is no need for this even for the scientists who admit the protocols were basically good and sound. In other words, here are the suppression tactics:

1. criticize the messenger, or author. Which is ludicrous. David is a good guy. But it wouldn't matter if he was. If Jack the Ripper had collected and released details on the various scientists work, the technique of trying to refute the work of these very worthy researchers due to the messenger, trying to cast slurs by association is very dark handed and manipulative. And it also reveals agenda.

For anyone trying to suppress humanity, you are going to be answering to everyone who you potentially harm.

However, they will wake up, and since your efforts won't succeed in the end, hopefully their concern for you will throw down the hand needed to pull you out of the pit you've put yourself in through doing this.

2. Trying to say they're faulty scientific experiments, when they've been demonstrated and repeated, over and over again.

3. By just using words without any basis, just opinion and yet trying to enforce them, over facts. etc. "Its ludicrous". "Its stupid". "he's just a nut". This is "laughable". Its like a bully trying to shut information down.

This is incredible work on David's part, compiling this.

So much coincides with my own experiences and could even add a bit to what he's written, as I'm sure many who open their eyes could.

For example, had an experience with trees, and almost like their fractal channel or realm that they share with us, its nestled up against ours, so to speak. It was like I'd done one of those shaman journeys, but it was spontaneous and happened naturally, and how while they're interconnected with the field we're all connected into, they're still the custodians of their own realm, ie. for example, this was a journey into the fractal realms of trees/forrests, and every insect, bird, snake, creature, is like their children, children of this realm. Whereas being taken into it, its as if the wood on the outside, is their own personal houses and mansions of such beauty and architecture, and they are intellects, akin to us, ie, when I felt lonely in this fractal realm, he appeared as a blond et, or an elf maybe, and then spoke of all of the nature they caretook as the children. And just like some of the videos I'd seen of people who took these shaman journeys, it sped up faster and faster.

Some of the research into hypnosis, was extremely interesting. It revealed that rather than thinking of hypnosis as capable of programming or blocking the mind, it actually could free the mind, and that the reality we perceived around us was a kind of hypnosis or program.

For example, a case was given of a man, standing in front of them, his daughter or a woman, and the researcher behind or beside her. He had given the suggestion that the man who was hypnotized would not see his daughter, for so long. And in that time, he had his hand behind her back with this pocket watch.

Now, there is no way he could have seen the watch, through her body. Even if there was a suggestion that blocked the area of the brain from registering her form, and it worked, he could not have seen, and described in detail the watch.

But he did. He saw through her.

Then the knowledge on the pineal was really important, and of course the controllers all having understanding of the workings, they all possessed the old knowledge, the era's before Atlantis, Lemuria, and the information of Sophia/Wisdom, where the serpent was the kundalini and connected the pineal. Then this takeover by negatives who toppled wisdom, buried the knowledge, stole it for themselves, rewrote history, ie. Sumar myths of life beginning then, Eve became separate from the Tree of knowledge, and Quetzcoatl became a fierce dragon being, akin to Satan. This part on the pineal, I'm adding more that I know from other research of course, that just ties into this.

We have this perpetual mistruth on the times coming, with their use of HAARP and Nukes to amp up cme's and allignments, so that we would perceive this enormous threat.

Well if anything bad does happen its because this is their intent and also they are trying to pull this in with our consciousness hijacked.

Instead, there is a lot of information, pertaining to our views our consciousness and abilities to affect/change the reality around us. And that I guess there are two ways of looking at things. The fierce serpent or the cosmic spiral of energy, and insight, awareness.

And for their own knowledge, they used this information and manipulation of timelines and probabilities to rule and enslave humanity.

Its criminal beyond belief.

My son is listening to this with me, as I wish it to open his mind more fully.

David has done the world an enormous favor, this is a great work of his. Thank you!

reply to post by Unity_99

Also listing many scientific experiments that I've already heard of, that were conducted very well, but the typical things stereologist says, or that there is no need for this even for the scientists who admit the protocols were basically good and sound.

The issue is not whether the original scientific work is sound. The issue is whether or not Wilcock misrepresents the experiments. He does.

1. criticize the messenger, or author. Which is ludicrous.

It is not ludicrous to point out that Wilcock misrepresents science. He is not a good guy. He is a fraud.

2. Trying to say they're faulty scientific experiments

Again, the issue is with Wilcock misrepresenting.

3. By just using words without any basis, just opinion and yet trying to enforce them, over facts. etc. "Its ludicrous". "Its stupid". "he's just a nut". This is "laughable". Its like a bully trying to shut information down.

I've pointed out in this and other threads that Wilcock is misrepresenting science.

The guy isn't even original. He parrots what other charlatans state.

this was a journey into the fractal realms of trees/forrests

Trees and forests are not fractal in nature.

reply to post by Unity_99

But he did. He saw through her.

Great, another anecdote passed off as more than a guess. Wonderful.

the era's before Atlantis, Lemuria

Lemuria never existed and there is no proof that Atlantis ever existed. Where did this come from? It came from a misrepresentation of the pineal gland.

David has done the world an enormous favor, this is a great work of his. Thank you!

The only good Wilcock has ever done is taking money from the gullible.

Go David, go!

reply to post by stereologist


You don't offer much do you, just your put downs. I call that agenda. Compared to the scientists named in the book,and the real work that has been done in university studies for years, your opinion is not equal. I know all the classic ways that this is done in. Slander the messenger and use put downs, frequently to try and stamp out the truth.

Well stamping isn't going to make it go away.

And as for this book, I'm going to tell you right now, I'm not going to allow you to dominate the thread with opinions. By the way, sharing experiences, thats part of life, and they're real. Real people and their experiences, are real events, and with witnesses are testimony that can be used in court. This book is one of the best I've read and gets to the heart of matters.

Its the way they've controlled us for years. But not any more!

Now, I would suggest you read the book. That might make you more selective in how you choose to "attack", ie. attacking the messenger, and not even addressing the scientific studies.

Its always better to do the research first.

This is some of the information in the book, and its a good look at things. But even more depth in the names that are complete give aways to their formation of religions, and control of the hidden knowledge, basically the old knowledge, which they have used to suppress humanity and gain wealth and power, that they don't deserve, and will not keep. We're going to equalize this world and progress. Thats the future of earth.


David Wilcock - Source Field Investigations: The Pineal Gland

reply to post by stereologist


Between you believing Mu didn't exist, and the legends of the Okanagan Natives, I'd run with theirs. That is not the only reason either.

reply to post by Unity_99

You don't offer much do you, just your put downs. I call that agenda. Compared to the scientists named in the book,and the real work that has been done in university studies for years, your opinion is not equal.

You repeat the same falsehood that I disagree with the referenced works. I simply disagree with Wilcock's hoaxes which are not the same as the work he misrepresents. No matter how often you try and misrepresent me you are wrong.

Your agenda is to misrepresent. That is a sad agenda.

Its the way they've controlled us for years. But not any more!

That's nothing more than opinion and it seems completely unrelated to anything you posted.

Now, I would suggest you read the book.

I would suggest you read the original studies.

Its always better to do the research first.

Definitely, do some research and see what a charlatan Wilcock is.

reply to post by Unity_99

Between you believing Mu didn't exist, and the legends of the Okanagan Natives, I'd run with theirs. That is not the only reason either.

There you misrepresenting me again or maybe you don't understand the difference between Mu and Lemuria. They are different. Mu is a hypothetical lost continent no where near where Lemuria was proposed.

Mu never existed. It was proposed based on a bad translation. It was disputed in the 19th century and it is clear now that the oceans have been mapped that there are no "lost continents."

Please look up these ideas and get them straight before claiming I stated something I clearly did not state.