Let's Talk about David Wilcock's 2012 Claims

reply to post by jaws1975


I'm simply asking for others to do what I have already done. My research regarding 2012 is posted on here complete with parentheticals and a works cited list. There are even links to this at the bottom of everyone of my posts. Why do 2012 supporters seem so hesitant to provide their own research and sources? I can't tell you how many times I have been told to find the information myself. That's not how this works. If you present a theory or make claims it is your responsibility to back it up with sources. What you're supporting is like having an article published in an academic journal that has the Introduction say "Do your own lit review." That's not how progress is made. If you actually want to enlighten others to what you believe is going to happen ou actually have to put effort in trying to enlighten other people. That doesn't seem like such a hard concept to grasp.

reply to post by MamaJ

You know for someone who strives to not be arrogant, you fail pretty bad at it.

Originally posted by jaws1975
reply to post by Lighterside

 

You don't want credible sources, you just want to be a douche!

What a tactful way to defend you ideas.

reply to post by jaws1975


I have no problem being proven wrong. In fact I have a number of threads on here that are specifically asking people to prove me wrong. I do however have standards. Just because a person "feels" something is going to happen doesn't mean anything. People have been having these "feelings" all throughout history and we're still here. If you're going to convince me that 2012 is special I require credible sources who in turn provide their own sources. I like to see where an idea originated, what material there is to support that idea, how that idea has evolved, and whether there is evidence to support these changes. That's how one properly presents and defends a theory.

Originally posted by Lighterside
reply to post by MamaJ

 

You know for someone who strives to not be arrogant, you fail pretty bad at it.

Originally posted by jaws1975
reply to post by Lighterside

 

You don't want credible sources, you just want to be a douche!

What a tactful way to defend you ideas.

WHY did you site me as saying that? Assuming again are we?

Look..like David if you want...don't like him. Its all good to me.

Just think...you could be watching a video right now.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by jaws1975

 

I have no problem being proven wrong. In fact I have a number of threads on here that are specifically asking people to prove me wrong. I do however have standards. Just because a person "feels" something is going to happen doesn't mean anything. People have been having these "feelings" all throughout history and we're still here. If you're going to convince me that 2012 is special I require credible sources who in turn provide their own sources. I like to see where an idea originated, what material there is to support that idea, how that idea has evolved, and whether there is evidence to support these changes. That's how one properly presents and defends a theory.

Keeping with the OP I will be honest and say it has nothing to do with David. Its not about David. Its about a lot of things combined. More so though it has to do with the cycle we are in. It can't be predicted. How can I give a prediction when I don't have one.

I will create a thread soon. Show all of ATS what I have and see what the consensus is.

Originally posted by Lighterside
reply to post by MamaJ

 

You know for someone who strives to not be arrogant, you fail pretty bad at it.

Originally posted by jaws1975
reply to post by Lighterside

 

You don't want credible sources, you just want to be a douche!

What a tactful way to defend you ideas.

Sorry, your bringing out the worst in me! Mama was willing to help you out and give one of her video's that she feels is very compelling and you just act like a jerk. Why would she want to help someone out acting in that way?

of all the project camelot interviews i believe david wilcox's the least .
especially the whole edgar cayce claim.

Originally posted by MamaJ

WHY did you site me as saying that? Assuming again are we?

You're kidding me right?

Originally posted by MamaJ
While I would love to spill the beans on all of my research I too have spent countless hours doing your arrogance makes me want to run from you. Why? Because in my 40 years an arrogant man is someone who is the opposite of who I am and who I strive to be.

Not assuming, just knowing how to read.

Polite Reminder

Hi People,


Just a reminder of the Terms and Conditions of this site, that you all agreed to when joining.

One of the major *rules* here is to keep things civil.

By all means we can debate things passionately...but please lets not get personal and poisonous about it.


Thanks people.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


If your looking for that information there is a really easy way to find it, it's called the search function! It's very clear that you looking for a crack, so that you can put another notch in your belt. Nobody on this thread is making 2012 predictions, so I don't know what all the fuss is about.

reply to post by jaws1975

No, Mama was trying to feed me some esoteric new age hyperbole of a video, and YES that is an assumption, based on an educated guess, but one can only assume with no pre-text to the content of the video other than "I bet you think the sun has always been in the same place".

If calling the claims she makes without source nonsense makes me a Jerk, then so be it. If asking for cited material on what I call nonsense makes me a Jerk then so be it. If pointing out the hypocrisy of her arrogance makes me a jerk then so be it.

Look, the OP made this a clear discussion about our thoughts on ATS. You new age types wanna defend him that's fine, but back it up. I think he's 100% wrong all the time, ya'll declare that aint so, so please by all means... back it up!

or.... just sit behind a wall of defense with a "you aren't worthy of knowing" attitude and sling some names I guess. But that's not really constructive towards the conversation.

reply to post by Lighterside


Please tell me who here is defending David Wilcock? Why would anyone want to share info with someone who has no interest other than finding an angle to bash it? You have made your position clear, so let's all move on shall we?

reply to post by jaws1975


The topic is "Let's Talk About David Wilcock's 2012 Claims." I responded why I thought Wilcock's claims are wrong based on my research. Mama posted that she thought he was 50% right based on her research. Therefore, she must have some beliefs regarding what will happen in 2012. However, I fail to see how I can search for information regarding her theory when she hasn't even said what it is. My research has led me to conclude that nothing will happen in 2012. If someone has come to a different conclusion then they must post their research. It's not my job to prove someone else's theories.

I also don't see what the big deal is with posting sources. You make it sound like a bad thing if I prove them wrong. I thought this site was about finding the truth. How can one find the truth if they are unwilling to present their beliefs thoroughly and have those beliefs challenged?

reply to post by Lighterside


Not that I am in agreement with anything in the OP or the premise it is spewing...or anything else Wilcock has to say for that matter.

However...you did ask for one example of global change in the last year...

The Earthquake in Japan...

The earth sped up...effectively shortening a day by a few milliseconds, moved Japan's shoreline and the Earth's axis shifted slightly...

blogs.physicstoday.org...

well...you did ask...

We're not going to "ascend", "vibrate", or go to "heaven"...
It's a fancy way of saying - The majority of the people on
the planet are going to die. But then again, I don't believe
in this nonsense anyway. Where's the proof?
Actual PROOF.

reply to post by bottleslingguy

btw his Timewave-Zero idea came about before the Mayans were chic

All McKenna did was shift his TWZ to coincide with the long count calendar. For unknown reasons he shifted his TWZ and latched onto something probably because he thought it made his idea more fun. He also labeled TWZ a fractal when it is not.

reply to post by MamaJ

No...you have assumed wrong. Ha! Who would have thought YOU are wrong?

Your continued vagueness just shows you to be wrong.

You managed to say nothing is many words. I and others see through your charade.

reply to post by Xcalibur254

Well said Xcalibur, well said.



reply to post by jaws1975

Originally posted by jaws1975
reply to post by Lighterside

 

Please tell me who here is defending David Wilcock? Why would anyone want to share info with someone who has no interest other than finding an angle to bash it? You have made your position clear, so let's all move on shall we?

I think there are two side forming two opinions. Those of us who think he's an absolute charlatan with ill intentions, and those who think he's at least somewhat right with good intentions.

Xcalibur already pointed out MamaJ is defening his ideals. And here is your quote from the first page.

Originally posted by jaws1975
Anyway's I don't think Wilcock is 100% right on everything, but I think he is on the right track and at least has a positive attitude to how he approaches this subject. I guess we will see shortly how this grand drama is going to play out! Peace!

Don't think I have the willingness to list others, you're more than welcome to drudge through the last 10 pages to find the rest.

As for finding an angle to bash your sources, that's the second time you've made such an assumption. Maybe if you say it a few more times it will be true!

Yes I have made my position clear, Wilcock is a charlatan. You have made yours, and you are more than welcome to move along [fingers crossed] but don't assume you have any right to tell me when I should stop denying ignorance.

Originally posted by Vandettas
We're not going to "ascend", "vibrate", or go to "heaven"...
It's a fancy way of saying - The majority of the people on
the planet are going to die. But then again, I don't believe
in this nonsense anyway. Where's the proof?
Actual PROOF.

The proof is a personal one, and the only way you can prove it to yourself, is through yourself.

I am not sure about ascension dates and what Wilcock tout's, but I can assure you from my own perspective I have experienced what I truly am, or separation from my physical body/shell. We are more than our bodies, hence my saying here on ATS.

The first time it happened to me it left me scared and confused, but I have lost the fear since then.

I can only give you my account of the first time, the rest is up to you. There is not a special book, or class we can take, but maybe it should be offered in school.

I was a hardcore skeptic, in regards to the great beyond, the metaphysical plane and other existence than the physical body, but one day or night changed that all.

Here is my personal account on ATS, again no one can prove anything to you, only yourself. Peace out.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Damrod


, "E" for effort! Actually I asked not "in the last year" rather "this year" i.e. 2012

But I would have to say that was probably the last event that had global impact to my recollection. There are certainly not any "global massive changes" going on every day.

But I hear there is a video out there that may prove otherwise