The 2012 Enigma and David Wilcock

Thanks for directing my consciousness that way. I don't know what percentage of that information is true, but I really enjoyed hearing about it, maybe because of his energy or something.

"Spinning in circles / Walking a straight line." - Trey Anastasio

"Money-a symbol for the efficient distribution of human energy."
I sincerely hope you're being sarcastic...

Money- a symbol of the web which has enslaved humanity's underclass in order to preserve the ruling authority of an elite few.

Yeah so, I'm a big fan of much of what Wilcock discusses. As for the guy himself, I'm not quite so sure. He seems to come off as somewhat egotistical which doesn't bother me so much. What does irk me (and others) to no end is the fact that he seems so aware of the inner workings of the Illuminati and their agenda but yet inexplicably seems to believe that Barack Obama is somehow not part of this agenda. He even thinks that he's a good guy! WHAT??!!
But whatever, I still agree with much of what he talks about. I do happen to find *some of* his followers to be rather annoying. In fact I find anyone annoying who worships the messanger rather than the message. Just for the record, David Wilcock is not Christ! And as far as him being the reincarnation of Edgar Cayce, am I the only one who couldn't give a rats ass whether it's true or not? There's just something about Wilcock that doesn't sit right with me whether or not I agree with what he's saying (and usually I do).

So i just watched the entire 2012 enigma movie, and it left me feeling like there were a few holes in Wilcock's arguments that he neglected to explain fully. or maybe i just failed to understand the full complexity of what he was saying, and somebody else could help clear it up...

the most significant issue that didnt sit well with me is that if we can use machines to look into the future, then hasn't that future already been cemented in place, unalterable and inevitable? If Sadaam Hussein had the ability to do this, wouldn't he have seen his own ultimate demise, thus preparing him to take measures to prevent it?
I just dont understand how we could see into the future and not alter it dramatically by doing so, unless it was already foreseen that we would be looking, in which case there is no free will whatsoever??
the whole time travel thing just really seems oversimplified here-

“No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” -Albert Einstein

I watched the first movie and am partway through the second. Here are my disputes, but I can't remember which movie they are in reference to:

First, Shiva is (classically, at least) male, not female.

Second, I have an issue with the Egyptian pyramid thing being a timeline for 2012 because the measurement they're using to calculate it is an inch. Inches didn't exist back in Egyptian time. It's also a nice story to weave around the whole pyramid that it's all a prediction for ascension or whatever, but I just don't know if that's really what Egyptians intended.

Finally, the sunken ruins off of Cuba may not be Atlantis. They may very well be Atlantean, but they could be from another 10,000 year old civilization. I read something about ruins off of Japan as well.

Anyway, it's a fine line between being open minded and blindly believing. The best way to decipher it I think is to develop your intuition. It's so tricky because the entire society can believe that something is true when it is in fact a huge lie, but the under dog trying to save humanity with his information can be false as well!

"Spinning in circles / Walking a straight line." - Trey Anastasio

In regards to seeing the future with technology it can only every give the most probable outcome according to the time-line of the present. The Egyptians did actually use a measurement that is very close to the inch of today.

I've only listened to approximately 7 hours of DW on the Camelot portal (Which includes interviews of DW and numerous other amazing personalities. More for me to hear today.)-- Thumbs up, i say!

Perhaps DW integrates over-abundant channels of knowledge. This might require too much additional, external research, too demanding for some hurried moment of judgement. Frankly, i love integrated streams of knowledge and wisdom-- It necessarily has to weave a library of information and feelings, in a personal mind, before cross-contextualization can proceed. Such gradients took years for me to climb. I can personally attest he has honored countless segments of things documented elsewhere.

As to Cuba, i'd check out Meso American archeology, (or the infancy thereof).

Thanks for this blog.