David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Hi David,
i am writing this letter because i am a fan of you and i want to contribute to your selfless work. I really appreciate your well intended drive to enlighten the people regarding the “reality” around them. I have gone through your recent work “Disclosure Endgame”, and want to contribute to your work in two ways: First I will criticise your explanation of the Norway Spiral with the intent to initiate an unbiased reflection by you. Then I will add some info to the Moscow UFO.
So lets go together:
My criticism revolves around your presentation of the Norway spiral and I might be wrong, but after all, who is perfect? I think you are dancing on very thin ice, as you are seemingly not very well educated in sciences.
You started out very promising by writing :

"I invite you to try the intellectual exercise of
at least allowing yourself to ask the "What If."

Then after much ranting for a few pages, without giving any info, you asked the question:

“In light of the tremendous, irrefutable body of evidence that is available, who really is the naive one?”

Well what do you expect me to answer to this question?
All I have read up to that point is only rhetoric’s noise. Sorry to say that, but maybe that the rhetoric reflects only your frustration which you developed by dealing with ignorant “debunkers”. Or your enthusiasm that now you have the ultimate proof.
In your “irrefutable scientific” proof you write:

“The lower limit velocity of 316.58m/s is equivalent to about 710mph. This is over twice the 318mph world record for the fastest wind speed recorded (which was caused by a tornado).”
“Furthermore, the “ripples” move away from the center of the spiral with a near constant speed. Particulates moving at such speeds should dissipate quite rapidly.”
“the velocity of the spiral would have to be at least 710 miles per hour -- which is over twice as fast as the world-record wind speed, from directly inside a tornado.”
“If the Spiral was caused by a missile from the White Sea, as the conventional explanation insists -- a location which is fully 100 times farther away -- it would have to be rotating at more than twenty miles per second!
The speed of sound is clocked at 761.2 miles per hour.
Anything over the speed of sound would have caused tremendous sonic booms – but the Spiral was completely silent.”

The whole argumentation is not very well thought through. I think you have entered a scientific field in which much more than rhetorics and simple geometry is required.

David you are entering outer space and you are supposed to think BIG. Do not deal with normal wind speeds and sonic booms, but with Cosmic numbers! There are no “winds” or “sonic booms” as you might think.

For example, the effective exhaust velocity of the Space Shuttle is about 4400 m/s, this is nearly 16.000 km/h.
So that’s quite in the range of the speeds required to produce a spiral in the “upper atmosphere”.
The atmospheric density at heights between 70-100 km is 10.000-100.000 times less than on the ground. You will not hear a “sonic boom” in these heights, because there is no mass/density to carry the energy of the sound wave. The “air” there is so thin that you start thinking about things like “mean free path” of a molecule. That is the distance the first molecules of the ejected exhaust cloud have to travel before even hitting the first atmospheric molecule. As the density decreases, that distance is increased dramatically, actually many thousand times.

Another statement is:
“It's utterly laughable to think a missile could have done this. The ionosphere is not thick enough -- not viscous enough -- to hold a spiral of exhaust this cleanly and tightly together, composed of geometrically-perfect circles, with at least 18 concentric layers hanging there in the air for 10-15 minutes.”

And then you produce this picture as proof :

http://projectavalon.net/forum/pictu...pictureid=8541

It seems you lack the proper understanding in basic atmospheric physics to make statements like that.
That picture is actually a very good proof that the rocket has reached the thinner upper atmosphere. The higher it gets, the less the resistance of the atmosphere against the exhaust gases which are ejected with a circular “spin” component (that is called a "radial-tangential" component). That’s why you can see the blue light expanding at greater heights. By having reached that height, the exhaust jet can then more freely expand than in the lower, thicker atmosphere. That’s why we get these high expansion rates of the spiral.
If it was really a rocket, then some chemtrails from the exhaust should be hovering around or near the right corner of the picture, where the launch pad is expected to be. The chemtrails should be clearly visible because the sun is rising in the same area.
A little more in depth research on Scandinavian websites would have produced these pictures :

http://projectavalon.net/forum/pictu...pictureid=8538

and

http://projectavalon.net/forum/pictu...pictureid=8539

BINGO ! Well illuminated chemtrails !! I think that is IRREFUABLE proof, that there is an extreme high probability for the Norway Spiral to be created by a malfunctioning rocket.

Then you post the power-consumption log of Icecat:

http://projectavalon.net/forum/pictu...pictureid=8542

Very impressive at first sight, but you should have listened to the scientists, at least when you try to enter this field. One brief explanation can be seen here:

http://projectavalon.net/forum/pictu...pictureid=8540

The main emphasis is on “HEATING” the atmosphere. Without the heating you will not get any visible results.
At ICECAT you have in principle three systems: The UHF antenna, the VHF antenna and the big microwave heater. These systems are monitored separately and are displayed on the Power Monitor:

White for UHF
Red for VHF
Green for Heater

Unfortunately your posted picture has cut these 3 descriptions out. The original picture is this:

http://projectavalon.net/forum/pictu...pictureid=8536

http://dynamite.eiscat.uit.no/power_...3343248042.png

It shows the power consumption of the UHV and the VHF while the heater is “OFF”.

Here is anotherdays log of the Power Monitor with the Heater “ON”:

http://projectavalon.net/forum/pictu...pictureid=8537

http://dynamite.eiscat.uit.no/power_.../20090318.html

Can you see the big green line, clearly indicating a running heater?
That “irrefutably” proofs that no any visible phenomenon was created by ICECAT on the day in question, and therefore can not have created the spiral.

Let me quote another of your statements:
“the velocity of the “ripple” propagation is found to be approximately 32,873m/s.”
When I was a kid in school, I made a similar statement during a maths test. Afterwards my teacher was shredding me into pieces in front of the class. He said something like this: “You have absolute no understanding of the principle of approximation! How can you give a 5 digit number without any zero at its end, and then state that it is an APPROXIMATION ! “

The last quote:
“[Don't bother or harass the scientists involved, please. They probably had no idea what was really going on here, and should be left alone.]”

Well, I was for some time thinking that I should leave you alone with your (cork) screwed-up explanation of the Norway Spiral. Because your lashing out left, right and centre on people with other opinions made me feel very uncomfortable. This is the way to suppress open discussion an create a kind of personality-cult where nobody else’s opinion is accepted. But I believe that we are all serious truth-seekers and to say nothing would, in my opinion, only increase the amount of disinformation. I am not saying that these miss-presentations are made intentionally, but you should think about refocusing on areas in which you are really strong, in order to avoid breaking into thin ICE(CAT). :zip:
I hope to have contributed to a clarification of the subject matter. But don’t worry, David, nobody is perfect and we are all still learning.



So, now to the Moscow UFO:
The videos are showing a very unusual form of UFO: A tetrahedron. I have not seen any other video showing that unique form so clearly. The appearance over the Russian powerhouse should be a little bit embarrassing to the government.
There are several scenarios possible:
1. It’s a hoax
2. It’s a hologram
3. It’s a real UFO hovering WITH Russian government knowledge/permission.
4. It’s a real UFO hovering WITHOUT Russian government knowledge/permission.

So, in detail:
1. It’s a hoax: I think that you, David, have already sufficient and plausible explained that it is most likely not a hoax.
2. It’s a hologram: The structure exhibits reflective properties while it is turning. No, to me known, hologram will exhibit these properties. Although it maybe a built-in feature of the projection. If it’s a hologram, then it can be only projected by the government. That would suggest an active effort into the direction of disclosure. But then also secret information would be “leaked” prior to this occurrence or simultaneous. The mum of the Kreml regarding UFOs suggests that it is not a hologram.
3. It’s a real UFO hovering WITH Russian government knowledge/permission: The government would only embarrass itself by allowing it to happen without a simultaneously beefed up PR-stunt. That’s why point 4 is most likely:

4. It’s a real UFO hovering WITHOUT Russian government knowledge/permission: It certainly draws a lot of attention towards the UFO by appearing over the Kreml. But if attention is the main reason, then why chose the Aliens to appear at night-fall? It looks to me like an attempt to pressurise the Russian government. Maybe the appearance at fall gives the government still the probability for plausible denial, while at the same time having the chance to jumpstart into action to rectify any outstanding agenda they might have with the Aliens. If the government is not willing to correct their agenda, then an undeniable appearance in full daylight might be looming. That might be enough to pressurize the Kreml into action.

I know, just speculation… But bear with me, the joker is coming.

Why are these Aliens embarrassing the Russian government?
Any agenda existing between these Aliens and the Russian government can only be identified by knowing who these Aliens are and what they want. The extremely unusual shape of their craft is the point onto which I will hook my thesis.
My assumption is as follows: Any appearance of aliens or info about them in the past, in which it is clearly shown or stated that their craft has the shape of a tetrahedron, is linked to the UFO over Moscow. I will reasonably assume that they are one and the same group of Aliens.
The only appearance I am aware of is Alec Newald´s abduction story, more than 30 years ago. It can be found here:

http://galactic.no/rune/aleceng1.html

The alien story in short is this: It’s about the ETIs from a planet called HAVEN (Not Heaven!). They are a race of Time/Space travellers, which has attempted to ascend from third density into fourth density by technological means and they failed. By tempering with the “Divine Plan” they got stuck in-between the dimensions. They are “presently” within a lifeless reality and their choice is to get extinct as a race, or to fall back to third density for another ascension trial. They have chosen Earth and had struck a deal with a particular government: An area only for them will be carved out, into which they can transport their 15 Million survivors in exchange for “goodies” and technology. According to them, the government has received whatever was due to the government, while it has not been keeping it’s end of the bargain. Which government was involved has not been mentioned to Alec Newald.

When I first read that story some years ago, I put the info into the shelf, because I was not aware of any other alien appearances with a tetrahedron-shaped craft. But now, let’s connect the dots:

To strike a deal with an Earth-government for a small alien enclave, the government has to fulfil certain conditions:
1. It has to be powerful enough to withstand any international pressure aimed at procedures which can compromise the security of the enclave.
2. It has to be independent specifically in the oil/energy sector, as a threat to cut oil supplies would be one of the challenges ahead, in order to pressurize that government.
2. It has to have vast, thinly populated areas, in which an enclave can be carved out, which is to be positioned far into the main territory.
3. It has to have the power within these territories to arrange an evacuation of the domestic population without too many democratic hic-ups.
4. It has to have a somehow “open mind” to be able to materialize the deal and keep to it. :welcomeani:
In principle only 3 governments can fulfil the above criteria, except Nr.2: USA, China and Russia.
The Russians are fulfilling all of the the above conditions (more or less).
The government in question has been unmistakably identified by the appearance of the craft from Haven over Moscow.
It’s very likely that the Aliens from Haven were trying to pressurize the Russian government to keep up with the agreed arrangement.

If this is the situation, and everything indicates it, then that’s

EXTREMLY GOOD NEWS.

These Aliens are time-travellers, and therefore I guess they know how to be at the right place at the right time.
The guys from Haven are bound to go for fourth dimension ascension. They have chosen Earth and this time! That’s a very strong indication for a very positive timeline ahead in the near future, here for us on Earth.
Also Bill Ryan mentioned in his Freedom Central interview that there are some good Reptilians, which “just want to walk on Earth”. Well, I guess they just want to be present on a planet during its ascension. Earth seems to become a huge elevator into fourth density and beyond, and all the good guys are scrambling to get seated.
That’s the conclusion.
It makes the appearance of the Haven craft over Moscow one of the most important appearances in UFO/Earth history.
It’s seems to be a very important evidence to prove that ascension is a reality and not a construct of some wishful thinking dreamers. Now we can really say “In Russia there comes the hope of the world..”
I hope to have helped you, David, with this small treatise. Sometimes you first have to chew the bitter stuff before it gets sweet.
Keep up the good work! :thumb_yello:

.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

so… Are you saying that the newest movie “District 9” and the older movie “Alien Nation” have valid clues as to what the real agenda is?

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Well done bashi, makes a lot more sense than Wilcock's waffle.

The biggest show in the universe is about to happen on this planet and the only ones who aren't being told are the inhabitants.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

I AM (one of the few) who is VERY excited about this!
it's truely an AMAZING time to be here, NOW!!!

and THX bashi for the science lesson :original:

~ one love ~

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Oh man, great post Bashi! :thumb_yello:

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Now, that was an interesting reading. Thank you for having posted it here. :thumb_yello:

We are indeed in some marvelous time to be here, I'm so glad of my choice, despite of all the trichery around.

Namaste, Steven

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

I dont read these long posts very often because I get bored with the BS half way through. However, This post had me riveted.

Thanyou for posting it Bashi.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Thank you bashi. It's been a long time since I last read a post and the link provided, with such interest.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

... officially. The information is there for the taking, but its not "official" so people dont beleive it. Lol.

Bashi - great work, great post.

A..

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

What a great post...I loved it...:thumb_yello:

Welcome Bashir...

viking

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Great post Bashi, it's time for Wilcock to take a long walk out of the picture

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Not too many people will like this but ...David Wilcock isn't a meteorologist by any stretch of the imagination. He isn't trained in any scientific discipline that I am aware of and from listening to him talk about his work with Richard Hoagland I get the impression his idea of scientific research is a google search. Unless someone can provide information to the contrary, I don't think he has the educational background to make the kind of statements that he is making about the atmosphere. He is a professional faux-reality lecture circuit speaker and that is about as far as his expertise goes in this matter.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

This is why we need more Trained Observers out there:original:

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Agreed. This is indeed an interesting time, because everything that is happening

is occurring for a reason. That reason is it part of are divine plan of evolution.

Do you honestly think all this stuff wouldn't be climaxing know, if it wasn't

planned? to many coincidences. So I look forward to the future with excitement.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

I disagree, my wish is that he would get back to what he did best - his spiritual work and his uplifting messages.

A..

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

On contactee stories ...

Why is that virtually all contactees have a different story told to them by those who contact them? Why do alien abduction stories, for example, follow a such a set pattern of events yet diverge when purposes and origins are communicated? I think the amount of diverse and contradicting information from what used to be referred to regularly as "the space brothers" indicates that the information is highly suspect and unreliable and should put in the same category as 'revealed information'. 'Revealed information' is notoriously unreliable and contradictory.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Fantastic post..................You truly put a smile on my face as some of the things you did come out with , I had already questioned myself regarding David's findings and I"m not that smart !!!!


It was all based on pure logic and I love the way you proved your findings


Thanks so much

I would really like to see David's response to your open letter

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Thanks for the post .

My question is ... Did David acknowledge your letter?

If so what was his response?

:thumb_yello:

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

I agree... Sometimes it's not always about the facts but the message intended...

Fantastic Post!:thumb_yello: We are living in great times my friends... It's a privilege to be here!

- Jose

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

I have to say the David's 2012 seminar was one of my first views to my awakening...Like Anchor said...It's what he does best.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

when david talks about et's and spirituality and universal reality , the positive stuff there is no one i like to listen to more.. however his last article was clutching at straws imo..

i know hes desperate for disclosure at any cost and we are perhaps on the cusp of something huge. also his russian cosmosphere info goes against previous info about the nato, anglo usa alliance having the more advanced stuff.. the article was confusing in many ways..i find mr wilcocks enthusiasm seems to get the better of him sometimes...:smoke:

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Is David even on here??

Can someone get him a message to give the other side??

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

If I remember well, at Hoagland's www.enterprisemission.com in part 2 about the Norwegian story, it is made clear that at the time the alleged 'pyramid video(s)' were said to be shot, it had snowed in Moscow. In both video's there's not a trace of snow to be seen. Ergo: the video's have not been shot at that day.

Also in Part 2, Hoagland comes, after a lot of research, with a surprising conclusion on 'the Spiral'.

Puts things in quite a perspective.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

I have a problem with your disqualification of his findings on the basis that he doesn't possess a little slip of paper in a specific course of study...

there are a lot of people who have a whole lot more research and life experience in other areas than what their "job title" says they can do

... so much for allowing for outside-the-box thinking and putting the puzzle pieces together

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

You attempt to debunk his entire article based on your opinion of anomalies in two pictures.

I doubt your a meteorologist either.

Are you sure thats a chemtrail? Why is it only in one corner of the picture? If it was a chemtrail the bottom would have disappeared first and the rest would disappear later. Thats obviously not the case.

Why did the western media use the last picture and not the first one?

Did you read the rest of his article? He goes into alot more detail as to why it CANT be a missile.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Tran I read that...I highly recommend it

http://www.enterprisemission.com/Norway-Message.htm

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

I totally agree with this too.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Bashi, your deduction that the tetrahedral object was a spaceship is quite ingenious, as is your argument regarding the extremely good news it implies.

Kind of reminds me of the intuitive brilliance of a fellow named Wilcock. I’m no expert on atmospheric physics. But wouldn’t it be well within the capacity of HAARP to create a holographic simulation of a missile fired from the location of EISCAT? David seems to offer enough evidence for this being so, despite his lack of technical expertise. For instance, doesn’t David apparently prove by simple trigonometry that the origin of the spiral was precisely at EISCAT? Surely three-dimensional dynamics and simple trigonometry is all that's needed to fix the location of the origin?

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

I just don't believe for a minute this spiral incident (whatever it was) has anything to do with some planned disclosure.

Yes, the enterprisemission part 2 article concluded it were a russian missile.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Actually...they concluded there was a launch that they SUSPECT was not involved in the creation of the spiral

From Enterprise Mission:

Case closed, right?
Of course not.
While we at Enterprise have independently proven to our satisfication that the Russians did, indeed, launch a missile from the White Sea that Wednesday morning ... and, that the tell-tale signs of that event were unquestionable captured on both Norwegian images and videos of the Spiral and its aftermath--
What we have not established by this analysis is any physical evidence that the Bulava was, in fact, directly involved in the generation of the Spiral.
The only case that we ... that anyone ... is capable of making at this point -- based only on analysis of the trajectory of the Bulava -- is completely--
Circumstantial.
While the Russians, stubbornly -- despite all their [inevitable] test telemetry -- for some reason ... continue to refuse to officially link the failed Bulava with the appearance of the Spiral ....
Could they know something we should know ...?

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Hoagland and David Wilcock work together often. I can't wait to see what will be the response of DW for all this new information that tends to lean the evidence towards this being a missile.

Honestly I thought about the fact that once out of the atmosphere a missile could in theory whistle about loads of gas at very high speeds due to the lack of air to resist it , which would also explain the perfect concentric circles as there would be a lack of air to dissapate it... I am not however sure that the Bulava missiles fly outside of the atmosphere.
The visibility would not be possible from many angles because to them it would only look like a curved contrail .. while only at a specific angle (this case norway) it would look like a spiral.

The problem however.. and it is a very big problem is that this kind of spiral has never ever before seen created by a missile, not even close. Another huge problem is that the mathematical probability of a missile failing with a perfect spiral for the first time ever EXACTLY over a HAARP facility which is able to produce such phenomena in the sky .. is almost zero.

I have to conclude that there are higher forces in play .. there is just too much coincidence for my liking.. After taking into account both this post and Hoaglands evidence I still lean over the electromagnetics explanation.

But very often .. both explanations may be valid. What if there was a missile launch targeted at the electromagnetic spiral?

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

moscow pyramid ufo...hoax, according to saucertube, check his vid out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR-q2jsW7rI

very clever letter, a good read, needs saying lest davids brain expands to earth size proportion on account of getting hooked on massive quantities of ratfish oil. thats juss my opinion loik.

thanks again for the good read. raising the platform.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Here is another pyramid shot in florida....Hoax..???

When this thing disappears it seems like it is maybe a hoax.

At the beginning of it though when things are coming out of it you can see a couple that pass over the front of it and it actually looks real.

I don't know what to think.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

I support the conclusions of the initial post, and have made similar comments, though much more briefly and not as clearly explained, in other threads. The Bulava ICBM has a range of over 8,000km and carries 6 independently targetable re-entry vehicles (nuclear bombs). For those of you unclear on the concept, an ICBM does indeed leave the earth's atmosphere, and this happens relatively early in the flight. The warheads are called "re-entry vehicles" because they re-enter the earth's atmosphere near the end of the flight. A spiral flight pattern can occur in a missile if the guidance system fails, or any component used in steering the missile fails, and the rocket nozzle tilts to one side and stays there. The Bulava missile has failed in more launches than it has succeded (7/13 failures, including the December launch).

The arguments against this being a failed missile are for the most part weak. "I don't understand how it can be a rocket, so it must be something else" is not sound reasoning. It just means you don't understand rockets. "It must be HAARP" is also for the most part not sound because nobody really knows what HAARP can or cannot do. People ascribe to it all sorts of magical capabilities with no evidence. Arguments about probabilities are also unsound - nobody has any basis for determining such probabilities. It sounds like creationists arguing against evolution. After you get done being mad at me, take a hard look at the assumptions you are using.

Here's a point to consider: just because the spiral pattern was created by rocket exhaust does not mean it was not a message.

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Now, we've had this discussion about this probable missile (or not) causing that wonderful and really perfect spirall on some other thread here. All of us have had, more or less and in tune with their skills in physics and/or maths, done some research...including DW as well.

His "conclusion" may or may not be correct...but the fact is, he presented a lot of unknown stats and other material and tried to back his conclusion that this couldn't be a missile at all. We will eventually never know exactly...as it is obvious from the discussion here, that we're all speculating right now.

Now, I will allow myself to speculate too...and my speculation is backed by some good background in physics and also some good background in missiles...as during my military time some 20 years ago, I had to deal with some (short distant and half-long distant) missile systems...and these were russian :naughty:

So my speculation is...this is not a missile...as for a failed missile, to project such perfect and for a long time visible spirall...it would simply need to violate many, if not all to us known laws of physics. I've seen many failed missiles with my own eyes...and never, really never ever I've seen such a perfect spirall like this. It would need soooo much more to do this kind of thing...and there comes that "bit of something extra" in this case...and this is something that we're all speculating at the moment.

Now, does my reasoning makes me better then DW...or would you also tell me that I'm just not well informed and my background is poor?

Just my opinion here...please don't feel offended...I really don't mean to offend anyone here...

with respect
malletzky

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

I doubt in the rocket theory, but I like Bashi's post anyway!

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

I'm with you Mall and I am no means an expert...

My "gut" is saying that it's not a missile though there was one in the area.

Yet another...Someone will tell me for sure AFTER I"M DEAD!!

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

There is nothing about all this that allows me to believe it was a missile. If the missile was what the media is reporting.. People should be much more concerned.

That said I still appreciate the OP here, it asks some good questions. There are aspects I would word differently but thats just me, and to each their own :).

With many friends in the military and several who test these type of weapons for a living, ALSO not "buying" the missile story.. Something inside me (my "gut", as it's said) will not allow me to accept the simple missile explanation. I still do "feel" it was man made.. I am prepared to be incorrect.

It is nice to see this discussed and I do hope that David responds in some way, be it directly or not.

Even if he is way off (which i don't feel he is) I have lost zero respect for the body we call David. He will always have my support, and he is free to make mistakes IMO. Comes with the territory.

In light, of love
Shaynard

Re: David Wilcock - The open letter
 

Someone contact mythbusters from the discovery channel.. we need this missile theory tested stat lol

I have a feeling though within a month or two we will have the answer due to further forthcoming evidence..