[feeler]

Originally Posted by milk and honey

Something bothers me about a conversation like this. So what if spacecraft did show up in our skies on Oct 14th? What could it prove? One thing only. That whoever was the source of 'Blossom's' message was also responsible for the 'UFO' fly-over. That could be anyone including terrestrial powers who have UFOs and other technologies to pull a stunt like that.

milk and honey

Thank you. I provided the two quotes below contrasting each other. Again, I acknowledge that the will is ours and free; however the free will is lacking under the current circumstance.

Hopefully, from the discussion among our fellow members thus far, we have a better sense as to whether David Wilcock's statement is logical, valid, and applicable to similar prophecies in the future.

A UFO appearance would get people thinking outside the constraint of the Bible and other religious doctrines. It doesn't mean the ET's are benevolent; it doesn't mean the visitors are necessarily real ET's. Even if the crafts turn out to be back-engineered, it's still an indication/hint of the original source - UFO's.

The quality of our free will is greatly compromised, if we by and large operate and make our choices out of blind faith, propaganda, lies, and half-truths. Perhaps a limited appearance would be a good starting point to motivate people to step out of their conditioning and explore the truth. -feeler

“Such a mass visitation, at this stage in our planetary game, would be an absolute tragedy — an irreversibly vast insult to the free will of the overwhelming majority of people on Earth who would see it as a horrific and terrifying event, based on their Hollywood movie conditioning.” – David Wilcock

Coercion and manipulation undermine free will, on this view, in virtue of making agents not reasons-responsive. If Allison has been brainwashed to walk the dog at a certain time, then even if she were to turn on the news and sees that it is snowing, she would attempt to walk the dog despite having good reasons not to. Thus, manipulated agents are not reasons-responsive, and in virtue of this lack free will. [See Fischer and Ravizza (1998) for one of the primary reasons-responsive views of free will.]