Go Back   Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) > Project Camelot Forum > Project Camelot > Project Camelot General Discussion

Notices

Project Camelot General Discussion Reactions, feedback and suggestions on interviews, current events and experiences.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-24-2008, 03:34 PM   #26
carcharodon
Avalon Senior Member
 
carcharodon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 17
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

influnces of a planetary body on other known solar sys bodies would allow to pinpoint the location of planetx. where are its pics? we're able to get photos of other solar sys planets, why can't we get the one from planetx?
carcharodon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2008, 03:38 PM   #27
beanny
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 71
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

fair enough shelly, (meaning mine?)
i cant say i "know" if he genuine or not....

but to say there is no proof. is never enough to negate information, just cant prove itself..
life HAS proved that much to all of us on somel evel or other
some of you whom experience life,largely through intuition will probably get my drift.
as we all know.....truth will eventually emerge to the forefront,
which ever it is
as the veil of .... lies slip away....

i guess we can keep seeking and seeking and listening inward....

Last edited by beanny; 10-24-2008 at 04:19 PM.
beanny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2008, 07:41 PM   #28
nibiru
Avalon Senior Member
 
nibiru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: CENTRAL MEXICO
Posts: 60
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Greetings :
Before anything, I honor the freedom of thought that every human being posseses. I will share with you all some data:
1) Sitchin is a scholar...Nevertheless that the whole system attacks him AND his theories,he belongs to the few that knows dead languages such as old summerian.
2) the u.s. Government has indeed sewed sitchin...they want to confiscate all his knowledge and thus preventing his words to be propagated. Does that fact tell you anything?
3) I have done my homework and investigated the data for years(15). What is of my knowledge is that he is 90% correct. He misses the fact that the lulu were created not only to serve as a working slave, but that this is part of a galactic plan to provide flesh in which divine sparks can incarnate in this planetary school of total free will.
4) Nibiru is a brown dwarf,hollowed and used as a galactic federation starship to seed worlds. Its orbit is not necessarily of a 3,600 years cycle.
5)sitchin, according to a top general in the mexican intelligence path, assured to me that the data provided was acurate,according to israeli,french canadian and chinese intelligence services surveys of the data.
6)the new southpole telescope observatory was built indeed,to track nibiru´s passage through our solar system....
And there is more....

Last edited by nibiru; 10-24-2008 at 07:50 PM. Reason: SPELLING
nibiru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2008, 08:03 PM   #29
Shellie
Banned
 
Shellie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 267
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Beanny, that wasn't directed specifically to you.

I am just saying that his scholarship is incredibly sloppy, and that it was a turn-off. Of all the Sumerian scholars (and there is plenty of them at universities like Chicago and all over the Middle East), why is he the only one to translate all of the material he uses? I used to study classical Arabic and found a lot of his explanation of Semitic roots dubious, if not completely contradictory to what I was getting from my peers in the Hebrew department. Now, interpretations of things (like what anthropologists study) can swing in any direction and I understand his questioning of the conventional understanding of Sumerian culture and archaeology- there is plenty of "conspiracy" material in that alone- but languages just aren't as fuzzy as that. This is almost like the one man in China who claims to have "translated" the Dropa stones... C'mon! Based on what?

The only think that DOES give Sitchin any credibility is that the government is so interested in him, and that there are some things in astronomy that are explained if you use the "Planet X" model. But that doesn't make the model itself correct. What if he is completely wrong about Planet X, but the government wants him to do research because they are interested in something else? Maybe he is being used to interpret other things, and by picking him instead of another scholar it keeps the "fringe conspiracy nut-jobs" busy running in circles are Nibiru and not looking at what they really are studying.

Another thing bothers me, and that is his logic. Too much is based on "ifs"... If this is true then that is true... and if it is true then this... than this... All you have to do is prove one "if" wrong early on, and the entire structure collapses.
Shellie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2008, 09:01 PM   #30
Doom
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 146
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

I have to agree with shellie. I have not personally studied the language myself for the same reason that there are so many flaws in his logic based on what I have read of his resaerch compared to what I have read from other scholars. though I would still like to learn it for myself eventually when the time grants itself. There's just too many ifs though based on what I have researched, too much possibility think that ignores reality. Many other legit genuine scholars who researched the same sumarian language and tablets all come to the same real tranlsations which don't match Sitchin's at all (Alan Watt has done this himself as well). Sitchin already had his conclusion before researching the information, and tried to spin everything to fit his pre-decided conclusion. There are obvious translations that all other researchers reach, while sitchin literally pulls meanings out of hats to make up his own that works for him and fit. Sitchin's translations not only have been basically completely disproven, but his entire education and scholary career is subject to suspicion as well - Please check out the links I have given through this thread.
Doom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2008, 09:28 PM   #31
Nebula
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

When people donot understand something, they will critize and discredit you!. Case and example with ZSitchin. With all information, you have to research and check it for yourself. I believe in what Sitchin is saying. Now i have a question for you!. Is there any other researchers prior to Sitchin with the same research, insight and info?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2008, 09:53 PM   #32
Brinty
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blackbutt, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 1,004
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebula View Post
When people donot understand something, they will critize and discredit you!. Case and example with ZSitchin. With all information, you have to research and check it for yourself. I believe in what Sitchin is saying. Now i have a question for you!. Is there any other researchers prior to Sitchin with the same research, insight and info?
On a somewhat different, but still earth shattering topic, may I put forward the name of the man who's books opened my eyes in the 1950s to a whole new way of looking at myths and legends. I speak of two of Imanuel Velikovski's books, "Worlds in Collision" and "Earth in Upheaval". The amount of research this guy did was mind blowing.

The first book is based on mythological tales and when it was published, he was of course ridiculed by the scientific community. This community forced his publishers to cease publication of Velikovski's book by threatening to take their (the scientist's) books and pamphlets, to another publisher.

As his first book had been criticised by science because it was based on "fairy tales", he chose to write his second book, "Earth in Upheaval", using irrefutable geological evidence of disasters having swept the earth. He brings in the concept of pole shift that also explains some of the "impossible" events reported in the Bible.

All in all, I think these two books of Velikovski's would be a worthwhile addition to any "truth seeker's" library.
Brinty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2008, 10:40 PM   #33
capreycorn
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: switzerland
Posts: 455
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

sitchin`s ideas are great. but the books don`t "resonate" for me just as the "new testament" won`t.
to me this always means, that it is not what the author wanted to publish - it couldn`t be published without "changes".
.censorship is everywhere.

Last edited by capreycorn; 10-25-2008 at 04:45 AM.
capreycorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2008, 10:40 PM   #34
Doom
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 146
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

I'll second Worlds in Collision by Immanuel Velikovsky.

But Sitchin is still a phony and his information is still false, and as fictional as it gets.

Lots of us have researched it for ourself, and we don't all come to the same conclusions. We must respect other's opinions, not poo-poo them because we don't agree.

I understand and respect the position that Sitchin's data is true, I once studied it and believed it. But I also learnt to understand that part of the solution to the mess we are in, is to seperate fact from fiction. Seperate Information from Dis-information. When one seeks the truth, they subejct themselves to all forms of psyhcological warefare and counter-intelligece that are set up to project the real truth, and very few make it through mentally intact. And through my continued research I have identified Sitchin as a psyops.

Last edited by Doom; 10-24-2008 at 11:07 PM.
Doom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2008, 10:42 AM   #35
elirien
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Posts: 100
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shellie View Post
My dad was really into Sitchin and sent me the first of his books. I didn't even get through it. As a theoretical linguist, grad student, and employee of the library, I just could not give any legitimacy to someone who

1) based an entire story out of his own translations of something no one else has ever translated or read before

2) had NO proper references to ANYTHING except himself

3) all of the illustrations were just that- illustrations. There were very little photos and everything else was hand drawn. We are expected to take his word for it.
It's like proving the bible with the bible isn't it
elirien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2008, 12:41 PM   #36
Rareheart
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE Coast, US
Posts: 195
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

This is "wisdom". (imho)
Quote:
Another thing bothers me, and that is his logic. Too much is based on "ifs"... If this is true then that is true... and if it is true then this... than this... All you have to do is prove one "if" wrong early on, and the entire structure collapses.
All logic is based on "ifs", and "truths"...the snag is "proof".
Written words will never "prove" anything...
Outside a court of law, anyway...and, we're all very aware of the truths spewed and digested in courts every day.
(again, my humble opinion)

All writing is merely opinion...waiting for approval.
Rareheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2008, 01:51 PM   #37
moshiya
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

[QUOTE=beanny;60553]elka....y dont you each spend 30 years studying the hebrew language and text as did sitchin, of whom it was already his native tongue...b4 you are eligilble to critisize his interpretation?
what was the hebrew background of this other guys that discredit sitchin,?
could you have read 2 words from hebrew text and write an entire page on its meaning?...well in hebrew you can...
i
very true,but even when hebrew is your first language, it does not make you an expert on its meaning.

while Nassim has touched something what both miss is knowledge of the first language ,if the first language is known then the structure upon which the letters are placed and spell out the text would be known , and it reveals the laws both of the uni-verse and of man.

one more thing that blocks them to find it, is that they all seek conditionally,they are not open enough, the ecept and reject according their own theories. what they should do is to look at other reseach and see what connects instead of seeing what does not.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2008, 05:24 PM   #38
mr.komie
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 30
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

when watchin david ickes Revelations Of A Mother Goddess, sitchins name came up a few times as an illuminati member quite high up. this was before i had heard of him thru the nibiru thing. i wouldn't pee on him if he was on fire....

he could be telling the truth or telling lies.... whose to know. i personally think nibiru is real and they are probably the blue coloured beings as depicted in indian tales as 'biru' means 'blue' in some s.e.asian languages. just try to find other sources of info rather than that iffy molester of kids!

peace KE
mr.komie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2008, 10:44 PM   #39
elirien
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Posts: 100
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.komie View Post
when watchin david ickes Revelations Of A Mother Goddess, sitchins name came up a few times as an illuminati member quite high up. this was before i had heard of him thru the nibiru thing. i wouldn't pee on him if he was on fire....

he could be telling the truth or telling lies.... whose to know. i personally think nibiru is real and they are probably the blue coloured beings as depicted in indian tales as 'biru' means 'blue' in some s.e.asian languages. just try to find other sources of info rather than that iffy molester of kids!

peace KE
This will sound like throwing **** at something but be careful when it comes to Arizona Wilder.

Have a look at this:
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=54
elirien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2008, 07:17 PM   #40
spiritual_wanderer
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 23
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

You know, I can't say whether Sitchin is disinfo or legit. But I find him and his work very interesting and therefore, I'll read it sometimes. No one should blindly follow anyone. But its important to have info of all kinds out there available to let everyone decide what is for them and not. Since I believe in the ancient astronaut theory, I find his intriguing.
spiritual_wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2008, 08:24 PM   #41
Brinty
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blackbutt, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 1,004
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Quote:
Originally Posted by spiritual_wanderer View Post
You know, I can't say whether Sitchin is disinfo or legit. But I find him and his work very interesting and therefore, I'll read it sometimes. No one should blindly follow anyone. But its important to have info of all kinds out there available to let everyone decide what is for them and not. Since I believe in the ancient astronaut theory, I find his intriguing.
I agree with you spiritual wanderer. It is best not to dismiss a theory out of hand just because it doesn't fit in with your own concept of "reality" or "truth'. It is advisable to keep an open mind - but not so open that you lose your brains when you bend over. Having to clean egg off your face after taking a public stand against a particular theory only to find that same theory was a fact, could lead to a lot of embarrassment.

Like the scientists many years ago who ridiculed people who claimed that stones had fallen from the sky. "Stones? Falling from the sky? Come on now, what's holding these stones up in the sky? Don't talk such nonsense!" Imagine their shock when a shower of meteorites occured during one of their conferences. I reckon an awful lot of frantic face cleaning went on after that.
Brinty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2008, 08:57 PM   #42
Doom
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 146
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brinty View Post
I agree with you spiritual wanderer. It is best not to dismiss a theory out of hand just because it doesn't fit in with your own concept of "reality" or "truth'. It is advisable to keep an open mind - but not so open that you lose your brains when you bend over. Having to clean egg off your face after taking a public stand against a particular theory only to find that same theory was a fact, could lead to a lot of embarrassment.

Like the scientists many years ago who ridiculed people who claimed that stones had fallen from the sky. "Stones? Falling from the sky? Come on now, what's holding these stones up in the sky? Don't talk such nonsense!" Imagine their shock when a shower of meteorites occured during one of their conferences. I reckon an awful lot of frantic face cleaning went on after that.

With comments like this I fear some of us are missing the point of the thread. Sitchin's work hasn't been dismissed or ignored by most of it. It has been thoroughly disporven. (And I don't mean by mainstream debunkers, I mean by truthseekers). Of course we have to keep an "open mind" to things even if they don't fit our concept of reality. (but not too open, because we need to keep our minds guarded, and not open to psyops programming). But keeping that "open mind" doesn't make fantasy real. That doesn't make counter-intelligence that is designed to disable the victim, truth.

Idenifying counter-intelligence and seperating fact from fiction is a must in the process of waking up. Step 1 is awareness, but Step 2 is understanding. The understand stage takes the longest, and is often where most people get caught up, and end up chasing their imagination around in circles, because that's where the most counter-intelligence pysops operations are working. Just becoming aware of this "new world order" is not enough, it's very easy to become confused and buy into falsified information when trying to understand and lead off into the wrong direction. We must understand it first to fix it, which leads us Step 3, which is once we understand, then action can be taken, in whatever form it needs to be taken - and it will be self evident at that point what that is - whether it be waking others up, or whatever.

Last edited by Doom; 10-27-2008 at 09:45 PM.
Doom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2008, 12:22 AM   #43
spiritual_wanderer
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 23
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

There are truthseekers of all kinds and they often disagree with each other. Who's to say one is right or the other wrong? People can have a different interpretation of the same data.

Red flags go up when one person is saying they have the answers. What I respect is people like David Icke who say, ok here is some information I have to share with you, now it is up to you to decide if it's for you or not.

Project Camelot is like that. They don't claim to have the answers, they're just trying to share the enormous wealth of ideas with the masses. Is all of their info correct? I would be suspicious if anyone claimed it was.

It is up to each individual to take what works for them and discard the rest. We can even learn from "disinfo."
spiritual_wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2008, 04:34 AM   #44
Doom
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 146
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Quote:
Originally Posted by spiritual_wanderer View Post
There are truthseekers of all kinds and they often disagree with each other. Who's to say one is right or the other wrong? People can have a different interpretation of the same data.

Red flags go up when one person is saying they have the answers. What I respect is people like David Icke who say, ok here is some information I have to share with you, now it is up to you to decide if it's for you or not.

Project Camelot is like that. They don't claim to have the answers, they're just trying to share the enormous wealth of ideas with the masses. Is all of their info correct? I would be suspicious if anyone claimed it was.

It is up to each individual to take what works for them and discard the rest. We can even learn from "disinfo."
I agree generally, but you have to draw a line, you can't just believe things because someone put the information out there and said, "decide if it's for you or not".
Many things can be proven - just because things can be interpreted differently, doesn't make all those interpretations correct. People can agree to disagree, but that still doesn't make fantasy truth. And when you look to the origins of a lot of this information(such as sitchins), it is not factual and was purposely designed, put out, and pushed, to mislead the public. It also makes truth associated with fiction, so that when you try and communicate to others about truth, right away they think of all the fictional lies attatched to the term "conspiracy" like reptilians. You see, it discredits the truth when it is assoiciated with fiction. We as truthseekers, must work together, to expose the counter-intelligence, because we are losing many minds to it, that think they are waking up. We still have a good chance to save those minds since they were at least willing to have the courage to not to go along with the normals.

also, I must comment that you must be very careful with David Icke ( http://www.projectavalon.net/forum/s...9&postcount=19 ), he puts out a lot of truth to suck you in, but then spins it into outerspace with fiction and new age philosophy. Whether he does it on purpose or is just mislead himself is another question(i would suggest a little of both), but please, all I am asking really is for people to at least look into the some of the information and links I have provided on the new age and counter-intelligence. AS well, I'm not saying to not look into David Icke's information, but at least get all sides of the story.

I feel the same about project camelot. I don't doubt that Kerry and Bill might be genuine, but that doesn't validate their information, or their sources' information.

Most people in this "truth movement" are eating everything up that's put out there without relizing that some of the information out there that is supposedly freeing them is just trapping them into a another cage. In fact there is an entire conspiracy culture, put out there by the establishment, created from the top down, for the prupose of discrediting the real truth. Be aware.

Last edited by Doom; 10-28-2008 at 05:05 AM.
Doom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2008, 08:01 AM   #45
elirien
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Posts: 100
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doom View Post
I agree generally, but you have to draw a line, you can't just believe things because someone put the information out there and said, "decide if it's for you or not".
Many things can be proven - just because things can be interpreted differently, doesn't make all those interpretations correct. People can agree to disagree, but that still doesn't make fantasy truth. And when you look to the origins of a lot of this information(such as sitchins), it is not factual and was purposely designed, put out, and pushed, to mislead the public. It also makes truth associated with fiction, so that when you try and communicate to others about truth, right away they think of all the fictional lies attatched to the term "conspiracy" like reptilians. You see, it discredits the truth when it is assoiciated with fiction. We as truthseekers, must work together, to expose the counter-intelligence, because we are losing many minds to it, that think they are waking up. We still have a good chance to save those minds since they were at least willing to have the courage to not to go along with the normals.

also, I must comment that you must be very careful with David Icke ( http://www.projectavalon.net/forum/s...9&postcount=19 ), he puts out a lot of truth to suck you in, but then spins it into outerspace with fiction and new age philosophy. Whether he does it on purpose or is just mislead himself is another question(i would suggest a little of both), but please, all I am asking really is for people to at least look into the some of the information and links I have provided on the new age and counter-intelligence. AS well, I'm not saying to not look into David Icke's information, but at least get all sides of the story.

I feel the same about project camelot. I don't doubt that Kerry and Bill might be genuine, but that doesn't validate their information, or their sources' information.

Most people in this "truth movement" are eating everything up that's put out there without relizing that some of the information out there that is supposedly freeing them is just trapping them into a another cage. In fact there is an entire conspiracy culture, put out there by the establishment, created from the top down, for the prupose of discrediting the real truth. Be aware.
Well I mostly agree with you but your comparison of David Icke and Project Camelot doesn't ring with me so to speak. First of all David Icke is not "a style of truth seeking". He is just a guy who gathered a lot of research of others like every researcher in this field that makes his research prone for disinformation that the likes of Sitchin and Maxwell put out there. His thoughts on reptilians are not unique to him. There are a lot of people talking about them, even Bill Deagle (if you've watched the last project camelot interview with him). I am not sure if I should label "the reptilians" as fiction because I don't have any means to disprove them. It could be a disinfo project perhaps but that has to be researched and documented.

Project Camelot are just two people who interview whistle-blowers or am I getting something wrong here. I mean I have heard tons of bs. from some whistle-blowers (mostly regarding Planet X and Sitchin) but I didn't judge Project Camelot for these testimonials as I have not judged David Icke for Arizona Wilder and Credo Mutwa (not that I am claiming they are bs. but they can't put proof on the table like Cathy O'Brien which would be a good candidate to interview by the way).

--Rant--
The main thing here that creates problems is, people like to "give their back to someone with full power of their trust" and "people tend to like to get hung up upon those people and the belief associated with them even if they are proven wrong in some aspect". These aspects make it impossible for finding truth especially if you are debating with guys that say "o.k. that is your truth and this is mine". I mean I read such sentences over and over and it still makes me very sad. It just reeks of programming.

Even though we don't know much and we can only perceive 0.05% or something of the universe through our eyes there still is much fact to prove something to go around. There are definite truths people which are embedded in many things from ancient religion to modern disinfo agents. We have to filter it from these sources and at least pick up a damn book to try to prove the claims made by any one of them. Well enough ranting. You've got my point.

--Rant Over--

The conspiracy culture is definitely an important subject since we are getting to become a new society almost with all this ground crew and project venus going (not that I want to be in any one of those societies besides for debating). I think that most people who think they are "awakened" will just jump at the idea of "a solution" which is of the "problem-reaction-solution" cycle that David Icke likes to talk about very much. These in effect will create a new post-industrialization mass who this time are not for nationalization but globalization disguised under the new age and projects like the venus project who both boil down to the Georgia Guide Stones and of course the mystery religions.
elirien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2008, 06:23 PM   #46
Doom
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 146
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Quote:
Originally Posted by elirien View Post
Well I mostly agree with you but your comparison of David Icke and Project Camelot doesn't ring with me so to speak. First of all David Icke is not "a style of truth seeking". He is just a guy who gathered a lot of research of others like every researcher in this field that makes his research prone for disinformation that the likes of Sitchin and Maxwell put out there. His thoughts on reptilians are not unique to him. There are a lot of people talking about them, even Bill Deagle (if you've watched the last project camelot interview with him). I am not sure if I should label "the reptilians" as fiction because I don't have any means to disprove them. It could be a disinfo project perhaps but that has to be researched and documented.

Project Camelot are just two people who interview whistle-blowers or am I getting something wrong here. I mean I have heard tons of bs. from some whistle-blowers (mostly regarding Planet X and Sitchin) but I didn't judge Project Camelot for these testimonials as I have not judged David Icke for Arizona Wilder and Credo Mutwa (not that I am claiming they are bs. but they can't put proof on the table like Cathy O'Brien which would be a good candidate to interview by the way).

--Rant--
The main thing here that creates problems is, people like to "give their back to someone with full power of their trust" and "people tend to like to get hung up upon those people and the belief associated with them even if they are proven wrong in some aspect". These aspects make it impossible for finding truth especially if you are debating with guys that say "o.k. that is your truth and this is mine". I mean I read such sentences over and over and it still makes me very sad. It just reeks of programming.

Even though we don't know much and we can only perceive 0.05% or something of the universe through our eyes there still is much fact to prove something to go around. There are definite truths people which are embedded in many things from ancient religion to modern disinfo agents. We have to filter it from these sources and at least pick up a damn book to try to prove the claims made by any one of them. Well enough ranting. You've got my point.

--Rant Over--

The conspiracy culture is definitely an important subject since we are getting to become a new society almost with all this ground crew and project venus going (not that I want to be in any one of those societies besides for debating). I think that most people who think they are "awakened" will just jump at the idea of "a solution" which is of the "problem-reaction-solution" cycle that David Icke likes to talk about very much. These in effect will create a new post-industrialization mass who this time are not for nationalization but globalization disguised under the new age and projects like the venus project who both boil down to the Georgia Guide Stones and of course the mystery religions.
Well, I pretty much agree, except on some of the details, such as david icke, project camelot, project venus, etc..

I don't want to argue back and forth about them, since I have already provided information that opens doors to show how these projects/researchers are counter-intellgence. But I'll just leave it with that as to not argue about specifics. We'll have to agree to disagree for the time being. My point is to just make sure we research both sides of the story, just because the people leading these projects, etc, may be genuine, but that does not validate the information. I'm not saying it isn't possible that some of the information is true, but when you look deeper into the origins of the information, and conspiracy culture creation from the establishment, questions have to be raised. They mix truth with fiction and push it so that people discredit the truth - and some of these projects/researchers, genuine or not, have bought into a lot of it - and have effectively become tools for the establishment, by disabling the minds of the victim by spinning the truth into outterspace.

If you research some of the links I have provided throughout the thread, it should at least open some doors to the reptilian, and alien dis-info. I never said Icke started the reptilian information or was the only one. He is just a superstar who champions it. It is an establishment created culture, well funded. Even in the middle ages they used the same techniques to do with making the public believe in reptilian/demon creatures. You can read about all of this and more if you take the time to do research on the new age religions and culture creations involving cia,mi5,mi6, crowley, blavatsky, etc. Like I said before I have provided links that will at least get one started on some of this info.

Last edited by Doom; 10-28-2008 at 07:13 PM.
Doom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2008, 07:00 PM   #47
realitydesign
Avalon Senior Member
 
realitydesign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 15
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

ZS is a pioneer. He was one of the first to get this ball rolling 30 years ago. He is not disinfo - if anything he may be off on a few points but he himself believes and stands behind his work. Read through the guy's credentials.

At the very least he has done so much to open the minds of humanity greatly.


I believe his basic premise: earth history is riddled with ET (if you can call them that) involvement. Is EVERY detail correct?... probably not but give the guy a break...
realitydesign is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2008, 01:01 AM   #48
ChristinCP
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New Castle, Delaware
Posts: 80
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Quote:
Originally Posted by nibiru View Post
Greetings :
Before anything, I honor the freedom of thought that every human being posseses. I will share with you all some data:
1) Sitchin is a scholar...Nevertheless that the whole system attacks him AND his theories,he belongs to the few that knows dead languages such as old summerian.
2) the u.s. Government has indeed sewed sitchin...they want to confiscate all his knowledge and thus preventing his words to be propagated. Does that fact tell you anything?
3) I have done my homework and investigated the data for years(15). What is of my knowledge is that he is 90% correct. He misses the fact that the lulu were created not only to serve as a working slave, but that this is part of a galactic plan to provide flesh in which divine sparks can incarnate in this planetary school of total free will.
4) Nibiru is a brown dwarf,hollowed and used as a galactic federation starship to seed worlds. Its orbit is not necessarily of a 3,600 years cycle.
5)sitchin, according to a top general in the mexican intelligence path, assured to me that the data provided was acurate,according to israeli,french canadian and chinese intelligence services surveys of the data.
6)the new southpole telescope observatory was built indeed,to track nibiru´s passage through our solar system....
And there is more....

I want to hear more!
ChristinCP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2008, 09:44 AM   #49
elirien
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Posts: 100
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doom View Post
Well, I pretty much agree, except on some of the details, such as david icke, project camelot, project venus, etc..

I don't want to argue back and forth about them, since I have already provided information that opens doors to show how these projects/researchers are counter-intellgence. But I'll just leave it with that as to not argue about specifics. We'll have to agree to disagree for the time being. My point is to just make sure we research both sides of the story, just because the people leading these projects, etc, may be genuine, but that does not validate the information. I'm not saying it isn't possible that some of the information is true, but when you look deeper into the origins of the information, and conspiracy culture creation from the establishment, questions have to be raised. They mix truth with fiction and push it so that people discredit the truth - and some of these projects/researchers, genuine or not, have bought into a lot of it - and have effectively become tools for the establishment, by disabling the minds of the victim by spinning the truth into outterspace.

If you research some of the links I have provided throughout the thread, it should at least open some doors to the reptilian, and alien dis-info. I never said Icke started the reptilian information or was the only one. He is just a superstar who champions it. It is an establishment created culture, well funded. Even in the middle ages they used the same techniques to do with making the public believe in reptilian/demon creatures. You can read about all of this and more if you take the time to do research on the new age religions and culture creations involving cia,mi5,mi6, crowley, blavatsky, etc. Like I said before I have provided links that will at least get one started on some of this info.
I agree with you to disagree then I loved that sentence about how they put a veil on truth by ignoring it and the ignorant sheople that follow them put the same veil on their heads. I'll have a look at your links Doom and I have looked through people's research on the new age (some radio programs and articles from cooper, frank lordi, chris white) If I have the time I want to read Constance Cumbey's and Blavatsky's books on the matter to at least see what people get so fascinated about. I just see the same pattern in all of this. If someone gets closer to the truth something else tries to cover up that fact and focus you/me to some crazy bs that you can't control or reach. It's also interesting to see that these people defend their stand point that they researched for 40 years these things. I mean you have to be quite the blazing moron or get paid for in some aspects to do the same errors for 40 years.

Take Care
elirien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2008, 05:42 PM   #50
Heretic
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Now
Posts: 371
Default Re: Zacharia sitchin is not legitimate

you know

we, most of us know jack ****

at BEST we have fragments of information here and there gathered over years of toil and a constant change in what we see as right or wrong

we weave them in to black and white realities that we can accept and be comfortable with

now I dont know about you, but when a deep insider comes out with earth shattering info like this (yes I too discounted Sitchin as "the enemy" and you will see this in my previous posts) I tend to start questioning everything I know and begin research again to try and discern the information for myself

this is new information someone is telling you, I suggest digesting it because ignoring it or just turning it off will do nothing to increase your knowledge base as it will only breed info stagnation

IMHO it would not be prudent to discount something outright based on assumption and conjecture, especially someone else's work from a website, who could be just as corrupt as you suspect Sitchin to be

I am aware of Arizona Wilder and have taken it into account and there are many possibilities to why she saw what she saw (IF she saw...corruption could be anywhere)

let your knowledge evolve and don't shut out new info to only preserve the old

where would you be now if you had been constantly rejecting new info?

BTW I have no idea if he is right or wrong so I am not selling anything

Yet I do realize I am an armchair researcher with no ties to any black world or privy to insider info, and when someone with clout and a background to know such things comes out and informs me of something I had once discounted...

I will not accept it because they told me so

but

I also will not discount it because someone else told me so

think for yourself

in any case, a wise person in this site mentioned on another thread:

what may be garbage or disinfo for you could be a catalyst for an awakening for another

none of you have proof either way

are you here to learn information or just to blindly judge it?
Heretic is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Project Avalon