this moon theory is really not new

[kukulkola]

I believe it was called "food for the moon" by I believe John Lear. About 2 summers ago I spent a good 3 weeks obsessing over it. Not really much info back then so I quit studying the phenomenon. He was going on about a soul sucker on the moon that traps the human souls upon death. Interesting read. In face, i'm gonna research a little more. Its been too long since I read that article

[kukulkola]

err wait I believe it was called "the living moon"

[karen3]

Yeah, none of Icke's theories are what could really be described as new.

[largejack]

Yeah, none of Icke's theories are what could really be described as new.

If the theories are real, then how the bloody hell can they be his ideas and new??? :rolleyes: The fact that they're not new adds far more validity if the truth be told.

He's a researcher not an inventor of theories!! This point should be stickied to remind people that david doesn't just sit in a dark room and try to come up with some wacky new theory that nobody else has ever thought of, (he's not a fiction writer trying to come up with something original), or be accused of copying someone else's work if they have. How can the truth be copying someone's work. Heavens you're all as mad and closed minded as the rest of the sheeple!

So if I wrote a book trying to lay down facts that (for argument's sake) God doesn't exist, would people start accusing me of not coming up with the theory first? It's about presenting the facts, and getting information out into the public domain, not creating theories.

[skyver]

I just hope that David is not being "played" by certain people. I love reading his books & i'm not a "book" type lol! In fact, even if he got duped, I would still have the most respect for the man as he is searching for the truth. Also he will hit dead ends from time, especially doing research into stuff like this.

[beldazar]

If the theories are real, then how the bloody hell can they be his ideas and new??? :rolleyes: The fact that they're not new adds far more validity if the truth be told.

He's a researcher not an inventor of theories!! This point should be stickied to remind people that david doesn't just sit in a dark room and try to come up with some wacky new theory that nobody else has ever thought of, (he's not a fiction writer trying to come up with something original), or be accused of copying someone else's work if they have. How can the truth be copying someone's work. Heavens you're all as mad and closed minded as the rest of the sheeple!

So if I wrote a book trying to lay down facts that (for argument's sake) God doesn't exist, would people start accusing me of not coming up with the theory first? It's about presenting the facts, and getting information out into the public domain, not creating theories.

lol, good post! :D

[subl1minal]

If the theories are real, then how the bloody hell can they be his ideas and new??? :rolleyes: The fact that they're not new adds far more validity if the truth be told.

He's a researcher not an inventor of theories!! This point should be stickied to remind people that david doesn't just sit in a dark room and try to come up with some wacky new theory that nobody else has ever thought of, (he's not a fiction writer trying to come up with something original), or be accused of copying someone else's work if they have. How can the truth be copying someone's work. Heavens you're all as mad and closed minded as the rest of the sheeple!

So if I wrote a book trying to lay down facts that (for argument's sake) God doesn't exist, would people start accusing me of not coming up with the theory first? It's about presenting the facts, and getting information out into the public domain, not creating theories.

1+ shebang!

[fairyelfdog]

If the theories are real, then how the bloody hell can they be his ideas and new??? :rolleyes: The fact that they're not new adds far more validity if the truth be told.

He's a researcher not an inventor of theories!! This point should be stickied to remind people that david doesn't just sit in a dark room and try to come up with some wacky new theory that nobody else has ever thought of, (he's not a fiction writer trying to come up with something original), or be accused of copying someone else's work if they have. How can the truth be copying someone's work. Heavens you're all as mad and closed minded as the rest of the sheeple!

So if I wrote a book trying to lay down facts that (for argument's sake) God doesn't exist, would people start accusing me of not coming up with the theory first? It's about presenting the facts, and getting information out into the public domain, not creating theories.

Yes, for crying out loud!

[tootrue]

"Something happened on the Moon, long time ago"
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[vienna]

I believe it was called "food for the moon" by I believe John Lear. About 2 summers ago I spent a good 3 weeks obsessing over it. Not really much info back then so I quit studying the phenomenon. He was going on about a soul sucker on the moon that traps the human souls upon death. Interesting read. In face, i'm gonna research a little more. Its been too long since I read that article

I spent some time studying scientology/dianetics and that sounds very similiar to what they believe I've also read Timothy Good UFO books and he claims the greys refer to us as 'containers' for souls (the sceintology theory is too long and elaborate to go into but its very similar)- its interesting seeing these themes from so many different sources - none of which Im convinced about but it's very intersting