Quantum - first I just want to say, all your tactful disclaimers are unnecessary - at least with me 
There are no sacred cows as far as I'm concerned.
I appreciate the perspective you bring to this, because it is very much a different perspective from where a lot of us see this stuff. I gather you are an older gentleman? I'm 23, for reference. I have a very different perspective on David Wilcock.
David, from my perspective, is a synthesizer. When I read his website, I'm not looking for impartial unbiased analysis, I read it as a blog. There is no pretext made that it is unbiased or impartial, or that it is 100% based on provable facts. It's a summary, a "big picture" based on his opinion, a synthesis. It's a blog - very 21st century.
Some of his stuff is based on physical evidence, some not. He tries to point out which is which, but blog posts are by nature informal and incomplete.
The LOO itself, to me, is (basically) unprovable, and itself is just opinion. I don't see the LOO as "source" but rather just another blogger, just another opinion.
This is a very internet-based kind of approach. My generation is the blogging generation. We replace impersonal academic rigor with thoughts that are conceived, written, and published all on the same day. It is a very different intellectual world.
David is a synthesizer. He synthesizes:
- The works of others as they relate to spirituality, religion, conspiracy, government, history, science, philosophy. These come from books, whistleblower testimony, articles, and every other source that exists.
- His own personal opinion a.k.a. his own discernment
- Interpreting his dreams
- His own channeled info
- Whistleblower testimony that he has personally received
When you read David Wilcock's Blog, you are reading the melting pot of the above things. If you don't like the stew you don't have to chew :p
He is an academic in the sense that, on occasion, he has written articles that used mainstream authorities (like NASA) as references to make a specific scientific point. He hasn't done this for a long time though.. years and years.
He is a scholar in the same sense we all are, in that he reads stuff and interprets it. Anyone can be a scholar, and his claims are indeed based on "sources" even if he doesn't reference them in his blog. (Blogs are informal. Me being up to date on the latest sources though, I can give you references for all the question marks you entered. David isn't just making the stuff up, he is distilling/synthesizing the info of various other sources that he has investigated and considered reputable, and then combining it with his particular spiritual perspective.)
He is an authority on the LOO in the sense that he has read it many times and spent over a decade thinking about it. So whatever amount of authority this gets him, he's that much of an authority. Your claims on what he thinks about the LOO are slightly off but you do have legitimate points of criticism.
You have a major issue with David's interpretation of the quarantine because of the fact he mentions ET technology. The quarantine is not violated if ETs are invited in by certain individuals and only communicate with certain individuals. Clearly, Ra makes room for STS ETs to enter, and according to whistleblowers, documents, and lots of other data, the rulers of the world on a certain level co-operate with ETs. A large amount of the communication is channeling-based and so does not have to get through the quarantine, although there are certainly whistleblowers (who David considers credible) who have talked about the many ETs that live on planet Earth as part of the power structure.
One issue you have with the quarantine is the advanced tech idea. This doesn't violate the quarantine. If humans have access to alien tech, that doesn't violate the quarantine because it is humans doing the perpetrating. The idea is that humans have back-engineered a lot of tech from a few crashes as well as developed some tech themselves with the help of both negative and positive channeling and ancient texts. This "idea" isn't based on the LOO, it is based on research done by many many people and a lot of whistleblower testimony and documents. The stuff that David in particular supports basically does not conflict with the LOO. There are whistleblowers and stuff out there in the conspiracy community who make claims that contradict the LOO philosophy and David actively criticizes these people and does not believe them. Stargates, free energy, looking-glass, etc are all technologies that humans are capable of creating themselves with the proper know-how. Aliens are the source of the information but this does not violate the quarantine since the quarantine allows for a certain level of information and other stuff to get through. The main issue of the quarantine is to protect the "reality" of the humans until the humans are ready to open to a bigger reality, and David believes this aspect is sustained by higher dimensional beings constantly and endlessly influencing our reality to "maintain the illusion".
The info in blog post that you quoted is not original to David. None of it is. I knew all of that stuff before I read it on David's site. To me David does a nice job of summing it up, giving a big picture perspective, and sometimes synthesizing connections that I didn't see before. That information is available from multitudinous other sources all over the place. David's summation is high quality because he does use discernment, he does filter out a lot of bad info, and he does put it in the proper philosophical and spiritual context as fits in with the LOO.
In my opinion, as one person who thinks the LOO is correct, none of that stuff contradicts the LOO and all of it has evidence from other places even if the evidence is often very weak. Some of the evidence is original to David in that he has had some contacts with government whistleblowers as well as has done some of his own scientific research. (In this case "scientific" borders on occult though, in my opinion science and religion are just two different attempts to express the same thing, and David's "occult science" is the attempt to synthesize these parts.)
The nature of real-time politics is that everything is based on fuzzy judgments. The blog post David made there is a real-time moment in history, he is summing up the latest info from MANY various sources that provide info, and in a timely manner that is meaningful at the moment. He doesn't reference it because in this case it's such a major "Cliff's Notes" that he wouldn't be able to... that sum-up of the factions is based on literally hundreds of different sources. Hundreds of hours of video and audio and thousands of pages of documents, combined with a spiritual philosophy.
One major weakness of David is his Ra Readings, which are very easy to criticize and he himself has made criticisms of them, although not nearly enough to address everything. The idea of a "rapture" where ETs come and take everyone away is outdated, he hasn't espoused that idea since pre-2004. 99% of his Ra channeling was done pre-2000 and has many negative influences as David himself attests to. When there is a contradiction between little-Ra and big-Ra David goes with big-Ra. He has dismissed a lot of his own channelings, but at the same time he does recognize many of them as valuable additions to the LOO philosophy. So I mean it is what it is - it's more channeling. It's purely a subjective and unverifiable process.
The reason you can't find common ground with David is because you really are coming from a very different perspective. You are not a politically informed person -- you aren't up on the conspiracies and whistleblowers and so on. These things are a major, major part of David's work. The other biggest part of his work is his own personal style of exposition of the consciousness science. His commentaries on the LOO are one of the smallest aspects of what he does and he hasn't done much of that since pre-1998 anyway.
If you watch his movie "2012 Enigma" you'll see the focus of his work. It's a combination of new-politics, new-spirituality, and new-science.
I get the feeling you used to talk to the guy way back in the day and haven't followed his work in at least several years. You're part of the "Carla Camp" which seems to be an older age group that is less politically involved and a lot more inward looking. A lot of people my age (not me) have actually found the LOO and heard about wanderers through David. Their interest in politics and conspiracy led them to David, who then led them to the idea of wanderers and LOO. So the approach is different.
Most of David's audience comes to him already knowing that the government does have flying saucers (as Ra stated in Book 1 of the LOO but was redacted by Don Elkins in the first draft) and other advanced tech which they have used to control the population. That the government was complicit in 9/11, Pearl Harbor, JFK, and basically every major political event.
The amount of information that pertains to all points in history that has come out during the Bush years is staggering. For the last 10 years of my life, I have spent the majority of my free time digesting incredible volumes of material. The internet provides raw data in a scope that was unheard of just 20 years ago. People of my generation are information sponges. Every month there are countless new disclosures that require a full-time job to stay abreast of. These aren't spiritually important, they are politically important, and David's aims are deeply political, but they combine politics with science and religion.
Personally I can't help but see this as a generation gap. I see such a massive gap between children of the internet and people who grew up pre-internet. Most of David's audience is my age, and he isn't trying to prove to us about the Annunaki or the Illuminati or 9/11 or saucers because we already knew it before we found his site. To us, David combines all that knowledge with the spiritual precepts of the LOO.
Personally I do think he is the reincarnation (the evidence is overwhelming) but I don't see Edgar Cayce in David. I actually see Pythagorus more than anything. I have vague recollections of Pythagorus, lol, and I constantly think of Pythagorus for some reason when I'm reading David's stuff. Pythagorus was a musician, mystic, scientist and mathematician. He wasn't much of an academic or scholar - although neither was Edgar Cayce for that matter. And neither is David Wilcock. His niche is hard to describe. A bit of a polymath combined with political activist.
There are no sacred cows as far as I'm concerned.I appreciate the perspective you bring to this, because it is very much a different perspective from where a lot of us see this stuff. I gather you are an older gentleman? I'm 23, for reference. I have a very different perspective on David Wilcock.
David, from my perspective, is a synthesizer. When I read his website, I'm not looking for impartial unbiased analysis, I read it as a blog. There is no pretext made that it is unbiased or impartial, or that it is 100% based on provable facts. It's a summary, a "big picture" based on his opinion, a synthesis. It's a blog - very 21st century.
Some of his stuff is based on physical evidence, some not. He tries to point out which is which, but blog posts are by nature informal and incomplete.
The LOO itself, to me, is (basically) unprovable, and itself is just opinion. I don't see the LOO as "source" but rather just another blogger, just another opinion.
This is a very internet-based kind of approach. My generation is the blogging generation. We replace impersonal academic rigor with thoughts that are conceived, written, and published all on the same day. It is a very different intellectual world.
David is a synthesizer. He synthesizes:
- The works of others as they relate to spirituality, religion, conspiracy, government, history, science, philosophy. These come from books, whistleblower testimony, articles, and every other source that exists.
- His own personal opinion a.k.a. his own discernment
- Interpreting his dreams
- His own channeled info
- Whistleblower testimony that he has personally received
When you read David Wilcock's Blog, you are reading the melting pot of the above things. If you don't like the stew you don't have to chew :p
He is an academic in the sense that, on occasion, he has written articles that used mainstream authorities (like NASA) as references to make a specific scientific point. He hasn't done this for a long time though.. years and years.
He is a scholar in the same sense we all are, in that he reads stuff and interprets it. Anyone can be a scholar, and his claims are indeed based on "sources" even if he doesn't reference them in his blog. (Blogs are informal. Me being up to date on the latest sources though, I can give you references for all the question marks you entered. David isn't just making the stuff up, he is distilling/synthesizing the info of various other sources that he has investigated and considered reputable, and then combining it with his particular spiritual perspective.)
He is an authority on the LOO in the sense that he has read it many times and spent over a decade thinking about it. So whatever amount of authority this gets him, he's that much of an authority. Your claims on what he thinks about the LOO are slightly off but you do have legitimate points of criticism.
You have a major issue with David's interpretation of the quarantine because of the fact he mentions ET technology. The quarantine is not violated if ETs are invited in by certain individuals and only communicate with certain individuals. Clearly, Ra makes room for STS ETs to enter, and according to whistleblowers, documents, and lots of other data, the rulers of the world on a certain level co-operate with ETs. A large amount of the communication is channeling-based and so does not have to get through the quarantine, although there are certainly whistleblowers (who David considers credible) who have talked about the many ETs that live on planet Earth as part of the power structure.
One issue you have with the quarantine is the advanced tech idea. This doesn't violate the quarantine. If humans have access to alien tech, that doesn't violate the quarantine because it is humans doing the perpetrating. The idea is that humans have back-engineered a lot of tech from a few crashes as well as developed some tech themselves with the help of both negative and positive channeling and ancient texts. This "idea" isn't based on the LOO, it is based on research done by many many people and a lot of whistleblower testimony and documents. The stuff that David in particular supports basically does not conflict with the LOO. There are whistleblowers and stuff out there in the conspiracy community who make claims that contradict the LOO philosophy and David actively criticizes these people and does not believe them. Stargates, free energy, looking-glass, etc are all technologies that humans are capable of creating themselves with the proper know-how. Aliens are the source of the information but this does not violate the quarantine since the quarantine allows for a certain level of information and other stuff to get through. The main issue of the quarantine is to protect the "reality" of the humans until the humans are ready to open to a bigger reality, and David believes this aspect is sustained by higher dimensional beings constantly and endlessly influencing our reality to "maintain the illusion".
The info in blog post that you quoted is not original to David. None of it is. I knew all of that stuff before I read it on David's site. To me David does a nice job of summing it up, giving a big picture perspective, and sometimes synthesizing connections that I didn't see before. That information is available from multitudinous other sources all over the place. David's summation is high quality because he does use discernment, he does filter out a lot of bad info, and he does put it in the proper philosophical and spiritual context as fits in with the LOO.
In my opinion, as one person who thinks the LOO is correct, none of that stuff contradicts the LOO and all of it has evidence from other places even if the evidence is often very weak. Some of the evidence is original to David in that he has had some contacts with government whistleblowers as well as has done some of his own scientific research. (In this case "scientific" borders on occult though, in my opinion science and religion are just two different attempts to express the same thing, and David's "occult science" is the attempt to synthesize these parts.)
The nature of real-time politics is that everything is based on fuzzy judgments. The blog post David made there is a real-time moment in history, he is summing up the latest info from MANY various sources that provide info, and in a timely manner that is meaningful at the moment. He doesn't reference it because in this case it's such a major "Cliff's Notes" that he wouldn't be able to... that sum-up of the factions is based on literally hundreds of different sources. Hundreds of hours of video and audio and thousands of pages of documents, combined with a spiritual philosophy.
One major weakness of David is his Ra Readings, which are very easy to criticize and he himself has made criticisms of them, although not nearly enough to address everything. The idea of a "rapture" where ETs come and take everyone away is outdated, he hasn't espoused that idea since pre-2004. 99% of his Ra channeling was done pre-2000 and has many negative influences as David himself attests to. When there is a contradiction between little-Ra and big-Ra David goes with big-Ra. He has dismissed a lot of his own channelings, but at the same time he does recognize many of them as valuable additions to the LOO philosophy. So I mean it is what it is - it's more channeling. It's purely a subjective and unverifiable process.
The reason you can't find common ground with David is because you really are coming from a very different perspective. You are not a politically informed person -- you aren't up on the conspiracies and whistleblowers and so on. These things are a major, major part of David's work. The other biggest part of his work is his own personal style of exposition of the consciousness science. His commentaries on the LOO are one of the smallest aspects of what he does and he hasn't done much of that since pre-1998 anyway.
If you watch his movie "2012 Enigma" you'll see the focus of his work. It's a combination of new-politics, new-spirituality, and new-science.
I get the feeling you used to talk to the guy way back in the day and haven't followed his work in at least several years. You're part of the "Carla Camp" which seems to be an older age group that is less politically involved and a lot more inward looking. A lot of people my age (not me) have actually found the LOO and heard about wanderers through David. Their interest in politics and conspiracy led them to David, who then led them to the idea of wanderers and LOO. So the approach is different.
Most of David's audience comes to him already knowing that the government does have flying saucers (as Ra stated in Book 1 of the LOO but was redacted by Don Elkins in the first draft) and other advanced tech which they have used to control the population. That the government was complicit in 9/11, Pearl Harbor, JFK, and basically every major political event.
The amount of information that pertains to all points in history that has come out during the Bush years is staggering. For the last 10 years of my life, I have spent the majority of my free time digesting incredible volumes of material. The internet provides raw data in a scope that was unheard of just 20 years ago. People of my generation are information sponges. Every month there are countless new disclosures that require a full-time job to stay abreast of. These aren't spiritually important, they are politically important, and David's aims are deeply political, but they combine politics with science and religion.
Personally I can't help but see this as a generation gap. I see such a massive gap between children of the internet and people who grew up pre-internet. Most of David's audience is my age, and he isn't trying to prove to us about the Annunaki or the Illuminati or 9/11 or saucers because we already knew it before we found his site. To us, David combines all that knowledge with the spiritual precepts of the LOO.
Personally I do think he is the reincarnation (the evidence is overwhelming) but I don't see Edgar Cayce in David. I actually see Pythagorus more than anything. I have vague recollections of Pythagorus, lol, and I constantly think of Pythagorus for some reason when I'm reading David's stuff. Pythagorus was a musician, mystic, scientist and mathematician. He wasn't much of an academic or scholar - although neither was Edgar Cayce for that matter. And neither is David Wilcock. His niche is hard to describe. A bit of a polymath combined with political activist.