Rush Limbaugh gives stirring report about NASA document revealing an ET civilization from Mars that migrated here to Earth. No /s.

14  2013-03-06 by no1113

The report got scrubbed from Rush's show immediately after he gave the report, and was all but flushed from the interwebs as a whole, but apparently a copy or two were found and archived. Here's the report itself.

http://divinecosmos.com/The_Gore_Report.mp3

And here is an article about it. I'm personally not crazy about Wilcock and don't quite know what to make of him one way or the other. I don't know if he's for real or not. Regardless, the information itself is what's important and valid independent of the messenger. Listen to the message.

EDIT: I originally was made aware of the information and article from here.

34 comments

9  [deleted] 2013-03-06

IT'S SATIRE.

The Gore report? Really?

It's satire on global warming and Al Gore. Terrible satire but satire nevertheless.

-2  no1113 2013-03-06

If it's satire, why then did it get pulled so quickly from his roster and never returned? Why was it all but excised from the net? Why has it been so difficult to find the archive of it when so many other reports by him are almost effortlessly easy?

While it may indeed be satire, the above questions are valid ones that claiming the piece was "only satire" does not account for. Is it possible that his "satire" unintentionally (or intentionally) got close enough to a certain aspect of a truth that TPTB didn't want shared with the public?

Ultimately, if it was indeed "only satire", then it would seem that someone as interested in keeping with the status quo like Limbaugh is would not only have kept the piece up, but he would have shotgunned it across the interwebs so that everyone could hear it and he could possibly make even more fun of "all the tinfoil hat wearers that gullibly fell for what I said as I was making fun of them."

Instead the piece is apparently totally scrubbed from his show and is, it seems, very difficult to find.

That's not something that jives with an explanation of it being a "simple satirical piece and that's it".

4  [deleted] 2013-03-06

It's terrible satire and was likely pulled because of gullible idiots.

Also, it's very easy to find. I found it within half a minute via google.

0  no1113 2013-03-06

Okay. So then if this is/was a satire piece, then that's good to know.

I'm not an uncritical naysayer debunker shill, but I also certainly don't want to be the type to think something is valid if it isn't.

Thank you for the information.

Peace,

6  weakmoves 2013-03-06

Spirit science talks about them....

2  no1113 2013-03-06

Cool. I was wondering what the name of the poster of those videos was. Yes. Spirit Science. I remembered correctly. :) Thank you.

5  readytoserve 2013-03-06

Interesting...Limbaugh seems like the last person that would say something like that on the air unless it had some validity. Really strange wonder where he got that report from?

3  WarHymn 2013-03-06

I like Rush but I think he is mostly for entertainment purposes. He can see all the evil in the Democratic party fine but is blind, def, and dumb to the evil in the Republican party. Notice I didn't say left/right, just party rott in general.

1  no1113 2013-03-06

As far as I know, this is a report from almost a decade ago. It's from 2004, I believe.

3  Slimlenny 2013-03-06

This animated video might interest you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAm-kbzT7xw

3  Libertarian_Atheist 2013-03-06

Wow. What a load of crap!

Thanks, I needed some laughs.

3  Bag_of_Ducks 2013-03-06

Alright, I couldn't get through the first few seconds of this video. He doesn't think people built the Egyptian Pyramids? We've known how they did that for a while now.

2  no1113 2013-03-06

I've seen quite a few of these animated videos. Spirit Science I believe is the poster's name or something like that?

It's been a while, but I found them quite informative when I went through them. Thank you.

2  Slimlenny 2013-03-06

Yeah, they're pretty interesting and mind opening if you can put up with the slightly annoying voice. Sure thing.

3  deathbear 2013-03-06

nice find! the 1 percents lineage will have that ego til on and on regardless of the truth.

3  downbythemountain 2013-03-06

David Wilcock was interesting until Dec 22nd, but good find. I will definitely try to find some other resources about this. Thanks!

3  no1113 2013-03-06

If you find anything else, post it up here. I'd like to see it if you do locate more info. Thanks. :)

2  youngli0n 2013-03-06

I agree.

3  Libertarian_Atheist 2013-03-06

This is fake. Not even a good one.

I watched the whole thing and wow, just wow.

1  no1113 2013-03-06

How so? Care to explain? I don't know much about it one way or the other, and know nothing practically about Limbaugh, as I very much don't follow him.

Therefore - and again - care to explain?

4  Libertarian_Atheist 2013-03-06

  1. The voice is an impersonation, it's not actually his voice. I can tell because I've listened to the guy off and on for fifteen years (usually until I get disgusted by one thing or another that he says).

  2. He would never ever ever ever ever ever admit to anthropogenic global warming. Ever. The only way he would say something like that is if he was being sarcastic and the way this voice personality says it and, given the context, appears completely convinced of anthropogenic global warming, it's definitely not Rush Limbaugh.

  3. Rush Limbaugh would not immediately accept a report purporting to NASA's knowledge of extra-terrestrial life. This is not so much because he is skeptical of it, it's more that he doesn't break "fringe" news like this, he only comments on news vetted by AP, CBS, NYT, WSJ, et al. and, at the furthest, news that appears on the tenth page of those major media sources. The most fringe news source he uses is Fox "News."

  4. If this NASA report were indeed true and even if it were vetted by major news sources, the fact that it presumes anthropogenic global warming and pushes an agenda directly contradicting Rush's own views, given his prejudices regarding such viewpoints, he would immediately reject this report purely upon this fact.

1  no1113 2013-03-06

So all of these points are pretty much strictly based on your own personal opinion/perspective of Limbaugh.

1) I, again, have pretty much never heard Limbaugh.

2) You seem to be pretty knowledgeable about the man.

This being said, it would seem that even though every sentence you typed could be started with a "Well, I personally think that...", or an "In my personal opinion..." antecedent, the things that you've said none the less seem to be good and valid to me.

I thank you for inserting these thoughts into this conversation, as it allows me and others reading this to consider the possibility that this really might very well be a hoax.

Again, thank you. I feel the points you made seem valid to me and are definitely worth considering.

Peace, :)

2  Libertarian_Atheist 2013-03-06

Well, I suppose it could be real but, if it is, I would suggest Rush Limbaugh must've started using drugs again (he used to abuse prescription medication). :P

I should also add that Rush has shifted a bit in his views from "militaristic right-wing corporatist" to "semi-militaristic leaning-classic-liberal." Typically neither position embraces anthropomorphic global warming.

If I haven't been clear enough, here is a quote from Limbaugh:

"Despite the hysterics of a few pseudo-scientists, there is no reason to believe in global warming."

2  [deleted] 2013-03-06

As a relatively-old-timer, I get kind of sad that this information never catches on no matter how many times it is released. Anyway, might I recommend:

Nothing in This Book Is True, But It's Exactly How Things Are by Bob Frissell.

2  no1113 2013-03-06

Thank you. I found this and am looking through it right now.

2  [deleted] 2013-03-06

Cool, I didn't know there was a video, thanks right back atcha!

1  Bikertomz 2013-03-06

"I've seen a secret document". 'It's true because I say so'. This aint gonna convince anybody.

-1  no1113 2013-03-06

I don't think the point of any of this is to try to "convince" anybody. For myself, I'm simply just passing along information that I found interesting, compelling, and that may or may not be true one way or the other.

If it isn't true, then oh well. If it is true, then that's a big, big deal.

1  [deleted] 2013-03-06

David Wilcock is full of shit.

0  no1113 2013-03-06

Here's a link to the response I posted to another individual who said almost exactly the same thing word for word on another post.

3  [deleted] 2013-03-06

He believes he's the reincarnation of Edgar Cayce. Can't get any more stupid than that.

-1  no1113 2013-03-06

That's your reason for thinking Wilcock is full of shit? You're either saying A) reincarnation itself is full of shit, B) Wilcock is full of shit for saying he's the reincarnation of Edgar Cayce, or C) both.

It it's A, then you have a looot to learn. There's a lot more you don't know about this world and existence than there is that you do. Go research the extensive studies of Dr. Raymond Moody, Dr. Elizabeth Kubler Ross, and Dr. Ian Stevenson for starters, then get back to me.

If it's B, then that may or may not be valid, as Wilcock may not be Edgar Cayce reincarnated at all. That much might be true. He and his close associates do indeed look a lot like Cayce and Cayce's close associates, however, in a side by side picture comparison. That much is valid also. A picture alone does not a reincarnation case make, however, and - again - Wilcock may indeed be off base in thinking he's Cayce reincarnated. Who knows.

If C, then see my first point.

1  [deleted] 2013-03-06

[deleted]

-1  no1113 2013-03-06

I've heard and read stranger things that are true.

1  iamnotfromtexas90 2013-03-06

Good impersonator. But not 100%