Daniel Pinchbeck VS Whitley Strieber

This podcast: War in Dreamland was really excellent for me, it's a few months old so sorry for the old news. But I only listened to it now, two researchers challenging eachother on their belief system and reality tunnel. I'd love to hear more researchers doing that. It got a little heated but remained very interesting. I know about both authors but haven't read any of their books, and I've only heard and seen what Daniel Pinchbeck has online.
They get to a point in the conversation where Pinchbeck challenges Whitley Strieber on his negative view of the future, he believes there will be a huge “die-off” of the human species in the immediate future (Pinchbeck repeated this a lot hehe). Pinchbeck said he was projecting his shadow too, but ironically was losing his own temper. Strieber was able to stay relatively calm but used some strong defensive language himself, and didn't appreciate it at all when Pinchbeck suggested his entity contacts might be influencing him negatively (I have no idea :p Am fascinated to find out more. More about this from Pinchbeck later in the post). The talk never really got out of hand for me though. Pinchbeck apologized too. I never felt the need to pick a side, or was persuaded one way or the other because both men had valid points and I understood their perspectives, taking both their history in consideration and trying to learn the most this way. It just goes to show the limits of language, the unconscious connections we make and how easy it is to get emotional over our values, views and beliefs. Even for the most aware. Ah to be human. I wonder how neutral I come across in this post to some people even though I'm trying hard to be I'm sure subjectivity always continues to shine through haha ;).
I do agree though that Strieber shouldn't be so sure about, and not necessarily especially, a negative future but any future, and send those vibes out, and that more discretion and carefully worded language could be used, like E-prime. I agree with Pinchbeck that we should take responsibility for the vibes we put out there (and I'll keep trying to improve the positivity which needs a boost with the daily conspiracy series, but that doesn't mean ignoring the conspiracy realm, I'll start with a more positive daily series when the conspiracy series runs out ;)), but at the same time I agree with Strieber that everything should be looked at and explored and that I'm not convinced (yet?) either about 'thought creating reality'. Both came out ok of the interview for me.
I think I'll read Strieber's book Communion, just because I wanna know what happened now, especially since Pinchbeck mentioned the original title was going to be 'Body Terror' until an entity told him to change it! What to think, well, nothing until you have at least some amount of info to be able to come up with an interpretation ;). I won't spoil it all (lol, haven't I already?) you'll just have to listen for yourself ;). I'll include both authors own views on the discussion and some excerpts I find interesting, if you still want more I read some interesting (including some very bias-detectable) blogposts on the interwebs so head to google for that ;).

Here's Daniel Pinchbeck's view on the discussion.

"The discussion then turned in a different direction. I noted that, from my reading of Strieber's work, I suspected that Strieber was influenced by the force that the visionary philosopher Rudolf Steiner called 'Ahriman,' the evil spirit who pulls humanity down into minerality, materiality, sterile technology, and extinction. As I also noted in 2012, I told Strieber that I thought he had been manipulated by alien entities that do not have the best interests of the human species at heart. Communion is ultimately the story of Strieber's seduction by those entities he calls the 'visitors' often known as the Grays. He notes that he was going to call the book 'body terror,' but changed the name to Communion when one of them told him to do this, speaking through his wife, while she slept. He also describes how the visitors were able to make him drink a bitter substance, by feeding it to him at different junctures over time. As anyone knows who has studied fairytales and fables, to drink the potion of the other world is to become entranced and overwhelmed by the beings that inhabit it."

And here is Whitley Strieber's.

Pinchbeck accuses me of bringing on a dark future by predicting it. That’s magical thinking, and just as impotent as its opposite—that you can create a positive future by believing in it. (The jury is still out on this one for me, for me awareness is a search light and synchronicity is fascinating, and that's where I'm at at this time.)

I say in the program that I believe that mankind is going to experience a dieback, and this makes Pinchbeck furious because he fears that just by saying something like that, it will become true. I don’t want to put words in another man’s mouth, but I had the impression that he sees me as a sort of viral particle of negativism, and that my perspective is designed to bring on the destructions of which I warn—presumably, so that my evil alien masters can inherit the ruined planet, I suppose.
...
Pinchbeck is right about me in one respect. I do think that there’s going to be a dieback of the human species, and I do not think that anything can be done to avoid it. Certainly, it can be ameliorated and even, to an extent, controlled, but it is going to happen. (Well I can't agree with such an assertion. "It seems very likely at this time" is a safer way to not look foolish when it doesn't ;p)

The reason that I’m sure of this could not be more simple. In nature, there is a formation called a bell curve. When the ascending shoulder of a bell curve develops, the descending shoulder follows. Nothing goes up for ever. Entropy always sets in. It must. That’s the way that physics works. I said it on the show—at least, I think I did—and it’s worth repeating here. Nature is numbers. It’s math, pure and simple.