On some points there’s no consensus on what is true and what is false about Pleiadians. Why? Because most people aren’t able to just discern / know what is true and what isn’t.
As an illustration: a third of the spiritual community is convinced that they have true inner knowing that Trump’s a good guy, and a third of the spiritual community is convinced that they have true inner knowing that Trump’s a bad guy. Whichever side is right, there’s a huge number of people out there who are labeling their own emotions as “true inner knowing.”
As another illustration, here are my opinions about the channel / hub “GFL station”:
https://www.youtube.com/@gflstation has 159k subscribers, who presumably truly believe that this channel puts out genuine channelings.
At the same time, for example https://gflstation.com/the-truth-is-stranger-than-you-know-ashtar-ashtar-command-2/ is most likely AI generated (not just the images but the “channeled” text). Here’s a literal quote from that message, read it and tell me this isn’t AI:
----
“Soft disclosure normalizes the premise. Medium disclosure teaches the mechanisms. Look closer still at the machinery your screenwriters keep describing with such suspicious accuracy, Paycheck’s oracle-machine dismantled by its own builders upon realizing the seeing itself births the catastrophe, Minority Report’s futures viewed and policed, Devs’ deterministic screen kept in corporate secrecy, the obdurate past of 11.22.63 physically shoving back against its editors and repairing each wound they cut, Loki’s Time Variance Authority pruning unruly branches outside of time to protect one sacred trunk, Interstellar’s father falling beyond a dark star who discovers the helpful beings reaching through the walls of moments are his own descendants, guiding him home, and stack beside them The Philadelphia Experiment of nineteen eighty-four dramatizing the Eldridge by name, The Final Countdown sailing a carrier back to Pearl Harbor’s eve, Stargate and its long television descendants teaching a ring network with factions and custody, Donnie Darko sacrificing a broken branch so the trunk survives, Frequency mending a murder-line across a father’s radio, Déjà Vu, Tenet, Primer, Groundhog Day, on and on across ten decades.”
----
For what it’s worth, https://app.gptzero.me/ and other “is this text AI” checkers agree that the message is most likely AI. Though admittedly, those sites aren’t very reliable.
Plus if you look in GFL station’s archives you will see the youtube channel started in 2024, right when “make a youtube channel filled with AI created messages” became a viable business strategy.
Also, GFL station’s narrative contradicts itself if you look at their old videos:
An April 2025 video by them says “the 5D split is complete“:
A July 2025 video by them says “THE GREAT SPLIT! THERE ARE NOW TWO CLEAR FREQUENCIES.” Wait, I thought the split happened three months earlier?
A December 2025 video by them says “The Split Will Finalize Early 2026”. But didn’t the split already complete in April 2025, then also in July 2025?
A June 2026 video by them says “THE SPLIT!! A Natural Separation Is Occurring.” Wait, didn’t the split happen in April 2025, then also in July 2025, then also in early 2026?
A July 2026 video by them says “The Crystalization Of The Split Is Happening”. But again, didn’t the split happen in April 2025, then also in July 2025, then also in early 2026?
Furthermore, their youtube videos (not just a few specific ones) contain in the description: “DISCLAIMER: all GFL content is created for entertainment purposes ONLY.” Well if you’re convinced you’re channeling Ashtar, and the video isn’t saying anything illegal / defamatory, then why put that under your video? It seems disrespectful to Ashtar and your audience. Plenty of channelers publish channelings on Youtube without that disclaimer, and don’t get into trouble.
However if you put out AI-generated “channeled” messages behind a patreon paywall... yeah, then you may want to have such a “for entertainment purposes ONLY” disclaimer.
Then there’s GFL station’s clickbait headlines and the strong focus on monetization.
So, it’s my opinion that about 159k people are convinced that an AI youtube channel is posting genuine channelings.
And undoubtedly there are more fake or heavily distorted messages out there that some people are nonetheless sincerely buying into.
It’s a huge ego trap to think “well those misguided people are falling for fake channelings. Of course, I have discernment, and I’ve figured out what the genuine channelings are.” But the thing is, those other people think that you’re the misguided one, and they’re the ones who’ve found the true channelings (which contradict the ones you believe).
And sure, some fake channelings are easy to spot. In some cases you probably can genuinely identify fake stuff. Yet, other fake / heavily distorted channelings are genuinely hard to identify.
So, what to do?
Well, if you’re able to access genuine intuition or talk to your soul, then listen to that. However, most people can’t do this -- they’ve just deluded themselves into thinking they can, and they just label whatever emotionally pleases them as “resonant and therefore true.” But that doesn’t actually point to the truth.
Even if you can’t access intuition or your soul, you should still listen to your emotions and your gut feelings and what resonates. It’s useful data. Still, your emotions / gut / “what resonates” can steer you away from painful truths, and towards pleasant lies.
An easy way to get compliments in the spiritual community is to write “follow your resonance / discernment / guidance / heart and you will KNOW what is true.” But the fact is, if the average person tries this, it could work but there’s also a decent chance they’ll fervently start believing in nonsense.
People shouldn’t teach spiritual novices that whatever resonates with them is the objective truth. And most people are spiritual novices. Some people who think they’re not spiritual novices -- are still spiritual novices. (It’s an easy trap to fall into. There was a period of several years when I thought I wasn’t a spiritual novice anymore, but looking back, I still was.)
If you think “I had inner knowing this one time, and I later got undeniable proof that it was true” -- okay, that very well could be true. Genuine inner knowing does exist. However, that proves you had true inner knowing once or a few times, not that you can always know what’s true and what’s false.
If you are able to always know what’s true and what’s false, then why aren’t you making millions on the site Polymarket? That’s a site where you can bet on all sorts of things, and where you could make literal millions if you could flawlessly tell truth from falsehood.
Hence most people can’t just access genuine intuition on demand. Then for those people, how can they know what’s true?
Some channelers might want to say “well I’ve had these experiences, and these two sources agree with what I’m saying, and I firmly believe I’m right, and also you can’t prove that I’m wrong.” Sure, but if that’s sufficient proof, then thousands of channelers are all “proven to be right” even though they’re saying contradictory things. It’s not practically helpful.
“I’ve had a dream / flash of insight / inner knowing / revelation that [a certain thing] will happen” isn’t sufficient proof either, because if you accept that as proof, then you have to believe several contradicting narratives at once. I’m not saying this is necessarily all nonsense, but often it’s just a situation where people see ONE possible future but instead think they’ve seen THE future.
So, what should we do?
Well, an underrated approach is to reason from first principles.
First principles are basic, foundational truths. We can then use logic to derive conclusions from those first principles. In this context, there’s little that we can 100% mathematically prove, hence our first principles are things we’re pretty sure about.
Namely, here are our two first principles:
1: The time of our liberation / meeting with galactics has been repeatedly delayed (the “soon - delay” pattern)
2: There are galactics walking and flying around on Earth
Are we 100% sure about these two first principles? No, but we’re pretty sure about them because a huge number of channelers, contactees, whistleblowers, scientists, Quantum Healing Hypnosis, etc people all agree on this.
Plus, if you reject these first principles, then we’re basically back to “everyone just believes what resonates for them” which, as we’ve established, isn’t reliable for most people.
My channelings have done the “soon - delay” pattern, by predicting that people’s lives would substantially improve before the end of 2025, which didn’t happen. I apologize for that.
Note that even many sources which claim not to give dates, still show the soon - delay pattern if you read their old message. For example, Cobra from 2012portal.blogspot.com also shows the “soon-delay” pattern:
- In 2012 he posted that First Contact will happen some time after the end of 2012: https://2012portal.blogspot.com/2012/04/portal-2012-normal-0.html
- In 2016 he posted that the ascension window closes by 2025: https://2012portal.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-ascension-plan.html. That, combined with him saying that ascension will happen, implies that it will happen before 2025. Then, Cobra later did the “soon - delay” by saying that the ascension window would remain open after 2025, but still,
Okay, so what’s the point of discussing these two first principles?
Well, they’re actually surprisingly effective at helping you evaluate theories about what’s likely going on.
For example, consider the theory “we’re waiting for the arrival of nibiru / for a pole shift.” Is this likely? Well no, because if that was the case, we wouldn’t see the “soon - delay” pattern. Galactics would just do some physics and wouldn’t give us “soon” messages for over a decade which then don’t come to pass.
Or consider the theory “galactics aren’t allowed to intervene.” Is this plausible? Well no, because they are walking and flying around and showing themselves and sometimes talking to us. So clearly they can intervene. And if you want to argue those things don’t count as intervening, then why aren’t they doing a whole lot more flying around / meeting people than they’re doing now?
Or consider the theory “well galactics simply have to beat astral entities first / have to wait for the energy or for our consciousness or people’s consent to reach a certain level. Then they’ll land.” Is that plausible? Well maybe that’s part of the situation, but if that was all that was going on, you wouldn’t see the repeated “soon => delay” pattern. Then you’d just have Pleiadian scientists drawing a graph and having a pretty good idea when they’ll land, rather than constantly going “soon => delay.”
Or consider the theory: “they are landing, just in higher-vibration timelines than the ones we’re in.” Is that plausible? At most that’s part of the situation. It can’t be the whole story because galactics are lowering our vibration with the “soon => delay” pattern. It would be evil (which I don’t think they are), or sub-optimal from their side to lower our vibration with “soon => delay” messages that then keep us in a lower timeline where we can’t meet them.
In my mind, the only thing that really makes sense if we reason from first principles is some kind of flaw with galactic leadership / Ashtar. If he’s a good person but also indecisive or struggling under the weight of responsibility, then that’s the only thing I can think of that actually would lead to a “soon => delay” pattern.
And it would explain things if average Pleiadians just aren’t thinking that much about Earth / are only “moderately good”, and as such there’s no large amount of popular pressure on Ashtar to land already.
I know some people don’t emotionally like that explanation, but what proof do you have that Ashtar actually is this perfect being? Isn’t that just people emotionally liking the idea of a perfect savior coming down to take care of them?
A possible counterargument is “well Jesus was perfect, so why wouldn’t Ashtar be” but the actual flesh-and-blood Jesus wasn’t perfect (even though he was a great man). For example, Mark 11:12-14 says:
“The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.””
That’s quite petty and human -- which is also a decent proof that it really happened. After all, if you make up a perfect savior, then you wouldn’t make up a story where he sounds silly. That’s called the Criterion of Embarrassment.
Now yes you can argue that non-physical beings, including arguably Jesus after his death, are near-perfect. But they’re not the ones in charge of deciding, for example, when the Pleiadians will land.
So, keep these two first principles in mind. And when you see a theory about what’s going on or why the galactics haven’t landed yet, feel free to test it against those two first principles. It’s not perfect, but “I believe whatever resonates with me” is even less reliable for most people.
So, I hope this was helpful.
With love,
