Confused about the plausibility of Conspiracies & in particular David Icke's work.

a reply to: anticitizen

Interesting. I've only skimmed the skinwalker stuff so definitely worth revisiting some of the old threads here. Thanks for the tip.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

George Knapp is the guy who does the best presentations on Skinwalker Ranch. There's a few decent ones on you tube if you combine his name with the ranch as a search term you'll find plenty.
If you get the chance, you should look for the book Hunt for the Skinwalker by George Knapp and Colm Kelleher. Its worth having on your shelf.

a reply to: BStoltman

Plausibility runs about 0 on the scale.

originally posted by: anticitizen

i really like the anti icke crowd to present proof that he is a liar or disinfo agent.

exclude esoteric themes like shapeshifting and demonic beings that feed on negative energy etc. - that we can not verify because we ain't got the tech to analyze it.

He claims the moon is hollow and created by aliens. Proven wrong. You're welcome.

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: anticitizen

Interesting. I've only skimmed the skinwalker stuff so definitely worth revisiting some of the old threads here. Thanks for the tip.

cheers mate! one of the most interesting places on earth besides hessdalen, hoia baciu and djatlov pass.

a reply to: anticitizen

No comment on my proof you asked for?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: anticitizen

i really like the anti icke crowd to present proof that he is a liar or disinfo agent.

exclude esoteric themes like shapeshifting and demonic beings that feed on negative energy etc. - that we can not verify because we ain't got the tech to analyze it.

He claims the moon is hollow and created by aliens. Proven wrong. You're welcome.

hey and thanks for the reply!
yet he isn't the only one talking about anomalies.
i don't know whether there are megacities inside the moon or another civilization put it there.
but yeah a 1km drilling and its samples as well as expeditions to its darkside and poles and pictures from its surface without blurring effects would be nice to begin with.
until then i myself wouldn't dare talking about "proof".

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: anticitizen

No comment on my proof you asked for?

have a star and a beer my impatient fellow

a reply to: anticitizen

The moon can't be hollow, and the composition has been tested and it's not alien, it is made of the same material Earth is and was formed when another planet crashed into Earth.
www.universetoday.com...
www.space.com...

a reply to: anticitizen

He was also sued and lost because he lied abuot stuff.

originally posted by: Tulpa
a reply to: audubon

Haven't listened to him for a while but Jimmy Saville (he wasn't the only one to bring up Saville, I know), PNAC, Soros and the meddling he does for "altruistic" reasons. Social engineering, more like.
Banking in general. A few American plans such as UN being a front for a world power. Weapons of mass destruction and the Bush/Blair dynamic.
Kalergi-Coudenhove.

I'm not sure that many of these count as things Icke 'got right'. Banking has never been regarded as a friendly profession by 90 per cent of the population. Everyone was all over PNAC by lunchtime on 9/11. The UN as a 'front' has been a theory since before the UN was established. The remarkable thing about Bush/Blair and the WMD would have been to claim that it was true, not that it was false, since most people thought it was a lie all along. And Coudenhove-Kalergi was already a big bogeyman for the far-right before Icke (the British National Party was promulgating such theories back in the 1990s).

What would impress me more is if Icke made predictions about things that people weren't already talking about anyway. All he seems to do is occasionally happen upon things that people are already talking about. And when you regard absolutely everything as a conspiracy, as Icke does, it's not surprising that occasionally you turn out to be correct (or seem to be correct).

I like Icke. I don't agree with everything he says, but i respect him for what he has done. He was a tv personality before he chose this path, and the ridicule he recieved, and the abuse was terrible. But he stuck at it, and i respect him for that.

A lot of stuff he says does make sense, and come to light. Yes, people are always going to hate him, but in my opinion, we need more people like him who think outside the box.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: anticitizen

The moon can't be hollow, and the composition has been tested and it's not alien, it is made of the same material Earth is and was formed when another planet crashed into Earth.
www.universetoday.com...
www.space.com...

thanks for the links!
just want to add that i don't think the moon is meant to be balloon-hollow but rather death star-hollow. the latter is not that easy to verify down from earth.
altough i admit your/the official version seems more plausible, there are too many questions remaining - and NASA itself as well as the moon missions contributed to that big time, making it hard for us sceptics to swallow the mainstream story that is still based on (although widely accepted) suggestions.

a reply to: anticitizen

Well I can't make anyone believe it, but we have moon rock, we tested it, we can see evidence of two planets in it, mostly Earth. That means it can't come from some other place and put here by aliens.

a reply to: BStoltman

I went into this a few years back with my "Recruit a group of crackpots" MJ-12 Hypothesis where I speculated that the CIA might be releasing reliable information through unreliable source mixed up with an enormous amount of disinformation. I don't think it focused on Icke, but he fits the pattern. Either he's playing a scripted role or he really believes his own claims and he is semi-rational. Either way some of these "Crackpots" occasionally make some good points the so-called credible sources ignore. One other possibility, as far-fetched as it sounds, is if there is an unknown advanced intelligence influencing mystics like Cayce or Padre Pio, they could be able to do a more subtle job without providing any supernatural phenomena and he could be sort of possessed.

I consider that wild speculation myself, unless there is some corroborating evidence, however there is evidence of major unsolved mysteries so I hesitate to rule out the bizarre even if I don't jump on the band wagon.

a reply to: BStoltman

I want to know the communities view of the plausibility of conspiracy's, and also of David Icke's work itself.

The plausibility of conspiracies?

Depends on what the theory is what the theory holds in terms of evidence.

David Icke's work?

Like many say he has gone into the deep end with certain claims he has made, stay away from his Reptilian stuff and a few other 'out there' theories he has about reality and what not which is basically almost all of his work in books.

But

Icke has done very good work which gets lost among st all the insane he has spewed during his time.

Take your time and go through it, Icke was one of the first people to catch my attention.

There is one video of his, its a 3 hour lecture on the Hegelian dialectic, that was brilliant.

It was actually surprising to to see Icke go so in depth but not go too deep where reptilians and holographic realities come into play.

The rest is entertaining to read, taking it any further and believing in the out there stuff he claims is just asking for trouble in a mental sense because nothing can be verified and investing belief in such dark conspiracies ruling the world or controlling reality is just asking for trouble up stairs, creating an unbalanced perception which could lead to many worse scenarios of paranoia and delusion.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Argh! I just watched half of the show... I can't stand it anymore. I hate those kind of shows.

Quote of the video;"I come from the world of pro wrestling. I've seen it all!" Definitive Ventura words about all things related to everything. Haha, also Kuita;"Ghdr ritid ssus..."

About your question, yes, it's cheaply done special effects. You can see part of the superimposed image, well, superimposed above even the lid, so yeah, fake.

I'm not sure though Icke would have went to the interview had he known he was going to be roasted. You can see Ventura is physically ready to enter into a fist fight with Icke...

BTW, a show like the video you linked made by Ventura are the kind I feel make CT look like raving lunatics. We are far from Jacques Vallée type of research...

A quote from wikipedia about Vallée:
---"Vallée proposes that there is a genuine UFO phenomenon, partly associated with a form of non-human consciousness that manipulates space and time. The phenomenon has been active throughout human history, and seems to masquerade in various forms to different cultures. In his opinion, the intelligence behind the phenomenon attempts social manipulation by using deception on the humans with whom they interact."

This is not different from what Icke says, and yet, Vallée is respected.

originally posted by: NowanKenubi
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Argh! I just watched half of the show... I can't stand it anymore. I hate those kind of shows.

Quote of the video;"I come from the world of pro wrestling. I've seen it all!" Definitive Ventura words about all things related to everything. Haha, also Kuita;"Ghdr ritid ssus..."

It's a show that throws political/governmental conspiracies into the mix with conspiracies about reptilian shape shifters.

The show exists for the sole purpose to control a narrative, NOT to expose a controlled narrative.

I think everyone who participated in that orchestrated -- highly controlled from all sides -- episode is implicated as an orchestrator and controller. As a disinfo agent.

And that's actually a FUN and DELIGHTFUL realization to allow yourself to have. There's zero reason to trust anyone involved in the making of that episode or give them any benefit of the doubt. None of them are bound by any ethical guidelines, whatsoever. It's all entertainment, and promises nothing more. Really.

Even if I agreed to take part in that episode, like Icke or Alex Jones, the moment I saw the special effects 'slit eyelid' stuff I would have withdrawn my consent. I'd argue that I have GOOD cause to do so and if they didn't let me out of any agreement, I would see them in court and let a jury decide.

The shapeshifting silliness was special effects. Bad ones. No sane person would argue it was genuine and since it is fake, everyone who agreed to participate in the episode should be considered a liar, propagandist, disinfo agent...a trickster:

David Icke, Alex Jones, Jesse Ventura, his son Tyrel, Oliver Stone's son Sean...

...AND probably Oliver Stone, as well, considering his body of work regarding conspiracy theories.

*cough* Most notably with respect to current events:

Oliver Stone's very recent interviews with Putin--




(I always thought his Garrison/Clay Shaw JFK assassination theory was disinfo, too.)

***

I think that episode of Jesse Ventura's Conspiracy Theory was a precious gift of clarity. Totally underrated and UNDERAPPRECIATED.

originally posted by: NowanKenubi
A quote from wikipedia about Vallée:
---"Vallée proposes that there is a genuine UFO phenomenon, partly associated with a form of non-human consciousness that manipulates space and time. The phenomenon has been active throughout human history, and seems to masquerade in various forms to different cultures. In his opinion, the intelligence behind the phenomenon attempts social manipulation by using deception on the humans with whom they interact."

This is not different from what Icke says, and yet, Vallée is respected.

Jacques Vallée: qualified to MA level in astrophysics and PhD in computer science; worked on NASA's project to map the surface of Mars; developed a proto-internet in the 1970s for conferencing purposes; has served on numerous government committees on space and artificial intelligence; published a string of highly-regarded academic publications in his specialist subjects; developed his 'ultraterrestrials' theory of UFOs in the late 1960s and early 1970s while Icke (n.b.) was still in his late teens/early twenties.

David Icke: goalkeeper for Coventry City FC; reservist for Hereford United FC; three years in local journalism before moving to concentrate on sports journalism; presented BBC TV's Grandstand in the 1980s.

Nope, I can't think why Vallée is taken seriously instead of Icke. Give us a clue.

originally posted by: audubon

originally posted by: NowanKenubi
A quote from wikipedia about Vallée:
---"Vallée proposes that there is a genuine UFO phenomenon, partly associated with a form of non-human consciousness that manipulates space and time. The phenomenon has been active throughout human history, and seems to masquerade in various forms to different cultures. In his opinion, the intelligence behind the phenomenon attempts social manipulation by using deception on the humans with whom they interact."

This is not different from what Icke says, and yet, Vallée is respected.

Jacques Vallée: qualified to MA level in astrophysics and PhD in computer science; worked on NASA's project to map the surface of Mars; developed a proto-internet in the 1970s for conferencing purposes; has served on numerous government committees on space and artificial intelligence; published a string of highly-regarded academic publications in his specialist subjects; developed his 'ultraterrestrials' theory of UFOs in the late 1960s and early 1970s while Icke (n.b.) was still in his late teens/early twenties.

David Icke: goalkeeper for Coventry City FC; reservist for Hereford United FC; three years in local journalism before moving to concentrate on sports journalism; presented BBC TV's Grandstand in the 1980s.

Nope, I can't think why Vallée is taken seriously instead of Icke. Give us a clue.

Some of the most qualified people in their field have come out with dumb explanations when it comes to certain ufo cases. Because you have a PHD, done this, done that, does not mean you do not talk crap!

Does not matter what you have done in your past, the qualifications you have etc

I do not see your point.