Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,452 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 372,427
Pageviews Today: 537,125Threads Today: 168Posts Today: 2,657
04:43 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds

 
jacksprat

User ID: 1420740
Canada
11/16/2012 01:03 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds

jacksprat
jacksprat

User ID: 1420740
Canada
11/16/2012 01:05 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds

jacksprat
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 01:11 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
I also find it discerning to attack a researcher's body of work. it is presented to do with it as you wish.
 Quoting: danwa


Let's look at this from the perspective of the entire so called "truth movement."

According to Bullhorn Jones, Icke was doing more harm than good in his work. He thought that David "Icke"'s reptilian stuff was "asinine" and "it discredits all of the reality people are talking about."

Is expressing such opinions an "attack a researcher's body of work"?



Or was what Jones was doing similar to what I'm doing in this thread?

What I'm doing is no different than what Icke has made a career out of:

I'm pointing out the actions and statements of a public figure and the significance of those actions and statements.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 01:13 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
...


You made a claim, "proof that David dIcke is telling the truth"...Will you please tell us what you're calling proof?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


what proof do you need, do you want to go down to Peru and drink some ayahuasca with a shaman and partake in a ritual so you can see for your own eyes
 Quoting: jacksprat


You made the following claim: proof that David dIcke is telling the truth.

I really want to know if your claim is true or not. Do you have "proof that David dIcke is telling the truth" or not?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866

what kind of proof are you looking for?
 Quoting: jacksprat


Proof, do I need to give you the definition of the word proof?
ANHEDONIC

User ID: 26795689
United States
11/16/2012 01:14 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
Here are two of your posts in this thread OP:

As I explained earlier Icke fits the definition of a charlatan. I think that's important enough to warn people about. In certain professions that alone would end your career but not in woo woo land.

Icke saying "Japan is over" is irresponsible at the very least. He has no credentials, background, or expertise to make such a judgment.

Wouldn't it be awful if his fans in Japan and the rest of the world were scared to death because they think he's a prophet and that what he says will come to pass?

I hate to see unnecessary suffering like that. How about you?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866



Great point. If you can debunk half of Icke's info then he's a con artist, case closed.

BTW, what you said is exactly what Bullhorn Jones said about David "Icke"! This brings up another question, if Jones felt that way about Icke a while ago why does he have him on his show so often now?

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


So you proclaim David to be a charlatan and a con artist who operates in 'woo woo land' yet just earlier told us that you're not anti-David dIcke and that he has presented some 'unique information' that has quote 'helped you tremendously'.

Tell us then, if David is by your definition a 'con artist' and 'charlatan', how did he provide you with information that helped you tremendously??? Why would you seek to deter others from listening to his presentations if you were helped tremendously by his information? Could others not also potentially be 'helped tremendously' in the same manner that you have? Or are you a special exception to the rule?

Important question. Which other con artists and charlatans in woo woo land have you listened to that have they also helped you tremendously? Can you recommend any others for us?

I anxiously await your clarification on this contradictory nature of your posts. So your message is now - Don't listen to this con artist/charlatan who presented information that helped me tremendously???

This is not helping your case here OP....

charlie
 Quoting: ANHEDONIC


bump

"You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger"
jacksprat

User ID: 1420740
Canada
11/16/2012 01:24 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
...


what proof do you need, do you want to go down to Peru and drink some ayahuasca with a shaman and partake in a ritual so you can see for your own eyes
 Quoting: jacksprat


You made the following claim: proof that David dIcke is telling the truth.

I really want to know if your claim is true or not. Do you have "proof that David dIcke is telling the truth" or not?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866

what kind of proof are you looking for?
 Quoting: jacksprat


Proof, do I need to give you the definition of the word proof?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


written, visual, video, shroom and dmt experiences, dreams, science, history, archeology, alien artifacts

Dan Winter has science proof of Reptilian dna and blood,

watch his video with Santos B and will confirm David dIckes proof of Reptiles
jacksprat
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 01:28 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
Here are two of your posts in this thread OP:

As I explained earlier Icke fits the definition of a charlatan. I think that's important enough to warn people about. In certain professions that alone would end your career but not in woo woo land.

Icke saying "Japan is over" is irresponsible at the very least. He has no credentials, background, or expertise to make such a judgment.

Wouldn't it be awful if his fans in Japan and the rest of the world were scared to death because they think he's a prophet and that what he says will come to pass?

I hate to see unnecessary suffering like that. How about you?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866



Great point. If you can debunk half of Icke's info then he's a con artist, case closed.

BTW, what you said is exactly what Bullhorn Jones said about David "Icke"! This brings up another question, if Jones felt that way about Icke a while ago why does he have him on his show so often now?

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


So you proclaim David to be a charlatan and a con artist who operates in 'woo woo land' yet just earlier told us that you're not anti-David dIcke and that he has presented some 'unique information' that has quote 'helped you tremendously'.

Tell us then, if David is by your definition a 'con artist' and 'charlatan', how did he provide you with information that helped you tremendously??? Why would you seek to deter others from listening to his presentations if you were helped tremendously by his information? Could others not also potentially be 'helped tremendously' in the same manner that you have? Or are you a special exception to the rule?

Important question. Which other con artists and charlatans in woo woo land have you listened to that have they also helped you tremendously? Can you recommend any others for us?

I anxiously await your clarification on this contradictory nature of your posts. So your message is now - Don't listen to this con artist/charlatan who presented information that helped me tremendously???

This is not helping your case here OP....

charlie
 Quoting: ANHEDONIC


I'm not going to discuss anything with you until you show the evidence that I've asked you for.

Now you have to prove something else as well, you just made this statement:

So you proclaim David to be a charlatan and a con artist who operates in 'woo woo land' yet just earlier told us that you're not anti-David dIcke and that he has presented some 'unique information' that has quote 'helped you tremendously'.

I did not "proclaim David to be a charlatan", I've said this several times:

Someone who continues to claim to be a prophet after many failed predictions is called a charlatan because that fits the definition of a charlatan, debunk it please:

A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages via some form of pretense or deception.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

"So you proclaim David to be...a con artist"

I never said this. Show me where I said that.

So you proclaim David...who operates in 'woo woo land'


I never said this. I said:

"As I explained earlier Icke fits the definition of a charlatan. I think that's important enough to warn people about. In certain professions that alone would end your career but not in woo woo land."

I was talking about GLP and a lot of his followers being in woo woo land, that's where we are. Look at the banner above, it says LUNATIC FRINGE.


yet just earlier told us that you're not anti-David dIcke


I've never said anything like that. This is what I keep saying:

My purpose with this thread is not personal, my purpose with this thread is not about opinions, my purpose with this thread is not about beliefs, my purpose with this thread is not about faith...

This thread is meant to be about truth. Truth is about evidence, logic, facts, and proof.

The more information people have the better choices they can make. More information being available only helps people to make better decisions.

What I'm doing is no different than what Icke has made a career out of:

I'm pointing out the actions and statements of a public figure and the significance of those actions and statements.

The difference between Icke and myself is that I can point to actual evidence to back up what I'm saying but Icke usually can't.

that he has presented some 'unique information' that has quote 'helped you tremendously'.


He has lots of factual information in my opinion. I have never said anything that contradicts that.
danwa

User ID: 26830438
United States
11/16/2012 01:28 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
I also find it discerning to attack a researcher's body of work. it is presented to do with it as you wish.
 Quoting: danwa


Let's look at this from the perspective of the entire so called "truth movement."

According to Bullhorn Jones, Icke was doing more harm than good in his work. He thought that David "Icke"'s reptilian stuff was "asinine" and "it discredits all of the reality people are talking about."

Is expressing such opinions an "attack a researcher's body of work"?



Or was what Jones was doing similar to what I'm doing in this thread?

What I'm doing is no different than what Icke has made a career out of:

I'm pointing out the actions and statements of a public figure and the significance of those actions and statements.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


It is an attack if you attempt to discredit him without presenting evidence to support he is incorrect. Calling him a charlatan or con man only suggests you disagree which is perfectly acceptable. What he believes is only relevant to him, it should have no bearing on your beliefs unless you find some "truth" within his work or it leads you to find something new of your own. There has always been a "truth movement". We believed (were lead to believe) the earth was flat and to most it was outrageous to believe otherwise. The earth was once the center of the solar system, yet we know better, but once would have been considered a "con artist" to state otherwise. These "truths" served to lead others to seek and find more valid "truths", supported by more and better evidence. Any hypothesis, right or wrong, will lead us to seek further evidence, to expand our knowledge and explore differing and unique possibilities. Lead, follow or carve your own path. Ridicule serves no purpose other than to foster hatred. I do not agree with all of what Icke proposes, but it will lead us to explore and that is the very root of who and what we are.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 01:30 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
...


You made the following claim: proof that David dIcke is telling the truth.

I really want to know if your claim is true or not. Do you have "proof that David dIcke is telling the truth" or not?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866

what kind of proof are you looking for?
 Quoting: jacksprat


Proof, do I need to give you the definition of the word proof?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


written, visual, video, shroom and dmt experiences, dreams, science, history, archeology, alien artifacts

Dan Winter has science proof of Reptilian dna and blood,

watch his video with Santos B and will confirm David dIckes proof of Reptiles
 Quoting: jacksprat


In order to prove your claim "proof that David dIcke is telling the truth" concerning his reptilian theory you'd have to prove it all to be true. Bits of pieces of evidence aren't enough.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 01:35 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
Calling him a charlatan or con man only suggests you disagree which is perfectly acceptable.
 Quoting: danwa


I never called him a charlatan. I pointed out the following FACT:

Someone who continues to claim to be a prophet after many failed predictions is called a charlatan because that fits the definition of a charlatan:

A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages via some form of pretense or deception.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Again Icke fans seem to be incapable of recognizing the difference between facts, beliefs ('views'), and opinions.
danwa

User ID: 26830438
United States
11/16/2012 01:41 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
Calling him a charlatan or con man only suggests you disagree which is perfectly acceptable.
 Quoting: danwa


I never called him a charlatan. I pointed out the following FACT:

Someone who continues to claim to be a prophet after many failed predictions is called a charlatan because that fits the definition of a charlatan:

A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages via some form of pretense or deception.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Again Icke fans seem to be incapable of recognizing the difference between facts, beliefs ('views'), and opinions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Here's the only true fact...there are no facts.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 01:48 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
Calling him a charlatan or con man only suggests you disagree which is perfectly acceptable.
 Quoting: danwa


I never called him a charlatan. I pointed out the following FACT:

Someone who continues to claim to be a prophet after many failed predictions is called a charlatan because that fits the definition of a charlatan:

A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages via some form of pretense or deception.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Again Icke fans seem to be incapable of recognizing the difference between facts, beliefs ('views'), and opinions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Here's the only true fact...there are no facts.
 Quoting: danwa


There's no basis for rational discussion when people can revert to faith at any time and ignore long established principles such as meanings of words and outright lie.

I'm sitting in a chair right now, that's a fact.
danwa

User ID: 26830438
United States
11/16/2012 01:50 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
Calling him a charlatan or con man only suggests you disagree which is perfectly acceptable.
 Quoting: danwa


I never called him a charlatan. I pointed out the following FACT:

Someone who continues to claim to be a prophet after many failed predictions is called a charlatan because that fits the definition of a charlatan:

A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages via some form of pretense or deception.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Again Icke fans seem to be incapable of recognizing the difference between facts, beliefs ('views'), and opinions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Here's the only true fact...there are no facts.
 Quoting: danwa


There's no basis for rational discussion when people can revert to faith at any time and ignore long established principles such as meanings of words and outright lie.

I'm sitting in a chair right now, that's a fact.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Is it? What tells you it is a chair? An electrical signal from your eyes and ass?
ANHEDONIC

User ID: 26795689
United States
11/16/2012 02:04 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
I'm not going to discuss anything with you until you show the evidence that I've asked you for.

Now you have to prove something else as well, you just made this statement:

So you proclaim David to be a charlatan and a con artist who operates in 'woo woo land' yet just earlier told us that you're not anti-David dIcke and that he has presented some 'unique information' that has quote 'helped you tremendously'.

I did not "proclaim David to be a charlatan", I've said this several times:

Someone who continues to claim to be a prophet after many failed predictions is called a charlatan because that fits the definition of a charlatan, debunk it please:

A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages via some form of pretense or deception.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

"So you proclaim David to be...a con artist"

I never said this. Show me where I said that.

So you proclaim David...who operates in 'woo woo land'


I never said this. I said:

"As I explained earlier Icke fits the definition of a charlatan. I think that's important enough to warn people about. In certain professions that alone would end your career but not in woo woo land."

I was talking about GLP and a lot of his followers being in woo woo land, that's where we are. Look at the banner above, it says LUNATIC FRINGE.


yet just earlier told us that you're not anti-David dIcke


I've never said anything like that. This is what I keep saying:

My purpose with this thread is not personal, my purpose with this thread is not about opinions, my purpose with this thread is not about beliefs, my purpose with this thread is not about faith...

This thread is meant to be about truth. Truth is about evidence, logic, facts, and proof.

The more information people have the better choices they can make. More information being available only helps people to make better decisions.

What I'm doing is no different than what Icke has made a career out of:

I'm pointing out the actions and statements of a public figure and the significance of those actions and statements.

The difference between Icke and myself is that I can point to actual evidence to back up what I'm saying but Icke usually can't.

that he has presented some 'unique information' that has quote 'helped you tremendously'.


He has lots of factual information in my opinion. I have never said anything that contradicts that.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Do you have difficulty exercising reading comprehending when viewing your own words for some reason? I provided you with your exact words. Here they are again, posted verbatim:

As I explained earlier Icke fits the definition of a charlatan. I think that's important enough to warn people about. In certain professions that alone would end your career but not in woo woo land.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


So now you are going to try and convince us that you never called him a 'charlatan' when you say he not only fits the definition of a charlatan but that you feel it's 'important enough' to warn others about? If you're not calling or implying that he's a 'charlatan' here then please tell us what you're 'warning' others about? His bad teeth?

Great point. If you can debunk half of Icke's info then he's a con artist, case closed.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Now you are also going to deny implying he was a con artist when it's right there in your own words??? Case closed?

Does any of the following mean that I'm Anti-David dIcke? Of course not. In fact he has some unique information that has helped me tremendously.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Youre denying saying this as well? You just said right there "Of course not" in reply to your question as to whether or not you're anti-David dIcke. So you're stating that you're not, and that he has presented you with QUOTE 'unique information' that has QUOTE 'helped' you 'tremendously'.


These are your quotes, anyone can scroll through the thread and see your exact words with your (OP) designation next to your name. See for yourself (Page 2, Page 14, and one other).

Not only is it puzzling that you are denying your own admissions but you still won't answer a very important and objective question. Why are you so vehemently discouraging others from listening to this individual when you by your own words found him to present 'unique information' that you personally found to be a 'tremendous' help to you. Could others also not stand to benefit in the same manner that you admit to or is there something that sets you apart from others when it comes to viewing information from a 'con artist' and 'charlatan'???

This question should be addressed if you expect others to heed your advice in this thread. Right now your tactic of denying your own posts and making conflicting statements is not serving your case very well.

peace

"You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger"
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 02:15 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
...


I never called him a charlatan. I pointed out the following FACT:

Someone who continues to claim to be a prophet after many failed predictions is called a charlatan because that fits the definition of a charlatan:

A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages via some form of pretense or deception.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Again Icke fans seem to be incapable of recognizing the difference between facts, beliefs ('views'), and opinions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Here's the only true fact...there are no facts.
 Quoting: danwa


There's no basis for rational discussion when people can revert to faith at any time and ignore long established principles such as meanings of words and outright lie.

I'm sitting in a chair right now, that's a fact.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Is it? What tells you it is a chair? An electrical signal from your eyes and ass?
 Quoting: danwa


Are you insinuating that I don't have the ability to judge whether or not I'm sitting in a chair?

Do you think Alan Watt was right with the following assessment?

"The first step in becoming one is to convince the followers that everything and they'll use the term "illusion." It's an illusion, but what they really mean is it's not real at all. An illusion, remember, is a distortion of a reality, like looking through an old-fashioned pane glass window from the side. You'll get a distortion of a reality which is there, but what they're really telling you when they say illusion is that nothing is real whatsoever. That's the greatest trick of mind control. You lose your identity in such thinking. You lose your persona in such thinking and what they do in brainwashing is called "depersonalization," it's the first main step in brainwashing a victim. That's why they use this technique of saying nothing at all is real."

[link to www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com]
danwa

User ID: 26830438
United States
11/16/2012 02:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
...


Here's the only true fact...there are no facts.
 Quoting: danwa


There's no basis for rational discussion when people can revert to faith at any time and ignore long established principles such as meanings of words and outright lie.

I'm sitting in a chair right now, that's a fact.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Is it? What tells you it is a chair? An electrical signal from your eyes and ass?
 Quoting: danwa


Are you insinuating that I don't have the ability to judge whether or not I'm sitting in a chair?

Do you think Alan Watt was right with the following assessment?

"The first step in becoming one is to convince the followers that everything and they'll use the term "illusion." It's an illusion, but what they really mean is it's not real at all. An illusion, remember, is a distortion of a reality, like looking through an old-fashioned pane glass window from the side. You'll get a distortion of a reality which is there, but what they're really telling you when they say illusion is that nothing is real whatsoever. That's the greatest trick of mind control. You lose your identity in such thinking. You lose your persona in such thinking and what they do in brainwashing is called "depersonalization," it's the first main step in brainwashing a victim. That's why they use this technique of saying nothing at all is real."

[link to www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


There is a difference between real and fact. Reality, by definition infers realism. The signal your eyes send to your brain to tell you there is a chair takes time, however minute, to reach your brain. For illustrative purposes, let's say it takes 0.0001 ms. Now, when you sit down on your "chair" is it a fact that it is there in the first 0.0000001 ms?

I do not wish to argue my beliefs, your's or Icke's. You have contradicted yourself many times over and are not adequately prepared to defend your position. It matters not. Your reality is yours, mine is mine. If they differ it is not relevant in the grand scheme of things. Only "brainwashing" would assert something as preposterous as we must all hold the same beliefs.

Last Edited by danwa on 11/16/2012 02:30 AM
ANHEDONIC

User ID: 26795689
United States
11/16/2012 02:33 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
Perhaps for integrity purposes you should modify the thread title to include some of your own words:

Debunked 'Charlatan' 'Con Artist' Davide dIcke Presents 'unique' and 'lots of factual information' that 'helped me tremendously', Ask me a question.


wink

Last Edited by ANHEDONIC on 11/16/2012 02:34 AM

"You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger"
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 02:36 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
I will only say, "Icke fits the definition of a charlatan." because I know what Icke fans are like. Not one Icke fan has even tried to debunk the statement, btw.

In order for people to understand the mentality of Icke fans and why you must be so careful when communicating with them look at this example. I just had the following discourse with an Icke fan (you can read it in this thread, it just happened):

Me: I'm sitting in a chair right now, that's a fact.

Answer: Is it? What tells you it is a chair? An electrical signal from your eyes and ass?

I would have to say, "I appear to be sitting in a chair..." or something for the statement to be accurate to Icke fans, I don't even know what I'd have to say to make the statement accurate enough for them.

I really don't know how to communicate with these people when they seem to deny the normal definition of a chair?
danwa

User ID: 26830438
United States
11/16/2012 02:41 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
I will only say, "Icke fits the definition of a charlatan." because I know what Icke fans are like. Not one Icke fan has even tried to debunk the statement, btw.

In order for people to understand the mentality of Icke fans and why you must be so careful when communicating with them look at this example. I just had the following discourse with an Icke fan (you can read it in this thread, it just happened):

Me: I'm sitting in a chair right now, that's a fact.

Answer: Is it? What tells you it is a chair? An electrical signal from your eyes and ass?

I would have to say, "I appear to be sitting in a chair..." or something for the statement to be accurate to Icke fans, I don't even know what I'd have to say to make the statement accurate enough for them.

I really don't know how to communicate with these people when they seem to deny the normal definition of a chair?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


LOL, perhaps you should consider working on your communication skills. It was merely an example of alternative perspectives, without which, we would remain at a stand still as a species.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 02:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
You have contradicted yourself many times over and are not adequately prepared to defend your position.
 Quoting: danwa


You claim "You have contradicted yourself many times over" please point out your evidence for making this statement?
Citizenperth
FUKUSHIMA, GLPTARD 24/7/365

User ID: 27714573
Australia
11/16/2012 02:47 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
"i listen to the voice in my head"

crickets............
It's life as we know it, but only just.
My Fukushima Site:
[link to citizenperth.wordpress.com]
sic ut vos es vos should exsisto , denego alius vicis facio vos change , exsisto youself , proprie

GLP's best Fuku thread: Thread: *** Fukushima *** and other nuclear-----updates and links
twitter: @citizenperth
“If I had an hour to solve a problem and my life depended on it, I would use the first 55 minutes determining the proper question to ask, for once I knew the proper question, I could solve the problem in less than five minutes.”
- Albert Einstein
danwa

User ID: 26830438
United States
11/16/2012 02:51 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
You have contradicted yourself many times over and are not adequately prepared to defend your position.
 Quoting: danwa


You claim "You have contradicted yourself many times over" please point out your evidence for making this statement?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Please see ANHEDONIC's posts. I like that you have a differing point of view, it is what makes us unique, learn and grow.

Peace
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 02:59 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
I posted a judgment based on a hypothetical situation:

"If you can debunk half of Icke's info then he's a con artist, case closed."

To explain what I said:

If, presuming a person could "debunk half of Icke's info" in that hypothetical situation, Icke would be a con man.

What's the definition of a con man?

someone who makes a living by swindling people.

noun

someone who makes a living by swindling people.


dictionary.reference.com/browse/con+artist?s=t&ld=1118

If half of Icke's info could be debunked then of course he'd be a con artist.

Do I have to say it's "By the normal definition of a con artist"?

Based on the above, the following accusation was made of me:

Now you are also going to deny implying he was a con artist when it's right there in your own words??? Case closed?

I said that in a hypothetical situation such as what is stated, Icke would be a con artist:

"If you can debunk half of Icke's info then he's a con artist, case closed."

I never implied that he was a con artist outside of that hypothetical situation and I stand by that 100%.
ANHEDONIC

User ID: 26795689
United States
11/16/2012 03:07 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
I will only say, "Icke fits the definition of a charlatan." because I know what Icke fans are like. Not one Icke fan has even tried to debunk the statement, btw.

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


I'm sorry but no one reading this thread is going to believe this explanation that you implied he was a 'charlatan' because of his 'fans'.

This is not an argument of right or wrong here. I'm encouraging you to be honest about your experiences and admissions. You stating that this individual has lots of factual information and information that you found to be unique and tremendously helpful to you, then turning around and making all these condescending statements about these so called 'fans' of David dIcke, it's very hypocritical of you.

You exposed yourself to his information and found some of it to be helpful, why are you discouraging others from pursuing this information to make their own decision about it? Why ridicule others who view the same information that you did?

I've never read any of his books and have watched 3 videos of his on YouTube. I found some of his ideas/opinions on consciousness, energy, emotion to be very intriguing and some of what he had to say I could confirm was accurate from what I have learned through my own personal experiences. When I've heard him talking about reptilians or really 'out there' topics I tend to tune him out and look for him to speak about other subject matters that I'm actually interested in hearing different perspectives on. Is there a problem with doing this? Does this make me a dumbed down fanboy the way you are portraying otherrs to be in this thread?

The only reason I'm speaking up in this thread is that I think you're doing a disservice to others by discouraging them from exploring ideas & theories that, whether true or not, will serve to raise their awareness level of possibilities and encourage them to step outside the confined and rigid paradigms of 'thinking' that society conditions us to accept.

"You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger"
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 03:11 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
I was accused of posting this:

"yet just earlier told us that you're not anti-David dIcke"

What I actually posted was this:

"Does any of the following mean that I'm Anti-David dIcke? Of course not."

I really don't see how so someone can get the meaning

"yet just earlier told us that you're not anti-David dIcke"

from the statement:

"Does any of the following mean that I'm Anti-David dIcke? Of course not."
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27798812
South Africa
11/16/2012 03:17 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Epic fail
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 03:28 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
"You stating that this individual has lots of factual information and information that you found to be unique and tremendously helpful to you, then turning around and making all these condescending statements about these so called 'fans' of David dIcke, it's very hypocritical of you."


Actually, the fact that Icke has unique and helpful information is what makes him dangerous. I feel that he baits people with the unique and helpful information and this helps lead people into believing things that require faith such as the moon matrix theory.

I was accused of being "hypocritical" above, let's look at the definition of that word:

of the nature of hypocrisy, or pretense of having virtues, beliefs, principles, etc., that one does not actually possess

A real hypocrisy is to claim to be about the truth and yet not point out both the positive and negative side of something honestly. Icke has a positive side and a negative side. It would be hypocritical to point out the positive while ignoring the negative while still claiming to be a pursuer of truth.

What I've done in this thread is no different than what Icke has made a career out of:

I'm pointing out the actions and statements of a public figure and the significance of those actions and statements.

The difference between Icke and myself is that I can point to actual evidence to back up what I'm saying but Icke usually can't.

What's my main reason for doing that?

The more information people have the better choices they can make. More information being available only helps people to make better decisions.

The 2012 hoax alone has caused people to go insane and lose a lot. I knew someone who I believe was driven insane by it. He believed 100% in the 'Mayan prophecy' and that December 21st 2012 was the end of the world. I had to cut ties with him because he was too crazy for me. He said that aliens were coming to save certain chosen people on December 21st 2012 of which he was one and that people like him would be taken off in a giant spaceship. He had given up his whole life to that belief basically. It's tragic.

Now you've got Icke fans saying that the moon matrix theory and the belief system it leads you to (see below) are a legitimate view of 'reality' and they support it as valid and credible.

It becomes incredibly tragic when you realize that if people actually do what gorilla199 suggested:

"go and start telling your friends and all your families and your workmates and everyone that you meet, start telling them that you believe what David dIcke has said. You believe that the moon is a giant spaceship full of aliens controlling us with mind rays"

It's going to cost people their relationships, their careers, their standing in the community, etc.. That's what happened between me and my old friend I just mentioned. Him sharing his outrageous beliefs about 2012 and the aliens that would save humanity cost us our friendship. In the long run he ended up losing his job and I believe that was related to his 2012 beliefs.

You've got Icke fans supporting the the moon matrix theory and the belief system it leads you to as a legitimate, valid, and credible view of 'reality'. Icke fans are rooting people on to their doom.

It's not only that though. Icke fans don't care that Icke is leading people to this horrible abyss of a belief system. No one outside of Icke's circle is gonna believe the moon matrix theory and where it leads you to. That will only cause massive suffering for those who believe in it and their friends and loved ones too.

I've experienced something similar so I have lots of compassion for the victims here especially the children and spouses of those who believe this stuff, those people may suffer the most.

Where's the compassion of the Icke fans?

All of this has nothing to do with Icke, this is about a charlatan who is leading people to do their doom.

Icke fans should be open to all possibility especially the possibility that a different view of things is necessary for some people to realize what's going as is pointed out below:

I've had PMs from people, two lots of PMs. One is sort of like, "Thank you for waking me up I didn't actually realize what I was doing, I just got caught in this stuff.

If Icke fans had any real awareness they'd be happy that more information is being put out there so that people can make better decisions but what we're seeing from Icke fans in this thread is the opposite.

Why is it important to get this truth out? Knowledge is power. As is pointed out in the following video, some people have been led to a place they don't want to be because of Icke's belief system and they need help. I think about my friend and I'm sad that I didn't help him to overcome his insanity, I just cut him off. I may be trying to make up for that by doing this thread. I have a ton of compassion for people like him.

We've got the people who claim "Infinite love is the only truth..." showing no sympathy or compassion whatsoever. They won't show any sympathy or compassion for the suffering that Icke will do and has done with his other claims. I think that speaks for itself.

Quoting from this video below:

"Since my little bundle with David dIcke and of course him owning himself so spectacularly by claiming that the moon is a giant spacecraft inhabited by aliens controlling us with mind rays, I've had PMs from people, two lots of PMs. One is sort of like, "Thank you for waking me up I didn't actually realize what I was doing, I just got caught in this stuff. Well, yeah, you know, because, you know TV programs are called a program for a reason and you know, movies are the same thing, they are a program. They are a program that goes in your head and it will stay there, you know. The more interesting they make it, the more exciting they make it, the more it will fiddle with your mind. It will just, you know, mess around with you there and you want to hear words like matrix and blue pill, red pill, and you know the rabbit hole, and the spider's web and stuff like that. Because it makes for a good dungeons and dragons conversation. But, big kids get together and that's what they do, they're playing dungeons and dragons and they don't even realize it....

Do this: go and start telling your friends and all your families and your workmates and everyone that you meet, start telling them that you believe what David dIcke has said. You believe that the moon is a giant spaceship full of aliens controlling us with mind rays....

You discover that your wife has been having an affair behind your back and you say to her, "Why did you do it?" And she says, "I'm sorry baby but the aliens in the moon with the mind rays, they made me do it. It's not my fault." Are you gonna believe her? Are you? I don't think you are, are you? But, you see, this is the problem. If you're prepared to accept that the moon is a giant spaceship full of aliens controlling you with mind rays then you're gonna have to accept that your wife or your girlfriend or your husband or whoever one day can turn around and say that to you..."

Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 03:30 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


Epic fail
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27798812


In order for that claim to be valid you have to debunk it.
WeAreOne

User ID: 27857462
United Kingdom
11/16/2012 04:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
I will only say, "Icke fits the definition of a charlatan." because I know what Icke fans are like. Not one Icke fan has even tried to debunk the statement, btw.

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


I'm sorry but no one reading this thread is going to believe this explanation that you implied he was a 'charlatan' because of his 'fans'.

This is not an argument of right or wrong here. I'm encouraging you to be honest about your experiences and admissions. You stating that this individual has lots of factual information and information that you found to be unique and tremendously helpful to you, then turning around and making all these condescending statements about these so called 'fans' of David dIcke, it's very hypocritical of you.

You exposed yourself to his information and found some of it to be helpful, why are you discouraging others from pursuing this information to make their own decision about it? Why ridicule others who view the same information that you did?

I've never read any of his books and have watched 3 videos of his on YouTube. I found some of his ideas/opinions on consciousness, energy, emotion to be very intriguing and some of what he had to say I could confirm was accurate from what I have learned through my own personal experiences. When I've heard him talking about reptilians or really 'out there' topics I tend to tune him out and look for him to speak about other subject matters that I'm actually interested in hearing different perspectives on. Is there a problem with doing this? Does this make me a dumbed down fanboy the way you are portraying otherrs to be in this thread?

The only reason I'm speaking up in this thread is that I think you're doing a disservice to others by discouraging them from exploring ideas & theories that, whether true or not, will serve to raise their awareness level of possibilities and encourage them to step outside the confined and rigid paradigms of 'thinking' that society conditions us to accept.
 Quoting: ANHEDONIC


As I've posted earlier in this thread I think the timing of all these sudden "Icke is wrong" threads is somewhat suspicious.

He is going full throttle on the Government/Elite Peodo rings (something he's spoken about for years but no-one would listen) and as if by magic numerous posts are popping up trying to derail him.

I personally believe there is something else going on with these threads as I've not seen this many posts popping up about him since I joined. highly suspect!

agentagentagent
Be the change you want the World to be. Be someone that makes you happy.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23254866
United States
11/16/2012 04:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: David dIcke Debunked in 19 Seconds
I will only say, "Icke fits the definition of a charlatan." because I know what Icke fans are like. Not one Icke fan has even tried to debunk the statement, btw.

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23254866


I'm sorry but no one reading this thread is going to believe this explanation that you implied he was a 'charlatan' because of his 'fans'.

This is not an argument of right or wrong here. I'm encouraging you to be honest about your experiences and admissions. You stating that this individual has lots of factual information and information that you found to be unique and tremendously helpful to you, then turning around and making all these condescending statements about these so called 'fans' of David dIcke, it's very hypocritical of you.

You exposed yourself to his information and found some of it to be helpful, why are you discouraging others from pursuing this information to make their own decision about it? Why ridicule others who view the same information that you did?

I've never read any of his books and have watched 3 videos of his on YouTube. I found some of his ideas/opinions on consciousness, energy, emotion to be very intriguing and some of what he had to say I could confirm was accurate from what I have learned through my own personal experiences. When I've heard him talking about reptilians or really 'out there' topics I tend to tune him out and look for him to speak about other subject matters that I'm actually interested in hearing different perspectives on. Is there a problem with doing this? Does this make me a dumbed down fanboy the way you are portraying otherrs to be in this thread?

The only reason I'm speaking up in this thread is that I think you're doing a disservice to others by discouraging them from exploring ideas & theories that, whether true or not, will serve to raise their awareness level of possibilities and encourage them to step outside the confined and rigid paradigms of 'thinking' that society conditions us to accept.
 Quoting: ANHEDONIC


As I've posted earlier in this thread I think the timing of all these sudden "Icke is wrong" threads is somewhat suspicious.

He is going full throttle on the Government/Elite Peodo rings (something he's spoken about for years but no-one would listen) and as if by magic numerous posts are popping up trying to derail him.

I personally believe there is something else going on with these threads as I've not seen this many posts popping up about him since I joined. highly suspect!

agentagentagent
 Quoting: WeAreOne


Do you want to know what Icke has actually done to expose "Government/Elite Peodo rings"?

I have to post the following video which I ran across. This guy is laughing at what you just said because of Icke and his totally irresponsible 'reporting':



How is Icke helping to expose anything when people are having that reaction?

And, actually, the reaction is totally appropriate and correct by normal standards. The guy is trying to examine Icke's article like a normal person would, taking it on its own merit.

I don't know how much Icke has helped expose "Government/Elite Peodo rings" in the big picture there's lots of other researchers exposing that stuff but Icke's the only one of them who gets laughed at in doing so by the public that I've seen.

An unbiased observer might say that he's discrediting these issues far more than exposing them. As is pointed out in the video above, it's Icke's total irresponsibility that causes people to laugh and rightfully so by normal standards.

Bullhorn Jones thought that David "Icke"'s reptilian stuff was "asinine" and "it discredits all of the reality people are talking about." According to Bullhorn Jones, Icke was doing more harm than good in his work.