David Icke?? The Reptilian bloodline guy?? dude.

Thanks for you response. Maybe I should read his books. However, to reiterate, the sparse solutions he has proposed that I have seen are, as I said, not tangible. You, yourself, appear to quote an example when you say; "We should stop doing that, if we don't want that to happen." The "we" in that sentence are, according to Chomsky, in no position to change anything by peaceful means. His rhetoric appeals to the radical elements of society to "take back" control, which implies anarchy and rebellion. His corporate conspiracy theories are myriad and he strikes me as a highly intelligent, educated version of the loon David Icke.

Ick this was annoying... I had to watch it on youtube to be able to turn of the captions... It is a good video though.

And ick...a smoker.

Oh yea this theory has always been good stuff... actually the David Icke books are a good read for many different reasons...

David Icke Website
http://www.davidicke.com

"British author exposes the reptilian bloodline that rules the world."

"...human beings originated in a breeding program run by a race of reptilians called Anunnaki from the Draco constellation, and that what we call reality is just a holographic experience; the only reality is the realm of the Absolute"

For all his out-there theories he makes good points and gives food for thought:

"When you survey the world today ... when a child dies in this world of preventable disease every two seconds, when the economic system of this world must destroy the Earth simply for that system to survive; when you see all the wars, and when you see all the pain, and when you see all the suffering, is it a force of love and wisdom and tolerance that is in control of this planet?" -- david icke

Mr. Brown's argument is belied by his body's reaction: profuse sweating and foamy mouth. Ick.

>> ^shuac:

I never understood what 1sttube was supposed to mean. Like it was "first on television"?
Ick.
What's the process for renaming a channel? Cuz that one needs it. How about, oh I dunno, something crazy like television. Maybe?


I've been on the sift 6 years, but each time I sift a video I have to look at the tool tips for half the channels to see what the heck they are; even then sometimes I don't know.

They are named by people who know the sift inside-out, for people who know the sift inside-out - which is a pretty poor design IMHO.

I never understood what *1sttube was supposed to mean. Like it was "first on television"?

Ick.

What's the process for renaming a channel? Cuz that one needs it. How about, oh I dunno, something crazy like *television. Maybe?

• because i've done pretty decent research on what they have to say and it's almost entirely and demonstrably horseshit (that's a scientific term)

• my agreeing with them isn't particularly important because what they say is commonly if not always outside their area of expertise (icke's area of expertise is football, chopra is technically a medical doctor, and haramein's is, well, nothing). because of this their understand of their "proof" is painfully poor and their conclusions from their proof is laughable. and as i like to say, even if they are right, the method that got them there was wrong (so to speak).

• they do seem to be crazy people who's insanity infects others. SO many people buy into this kind of wishful thinking and i think it's dangerous and damaging to the intellectual process and infrastructure we've spent so long building. it's baseless new age bullshit perpetrated by charlatans.

• babies and puppies are delicious, i don't know what's wrong with you.

• the blanket statement is due to most/all of these ideas having been completely discredited.

• i don't care what you call yourself or them but they are saying things that are untrue. if they were just making up a new mythology that didn't try to have any basis in science or facts then i wouldn't care but they pretend that certain theories mean things when they don't understand the theories in the first place.

• it can be discussed but in that discussion, like this one, it can be dismissed pretty quickly.

• i don't know anything about your "faith" so i can't really comment on it but if you're telling people your faith is an objective truth then we have a problem.


to be clear, i have seen the movie. i know who this kid is and i've seen his other movies (one i liked). just because he spent a lot of money on his informal research does give credence to said research. by volume, i could probably find more information on this type of nonsense than the science they're supposedly basing these ideas on. AKA there is SO much of this garbage out there.



>> ^enoch:

>> ^kir_mokum:
anything that takes deepak chopra, nassim haramein, and david icke seriously is not worth paying attention to.

i wasnt going to comment but curiosity has gotten the better of me.
why would you state that with such authority?
because you disagree with those people?
find their theories to be suspect?
are they crazy people whose insanity may infect others?
do they eat babies and kick puppies?
why the blanket dismissal?
because one is a spiritualist who has a different way of approaching the human condition?
or that another has wild conspiratorial theories?
does that invalidate them from participating in discussions on what we should do?
and if that is the case..
what about me?
i am a man of faith.everything i do and say is born from my faith.
yet the form my faith takes would make me an apostate and i would have been executed only a few hundred years ago.
does me being a man a faith invalidate my opinions?
the man who made this movie is from the gamble family.the proctor and gamble family.
he spent his wealth on researching and discovery and made a movie revealing his conclusions and possible solutions.
the movie has a very humanist philosophy.
and he uses many many people to help express what he sees as an end game with global elite to control us.chopra and icke are only one of many.
i guess i just dont understand absolutist thinking.
chopra and icke?
well it must be about a. b. or c. and therefore should be ignored.
that just seems so.......limiting......to me.
i found some of the claims in the movie to be questionable and other things i agreed with wholeheartedly,but i have to give gamble credit for putting his ideas out there.
that takes balls.

>> ^kir_mokum:

anything that takes deepak chopra, nassim haramein, and david icke seriously is not worth paying attention to.


i wasnt going to comment but curiosity has gotten the better of me.
why would you state that with such authority?
because you disagree with those people?
find their theories to be suspect?
are they crazy people whose insanity may infect others?
do they eat babies and kick puppies?

why the blanket dismissal?
because one is a spiritualist who has a different way of approaching the human condition?
or that another has wild conspiratorial theories?
does that invalidate them from participating in discussions on what we should do?

and if that is the case..
what about me?
i am a man of faith.everything i do and say is born from my faith.
yet the form my faith takes would make me an apostate and i would have been executed only a few hundred years ago.
does me being a man a faith invalidate my opinions?

the man who made this movie is from the gamble family.the proctor and gamble family.
he spent his wealth on researching and discovery and made a movie revealing his conclusions and possible solutions.
the movie has a very humanist philosophy.
and he uses many many people to help express what he sees as an end game with global elite to control us.chopra and icke are only one of many.

i guess i just dont understand absolutist thinking.
chopra and icke?
well it must be about a. b. or c. and therefore should be ignored.
that just seems so.......limiting......to me.

i found some of the claims in the movie to be questionable and other things i agreed with wholeheartedly,but i have to give gamble credit for putting his ideas out there.
that takes balls.

anything that takes deepak chopra, nassim haramein, and david icke seriously is not worth paying attention to.

Pantyhose. Ick.

She's still a cutie.

this guy is a certified quack. david icke has more credibility than david wilcock.

>> ^KnivesOut:

Again, I don't necessarily think you're a sexist or a misogynist. I think you may be suffering from the same "boys club" attitude that many of the engineers I've worked with operate under. I just want you to introspect a little and consider the possibility.

Possibly. I'd like to think I don't suffer from that, although in reality, I cannot ignore the fact that we are all a product of the society we grew up in. In my defence, it is something I've thought about and I feel I'm open to the possibility of being wrong.

>> ^KnivesOut:

For the sake of argument, what if we replaced the masculine/feminine terms in your question with racial ones:
"why do we need to promote any career/vocation that is traditionally single [race] dominated to the other [race], e.g. [some profession] to [blacks], [some other profession] to [whites]?"
I'm drawing no conclusions about the importance or the value of one profession over the other, merely putting it into racial terms instead of sexual ones. To me, it feels just as icky.

I understand the ick factor there. But isn't there a difference between assuming a racial bias and a gender or even cultural bias? (bias is really the wrong word here, but I'm struggling to come up with a better one). I don't believe we can ignore the fact that different genders or cultures show aptitudes for different things (I believe culture is more important than race in determining this, in fact, I generally believe race to be largely irrelevant).

I guess my idea is to be "post-feminist/racist". I'd hope that we can accept individuals on their merits.

>> ^KnivesOut:

I believe that sexism is still widely accepted in our society, to a much higher degree than racial intolerance, or even tolerance of "alternate lifestyles". It's insidious, and it crosses the entirety of our society (sexism in every racial community.) Women still get paid less for the same work, they still have a harder time getting promotions (and then still make less money.) Women are even very sexist against each-other (you should see the looks my wife gets when she tells other mothers at school functions that she's finishing a compsci degree.)


This I agree with. Look at the current crop of games from E3. I utterly dislike the idea that anyone is judged in a career on anything other than their merits.

>> ^KnivesOut:

Maybe I'm overly touchy about it, and for that I apologize.


You probably shouldn't. In general, I am a cantankerous, grumpy bastard who's entirely too sure of the correctness of his own opinions.

You think they'd have learned by MANY of the areas of the world that have found extremely better ways to handle waste than just dumping it in one massive site (even here in the U.S.; I remember having massive dumps in the 80's in Utah, but they're long gone now). Maybe it's temporary, but the fact that all the waste isn't separated, with hazardous and toxic chemicals not being separated is unreal in a semi-well to do country.

They'll have to restore the whole area to rid it of the toxic sludge that'll be made, let alone what WILL go into the water once it hits the water line in that sand. Ick.