Theophobia

[American Dream]

Which bit of 'no' did you have problem in reading? No is a pretty simle answer AFAIK! Tell you what, I'll make it BIG and RED and ITALIC and UNDERSCORED.

I would now appreciate you addressing my issues with your support of critical thinking which I raised.

I noticed that you didnt address ANY of the issues I raised.

Searcher- Your answer was, "If you mean I think there are four dimensional astral entities from Draconis at the top of the NWO pyramid, then err.. NO!!. " But my question wasn't, "Do you think there are four dimensional astral entities from Draconis at the top of the NWO pyramid?" It was, "Does your support for David Icke include his Reptilian Theory?".

The only questions of me in that post of yours are contained in this paragraph:

Are you saying that you are certain that out of probably a bare minimum 300,000,000 'Goldilocks' zone planets in just this Galaxy that NONE of them have any interest in us?Or are engaged in interaction at this time? My understanding is that CIA aligned Arlington Institute did a major year-long investigation in to the subject of human reaction to finding there were already many very human looking races from the Greater Community on Earth. Have you ever thought about the implications of exopolitics? Critical thinking is pants for thinking through scenarios.

To which my answer is: I'm not by any means saying I'm certain there is no life beyond Earth, nor am I saying that there could be no interactions with humans and I definitely have thought about the implications of exopolitcs.

Now, please do provide a clear and responsive answer to my question: "Does your support for David Icke include his Reptilian Theory?".

It is my sincere hope that by engaging reason, faith, intuition, etc. around the question of David Icke's Reptilian Theory that we might ground this discussion a bit more, and maybe even find out some things about these various methods of trying to ascertain truth that could be enlightening and/or useful to all of us.

[brainpanhandler]

My two cents:

$.01 - The world is in much greater need of more critical thinking than it is more faith.

$.01 - It takes a great deal more courage to live this life without faith than it does with it.

[wordspeak2]

Agreed.

Eat some psychedelic mushrooms, and you encounter real mother nature spirituality. If you really get there you're unlikely to go back to "faith," which basically means believing something that you don't actually know. More than that we need knowledge and exploration. The reality of spiritual dimensions is ten thousand times wilder than modern religion would have us believe.

I have no problem with strongly religious people who use their "faith" for good, such as Catholic Workers, as mentioned. But to point out the obvious, Christianity, and now Mormonism as well, has been used as a tool to spread capitalism throughout the world, and this is evil. A good read is "Thy Will Be Done," a history of the Rockefeller family.

It's totally about spirituality- earth-based, plant-based spirituality. It's not at all about faith in something above us.

[Searcher08]

Which bit of 'no' did you have problem in reading? No is a pretty simle answer AFAIK! Tell you what, I'll make it BIG and RED and ITALIC and UNDERSCORED.

I would now appreciate you addressing my issues with your support of critical thinking which I raised.

I noticed that you didnt address ANY of the issues I raised.

Searcher- Your answer was, "If you mean I think there are four dimensional astral entities from Draconis at the top of the NWO pyramid, then err.. NO!!. " But my question wasn't, "Do you think there are four dimensional astral entities from Draconis at the top of the NWO pyramid?" It was, "Does your support for David Icke include his Reptilian Theory?".

I am uncertain what you are saying - my understanding of David Icke's book is that THAT IS what you call his 'Reptilian Theory'. My answer to that is given above.

The only questions of me in that post of yours are contained in this paragraph:

Are you saying that you are certain that out of probably a bare minimum 300,000,000 'Goldilocks' zone planets in just this Galaxy that NONE of them have any interest in us?Or are engaged in interaction at this time? My understanding is that CIA aligned Arlington Institute did a major year-long investigation in to the subject of human reaction to finding there were already many very human looking races from the Greater Community on Earth. Have you ever thought about the implications of exopolitics? Critical thinking is pants for thinking through scenarios.

To which my answer is: I'm not by any means saying I'm certain there is no life beyond Earth, nor am I saying that there could be no interactions with humans and I definitely have thought about the implications of exopolitcs.

You have not addressed any of the issues I raised about the limitations of critical thinking

Now, please do provide a clear and responsive answer to my question: "Does your support for David Icke include his Reptilian Theory?".

I already have. It's NO! Maybe this can make it clearer for you


I would be very interested to hear of any exopolitics thinking you have done, because there is an terrible lack of it. I have found very few people willing to talk about it - and here I refer not to "channeled space masters". Libertarian ideals of freedom and autonomy and Progressive ideals of fairness and compassion might end up being perceived in dramatically different ways in the Greater Community.

I did some research a few months ago into IMHO 'high quality' contact experiences.
There appear to be very very few. What I found I found really startling and very though provoking.

It is my sincere hope that by engaging reason, faith, intuition, etc. around the question of David Icke's Reptilian Theory that we might ground this discussion a bit more, and maybe even find out some things about these various methods of trying to ascertain truth that could be enlightening and/or useful to all of us.

To begin that process for me, I would like you to at least engage with my points about the limitations and dangers of critical thinking. These are big subjects, requiring lots of tools to be even able to engage with the subject matter in a meaningful way - reductionist thinking has a very small place to play in that.

[Searcher08]

Agreed.

Eat some psychedelic mushrooms, and you encounter real mother nature spirituality. If you really get there you're unlikely to go back to "faith," which basically means believing something that you don't actually know. More than that we need knowledge and exploration. The reality of spiritual dimensions is ten thousand times wilder than modern religion would have us believe.

I have no problem with strongly religious people who use their "faith" for good, such as Catholic Workers, as mentioned. But to point out the obvious, Christianity, and now Mormonism as well, has been used as a tool to spread capitalism throughout the world, and this is evil. A good read is "Thy Will Be Done," a history of the Rockefeller family.

It's totally about spirituality- earth-based, plant-based spirituality. It's not at all about faith in something above us.

One of the things that concerns me is how , for want of a better word, "Terra-centric" plant spirituality is seen as. Lots of the metaphors are about Gaia as our universal mother. In a sense, the lack of engagement that most people have with (for want of a better word, the Shaman's world - one I am very familiar with as a Wiccan) is also mirrored by the lack of engagement people have with the Greater Community, which in another way is that "something above us".

Shifting from a Earth as centre of the universe to Sun caused a huge shift in humanity; going from a Heliocentric to (I dont even know the word exists - galactic node?) will be a thousand times bigger -
and can you imagine the effect upon finding out that we might be as interesting to the bigger world as Buttfuck, Idaho and given the same degree of consideration that we give to a news report about the hell of Mogadishu?

[barracuda]

are you being serious?

Not entirely. But I find your conception of your faith to be dangerously close to the teachings of the Jedi masters. And we know what kind of trouble that got us into - the Empire, the Clone Wars, the return of the Sith, etc. j/k

Further, I can't tell from your description if there is a moral aspect to this force or not, nor can I guess what precepts might be obtained by such faith. It sounds like you just made it up, which is fine, I guess, but I'm not sure how a made-up religion like the one you describe can help you in your interactions here in the now on earth. If you make up your religion, what's to stop you from making up your ethics to suit as well?

I think I can VERY VERY safely rest my case at this point.

I thought you rested your case with the very first post.

Wow. Now I realize that Albert Einstein was a complete idiot. His critical thinking and faith in understanding the unseen and the seen was a complete waste of time and space. You're right, Cuda. Thanks so much for showing me the light of never trusting people of faith or having faith in anything, period. RI kicks ass.

I have no idea how my username ended up associated with this remark. I myself have attempted to live my entire life with regards to a variety of the aspects of faith, and I consider the relationship with one's faith for better or worse a fundamental aspect of the human condition.

But since you decided to build your convictions upon those of Einstein, let's examine that:

Childish superstition: Einstein's letter makes view of religion relatively clear

...

A little known letter written by him, however, may help to settle the argument - or at least provoke further controversy about his views.

Due to be auctioned this week in London after being in a private collection for more than 50 years, the document leaves no doubt that the theoretical physicist was no supporter of religious beliefs, which he regarded as "childish superstitions".

Einstein penned the letter on January 3 1954 to the philosopher Eric Gutkind who had sent him a copy of his book Choose Life: The Biblical Call to Revolt. The letter went on public sale a year later and has remained in private hands ever since.

In the letter, he states: "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."

Einstein, who was Jewish and who declined an offer to be the state of Israel's second president, also rejected the idea that the Jews are God's favoured people.

"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them."

Einstein's own relationship with faith seems far more complex than you are prepared to give him credit for.

[justdrew]

Agreed.

Eat some psychedelic mushrooms, and you encounter real mother nature spirituality. If you really get there you're unlikely to go back to "faith," which basically means believing something that you don't actually know. More than that we need knowledge and exploration. The reality of spiritual dimensions is ten thousand times wilder than modern religion would have us believe.

I have no problem with strongly religious people who use their "faith" for good, such as Catholic Workers, as mentioned. But to point out the obvious, Christianity, and now Mormonism as well, has been used as a tool to spread capitalism throughout the world, and this is evil. A good read is "Thy Will Be Done," a history of the Rockefeller family.

It's totally about spirituality- earth-based, plant-based spirituality. It's not at all about faith in something above us.

One of the things that concerns me is how , for want of a better word, "Terra-centric" plant spirituality is seen as. Lots of the metaphors are about Gaia as our universal mother. In a sense, the lack of engagement that most people have with (for want of a better word, the Shaman's world - one I am very familiar with as a Wiccan) is also mirrored by the lack of engagement people have with the Greater Community, which in another way is that "something above us".

Shifting from a Earth as centre of the universe to Sun caused a huge shift in humanity; going from a Heliocentric to (I dont even know the word exists - galactic node?) will be a thousand times bigger -
and can you imagine the effect upon finding out that we might be as interesting to the bigger world as Buttfuck, Idaho and given the same degree of consideration that we give to a news report about the hell of Mogadishu?

how about "acentric"

no center

[American Dream]

Searcher08 wrote:

To begin that process for me, I would like you to at least engage with my points about the limitations and dangers of critical thinking. These are big subjects, requiring lots of tools to be even able to engage with the subject matter in a meaningful way - reductionist thinking has a very small place to play in that.

I do agree that what some may call "critical thinking" can have its own limitatioans and some times provide cover for dogmatic belief.

Now, to begin the process for me, I am going to state that I have a hunch- an intuition if you will, that you do to some degree support David Icke's Reptilian Theory. My further hunch is that I could never in a million years guess the subtleties of which parts you believe, which parts you don't and everything in between.

What is the truth regarding you and Reptilian Theory?

[Canadian_watcher]

My two cents:

$.01 - The world is in much greater need of more critical thinking than it is more faith.

$.01 - It takes a great deal more courage to live this life without faith than it does with it.

one day you will come to the realization that neither of those statements is true.

[Peregrine]

Now, to begin the process for me, I am going to state that I have a hunch- an intuition if you will, that you do to some degree support David Icke's Reptilian Theory. My further hunch is that I could never in a million years guess the subtleties of which parts you believe, which parts you don't and everything in between.

What is the truth regarding you and Reptilian Theory?

ah jesus...

[Canadian_watcher]

are you being serious?

Not entirely. But I find your conception of your faith to be dangerously close to the teachings of the Jedi masters. And we know what kind of trouble that got us into - the Empire, the Clone Wars, the return of the Sith, etc. j/k

was it under the couch cushions? glad to see you've retrieved it.

Further, I can't tell from your description if there is a moral aspect to this force or not, nor can I guess what precepts might be obtained by such faith. It sounds like you just made it up, which is fine, I guess, but I'm not sure how a made-up religion like the one you describe can help you in your interactions here in the now on earth. If you make up your religion, what's to stop you from making up your ethics to suit as well?

The moral aspects are to act with courage and do what one believes (knows) is right.

Are there non made up religions?

Are there ethics that are never subject to situational judgment?

I think I can VERY VERY safely rest my case at this point.

I thought you rested your case with the very first post.

silly. that was a mere starting point. I don't happen to agree with the way he framed parts of it, but I thought, "Meh, good enough to open the chat."

As to the Einstein thing above...

In a little known interview with John Lennon he says he was a Reagan fan. Which of the 'little knowns' are you willing to believe - both, neither, or the one that suits your worldview?

[justdrew]

What is the truth regarding you and Reptilian Theory?

an aside here: (and this took about an hour or so to draw together, so please consider...)

I tended to consider Icke's take on "reptilian" and all that's grown from it as a case of an appropriated theory/metaphor then getting taken way too literally and then growing into it's own rather strange belief system. The seed lies here:

American physician and neuroscientist Paul D. MacLean's Triune Brain first popularized by none other than Carl Sagan. MacLean then expanded on his ideas in a mass market 1990 book. Read the above link for more detail.

here's a good page from 2000 from Icke talking about "the reptilian brain" (and the word 'jew' doesn't appear even once, a rarity when reading people's creations within the broader "reptilian" mythos.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/reptiles/reptiles14.htm

While the original triune-brain theory may have been found non-functional, the basis for much of the bad behavior/psychology stuff he talks fairly well about there may none the less lie partially in neuroanatomy in some way. Probably it does I would think. It's just not based on a "reptile brain" brought forward through evolution into humans. but it certainly could be due to structures in the brain, why/how they got that way, who knows, and obviously individual variation and development is a major factor.

Now - some good points may be found in his early work talking about this, and he'd have been inspired by at the time, relatively credible sources. but then Something Went Wrong.

if one is interested they can mainline the reptillian mythos as it's been developed here:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/reptiles/reptiles.htm

this wide body of work has been crafted over roughly the last 15 years. I'm not exactly sure when this whole shape-shifter/reptilian thing burst on the scene, but late 90s seems like a safe time frame. That's a long time, an enormous project has spun a vast body of work on this subject. Another name worth mentioning here is Michael Sokolov "Engineer / Researcher / Truth seeker / Freedom fighter"

Yet after ALL THIS time, and who know how many millions of man-hours of human lives poured into researching or crafting this vast narrative, not one shred of proof has emerged.

The mythos concerns itself greatly with jews/isreal/the middle-east/etc and that aspect of it can't be ignored. That aspect has nothing whatsoever to do with the triune-brain theory from which a part of this started. However, the idea that this is all anti-Semitic "code" or psi-ops designed to cause people to become anti-Semitic, seems questionable. Is that the effect it's had? It seems more like bait to ruin actual would be "Researchers / Truth seekers" and use them in a variety of ways. Meanwhile a great many people exposed to some portion of this material surely reject it out of hand as absurd, and may very well then end up applying that rejection very quickly to anything else speaking disapprovingly of Israels interactions with the Palestinians. "oh boy talk about israel/palistine... how long before the 4D space monsters come out? reject"

If the main people crafting this story are knowingly disingenuous, and they may well be, surely this hoax will go down as a very cruel one indeed. and who has this stuff "helped" ? anyone?

[Canadian_watcher]

lol, Peregrine!

[barracuda]

The moral aspects are to act with courage and do what one believes (knows) is right.

The people in charge of our military believe what they are doing is right and courageous by killing hundreds of thousands.

Are there non made up religions?

Traditionally, yes, quite a few, if you have faith.

Are there ethics that are never subject to situational judgment?

Perhaps not ever. But it helps to have some guidelines, don't you think? If you don't know what your faith is but in the most vague, general way, like a nebulous force that is in me (how'd it get in there, anyway?) you never really know what it is you might be following.

In a little known interview with John Lennon he says he was a Reagan fan. Which of the 'little knowns' are you willing to believe - both, neither, or the one that suits your worldview?

Einstein seems rather specific in that particular letter. And all I'm saying is that his relationship with faith and religion was not simplistic, and probably was a poor example for Laodicean to chide me with.

But your disapproval is noted. May the force be with you.

[American Dream]

What is the truth regarding you and Reptilian Theory?

an aside here: (and this took about an hour or so to draw together, so please consider...)

I tended to consider Icke's take on "reptilian" and all that's grown from it as a case of an appropriated theory/metaphor then getting taken way too literally and then growing into it's own rather strange belief system. The seed lies here:

American physician and neuroscientist Paul D. MacLean's Triune Brain first popularized by none other than Carl Sagan. MacLean then expanded on his ideas in a mass market 1990 book. Read the above link for more detail.

here's a good page from 2000 from Icke talking about "the reptilian brain" (and the word 'jew' doesn't appear even once, a rarity when reading people's creations within the broader "reptilian" mythos.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/reptiles/reptiles14.htm

While the original triune-brain theory may have been found non-functional, the basis for much of the bad behavior/psychology stuff he talks fairly well about there may none the less lie partially in neuroanatomy in some way. Probably it does I would think. It's just not based on a "reptile brain" brought forward through evolution into humans. but it certainly could be due to structures in the brain, why/how they got that way, who knows, and obviously individual variation and development is a major factor.

Now - some good points may be found in his early work talking about this, and he'd have been inspired by at the time, relatively credible sources. but then Something Went Wrong.

if one is interested they can mainline the reptillian mythos as it's been developed here:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/reptiles/reptiles.htm

this wide body of work has been crafted over roughly the last 15 years. I'm not exactly sure when this whole shape-shifter/reptilian thing burst on the scene, but late 90s seems like a safe time frame. That's a long time, an enormous project has spun a vast body of work on this subject. Another name worth mentioning here is Michael Sokolov "Engineer / Researcher / Truth seeker / Freedom fighter"

Yet after ALL THIS time, and who know how many millions of man-hours of human lives poured into researching or crafting this vast narrative, not one shred of proof has emerged.

The mythos concerns itself greatly with jews/isreal/the middle-east/etc and that aspect of it can't be ignored. That aspect has nothing whatsoever to do with the triune-brain theory from which a part of this started. However, the idea that this is all anti-Semitic "code" or psi-ops designed to cause people to become anti-Semitic, seems questionable. Is that the effect it's had? It seems more like bait to ruin actual would be "Researchers / Truth seekers" and use them in a variety of ways. Meanwhile a great many people exposed to some portion of this material surely reject it out of hand as absurd, and may very well then end up applying that rejection very quickly to anything else speaking disapprovingly of Israels interactions with the Palestinians. "oh boy talk about israel/palistine... how long before the 4D space monsters come out? reject"

If the main people crafting this story are knowingly disingenuous, and they may well be, surely this hoax will go down as a very cruel one indeed. and who has this stuff "helped" ? anyone?

Very astute.

Thanks for this.