David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

[Searcher08]

The fact that your relative got really upset at you could have been due to other things than having her mental map of Icke challenged - based on the evidence of how you communicate here that isnt exactly at a 'lizardman level of likelihood'.

It is also interesting how you collapse 'past Presidents being pedophiles' with 'blood drinkers'. I'm sure you are familiar with Nick Bryant and his work on the Franklin Scandal though.

About your last question - I have never seen a pseudoskeptic apply the same 'critical thinking' to their own belief system... questioning it's assumptions, what is behind it, looking on it asa system of thought, exploring it's foundations, looking for alternatives

Strange that.

To reflect on your own words... with one word changed

This kind of selective attention speaks volumes about the reader, begging the question: What void must be tugging on their psyche that they can blind themselves to, or completely avoid and deny, the other side of the pseudoskeptic coin?

My communication is not a problem if direct questions are not a problem.

As for my relative - I did my reading and watching (as he had asked) and i simply asked him, "Do you believe this alien-human hybrid stuff?" He basically said "the overall picture is correct" and i was being jerky for asking such questions.

It reminds me of being in bible class and i asked the nun if a sceptor really transformed into a snake and then back to a sceptor like it says in the bible. I was reprimanded and sent to the front office. I never did get my answer.

"pseudoskeptic" is just name calling.

No it isnt. It fits you and your site perfectly. You are in it for righteousness LULZ.

Truzzi was skeptical of investigators and debunkers who determined the validity of a claim prior to investigation. He accused CSICOP of increasingly unscientific behavior, for which he coined the term pseudoskepticism. Truzzi stated:

They tend to block honest inquiry, in my opinion. Most of them are not agnostic toward claims of the paranormal; they are out to knock them. [...] When an experiment of the paranormal meets their requirements, then they move the goal posts. Then, if the experiment is reputable, they say it's a mere anomaly.[4]

[American Dream]

Wow- nobody seems to want to talk about their belief in human-alien hybrids, do they?

So why do they defend Icke?

[Mason I Bilderberg]

Reptilians are possible.

Do you believe there is any credible evidence alien-human hybrids actually exist?

Mason B. ... I think you'd like to drive people to your skeptic site, while you try to dismiss RI as corrupt for its occasional tolerance of possible proponents of intolerance, flim-flammers, left-hand-pathfinders, boldfaced liars, and those with a highly suspect agenda... see Icke, Randi...

You're reading way too much into what i haven't said.

[Searcher08]

oh for fuck's sake.

who among us are the mind controlled, thought stopped? it's really really really obvious what the answer is at this point, so I'm out. I tried.
No dialog to be had, just an endless game of chase the goal posts.

The thought stopping techniques- for example "He/she linked to somebody who linked to James Randi so obviously the arguments are not worthy of any consideration" are self-induced and/or shared means of avoiding the substance of the argument.

Never entertaining substantive critique is definitely a technique used by the Moonies- this does not mean that everyone here is a glassy-eyed Moonie- but it does suggest that there is a serious problem in David Icke Land.

The key problem is avoiding the substance of the argument.

WHAT I'M RECEIVING FROM YOU IS:
Maybe we need to have a real look at what R.I. is about and really see if Icke is something that should be discussed her at all - as obviously he is a raving fascist with dubious right wing connections and no doubt fascist and White Power and anti-semitic undertones and what is needed to move this forward into the real world is that we need to have a declaration of whether members are Icke supporters in the light of this, and if they say yes, we should ban them as this is an anti-fascist board

Actually what I'm saying is that I wish the defenders of Icke would stop avoiding the substance of the argument.

That is quite the opposite of what you are suggesting.

<takes deep breath>

I'm not aware of ANYONE on this thread or even on R.I. who has what you would call an "Ickean world view" or operates according to an "Ickean ideology".

I certainly dont, slad certainly doesnt, slim doesnt, Willow doesnt, 8bit doesnt, etc etc

There was a real piece of gold I learned from John Grinder in NLP - the idea of seperating the intntion of a communication from it's meaning. The intention is what the sender wants to communicate - the meaning is what occurs in the mind of the receiver as a result...

The meaning of what you are saying and doing is how what you are saying lands in my world - just saying 'that's NOT what I intended' is something I accept in goodfaith - would you be willing to accept in good faith that that is the experience your words have created?

Because when the meaning doesnt match the intention, you have to rely on the sender to create a different message, where his intention and the meaning it creates DO match.

[Mason I Bilderberg]

Its an interesting philosophical discussion to ask what is the bigger danger of such people. The fact that they are lying to us, or that they are lying to themselves?

In your mind "they" can only be lying? No other possibilities?

You know what, youre right. I didnt frame that very well. Nice spot.

I'll reprhrase. How does "in too many cases intentionally decieving others and in the vast majority of cases decieving themselves sound?"

[ . . . ]

An off topic false choice with some added distract and attack.

I really can't remember, did you opine on the existence of alien-human hybrids?

[Searcher08]

Wow- nobody seems to want to talk about their belief in human-alien hybrids, do they?

So why do they defend Icke?

Why does WHO, SPECIFICALLY defend Icke?????

[Mason I Bilderberg]

there's a whole lot of things you have wrong about me A WHOLE LOT OF THINGS but that never stops you from posting crap like that

Are you willing to say what the truth is?

If you'd take your head out of this thread and your own mega thread maybe just maybe you would be able to tell quite easily, I might add...what the truth is about me...what I really care about...(because what I am is what I care about, what I post about) go back 1 year like bhp did....go fuckin back 9 fuckin years here and check out my posts....I have a record here and it's 9 YEARS OLD....check it out sometime....and then maybe you can stop running your mouth off about who I am and what I think about most in my life here at RI....DO IT I DARE YOU

hell go back to DemocraticUnderground to 2002 check out my 40,000 post there and tell me who you think I am but until you do that YOU DON'T HAVE A FUCKIN' CLUE WHO I AM OR WHAT I THINK...so I wish you would stop pretending to know me at all....YOU DO NOT!

Slad, you have almost 10,000 posts here and 40,000 there. I don't have the time or energy to go through all that. Is there any place you can point to where you lay out your position(s) on Icke and/or your history with posting conspiracy material?

I would like to better understand where you're coming from.

No and that's the point! Thanks for making it eloquently

but be my guest you're the one running your mouth off all the time ...Mr. know it all....maybe you should know what you're talking about before posting...it would help

So if I don't understand your position on the fundamental points of Icke's platform and misunderstand something about your history with the Internet and conspiracies, then it's my fault because I won't dig through and read your 50,000 posts?

It would seem a tad bit easier for him to just make a 50,001 post and answer your question.

[Mason I Bilderberg]

you cannot NOT see a sad face here:

Actually I see bemusement with maybe a slight tinge of anger.

And there's some sort of weird caped shadow hornet man reflected in the glass to the left.

Damn. It. Now I see the hornet man too! How do i UN-see it?

[American Dream]

oh for fuck's sake.

who among us are the mind controlled, thought stopped? it's really really really obvious what the answer is at this point, so I'm out. I tried.
No dialog to be had, just an endless game of chase the goal posts.

The thought stopping techniques- for example "He/she linked to somebody who linked to James Randi so obviously the arguments are not worthy of any consideration" are self-induced and/or shared means of avoiding the substance of the argument.

Never entertaining substantive critique is definitely a technique used by the Moonies- this does not mean that everyone here is a glassy-eyed Moonie- but it does suggest that there is a serious problem in David Icke Land.

The key problem is avoiding the substance of the argument.

WHAT I'M RECEIVING FROM YOU IS:
Maybe we need to have a real look at what R.I. is about and really see if Icke is something that should be discussed her at all - as obviously he is a raving fascist with dubious right wing connections and no doubt fascist and White Power and anti-semitic undertones and what is needed to move this forward into the real world is that we need to have a declaration of whether members are Icke supporters in the light of this, and if they say yes, we should ban them as this is an anti-fascist board

Actually what I'm saying is that I wish the defenders of Icke would stop avoiding the substance of the argument.

That is quite the opposite of what you are suggesting.

<takes deep breath>

I'm not aware of ANYONE on this thread or even on R.I. who has what you would call an "Ickean world view" or operates according to an "Ickean ideology".

I certainly dont, slad certainly doesnt, slim doesnt, Willow doesnt, 8bit doesnt, etc etc

There was a real piece of gold I learned from John Grinder in NLP - the idea of seperating the intntion of a communication from it's meaning. The intention is what the sender wants to communicate - the meaning is what occurs in the mind of the receiver as a result...

The meaning of what you are saying and doing is how what you are saying lands in my world - just saying 'that's NOT what I intended' is something I accept in goodfaith - would you be willing to accept in good faith that that is the experience your words have created?

Because when the meaning doesnt match the intention, you have to rely on the sender to create a different message, where his intention and the meaning it creates DO match.

I think the "we're not true believers in Icke" gambit has serves as another dodge, to be quite honest. I said "defenders of Icke" and here we get into the walks like a duck, acts like a duck principle. Though some of the people you mentioned are not necessarily such defenders of Icke at all. Project Willow, for example- I think she has some pretty serious concerns about what Icke has done to propagate disinformational mind control discourse- and possibly how he taints the more verified info, too...

[norton ash]

Reptilians are possible.

Do you believe there is any credible evidence alien-human hybrids actually exist?

Mason B. ... I think you'd like to drive people to your skeptic site, while you try to dismiss RI as corrupt for its occasional tolerance of possible proponents of intolerance, flim-flammers, left-hand-pathfinders, boldfaced liars, and those with a highly suspect agenda... see Icke, Randi...

You're reading way too much into what i haven't said.

No, I don't believe there is any credible evidence that human-alien hybrids exist. I just said it was possible.

There is, however, ample evidence that you have an agenda, and that you're trying to drive people to your 'skeptic' site. You are clearly at war with Icke-ians. I'm not. Although I've already stated I think they could be dangerous, I don't think they're nearly as dangerous (or sick) as martinet deniers like yourself, who are much, much more useful to the PTB and an unacceptable status quo than freethinkers are. The tiresome lot who know that they are RIGHT.

And 'what you haven't said' is simply the usual mark of a typical sophist passive-aggressive smirking away while he rides his one fucking hobby horse.

Adios, this is all just boring and pathetic and the last thing I'll dare contribute to a long trainwreck.

[seemslikeadream]

Reptilians are possible.

Do you believe there is any credible evidence alien-human hybrids actually exist?

Mason B. ... I think you'd like to drive people to your skeptic site, while you try to dismiss RI as corrupt for its occasional tolerance of possible proponents of intolerance, flim-flammers, left-hand-pathfinders, boldfaced liars, and those with a highly suspect agenda... see Icke, Randi...

You're reading way too much into what i haven't said.

No, I don't believe there is any credible evidence that human-alien hybrids exist. I just said it was possible.

There is, however, ample evidence that you have an agenda, and that you're trying to drive people to your 'skeptic' site. You are clearly at war with Icke-ians. I'm not. Although I've already stated I think they could be dangerous, I don't think they're nearly as dangerous (or sick) as martinet deniers like yourself, who are much, much more useful to the PTB and an unacceptable status quo than freethinkers are. The tiresome lot who know that they are RIGHT.

And 'what you haven't said' is simply the usual mark of a typical sophist passive-aggressive smirking away while he rides his one fucking hobby horse.

Adios, this is all just boring and pathetic and the last thing I'll dare contribute to a long trainwreck.

THANKS

couldn't have said it better myself ...thank you so much and with that ...this will also be my last post in this LONG TRAINWRECK...PURE GARGAGE FROM START TO FINISH

[American Dream]

Wow- nobody seems to want to talk about their belief in human-alien hybrids, do they?

So why do they defend Icke?

Why does WHO, SPECIFICALLY defend Icke?????

Once again, we come to the walks like a duck, acts like a duck principle. I don't recall that any of the people who seem to like Icke and/or have served to directly defend him and/or indirectly defend him through repeatedly throwing up distractions ever said if they believe in human-alien hybrids, which seems pretty fundamental to me.

c_w said she did give an answer, but as I recall all she did was aver that such things might be possible.

Here we are coming up on 40 pages and we can't really tell with surety what most of the major protagonists think on a fundamental question that was put on the table many, many pages ago?

There's something wrong with this picture...

[barracuda]

Human sacrifice is certainly a part of history, but in the context of Icke, he asserts presidents and people in positions of power are currently engaging in human sacrifices and blood drinking (not to mention pedophilia). This is an example of Icke's masterful ability to interweave plausible with crazy.

Well, there's human sacrifice and blood drinking and then there's human sacrifice and blood drinking.







WRT elite pedophilia, anyone even cursorily familiar with Don Patrizio Poggi, Dutroux, the Franklin coverup, and Jimmy Savile should have realized by now the widespread nature of the practice, that it is well organized, and ongoing. Again, the only real question is how deeply these children are used in pursuance of the types of occult agendas which accompanied such behavior throughout history.

[Wombaticus Rex]

There is, however, ample evidence that you have an agenda, and that you're trying to drive people to your 'skeptic' site.

I had the same initial thought, but it's such a terribly designed site I don't get the impression he's taking it any more seriously than we are.

I buy his assertion at face value that he's here to engage with Icke true believers, which also implies that MIB is kinda dumb, since there actually aren't any here. And since there is a forum with 83,000 members who are true believers. I just checked the stats, and there's over 3k online right now.

So it's a bit like having a sociologist walk into the local cafe here in VT looking for Black Panthers and trying to engage everyone on the subject of Black Power and the politics of armed revolution. I think you took a wrong turn is about the most helpful advice I can offer.

I'm not disturbed, i am fascinated - by the mechanisms of the mind. How and why people think what they think and believe what they believe. If our beliefs are wrong our memories are wrong, our reasons for conflict are wrong - so many wrong actions follow wrong beliefs … i can't think of anything NOT affected by our beliefs. It is fascinating.

What are your own irrational beliefs?

I don't have any. (Is that irrational enough?)

MIB

I got a huge kick out of that, thank you.

Doubt is gateway drug to honesty, but neither is very much fun. Wouldn't wish 'em on anybody.

[Mason I Bilderberg]

There are a number of other ways the brain is hardwired which can cause us to misinterpret the world and the "cause and effect" patterns that surround us everywhere.

Are any of them more likely to lead to consequential misinterpretations of the world than the inability not to see a sad little clock . . .

Yes.

Evolution has hardwired our brains to connect the dots in ways that improved chances of survival in caveman days but can hinder our critical thinking skills in modern times.

To paraphrase one example told by one of my favorite authors:

A caveman walks past some tall grass and hears a rustling. As a matter of survival, does he assume it's a bird building a nest or a lion preparing to pounce and have him for dinner?

Thousands of years later, the Darwin Award winners from the above scenario has given us a brain that instinctively fears the unknown or explains the unknown by believing in invisible agents with power and intent (spirits, ghosts, gods, demons, angels, aliens, intelligent designers, government conspirators).

History is rife with authority figures taking advantage of and/or manipulating people using their own fears and beliefs against them.

This is just one, rough example. By not understanding why we think what we think and believe what we believe, we are susceptible to those who do.