All you are saying here is that you don't accept his evidence. You don't believe him. You have promulgated your own belief system as superior to his: a simpler explanation is better.
Correct. If all his evidence for seeing a alien-human hybrid is he saw it down in the basement then I don't accept it in relation to everything else we currently know about the matter. If he came up and said he saw Sasquatch down in the basement I'd be of similar mind, but a little more open. If he came up and said he saw George Clooney, I'd be of similar mind, but a teeny bit more open than Sasquatch. The greater the claim, the greater the need for corroborating evidence.
Isn't this the exact same rationale given to discredit and sideline every aspect of the paranormative world encountered by people on a daily basis? More or less, isn't that sort of why we're here, because for most of us this razor strikes us as and exceedingly dull blade, and makes too shallow of a cut adequate for revealing the workings of the world?
I'm all for alternative theories, but we shouldn't accept them as fact because their elegant or persuasive. There is even a snowball's chance Icke is right, but we can't throw out the rigor because the intuition finds something exotic or desirable.
This is pretty much my whole problem here. We know for a fact that simple explanations aren't necessarily at the bottom of complex events.
But Icke's belief system is patently simple. (It's all the lizard's fault!) It's just extremely attractive (guilt free scapegoating evil nonhuman minority) and fanciful enough to plug into any complex event. To me his explanation lets off the real majority of perpetrators of what is really going on. If what he says is true, any high level person with any real reach can just say "The reptiles made me do it".
I'm done for today, I'm going to the movies.
