Reptilian conspiracy

whadabouchasir

I Don't know if any of you have heard of this theory but basically it says that there is an underground elite which runs the world and is responsible for things like 9/11, chemtrails, mind control experiments however, they’re not humans: they’re shape-shifting reptilians.Basically human-impersonating beings who either came from outer space or the center of the earth or evolved along side the rest of us.The theory was proposed by David Icke.
http://www.davidicke.com/index.php/
Surely all of these conspiracy theories are perpetrated by someone,might it be shape-shifting reptilians?

Brown Bomber

whadabouchasir wrote: »

Surely all of these conspiracy theories are perpetrated by someone,might it be shape-shifting reptilians?

nahhhhhh

stuar

whadabouchasir wrote: »

I Don't know if any of you have heard of this theory but basically it says that there is an underground elite which runs the world and is responsible for things like 9/11, chemtrails, mind control experiments however, they’re not humans: they’re shape-shifting reptilians.Basically human-impersonating beings who either came from outer space or the center of the earth or evolved along side the rest of us.The theory was proposed by David Icke.
http://www.davidicke.com/index.php/
Surely all of these conspiracy theories are perpetrated by someone,might it be shape-shifting reptilians?

no actually they are human with idea's to set the sheeple on the wrong track, some believe, others dont, its just a ploy to make anybody that diverts from the norm look like a pr1ck, best look for non shapeshifting humans looking for gullible's. no disrespect intended

chooochooo

It pretty obvious that some of the 'wums' and denial posts on this site are the work of Reptilians. They have a unit monitoring the web and feeding out intelligent disinfo.

humanji

The polite thing to do is to respect people's beliefs and to just get on with life. In this forum, with such opposing views, we should all just accept that there are others with an alternative viewpoint to our own. It's difficult to let some things slide and we all get confrontational at times, but I kind of think that the the very fact that there are arguments means that we accept that someone believes different to us and aren't dismissing them out of hand.

That said, the idea of inter-dimensional shape-shifting reptilians is f*cking bat-sh*t crazy!

It doesn't make a lick of sense. The "evidence" consists of incredibly bad video footage of people apparently shifting shape, but the footage is so bad, it's impossible to determine what is actually happening. I think the worst thing to happen to those who believe in reptilians is the advances in video technology which means that even the cheapest of mobile phones can take high quality footage. As a result, there's no way to take ambigous shots and claim that it's a shape-shifter.

I'd love to know where all of this came from. I think it was Icke who made it famous, but the theory was around for a long time before him (I think it was, anyway). There have been posters on here before who championed the idea. But what they posted about it was so convoluted that it really does just come across like a religion, in that there's no evidence and absolutely nothing to base it on other than faith that it's true.

nullzero

humanji wrote: »

The polite thing to do is to respect people's beliefs and to just get on with life. In this forum, with such opposing views, we should all just accept that there are others with an alternative viewpoint to our own. It's difficult to let some things slide and we all get confrontational at times, but I kind of think that the the very fact that there are arguments means that we accept that someone believes different to us and aren't dismissing them out of hand.

That said, the idea of inter-dimensional shape-shifting reptilians is f*cking bat-sh*t crazy!

It doesn't make a lick of sense. The "evidence" consists of incredibly bad video footage of people apparently shifting shape, but the footage is so bad, it's impossible to determine what is actually happening. I think the worst thing to happen to those who believe in reptilians is the advances in video technology which means that even the cheapest of mobile phones can take high quality footage. As a result, there's no way to take ambigous shots and claim that it's a shape-shifter.

I'd love to know where all of this came from. I think it was Icke who made it famous, but the theory was around for a long time before him (I think it was, anyway). There have been posters on here before who championed the idea. But what they posted about it was so convoluted that it really does just come across like a religion, in that there's no evidence and absolutely nothing to base it on other than faith that it's true.

All human history is chocked full of reptilian symbolism.
I wouldn't say its a "bat **** crazy" idea, just an idea that is at odds with the self important "intellectual" culture of the average modern person. We think we know close to everything when we actually knowvery little.
Saying the reptilian idea is off the wall in a world where most people believe in the truly crazy religions so many of us follow so blindly is what is really crazy.

hooradiation

Nah, it's batshit crazy.

humanji

nullzero wrote: »

All human history is chocked full of reptilian symbolism.
I wouldn't say its a "bat **** crazy" idea, just an idea that is at odds with the self important "intellectual" culture of the average modern person. We think we know close to everything when we actually knowvery little.
Saying the reptilian idea is off the wall in a world where most people believe in the truly crazy religions so many of us follow so blindly is what is really crazy.

You make it sound like it's plausible and ignored simply because it's against mainstream beliefs. It's not "just an idea that is at odds". It's something that has little basis in anything. Taking the existence of reptile symbolism as evidence that maybe inter-dimensional shape-shifting reptilian overlords exist is a hell of a bigger stretch than saying a cosmic fairy exists because someone wrote a book about it.

Both ideas are silly, but that doesn't mean one can't be sillier than the other.

Alzy

I am the lizard king I can do anything ... maybe Jim Morrison is the leader and he blew all our money on drugs and hot women

Boulevardier

Some anti-nazi activists went after David Icke because they suspected he was hinting that the jews and the reptiles were one and the same. I think he has denied that.

mcmoustache

nullzero wrote: »

All human history is chocked full of reptilian symbolism.
I wouldn't say its a "bat **** crazy" idea, just an idea that is at odds with the self important "intellectual" culture of the average modern person. We think we know close to everything when we actually knowvery little.
Saying the reptilian idea is off the wall in a world where most people believe in the truly crazy religions so many of us follow so blindly is what is really crazy.

People believing in the crazy beliefs of religion doesn't make the reptillian idea any less crazy.

If you take 911 or the Kennedy Assassination or the more popular CT's, it's possible to exchange evidence and evaluate the veracity of the claims from both sides. Both sides might get pissed off with each other and might never agree, but at least there is an effort made to stick to what can be understood to be "facts" and reality.

For example, regarding 911, people argue over whether not thermite could do this or that based on current scientific evidense. There is a concensus not to resort to saying magic did it.

Lizard people is like resorting to magic. There is no physical or biological mechanism provided to explain how a large organism such as a human can instantly change the texture of his skin or the shape of his tongue. There is no explanation provided as to how a human/reptile hybrid would arise. There's no effort made to explain the biology of these creatures.

Instead, people are just asked to entertain the possibility that they exist, even if it is scientifically impossible. This stuff really belongs in the Paranormal Forum and not here. The only reason it pops up here from time to time is that these magical creatures are allegedly the illuminati.

What if I suggested that the illuminati were ghosts or vampires? People would think that I was crazy and rightfully so.

mcmoustache

Boulevardier wrote: »

Some anti-nazi activists went after David Icke because they suspected he was hinting that the jews and the reptiles were one and the same. I think he has denied that.

He used to write about the Jews at first and then switched "Jew" for "Reptillian" and wrote the same stuff about them. It may have been that reptile was code for "Jew" or maybe he thought the Jews were reptiles.

Regardless, I'd take anything from DI with a pinch of salt because he has demonstrated quite a bit of mental instability in the past.

hooradiation

mcmoustache wrote: »

What if I suggested that the illuminati were ghosts or vampires? People would think that I was crazy and rightfully so.

Reverse vampires.

chooochooo

The problem is that Reptilians are adept at appearances and exploit the sheeplike minds of the average person who cannot understand that. It's obvious that the world is in the grip of evil so you have to be careful about dismissing any idea.

mcmoustache

chooochooo wrote: »

The problem is that Vampires are adept at appearances and exploit the sheeplike minds of the average person who cannot understand that. It's obvious that the world is in the grip of evil so you have to be careful about dismissing any idea.

Read that aloud to yourself and tell me that it doesn't sound crazy.

whadabouchasir

I really don't think that people are taking this theory seriously.

al28283

This thread doesn't take itself seriously

psychward

Icke is probably a Reptillian engaging in a false flag operation in order to discredit anyone who reveals the truth

Daithi 1

Watched an Interview with Michio Kaku recently, he was going on about string theory and how it required 10 or 11 different dimensions for the theory to work and how a new hadron collider will be in Switzerland from next year, somehow will be able to see if there are other dimensions and possibly even manipulate the content of a dimension eventually.

Given the amount of planets being discovered and the whole size of the universe thing and now there is a multi-verse with different dimensions and soon might be able to manipulate those dimensions is it really so hard to fathom that a different race could have got there first ?

Some guy who says the reptilian theory is madness, crazy of whatever, will be in the paranormal forum next week stating he seen a ghost or has stated it in the past, but thats fine because dead HUMAN interdimentional spirits are much easier to accept than a living interdimentional traveller of a different race.

espinolman

whadabouchasir wrote: »

I really don't think that people are taking this theory seriously.

You would be surprised .

whadabouchasir

humanji wrote: »

T

That said, the idea of inter-dimensional shape-shifting reptilians is f*cking bat-sh*t crazy!

That's what they want you to think.

chooochooo

mcmoustache wrote: »

Read that aloud to yourself and tell me that it doesn't sound crazy.

nothing crazy there - vampires are the epitome of evil and are shapeshifters

espinolman

Look at the viewcount , and the thread only started yesterday !
People are taking this seriously . They are in the government , the media , the education system -i knew they were when i was in school , and i did'nt need david icke to tell me .
People know .

humanji

mcmoustache wrote: »

He used to write about the Jews at first and then switched "Jew" for "Reptillian" and wrote the same stuff about them. It may have been that reptile was code for "Jew" or maybe he thought the Jews were reptiles.

Regardless, I'd take anything from DI with a pinch of salt because he has demonstrated quite a bit of mental instability in the past.

It's hard to know where Icke really stands. His reptilian talk can be taken to be an allegory about Jewish people (he believes the Protocols of Zion to be real), or about the increasingly fascistic nature of governments. I've only read snippets of his work so may have taken him up wrong, but a lot of it comes out as sounding like an acid trip version of reality. Like he's talking about the world as it is, but everything is warped and anyone who he feels is a threat is changed from a person to a reptilian.

As Icke said, "If the reptilians did not exist, we would have to invent them. In fact, we probably have."

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Watched an Interview with Michio Kaku recently, he was going on about string theory and how it required 10 or 11 different dimensions for the theory to work and how a new hadron collider will be in Switzerland from next year, somehow will be able to see if there are other dimensions and possibly even manipulate the content of a dimension eventually.

Given the amount of planets being discovered and the whole size of the universe thing and now there is a multi-verse with different dimensions and soon might be able to manipulate those dimensions is it really so hard to fathom that a different race could have got there first ?

Some guy who says the reptilian theory is madness, crazy of whatever, will be in the paranormal forum next week stating he seen a ghost or has stated it in the past, but thats fine because dead HUMAN interdimentional spirits are much easier to accept than a living interdimentional traveller of a different race.

See, "theory" has a different meaning in science than it does to everyone else. A scientific theory is something along the lines of an idea that hasn't been conclusively proven, but all evidence points towards it and that you can in general take it as a given (evolution, gravity, etc).

The reptilian theory is not scientific at all. It's not really based on anything other than a bit of hearsay. It's just like ghosts. There's nothing to even indicate the probability that they might exist. It's possible they exist, but it's also possibly that I'm a sentient cabbage controlling you all with my mind.

As you say, it may be easier for some to accept ghosts than to accept reptilians. But that doesn't mean either exist.

espinolman wrote: »

Look at the viewcount , and the thread only started yesterday !
People are taking this seriously . They are in the government , the media , the education system -i knew they were when i was in school , and i did'nt need david icke to tell me .
People know .

People are curious because they've seen a thread about reptilians. Some may believe, but you can pretty much guarantee that the majority clicked on this thread for a giggle.

humanji

Just a quick note, if you want to post here to take the piss, then don't!

hooradiation

espinolman wrote: »

Look at the viewcount , and the thread only started yesterday !
People are taking this seriously . They are in the government , the media , the education system -i knew they were when i was in school , and i did'nt need david icke to tell me .
People know .

Argumentum ad populum is a hell of a mistake to make.

nelly17

if you take it from a biological point of view is there any animal/creature that we are aware of that can change their physical characteristics so dramaticlly at will? I'm not so sure

stuar

nelly17 wrote: »

if you take it from a biological point of view is there any animal/creature that we are aware of that can change their physical characteristics so dramaticlly at will? I'm not so sure

This octopuss does a fairly good job.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYPXVuSia50

Di0genes

nullzero wrote: »

All human history is chocked full of reptilian symbolism.
I wouldn't say its a "bat **** crazy" idea, just an idea that is at odds with the self important "intellectual" culture of the average modern person. We think we know close to everything when we actually knowvery little.

Generally I find that sentiment is echoed by people who don't seem to understand the limits and depth of what we do understand, and actively spends time avoiding grasping what the limits of science are at the moment.

Saying the reptilian idea is off the wall in a world where most people believe in the truly crazy religions so many of us follow so blindly is what is really crazy.

Ah the "who's the real crazy person" gambit. If you think the royal family are lizards who rule the world I'd not stand judgement over buddhists or christians.

Daithi 1

humanji wrote: »

See, "theory" has a different meaning in science than it does to everyone else. A scientific theory is something along the lines of an idea that hasn't been conclusively proven, but all evidence points towards it and that you can in general take it as a given (evolution, gravity, etc).

The reptilian theory is not scientific at all. It's not really based on anything other than a bit of hearsay. It's just like ghosts. There's nothing to even indicate the probability that they might exist. It's possible they exist, but it's also possibly that I'm a sentient cabbage controlling you all with my mind.

As you say, it may be easier for some to accept ghosts than to accept reptilians. But that doesn't mean either exist.

I'm not saying it's a definite, just a possibility I personally wouldn't discount.

Excellent documentary here which somewhat supports the idea that reptilians/ET have been here in the past.

Well worth a watch if you can handle Klaus's monotone voice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmMwo1Xzgus

nullzero

Essentially people can believe whatever they like.

There have been plenty of the usual type of posts here about this topic and I don't care to attempt to make anyone believe anything.

David Icke could be having a laugh but I think anyone who has bothered to listen to what he says or read his books would know he doesn't have some anti Jewish agenda, although it's a nice handy way to discredit someone.

There's been some seriously laughable attempts to discredit this theory here, not least from Humanji. I'm not standing by the theory but some of you posts are tiresome in the extreme.

I think the reptilian idea is just as plausible as the idea of Jesus or any other BS you care to mention.
Diogenes, I wouldn't expect anything else but the response you gave, best of luck to you I don't care what you or anyone else believes.

nullzero

humanji wrote: »

You make it sound like it's plausible and ignored simply because it's against mainstream beliefs.

Thats not true, it's just your reading of things, opinions etc...

clever_name

nullzero wrote: »

Essentially people can believe whatever they like.

I agree 100%. people can and will believe anything they want. As it should be.

nullzero wrote: »

David Icke could be having a laugh but I think anyone who has bothered to listen to what he says or read his books would know he doesn't have some anti Jewish agenda, although it's a nice handy way to discredit someone.

I dont think Icke is having a laugh, I think he believes what he is saying... which imho makes him discredit himself.

nullzero wrote: »

There's been some seriously laughable attempts to discredit this theory here, not least from Humanji. I'm not standing by the theory but some of you posts are tiresome in the extreme.

I think the reptilian idea is just as plausible as the idea of Jesus or any other BS you care to mention.

Based on your post I think you are in agreement with most people, as you say the entire reptilian idea is as plausible as any other BS that people care to mention, from vampires to the flying spaghetti monster.

psychward

clever_name wrote: »

flying spaghetti monster.

Dont' you dare insult his noodliness

humanji

Daithi 1 wrote: »

I'm not saying it's a definite, just a possibility I personally wouldn't discount.

Excellent documentary here which somewhat supports the idea that reptilians/ET have been here in the past.

Well worth a watch if you can handle Klaus's monotone voice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmMwo1Xzgus

Thanks for that. I won't get a chance to watch that until the weekend, so I'll have to get back to you then.

nullzero wrote: »

David Icke could be having a laugh but I think anyone who has bothered to listen to what he says or read his books would know he doesn't have some anti Jewish agenda, although it's a nice handy way to discredit someone.

You do realise you are using the exact same technique to discredit Icke detractors, right? It's a simple fact that Icke used the Protocols of Zion as part of the foundation of his Global Elite beliefs. The Protocols of Zion was anti-semetic propaganda. So it's hardly a surprise if some people may wonder if Icke holds similar beliefs about Jewish people.

Personally, I don't think he's an anti-semite. To me he comes across as a kind of Alex Jones type character. Someone who read something years ago and came up with a belief system based on it. Over the years he fillled in the gaps himself to cover any contradictions, plot holes and, I'm hoping, to correct earlier misunderstandings that he may be anti-semetic and was only refering to a general elite and not a religious elite.

He did later go back on his earlier claims, explaining that he isn't anti-semetic and that reptilians do not represent any race or group of people. But I don't know if he's ever explained his current thoughts on the Protocols of Zion. He may have denounced them completely, but I've never heard him do such.

There's been some seriously laughable attempts to discredit this theory here, not least from Humanji. I'm not standing by the theory but some of you posts are tiresome in the extreme.

Funny how you say that, then say:

I think the reptilian idea is just as plausible as the idea of Jesus or any other BS you care to mention.

So are you agreeing that it's as much bull**** as anything else that's never been proven or shows next to no evidence for? Because that's my stance on it. It's a claim that something exists because they believe it exists. Why should any one have any respect for a far out belief that doesn't make sense?

You use the phrase "It's just as plausible" but that doesn't mean it's even slightly plausible. It just means that there's as much chance of it being true as any other man made belief system, which isn't really that much of a chance at all.

nullzero wrote: »

Thats not true, it's just your reading of things, opinions etc...

The what did you mean by: "I wouldn't say its a "bat **** crazy" idea, just an idea that is at odds with the self important "intellectual" culture of the average modern person."?

al28283

nullzero wrote: »

I think the reptilian idea is just as plausible as the idea of Jesus or any other BS you care to mention.

The only difference there is that Jesus almost certainly existed

espinolman

al28283 wrote: »

The only difference there is that Jesus almost certainly existed

Any evidence he existed !

al28283

espinolman wrote: »

Any evidence he existed !

yes there's quite a bit of evidence which corroborates the stories about him told in the bible, mainly in the other characters who appeared in the bible with him and other contemporary reports of what was going on at the time.

humanji

espinolman wrote: »

Any evidence he existed !

Most historians agree that a man called Jesus existed, but to what extent, they don't know. Some, and I'd tend to agree with them, believe that he was some sort of political agitator who aquired a following. The claims of a god-like Jesus aren't really backed up, though there's a hell of a lot more evidence to it than for Reptilians.

nullzero

humanji wrote: »

Most historians agree that a man called Jesus existed, but to what extent, they don't know. Some, and I'd tend to agree with them, believe that he was some sort of political agitator who aquired a following. The claims of a god-like Jesus aren't really backed up, though there's a hell of a lot more evidence to it than for Reptilians.

You're having a laugh right?

Jesus didn't exist, he can't have existed "to some extent", he either did exist or didn't. Sure there could have been people similar to Jesus is some way but Jesus as depicted in the bible didn't exist and there is no evidence to suggest he did. In this case "most historians" are completely wrong.
You dismiss the reptilian idea out of hand but you gladly entertain the cosy idea of Jesus:rolleyes:.

Also the protocols of Zion refer to the agenda of Zionists and Zionism, not Jewish people as a whole or the Jewish faith which Zionism has nothing to do with per se.
I would say I am anti Zionist, I'm not anti semtic and I have nothing against Jewish people but Zionists do not represent all Jews, rather they hide behind them. You don't have to be Jewish to be a Zionist there is a clear line in the sand on that note. I would have thought you'd be smart enough to know the difference.

nullzero

nullzero wrote: »

You're having a laugh right?

Jesus didn't exist, he can't have existed "to some extent", he either did exist or didn't. Sure there could have been people similar to Jesus is some way but Jesus as depicted in the bible didn't exist and there is no evidence to suggest he did. In this case "most historians" are completely wrong.
You dismiss the reptilian idea out of hand but you gladly entertain the cosy idea of Jesus:rolleyes:.

So why are you allowed to say that the idea of Jesus is totally wrong and bull****, but we're not allowed to say the same about reptilians or other "alternative" ideas?

nullzero wrote: »

Also the protocols of Zion refer to the agenda of Zionists and Zionism, not Jewish people as a whole or the Jewish faith which Zionism has nothing to do with per se.
I would say I am anti Zionist, I'm not anti semtic and I have nothing against Jewish people but Zionists do not represent all Jews, rather they hide behind them. You don't have to be Jewish to be a Zionist there is a clear line in the sand on that note. I would have thought you'd be smart enough to know the difference.

But the Protocols were written as anti-Jewish propaganda, not just anti-Zionist propaganda.
Oh and the important part is that it's a fake. So just because you think it's not a bigoted source doesn't make it less fake.

chooochooo

We know so little baout this universe yet we are certain the reptilian theory is wrong........................
Obviously any superior and very advanced being would be well capable of hiding their presence from us - humans are so destructive no advanced beings would reveal their presence they would work in hiding. So the reptilian thesis is very likely correct.

chooochooo

chooochooo wrote: »

We know so little baout this universe yet we are certain the reptilian theory is wrong........................
Obviously any superior and very advanced being would be well capable of hiding their presence from us - humans are so destructive no advanced beings would reveal their presence they would work in hiding. So the reptilian thesis is very likely correct.

We know so little baout this universe yet we are certain the feline theory is wrong........................
Obviously any superior and very advanced being would be well capable of hiding their presence from us - humans are so destructive no advanced beings would reveal their presence they would work in hiding. So the feline thesis is very likely correct.

Or just replace feline/reptilian with any nonsense you feel like.
Just because something might be true, it doesn't follow that it is true.

weisses

King Mob wrote: »

We know so little baout this universe yet we are certain the feline theory is wrong........................
Obviously any superior and very advanced being would be well capable of hiding their presence from us - humans are so destructive no advanced beings would reveal their presence they would work in hiding. So the feline thesis is very likely correct.

Or just replace feline/reptilian with any nonsense you feel like.
Just because something might be true, it doesn't follow that it is true.

And there the (Conspiracy) theory starts

nullzero

King Mob wrote: »

So why are you allowed to say that the idea of Jesus is totally wrong and bull****, but we're not allowed to say the same about reptilians or other "alternative" ideas?


But the Protocols were written as anti-Jewish propaganda, not just anti-Zionist propaganda.
Oh and the important part is that it's a fake. So just because you think it's not a bigoted source doesn't make it less fake.

I never said anyone wasn't allowed to say anything.
Nobody needs my permission to express an opinion.

The Jesus myth is less plausible than thousands of years of reptilian idolitory all over the world in all cultures, which could be coincidental but still the idea of reptilians has more supporting evidence than the idea of Jesus Christ.

As for the protocols of Zion, they may well be bogus, as for their being "anti Zionist" I'm not so sure if we should be getting up in arms about something being anti Zionist. Zionists aren't exactly the victims they paint themselves to be. The difference between Zionists and the average Jewish person are marked and it is no secret that Zionists use the majority of Jewish people as a shield to deflect criticism of their actions which are for the most part incredibly immoral at best.

I think at this stage we should be able to tell the difference between a Jew and a Zionist and being anti Jewish and anti Zionist. You can proclaim yourselfto be a Zionist without first being Jewish and conversly you're not automatically a Zionist if you're a Jew.

I never said anything is true because it could be true either.
You like shoving words into peoples mouths and not for the first time you're trying it with me, but I'm not standing for it.
A discussion is fine, but don't you dare misrepresent me.

Di0genes

nullzero wrote: »

I never said anyone wasn't allowed to say anything.
Nobody needs my permission to express an opinion.

The Jesus myth is less plausible than thousands of years of reptilian idolitory all over the world in all cultures, which could be coincidental but still the idea of reptilians has more supporting evidence than the idea of Jesus Christ.

As for the protocols of Zion, they may well be bogus, as for their being "anti Zionist" I'm not so sure if we should be getting up in arms about something being anti Zionist. Zionists aren't exactly the victims they paint themselves to be. The difference between Zionists and the average Jewish person are marked and it is no secret that Zionists use the majority of Jewish people as a shield to deflect criticism of their actions which are for the most part incredibly immoral at best.

Yeah the Protocols are fake. Doctorated by a Tsar's secret police to justify anti Jewish progroms.

And I'm curious to know about your definition of Zionism and how it relates to the protocols. Seeing as the Protocols predate the jewish state by some sixty years.

nullzero

nullzero wrote: »

I never said anyone wasn't allowed to say anything.
Nobody needs my permission to express an opinion.

So then you have no issue with people saying that the reptilian and other ideas are totally bull**** as you say the Jesus myth is?

nullzero wrote: »

The Jesus myth is less plausible than thousands of years of reptilian idolitory all over the world in all cultures, which could be coincidental but still the idea of reptilians has more supporting evidence than the idea of Jesus Christ.

And I'm sure the idea of messiah and a peace loving preacher is as old, but that's not really an argument for it's existence.

nullzero wrote: »

As for the protocols of Zion, they may well be bogus,

No, it's not "may well be". they are bogus.
The only people who debate otherwise are the usual anti-semetic crowd who desperately want the Protocols to be real.
No unbiased researcher or historian takes that book as anything other than bigoted propaganda.

nullzero wrote: »

as for their being "anti Zionist" I'm not so sure if we should be getting up in arms about something being anti Zionist. Zionists aren't exactly the victims they paint themselves to be. The difference between Zionists and the average Jewish person are marked and it is no secret that Zionists use the majority of Jewish people as a shield to deflect criticism of their actions which are for the most part incredibly immoral at best.

I think at this stage we should be able to tell the difference between a Jew and a Zionist and being anti Jewish and anti Zionist. You can proclaim yourselfto be a Zionist without first being Jewish and conversly you're not automatically a Zionist if you're a Jew.

That's great and all, and often is used as a shield for anti-semetism in the same way you are accusing those horrible Zionists.
But the Protocols are very much a propaganda weapon against Jews and are very much used extensively against them to this day.

nullzero wrote: »

I never said anything is true because it could be true either.
You like shoving words into peoples mouths and not for the first time you're trying it with me, but I'm not standing for it.
A discussion is fine, but don't you dare misrepresent me.

So personal attacks again. Great...

nullzero

Di0genes wrote: »

Yeah the Protocols are fake. Doctorated by a Tsar's secret police to justify anti Jewish progroms.

And I'm curious to know about your definition of Zionism and how it relates to the protocols. Seeing as the Protocols predate the jewish state by some sixty years.

So Zionism only came into being after the state of Israel was founded?

Yitzhak Rabin

So nullzero, are you saying there is merit to the reptilian theory for you personally?

Or are you mainly here to argue your tired point that the skeptics here dismiss things to easily out of hand.

nullzero

King Mob wrote: »

So then you have no issue with people saying that the reptilian and other ideas are totally bull**** as you say the Jesus myth is?


And I'm sure the idea of messiah and a peace loving preacher is as old, but that's not really an argument for it's existence.


No, it's not "may well be". they are bogus.
The only people who debate otherwise are the usual anti-semetic crowd who desperately want the Protocols to be real.
No unbiased researcher or historian takes that book as anything other than bigoted propaganda.


That's great and all, and often is used as a shield for anti-semetism in the same way you are accusing those horrible Zionists.
But the Protocols are very much a propaganda weapon against Jews and are very much used extensively against them to this day.


So personal attacks again. Great...

Lets get one thing straight, I didn't make any such thing as a personal "attack" against you. You put words in my mouth and I told you not to do it again, you have got form for doing that and you've done it to me in the past.
If you feel I don't have the right to take issue with being misrepresented then report me.

I'm not anti semitic and there is a huge difference between being anti Zionist and anti semitic.
I understand that it's handy to lump people into groups, but it doesn't make it right.
I would agree that there are a lot of people with an anti Jewish agenda in the world and they are as abhorant as any other form of bigot.
Just becasue somebody takes issue with Zionism it doesn't make them anti semitic. Plenty of Jewish people take issue with Zionism and they are labelled as "self haters", thou shalt not question the blessed Zionists it seems sometimes even when they're massacaring innocent Palestinians (Do you feel Israels behaviour towards Palestinians is warranted?) and facing no recriminations.

To be fair as interesting as dicsussion as that is it is getting way off topic at this stage, we could continue the discussion via PM or perhaps take it to another thread.

Also, do you find the idea of a messiah plausible?
There is zero evidence to support the idea of Jesus Christ. Sure it's a very conventional idea but that in itself doesn't make it correct.

nullzero

yekahS wrote: »

So nullzero, are you saying there is merit to the reptilian theory for you personally?

Or are you mainly here to argue your tired point that the skeptics here dismiss things to easily out of hand.

There is some merit in the theory, I'm not sure if it's important that only I believe it or not.

Sometimes skeptics do dismiss things out of hand but both sides on this forum are guilty of simply suiting their own opinions without examining things properly.

As for my point being "tired" thats your problem, am I breaking the rules by pointing out the obvious, or are skeptics the only ones allowed to point out the obvious around here?