Does David Icke Just Say Random Stuff?

[Cryptoverse]

I don't see anything wrong with questioning David's work as long as it's not flagrant slander or obsessive. I disagree with some of the stuff David says too. The staff is not full of David yes men, as may have been suggested.

[the tealady]

Originally Posted by omnisense

I don't see anything wrong with questioning David's work as long as it's not flagrant slander or obsessive. I disagree with some of the stuff David says too. The staff is not full of David yes men, as may have been suggested.

As I said before its the way its done and the constant pretence of 'playing the devils advocate'. That I object to.

You give people a sensible answer, or one that is sincere and as factual as you can make it and they still want to argue. I don't do that. I say my bit and move on.

[markritter]

Originally Posted by iamawaveofthesea

why not be a little more specific?

if there is something he has said you disagree with then share it

There are various things but each to their own thread!

[fudgetusk]

Originally Posted by kizzie

Do you have evidence he wasn't real? Im not religious in anyway but do think a lot of stuff is true, just been twisted.

I'm not saying he's real or unreal. The evidence for him not being real is that no scribe living in those times mentions him at all.

[the apprentice]

Originally Posted by iamawaveofthesea

why not be a little more specific?

if there is something he has said you disagree with then share it

And I was not so long ago pulled up about being vauge, but you cannot get answers from anyone who doesn't really know.

Asking questions is taboo you know, from a mason, it might draw attention to their cause.

The rule with masons, being invariably this, that the less they know about any thing, the wiser that take themselves to be : and the more profoundly ignorant, the more fervently masonic.

[equinoxboy]

I can relate David's early experiences with my own. From the closed down mind I inhabited, to suddenly having infinity unfold before me, my ego tried to frame it, make sense of it and share my newfound wisdom with everybody who would listen. The biggest mistakes I made were down to my own filters interpreting. Ego cannot conceive of infinity.

Back in those wild times, the 90's, it seemed like everybody who began to spiritually awaken quickly encountered "higher beings", who were waiting to benevolently guide us. Lots of information we uncovered came from these sources. A question which I am left with is;

Were these internal or external sources?

David is us. So is Jesus. So is Hitler. We are all infinite potential, limited merely by the filters we impose upon reality.I think it is a mistake to put people on pedestals. I am grateful for what David has done over the years, as part of our unfolding awareness. It is as valuable as the perspective of the OP, because it encourages us to ask questions and to wonder what lies beyond our current understanding.

I don't believe anything, because I think that solid parameters to reality are the boxes we pace ourselves in to avoid confronting infinity. (This perspective leads me to think of the irony that I am writing these words, which create further solidity, just as David's words about Jesus did. David acknowledged this in the quote Pound highlighted.)

Love

[mondogobbo]

I don´t consider David Icke a guru that knows everything and who never makes mistakes. I consider him as a human being, as a great and very intelligent researcher who has a lot of interesting ideas about how the World is. I find him very inspiring. But that doesn´t mean that I necessarely agree with him on everything. And I also think that he doesn´t want us to follow him like sheeps - but to think for ourselves and to follow the Information that he gives and investigate Things for ourselves.

I am not sure about his idea that the moon is artificial and hollow. But I am open to this idea - just not convinced yet. He might be wrong - or right? What do I know. What concerns the reptilians, I am sure that there is SOMETHING about it, because we have a lot of historical artifacts that show a reptilian presence on earth. We find them all over the world. Sumeria, Maya, South Africa, China and even here in Scandinavia where I live (in Sweden there are the Fossum rock carvings that seem to show reptilians or humanoid beings with a serpenthead. The funny thing is that mainstream historians just see them as "men", when it´s obvious that they are not human beings...). - And we also have a lot of other very serious researchers who say more or less the same Things as Icke says. But I am just not sure about how it exactly works with these reptilians. If they are only interdimensional beings. If they are aliens. Or if there also exist 3dimensional reptilians living underground somewhere on the earth. I have not yet a clear idea about this. But I am convinced that reptilians exist, but I am just not sure about which form they have. If interdimensional, aliens or creatures of flesh and blood living underground. Or maybe all of them?!

This is a rock carving from Tanum in Sweden. If this is not a serpentlike humanoid, I don´t know what it is....and we have so many similar artifacts from all over the World, that I am absolutely sure that there is something about the reptilian-theory. Why else would they make these artifact all over the World?

[raburgeson]

No, I don't think so. He appears to hop from subject to subject because of research time. He might have 5 irons in the fire right now. When the research is done the subjects get vetted in the order the research is finished.

[grandmasterp]

Originally Posted by fudgetusk

I'm not saying he's real or unreal. The evidence for him not being real is that no scribe living in those times mentions him at all.

Whether he was real or not doesn't matter - really.
The stories about him took on a life of their own so now they are very real to some people.
Zhiba hit it a while back IMO...
Christ Consciousness doesn't depend on whether or not there was actually was a Christ because Christ Consciousness is something that exists in the here and now for those who believe in it.

[unsheepled]

Originally Posted by grandmasterp

Whether he was real or not doesn't matter - really.
The stories about him took on a life of their own so now they are very real to some people.
Zhiba hit it a while back IMO...
Christ Consciousness doesn't depend on whether or not there was actually was a Christ because Christ Consciousness is something that exists in the here and now for those who believe in it.

Its called "MAKE BELIEVE" which is in my opinion what David asks us to do with his work....its all make believe

There's no better way to make believe than to write a few books on a subject

[fudgetusk]

Originally Posted by paddy_blake

We all live in our own realities, so there is no fundamental truth except for universals such as 2+2=4, that we agree on. What may be true for David Icke may not be 100% true for marcusejc.

If that were true then us being on this site is pointless. No point in us reading Icke's books. Because that would just be HIS truth and not ours.

There is a lot of common ground. It is just in the finer points that reality becomes individual. Our opinions of reality is individual. But the moon is the moon in all our realities.

[fudgetusk]

Originally Posted by grandmasterp

Whether he was real or not doesn't matter - really.
The stories about him took on a life of their own so now they are very real to some people.
Zhiba hit it a while back IMO...
Christ Consciousness doesn't depend on whether or not there was actually was a Christ because Christ Consciousness is something that exists in the here and now for those who believe in it.

But would you gamble your soul on such a vague truth?

[fudgetusk]

Originally Posted by kizzie

Who debunked the book?

Vaccine causing harm has been debunked
911 being a inside job has been debunked
etc and so on

Im betting there was more to the homoeopathy situation that just blurting out it must work after realising water had a memory.

A lot judge DI on "now" they forget he has been doing it a long time and a lot of his stuff is just accepted as fact now.. A lot of people say he just repeats what others have said.. never dreaming or believing it might just in fact be the other way round.

I think anyone can debunk Alexander's book or the parts Icke relays to us. It's a fact that the brain does hallucinate when starved of oxygen or when it's at its lowest ebb. The world that Alexander visits is clearly a metaphor for his condition. The mud is the pus filling his brain.

[JustMe418]

Originally Posted by equinoxboy

I can relate David's early experiences with my own. From the closed down mind I inhabited, to suddenly having infinity unfold before me, my ego tried to frame it, make sense of it and share my newfound wisdom with everybody who would listen. The biggest mistakes I made were down to my own filters interpreting. Ego cannot conceive of infinity.

Back in those wild times, the 90's, it seemed like everybody who began to spiritually awaken quickly encountered "higher beings", who were waiting to benevolently guide us. Lots of information we uncovered came from these sources. A question which I am left with is;

Were these internal or external sources?

David is us. So is Jesus. So is Hitler. We are all infinite potential, limited merely by the filters we impose upon reality.I think it is a mistake to put people on pedestals. I am grateful for what David has done over the years, as part of our unfolding awareness. It is as valuable as the perspective of the OP, because it encourages us to ask questions and to wonder what lies beyond our current understanding.

I don't believe anything, because I think that solid parameters to reality are the boxes we pace ourselves in to avoid confronting infinity. (This perspective leads me to think of the irony that I am writing these words, which create further solidity, just as David's words about Jesus did. David acknowledged this in the quote Pound highlighted.)

Love

If ego cannot conceive infinity then why do many people who talk about infinite consciousness often act from a position of ego? you can see many people throughout history talk about infinity and yet they retain some sense of ego. Personally I think the ego is still there in people but in periods of exaltation it is subdued, not removed.

Does it matter where information come from, within or without, as long as its useful? some people relate to internal processes by externalising them.

[JustMe418]

Originally Posted by Cryptoverse

I don't see anything wrong with questioning David's work as long as it's not flagrant slander or obsessive. I disagree with some of the stuff David says too. The staff is not full of David yes men, as may have been suggested.

I think it would be a mistake to not question it as then his work becomes nothing but a belief system rather than something to help people to get beyond belief systems.

I think a lot of people are looking for a belief system outside of the mainstream and some of those might not like to question his work as it becomes a bit of a comfort zone for them but this in itself is a subtle trap. Same with any system of knowledge though, for some its a safety net or comfort zone, for others a tool for inner expansion and development.

[unsheepled]

The land of make believe is right next door to the land of nod ,you just have your eyes open

[grandmasterp]

Originally Posted by fudgetusk

But would you gamble your soul on such a vague truth?

How do you "gamble your soul" Fudge?
Are any bookies making odds do you think?

[chriswalker]

Originally Posted by grandmasterp

Whether he was real or not doesn't matter - really.
The stories about him took on a life of their own so now they are very real to some people.
Zhiba hit it a while back IMO...
Christ Consciousness doesn't depend on whether or not there was actually was a Christ because Christ Consciousness is something that exists in the here and now for those who believe in it.

Therefore if Christ did not exist in our timeline, he exists as a golem or some kind of thought-form due to all the global energy directed at him.

I can dig that.

[grandmasterp]

Originally Posted by chriswalker

Therefore if Christ did not exist in our timeline, he exists as a golem or some kind of thought-form due to all the global energy directed at him.

I can dig that.

Terry Pratchett had it right....

“Night poured over the desert. It came suddenly, in purple. In the clear air, the stars drilled down out of the sky, reminding any thoughtful watcher that it is in the deserts and high places that religions are generated. When men see nothing but bottomless infinity over their heads they have always had a driving and desperate urge to find someone to put in the way.”

(Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

[noncooperation]

Originally Posted by marcusejc

Does David Icke just say random things that he discovers, regardless of whether they are true or not?

Whenever I have watched his talks, half the stuff I have agreed with, and the other half I've thought was complete nonsense. I've no doubt that he works very hard and does a lot of research. My only doubt is about how true everything he discovers actually is.

For example, I think he's spot on about 9/11 and everything surrounding it. I think he's probably right about a lot of things he says about the powers in the world and what life is really about. But there are things like the reptilians and the moon being fake that just seem like nonsense.

Once I was really into one of his talks, and then he got onto the topic of water. He said that water has a memory because when you freeze it, it freezes into certain patterns. He then made the jump to implying that this means homeopathy is real. I suddenly lost all respect for him and stopped watching. What a daft leap of false logic!

On another talk, he mentioned Dr Eben Alexander's book about his near death experience. I've read that book, and it's fascinating story, but after I'd read it I found out that it's been debunked as complete nonsense.

So I can't help but feel like David just does a lot of reading and lot of research, then just puts it all out there. Anything that's anti the system or the norm seems to be the way. It doesn't seem to matter whether it's actually true or not. Of course, some of it will be, which is merely a coincidence.

Churn enough controversial information out, by the law of averages at least some of it will be true...

David shares what he finds, normally in multiple places and from more than one source, from what i gather.

whether 'you' believe it or not is irrelevant!