Reptillians - There is NOTHING to prove they exist

reply to post by dalan.




umm yeah nice post couldn't read it though must be that invisible ink the reptilians invented

Originally posted by q_ball
reply to post by dalan.

 

umm yeah nice post couldn't read it though must be that invisible ink the reptilians invented

Yeah. Curse that invisible ink.

I wonder myself whether it's the outward form that gets passed on or it's the abilities of the mind.

If limbless snakes can capture prey and elephants can draw pictures, then mental abilities are more important than feathers or scales.

Most DNA code is labeled as junk. I wonder how much of that is mental.

reply to post by sarcastic


Yeah I like the way they label it 'junk' cause they dont understand it.

reply to post by enigmania


If you could see the daylight between how you describe cosmic string theory and how you argue for reptilian theory, you would really have progressed.

reply to post by enigmania


If you could see the daylight between how you describe cosmic string theory and how you argue for reptilian theory, you would really have progressed.

[Double posted for some reason...]

[edit on 27-5-2008 by wytworm]

reply to post by wytworm


Please, show me the daylight and explain the difference in credibility between the two theories, since you seem to keep pointing out that if I can somehow relate to your point, I'll progress.

Well show it to me then, instead of patronizing me.

Why do you think it's called String-THEORY? What is the evidence for string theory?

reply to post by enigmania


Thats all i have been doing. I will assume then that it is a moot point as you are not going to engage on that level. Best of luck with it!

reply to post by wytworm


Lol, exactly what I expected.

If you could see the daylight between how you describe cosmic string theory and how you argue for reptilian theory, you would really have progressed.

So if your big enough to say that, why aren't you big enough to explain it to me?

Step up my friend!

Thats all i have been doing. I will assume then that it is a moot point as you are not going to engage on that level. Best of luck with it!

No, you haven't done anything when it comes to explaining why String-theory is more credible than the Reptillian-theory, but you keep attacking me for not seeing it. Lol.

Is that maybe because, oh, I don't know, you can't explain it?

Very weak.

Originally posted by enigmania
reply to post by wytworm

Lol, exactly what I expected.

You are a barn wall circle drawer. You start with a predefined conclusion then work backwards to fill in supporting facts and disregard conflicting facts. It is impossible under those conditions to get anything other than what you expect to see.

So if your big enough to say that, why aren't you big enough to explain it to me?

Its already there. Go back and re-read. I am not sure what you don't understand.

No, you haven't done anything when it comes to explaining why String-theory is more credible than the Reptillian-theory, but you keep attacking me for not seeing it. Lol.

Seek your therapist's advice on feelings of persecution. That is wholly your invention and gets no traction from me.

Is that maybe because, oh, I don't know, you can't explain it?

Your unwillingness to read the message does not equate to it not being delivered.


[edit on 27-5-2008 by wytworm]

Historical evidence, is still evidence.

Reptilians, like string theory, are both theories. Some physicists are merely speculating about string theory and it's properties.

You cannot compare the idea of reptilians to that of string-theory.

Any idea that we have of aliens, whether they be reptilians or greys, we only have because of EYE WITNESS TESTIMONY.

Anyone who "assumes" that reptilians are not real, or better yet, aren't on our planet; are denying both eye witness testimony and historical evidence.

Maybe a better thread would be "Does anyone else find it odd that the idea of Reptilians, is being completely rebuked by EVERYONE?"

and most importantly...why???

Originally posted by dalan.
Historical evidence, is still evidence.

Reptilians, like string theory, are both theories. Some physicists are merely speculating about string theory and it's properties.

You cannot compare the idea of reptilians to that of string-theory.

Any idea that we have of aliens, whether they be reptilians or greys, we only have because of EYE WITNESS TESTIMONY.

Anyone who "assumes" that reptilians are not real, or better yet, aren't on our planet; are denying both eye witness testimony and historical evidence.

Maybe a better thread would be "Does anyone else find it odd that the idea of Reptilians, is being completely rebuked by EVERYONE?"

and most importantly...why???

I am an eye witness. I have never seen one. Do you dispute my eye witness testimony? Shall we count the eye witnesses on either side?

String theory is not a result of spontaneous generation (look it up). It is the end of a chain of research, experimentation, debate and peer review consisting of centuries.

reply to post by wytworm


Yes I do dispute your "testimony". That would be like someone who lives in the US saying that, because they have never seen Europe, it must not exist. Which by your testimony is what you are stating, that something isn't real until you have seen it.

So that would mean that you are in fact NOT an eyewitness.

www.thefreedictionary.com...

reply to post by wytworm


Reptilians also are not the reslut of spontaneous generation (look it up).

Originally posted by dalan.
reply to post by wytworm

 

Yes I do dispute your "testimony". That would be like someone who lives in the US saying that, because they have never seen Europe, it must not exist. Which by your testimony is what you are stating, that something isn't real until you have seen it.

So that would mean that you are in fact NOT an eyewitness.

www.thefreedictionary.com...

I have been to what you call Europe, ant it was just thousands of miles of empty sand. That is my eye witness testimony. As legitimate as those witnesses you cite.

Originally posted by dalan.
reply to post by wytworm

 

Reptilians also are not the reslut of spontaneous generation (look it up).

So you have a chain of facts to cite to backup your thesis? I have seen none to date.

Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature that is supported by many facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena. --National Academy of Sciences

How does reptilian theory fit either of those definitions?


[edit on 27-5-2008 by wytworm]

If you take into account all of our ancient myths and legends they paint quite the image.

And you must remember that even the "scholars" are forming they're assumptions about ancient mythology on biases.

reply to post by wytworm


And as far as reptilians goes, your lack of not seeing one doesn not make you an eyewitness. Quite the opposite actually.

Seems to me when we completely unravel and decode DNA we'll understand the genes and abilities that are common to some humans and reptiles.

Until that work is done we are all just still guessing.