Reptillians - There is NOTHING to prove they exist

page: 17
12
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 28 2008 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by wytworm

Originally posted by enigmania
reply to post by dalan.
 





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?


I'm an eye witness to. I've never seen any cosmic strings, and I think noone ever has. Jeah, that's it, String theory must be wrong.


[edit on 28/5/08 by enigmania]


So you concede the absurdity of 'eye-witness' testimony? Great! We finally have common ground.


No I do not, because I am an eyewitness. Of course there are hoaxers but it is not hard to tell when someone is sincere.

But there is no point in arguing with you, if you don't think that there is a possibility of a reptilian race being real that's fine.




posted on May, 28 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by 1nelove
 


Lol, I like how you disguise your attack on me in a reply to wytworm.

If you want to attack me, at least direct it at me.

It's very easy not to participate in this thread, and then come in after a few weeks to say this about me.

I couldn't really understand what you were accusing me of, and who you were accusing of what, so please answer my questions so I can react.




He's speaks of science in a blasphemous way and also contradicted himself through self-bias.


Please explain both.




He's acting like an egotist or an elitest.


I feel it is not egotistic to defend a theory that is being dismissed by double standards. I'm not particularly into "Reptillians", just can't stand the hypocracy.
What is so egotistic or elitist about me?




Anyone who understands reality will tell you that the mind is the controller of humanity (and hence, reality as we know it) and the scientific method that ignores that, as if some certain individuals can deny this "objective" weakness, is a scientific method that does not apply to reality.


Does this bit refer to the argument wytworm and I had about reality? Please explain further, cause I cannot see your point.




You're arguing that we should look at everything to understand a truth, with science as a subset.




He is arguing that the scientific method is the only way.


Eh, wasn't that the other way around?

Im sorry, but your post was very confusing.

Could you perhaps insult me in a more clear and comprehensible way?

Thank you.

[edit on 28/5/08 by enigmania]

[edit on 28/5/08 by enigmania]

[edit on 28/5/08 by enigmania]



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by wytworm

Yes they are non-verbal in that they do not use the spoken word. They are except for 3 or 4 species non vocal, if by that you mean making noises that emanate from their mouths. They communicate through non-verbal means, yes, but it isn't telepathy. They communicate using body language: pushups, change of skin color, head bobbing, dewlap extension, posture changes, movement (strutting, for example) or making themselves look tall or flattened out.

I have seen plenty of humans exhibiting the same behavior as you describe above. I have never seen any of those wearing jeans made from a reptile. If you mean genes, I would say you have a good start on a hypothesis. Go run your studies and let us know what you find out.


Mom tells me, I AM one of those whose gift is to communicate non-verbally and mentally before the words come up.

But til now my eyes have never gone into slits yet. My cats do, though. Does this mean my cat is more reptile than I am?



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 


I have to agree with you on that one. I couldn't make head nor tail of it.



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by wytworm
 


Lol, this is the first thing we can actually agree, to agree on. That's nice for a change.
.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 05:23 AM
link   
Remember - The LACK of evidence does not prove seomthing does not exist, only that NO evidence has yet been found to support the idea.

You need to remember that so far there is NO evidence to prove they DONT exists either, so in reality your argument is fundamantalyl flawed.

However there is a great deal of paintings, sculptures of no human beings dating back to pre Egyptians. Now, why would the acients be creating non human art ? We will probably never know the answer.

When people come out and say this is a FACT - Something exists or does not exists, they are basing their reasoning on their own assumptions. Have you travelled across the milkyway galaxy ? Or the universe ? If NO, then please refrain from making statements like this, because we are such a young species, we must open our minds to the fact that life exists throughout teh universe. Need proof ? What about GOD - Need proof to believe in Jesus ? There is none, but millions believe it!

Just a thought !

Peace.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 05:36 AM
link   
reply to post by 1234567
 


You're absolutely right and on a site like this, you'd expect that to be obvious.

Still, a lot of people aren't willing to at least consider the option of Reptillian beings.

Apparently, it is way to much for some.

Like you said, the whole premise of this thread is ridiculous. Nothing to prove they exist - nothing to prove they don't exist, but the evidence, no matter how insignificant to some, is there.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 06:46 AM
link   
reply to post by 1234567
 


yes but its a ludicrous idea that reptiles that shapeshift...



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by 1234567
Remember - The LACK of evidence does not prove seomthing does not exist, only that NO evidence has yet been found to support the idea.


What the LACK of evidence does is make the idea meaningless. If they do exist and we will never see them, or any effects of their presence, who cares?



You need to remember that so far there is NO evidence to prove they DONT exists either, so in reality your argument is fundamantalyl flawed.


This depends on who makes the statement. If you come in claiming that they do exist, you take on the burden of initial claim -- the burden of proof. It does not fall on those who oppose you to prove a negative to your premise, all they have to do is identify your faulty reasoning, attack your premises, and provide counterexamples. Lets explore this below:


However there is a great deal of paintings, sculptures of no human beings dating back to pre Egyptians. Now, why would the acients be creating non human art ? We will probably never know the answer.


This is your flawed premise. Why flawed? you are making a classic mistake in analysis. You are applying contemporary context to paintings and sculptures that are so far separated from us that this transposing of context makes their meaning wholly different and unreliable.

Therefore, I as the counter to your premise do not have to prove something unprovable, as your premise implodes just based on its bad structure.



When people come out and say this is a FACT - Something exists or does not exists, they are basing their reasoning on their own assumptions. Have you travelled across the milkyway galaxy ? Or the universe ? If NO, then please refrain from making statements like this, because we are such a young species, we must open our minds to the fact that life exists throughout teh universe.


Your premise here is that those who report facts are biased therefore their clams are meaningless. So far I am with you as it is a simplistic version of the principle of argumentation theory i described above. Where the statement is less successful is the second half where you employ a non-sequitur to make our point. What is the logical connection between traveling the milky way and being able to argue and debate? My assumption here is of innocence, I am sure your are not intending to deceive as much as you just have not made it clear who you are responding to.



Need proof ? What about GOD - Need proof to believe in Jesus ? There is none, but millions believe it!


Using Christianity to relieve ourself of the burden of proof is an interesting if risky tactic. Risky in that there is no logical or causal link between this and the topic so it might be read as a desperate last gasp of one who has no better argument to make.

On the other hand, it might be read that the hidden premise here is that if we believe anything 'on faith' then we have the burden of accepting everything 'on-faith'. Ergo, Christians have to accept reptilian theory with absolutely no proof proffered as a quid pro quo of sorts.

I admire that as a funny argument to make if it was intentional. I would imagine it to be rather ineffective on the whole as Christianity and other belief systems have the weight of centuries behind them. Do you propose a church of reptilia?



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by enigmania
reply to post by 1234567
 
the evidence, no matter how insignificant to some, is there.


I think for me this is the crux of the problem. You have failed to convince that your 'evidence' supports anything at all! The insignificance is in its relation to the topic and its credibility, not the volume of it.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 08:25 AM
link   
No point arguing with them.

If they can't see it, well they just can't see it.


Seriously, why bother, it's draining (for all parties).

Agree to disagree. And those that are with you, ARE with you, and those that ain't... well that's their problem. The education system is to blame, and you can see it in most of the intelligent left brains out there, and to be honest I do pity them, but ** if and when ** they see it, it should be our duty to calm them, AND then ask them to help bridge the gap between their own matrix like existences, and..... ours.


"the love you withold, is the pain you will carry" _ Alex Collier 1994

Z



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by dalan.
 


dalan, I've been meaning to ask you, the statue in your avatar, do you know it's history, and any background information on it? If you or anyone else does, I'd love to hear the story.

Thanks in advance


Z

[edit on 29-5-2008 by watchZEITGEISTnow]



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
 


Look at the 11th post of page one of this thread. Someone posted this picture and it is said to be Summerian.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 


Hey mate. Yeah I see its Summerian, but what's its story...anyone know?

Looks like a reptile version of mary and jesus if you ask me.., makes ya think eh?


Z



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
 


It does look a bit like that.

I looked at the source off the picture, and it is on imageshack with no further info.

Maybe NephraTari knows more.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by 1234567
 


There is also the matter of Time.

Those who existed in the past may or may not exist in the present, or the future.

I agree there are some weird looking dudes and dudettes in internet pictures coming out of ancient Egypt and Sumeria. But that was a different time.

What I can relate to is that there is a time to be up-front and obvious and a time to hide yourself due to what is coming at you.

Maybe we as humans haven't learned this yet?



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
 


I'll see what I can find for everyone. I know, as everyone else, that it was a Sumerian sculpture...

The Sumerians seem to have had many sculptures that have a profound effect on what they really represent.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Well, I looked everywhere and I can't seem to find any actual info on the sculpture.

You can find the sculpture on google in an image search for "anunnaki" or anything related to that subject. But I couldn't find any info on the sculpture itself.

Any one else is welcome to give it a shot, I am curious as well to know the history of my avatar.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by dalan.
 


I looked around with the same result you had. The trouble is its such an esoteric subject that there isn't as much on the web. The archaeologist looks like she was active in the 60s and put some books out but I was not THAT interested to drop $125 on amazon for an out of print book.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by wytworm
 


I can't blame you there. Too bad knowledge is so expensive...

sorry for the one-liner.





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join