It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

David Icke - Nut or Brilliant Researcher!

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 03:27 AM
link   
Welcome all truth seekers. In this discussion I want to try to uncover whether David Icke is just some crazy nut or is he a brilliant researcher. Let’s dig right into this. I have read many of the major conspiracy author’s books, and listened to their lectures. The major ones in my eyes are Jordan Maxwell, Michael Tsarion, Jim Marrs, Fritz Springmeier, Len Horowitz, and of course David Icke.

I was first introduced to some of David Icke’s theories when I ended up coming across a document he wrote sometime ago. It basically covered the Freeman incident, which If you don’t know is about a group of people who declared themselves sovereign from the United States, and did it all while abiding by the laws of the United States. Now I am not going to go into details on how this was done, but if you do a little research on the Freeman incident you will come across some of the details. This document was quite interesting to me, and as I got through this information, eventually he started talking about some of the conspiracy theories revolving around the Freemasons, and many leaders of different countries. Which again I must say was very interesting and there is a lot of evident to support such theories. Shortly after this, Icke came upon the topic that has made him famous or infamous; the idea of a reptilian species on the planet. This is when my ears turned off and my mind said “Ok, you were good up till now. What the heck is this about some sci-fi type creature that has taken over the world or whatever” I must admit I quit reading the document after that, and didn’t really pursue any more of David Icke’s work after this. It was a good couple years before I ever got back to reading David Icke’s material.

A couple of years later; after I had read quite a great deal of material by different authors, in the area of Religion, Conspiracy, Aliens, Paranormal, Freemasonry, Symbology, and many other subjects. I did find a remarkable amount of claims by different people of a reptilian like creature; some even referenced the Grays that everyone has heard of as being reptilian like. Mind you these people are not conspiracy researcher, some say they were just trying to make a buck, and indeed some probably were, but why reptilian, and why so many claims there obviously must be some truth to this. I recommend The Universal Seduction series; it has many different sighting and claims listed that are generally unbiased. Might I also mention that many of the religions have the evil god/being ex. Satan, as being reptilian? What’s this about a serpent in the garden? Some religions even reference a great alligator as the evil one. Perhaps there is more to this after all, maybe Satan isn’t referred to as the great serpent just because he was slippery, perhaps he had an appearance of a reptile. “Now I’m not saying this is absolutely the answer, I am just trying to open your mind up to the possibility of it. I don’t know all the answers but there is some evidence to support this claim.” Perhaps the Nephelium, that are referred to in the beginning of Genesis 6 were reptilian like creatures who knows.

My point is that unless you know all or at least a great deal of the facts, do not throw an idea out. Set it on the back burner, someday you may find it fits. Even so even if David is completely wrong on the reptilian idea, does it matter? That’s like saying that before I went to school I believed that the world was flat, and then later found out that it is in fact round, but because I announced that is was flat early on, now everything I say from this point on is wrong. This is nuts in my opinion. My views 10 years ago are way different from my views now. I would have said you are nuts if anyone came up to me and told me what I know now, and 10 years from now I will have very different views from now. Your perspective of a situation or idea is completely based on the knowledge you have acquired at that moment.




posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 03:28 AM
link   
One last thing I wish to discuss is there a great many people who have declared that David Icke has said he was some form of Messiah or Son of God or whatever. I have not come across that statement in all his books that I have read or in his lectures. David Icke does not profess to a religion, but he does believe in a god like entity or energy. He has many times said that we are all a part of the great source. It is his energy that runs through us. So in that sense I guess we are all part of God. If anyone can show me where he says he is a messiah or Son of God I would be much obliged. Otherwise I regard this as completely disinformation to discredit him.

To conclude this I wish to ask each and every one of you to open your minds, and your hearts. Do not throw anything away unless you know for a fact that is crap. What seems to be crap now may be the answer you have been looking for later? Am I declaring that reptilians exist? No and Yes, I believe it is possible; there is evidence to support and to dismiss this. Does it matter? No, it’s good to have it in your mind as a possibility but don’t get hung up on it. I have read many of David Icke’s books and they contain a lot of very good information. I personally want to declare that David is a brilliant researcher who is willing to think outside the box. I hope each and every one of you can learn this skill. Just because you think something that is out of ordinary is possible, doesn’t make you a nut, it makes you free. I wish you all luck in your research, and may we all find the answer we are search for.

Researcher,

Blake K. Stoltman



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by BStoltman
 


He stated (or at least implied) he was the son of god whilst appearing on the chat show 'Wogan' in 1991.


Icke told Wogan, amid howls of laughter from the studio audience, that he was "the son of God," and that Britain would be devastated by tidal waves and earthquakes. He later said that he had been misinterpreted, and that he had used the term "the son of God" to mean an "aspect" of the Infinite consciousness.


Wikipedia



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 04:02 AM
link   
well, ummmmm, errr
hmmmmm, how do I say this
maybe a lil of both

or maybe a different word than nut

how bout eccentric ????
yep that would work for me



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 04:33 AM
link   
Funny, I was thinking about this last night.

I think both really. I love his research and think he does a very good job but there's a point where I really have to question him. I can accept the illuminati conspiracy, i can even accept (or at least be open to) the idea of reptilians controlling Earth but it's the shapeshifting monachy that I just find really hard to accept.

It seems to me that he just goes too far with it. I used to read and listen to him a lot but I never really saw/heard ANY evidence for shapeshifting humans. As far as I remember, his evidence is apparent quotes from apparent royal leaks. I just don't buy it. It's a shame beacause a lot of his work is very well researched.

I do wonder whether his 'enlightenment' on Ayahuasca was actually detrimental to his work, perhaps it just pushed him over the edge slightly.

I also wonder how much less money he would've made if he hadn't gone balls out with the shapeshifters and got so much media attention.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 04:40 AM
link   
One mans genius is another mans nut.

As Einstein spent most of his academic life after completing the special theory of relativity, trying to prove the existence of a solid state universe, and refused to accept the over 20 to 30 yrs of data that disproved this.

He just changed his maths and equations, added things to make his ideas fit.

He was the most intelligent man in the world (certainly with physics) but still would not accept facts, or data.

Does that mean that the rest of his work, Relativity, and Special Relativity should be ignored?

Should he be labelled as a nut?

Infact Icke has more research which he has compiled about the historical cultural and folklore aspects of Lizards, or reptilians, dragons whatever, than has ever been put forward against what he says.

Its strange he shows, look here this record shows that mankind here mention Lizard Gods, here’s the source, and here in this part of the world here. then he will add modern stuff, like I met this Shaman and discussed it with him, look this is his name and where he is, he confirms that the Nation of X has for 3000 yrs told the history/story of the people that Lizards/Reptilians came from the sky and....

That’s all he does, and links it in with bloodlines, great genealogical research.

And what happens in debate in return?

Nothing, no one comes forward and states "Ive spoken to your shaman guy, you were lying...."

"The historical records you show are infact from a different date... or represent this not x....."

No one comes forward with any alternatives to the information he has collated.

These ideas are not soo much his opinions, just his collation of data, testimonies and facts.

What happens?



Nut job




Loony


Etc etc, but no substantial evidence or counter research to negates the information he has brought. Its personalised against Icke not the subject matter.

Was Einstein also a loon?

infact at least Einstein was shown proof he was wrong, no one seems to have done this to Ickes research....

So am I saying Icke is a genius? no way, but just showing the analogy and blanket references Ickes important research in many areas- Genealogy of the organisations that control the world, the Bankers, Zionism, families etc etc, is much more important than any lizard aspect.

Be they Lizards or not, the work he has done to show the links, connections, families and interconnectedness of the secret societies, groups and politics that govern us is stunning, and has brought the entire topic of conspiracy a step closer by far to the truth.

I don’t personally think the Queen etc eat live mice when the curtains are closed and get all scaly, however this does not mean that I do not accept and respect other areas of the work he has done.

The same as I don’t accept Einstein’s ideas of an static universe, I know from science and historical records around the world it seems to be an cyclic one of one sort or another, do I therefore not accept the importance of E=Mc2?

To do so and base your worldview on such blanket terms is very dangerous and ignorant imho, and shows a real lack flexibility of the mind and will just lead to stunted intellectual growth, and invalidate any search for the truth.

I also am very wary myself of putting such blanket terms on those who criticise so strongly Icke, "Searchers for Truth" "conspiracy Theorists" then they just slag him off, well guys sometimes I think you are more ignorant then the MSM and masses, bring the evidence forward to prove his testimonies, historical research etc is wrong, show proof that he is wrong, or at least accept his other research as some of the most important done in the history of modern "Conspiracy Circles" and gave him his bloody due!

Whilst many who slag him off were still in Diapers when he started his research, and he has put real real time and effort into it, his research not being the same as many who criticise him, that is he does not "Google" whatch a couple of You Tube vids then proclaims a "Worldview", this guy has been going out there travelling the world speaking to people, digging round in dusty libraries, etc etc whilst most of his detractors were but even a sparkle in their fathers eye.

Icke is one of the founding fathers of Conspiracy scene, we should give him the respect he deserves imho, agree with hs reptillian thing or not.

Kind Regards,

Elf



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 04:42 AM
link   
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


God is consciousness and we all emanate from this single consciousness. All there is is God and being part of it means we are all sons and daughters of God. Jesus is supposed to have stated that he was the Son of God, just as David Icke is purported to have said. The difference between us is the degree of consciousness that we have.

Consciousness, like all energies, cannot be destroyed, but we can develop it further. As such we are all eternal beings working to increase our level of consciousness, knowingly or not. This is done in each lifetime - the worst we can do is not to move forward.

To move from this planet one needs to achieve a form of graduation through various levels of initiation. The pagans of old taught that one must be baptized, first with water, and then with light. This is followed by "the crucifixion" and finally Resurrection to Life aka Bliss, until one chooses to leave, or one's physical body dies. From there I assume we may then return to help others (in a future life) or move to another plane or world of existence.

Unfortunately, the three current Religions of the Book, were manipulated towards giving power to a priest class and retarding our progress. The main themes within the Christian Bible however remain. The Baptism of Light is evidenced by Saint Paul on the road to Damascus, and the rest are clearly portrayed in Jesus life. The whole story is simply an updated version of earlier allegories demonstrating our true purpose on Earth. Whether Jesus actually existed as a person is debatable.

Homer's Odyssey is an earlier version of the same theme and still available today.

If you are interested an excellent source is the book, Jesus and the Goddess, by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy published by Thorsons 2001).

So, in effect, David Icke was perfectly within his rights to state that he is a Son of God, as was Jesus.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 04:45 AM
link   
I think david is being used by british intelligence, and i think he knows it.

I do not think he has much critical thinking as he states, but just steals all his ideas from others, and goes with it.

Working at the bbc probably got him put on some list and being used for public control.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by BStoltman
 


Icke looks more like an Illuminati disinformer. There is NO evidence the Anunnak were reptile humanoids. The sumerians NEVER said that. All over the Middle East there are steles, statues, sculptures depicting the Anunnaki. In NO ONE of them you can see any odd detail in their appearance that suggest they are reptoids. It's an Illuminati propaganda to spread panic in mankind, 'cos the return of the Anunnaki totally threats the NWO agenda.







Above you can see 3 distinct sculptures with scenes of Princess Inanna and other Anunnaki. The first stele there are only Anunnaki women. Notice their large breasts. I just want David Icke explain FOR WHAT a reptile needs mammal glands??? Oh, I forgot... they are "shapeshifters", they can "turn into humans" and the Illuminati have their genetic bloodline... Oh, hold on, wait a second... According to sumerians ALL human race is a genetic copy of the Anunnaki, despite of the different ethnic groups that may suggest crossbreeding with other extraterrestrial races. And so far David Icke, Arizona Wilder and these clowns, NEVER got any single picture of a human turning into reptile...
Ain't saying that doesn't exist such specie of reptile humanoids. They do exist, actualy, but most likely they are result of ancient genetic experiments, just as we are. According to sumerians, the Anunnaki carried several genetic experiments in order to create an intelligent humanoid specie, and ENKI, the genetic master, used primates, amphibians, birds, reptiles and other species of mammals. Many odd mythic creatures, as centaurs, minotaurs, harpies and many others, most likely were engineered beings. My theory about the "reptilians" is that, during the last ice age, they migrated to the underground and weren't exposed to the extreme cold environment. That's why they reached a very advanced technological level. They kept the inheritance of the Anunnaki, and they had time to evolve and develop their society. After the Anunnaki have left Earth, the reptilians returned to surface, got the control of the cloned bio androids, Greys and started to pull the strings of the powerful greedy men of Earth. The return of the Anunnaki isn't interesting to them.


[edit on 26-3-2010 by ucalien]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 05:41 AM
link   
He's both. He's a nut to a beginner truth seeker who is starting to peer down the rabbit hole. He's a brilliant researcher to one who is a more seasoned expanded truther on his level. And hes a somewhat amateur close minded novice at times to an enlightened one. To the one infinite creator, well... who knows.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by LiveForever8
reply to post by BStoltman
 


He stated (or at least implied) he was the son of god whilst appearing on the chat show 'Wogan' in 1991.


Icke told Wogan, amid howls of laughter from the studio audience, that he was "the son of God," and that Britain would be devastated by tidal waves and earthquakes. He later said that he had been misinterpreted, and that he had used the term "the son of God" to mean an "aspect" of the Infinite consciousness.


Wikipedia



Sorry to be pedantic but he didn't state he was "the son of God" on the Wogan show. Yes it was more like an implication. Wogan said "Is it true that some people are reporting you are saying you're the son of god"?
Icke replies "yes" but is obviously cut off by audience laughter before he can finish his sentance. So in reality he was saying yes it's true that people are reporting I have said it, not necessarily that he is confirming it's what he's said.

On other shows at the time he talks about 'Christ concioussness' and how we are all sons of God. Of course the public at the time didn't get that concept and believed he meant he was the physical reincarnation of Jesus and this is how it got reported in the papers. Icke is the first one to admit that he was slightly unhinged in this period and some of the things he said did seem crazy, he sees it as an ego death that allowed him to grow spiritually.

Most people who ridicule Icke today are thinking back to what they heard through the media years back. Every single person I've met who laughs and comes out with the 'Icke's a nutter' line has always admitted that they've never read anything he's written. It's just a knee jerk response, agreeing with the flock so you don't stand out. I can totally respect anyone that has read his stuff and doesn't agree, fair enough.

Having said this I don't think he is in any way a 'genius researcher'. I think more than anything he is a brilliant communicator who will speak his particular truth even if people find it ridiculous or unpalatable. I admire him for that.

Most critics bring up the reptilians as proof of Ickes nuttiness, again they haven't read any of his work and missed that Icke's reptilians are interdimensional beings, not aliens. Is it possible that there are other dimensions? Science says so. Is it possible that there are other types of life form occupying these dimensions? Who knows, I think it is possible but I have personally never seen any evidence, so I remain on the fence on the reptillians and it is only one part of his work.

The main reason I like Icke is because when I first read one of his books it was a confirmation of everything I felt instinctively to be true in a spiritual sense. The overall message in his books is a very positive one. Yes we are being manipulated and controlled but we are infinite beings who can change it if we want to. Anyone who has read his books will have noticed that Icke constantly says not to take his word for things and not to look to people like him as gurus or leaders. This is another criticism I have heard from people, Icke does not hold himself up to be some infallible guru, just someone communicating their version of 'truth'.


[edit on 26-3-2010 by DrHammondStoat]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 06:25 AM
link   
I haven't decided how I feel in the end about Icke. BUT.......his research is indeed fascinating even apart from the reptillian theory. I think what we all need to remember is that Galileo was laughed at and considered a heretic in his day. And look how far we've come.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
I think david is being used by british intelligence, and i think he knows it.

I do not think he has much critical thinking as he states, but just steals all his ideas from others, and goes with it.

Working at the bbc probably got him put on some list and being used for public control.


This is another accusation that is often directed at Icke, he 'steals' other people's ideas. What ideas has he stolen exactly when all his sources are listed in his books?

Has every evolutionary bioligist stolen their ideas from Charles Darwin or have they used his theories as a basis to explore the subject further? I though that was how research was conducted.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:08 AM
link   
David Ike is no more of a nut then the entire human population.....

we could debate this all day long....

65 million years ago they (researchers) say life was all but wiped out on earth....

Then Explain how the Chicken has T-REX DNA and is it's closest relative....

on one hand researchers state... Reptiles evolved into birds....yet most of life was wiped out.......


Gonna go out on a whim here.... We are lied to every day



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Who is a nut today? The whole world seems to have lost it's compass.

Children, who fail to adapt to the system are given psychotropic drugs. Torture, indefinite detention and preemptive wars have become reasonable. People are considered to be on the fringe, when they speak out for peace and a rapid withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq. A compassionate person like Norman Finkelstein is considered to be a radical, while people who use white phosphorous on a civilian population and kill children by the hundreds are considered to be rational people.

I doubt, that Icke's research is brilliant. He seems to lack a bit scepticism. I believe Icke genuinely tries to tell the truth. He often relies on first and second hand accounts. This reliance makes him prone to manipulative attempts by hoaxers or disinformation-agents. There is often no possibility to verify such information.

Because of this, I don't subscribe to Icke's more outlandish theories. But I am impressed by the style he presents his more mundane ideas. He has a knack for both presenting pivotal information and telling anecdotes. In my opinion, he is a passionate and fascinating orator and skilled writer. He encourages people to think for themselves. I enjoy listening to his lectures and reading his stuff.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


I remember Icke on Wogan very well and saw this myself.

Prior to the Wogan show Icke had been a TV sports presenter



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:07 AM
link   
I don't think Icke is a particularly good researcher.

He IS, however, a very good writer and an exceptional public speaker.

If someone wants to watch a good objective piece on Icke, I recommend the British television documentary, David Icke: The Lizards and the Jews

HERE

I think this documentary does two thnings:

1. Indicates that David Icke is dedicated and genuine, even if a bit nuts.

2. Puts to rest claims of Anti-Semetism that seem to waft after him somehow.

And speaking as someone who has absolutely ZERO tolerance for Anti-Semetism (just check out my threads and posts) I think that's saying something.

Def. worth a watch. Funny, too.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Most of the credible info he brings up is already in the public and conspiracy domain to anyone who bothers researching..and has been the topic of many people before him. He is hardly a methodical researcher, Icke uses well known info to the average ct'er, completely misunderstood or fabricates aspects of ancient civilizations, fabrications about masons..and then the rest is just nut job material. He is nothing more than a kooky new ager imo. I will agree he is a good speaker though.

[edit on 26-3-2010 by Solomons]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by BStoltman
 


Nut that has books and such to sell.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:34 AM
link   
I would say that he is a brilliant minded eccentric, not a nut and though I do not believe everything he says I believe that he may be onto the right track as even before I had heard of him I had already suspected the reptilian hypothesis so when many say it all started with him I say no, it started elsewhere – probably ancient Sumeria.

When I first heard him mention the reptilian king maker as being a possibility I was pretty much speechless as he was expressing my own thoughts pretty much spot on.

As he is a human being like the rest of us the insights he may gain could be open to misinterpretation even by himself and for that reason I think he sometimes makes some terrible mishaps with his mouth but on the whole I like and admire the man and if that somehow means I am a nut for putting some merit into what he says that’s fine I will wear that badge of the gullible and nutty because I would rather expose my mind to the open air than have it fester in a locked cell.

Keep on rocking David, respects to the man from this being!

PS: Terry Wogan was always an overrated and sarcastic no body who was highly skilled in adding nothing to nothing in my opinion.


[edit on 26-3-2010 by SmokeJaguar67]



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join