Icke's Reptilians scientifically proven...

reply to post by Xcalibur254


Sounds like you need to define the word "Human" first, then we can discuss whether or not my statement is "disgusting".

It is such a relative word that if we are not all giving it the same definition then there is bound to be confusion.

One pre-requisite of being human is the ability to feel empathy,compassion, and love.
in my opinion of course.

These beings DO NOT HAVE THIS ABILITY!!!.

In MY definition they ARE NOT HUMAN!
They carry a gene which kicks the reptilian portion of their brain into overdrive/suppresses the mamalin portion of their brains or BOTH!
Read about the R-Complex in our brains.
We have a portion of our brains which is reptilian in nature which has caused me to spend countless hours
contemplating if ANY of us are fully human.

If you want to take that as meaning that they are aliens disguised as humans using a cloaking device then you can certainly take it that way.
If you want to think that they are shapeshifters you can certainly think that.

By MY definition these people who carry the psychopath gene are NOT human.
They LOOK human.

Defining the word HUMAN may be the most important thing you ever do.
Think carefully.

reply to post by Billmeister


Very good and interesting post.

you admirably listed the traits of your usual psychopath. I remember a test devised some 10 years ago which reckoned that its 1 in 12 of us although 1 in 13, as seems to be thought today, is pretty close.

Most of these people don't make the death camps or merry murderers list they are simply in positions of power in Government, law, industry, our institutions, anywhere they can mercilessly claw their way to the control at the top of the chain. A typical place is the City where firms are slung to the wall for profit without so much as a minute qualm of responsibility felt as they guzzle their champagne.

Another trait many possess is that they think they can easily break the rules for their own purposes and benefit yet they will insist everyone else staunchley obeys those same rules they gaily disregard.

I must admit to feeling that the above traits are not human. Certainly 1/12 have these traits but, where does this hideous nature stem from. A psychopath is an alien. Sure they have the charming side but they don't feel love or commitment to anyone and certainly don't have the heroic humane side to their natures the rest of humanity can display, as within their job eg a fireman, or ocasionally as in someone spontaneously leaping into a raging river to save another.

I think it was Horizen on tv that showed two scientist's work on the brain and dna which clearly showed how the reptilian or psychopath's brain differed to the rest of our brains. I think its hats off to David Icke, whom I saw talk at Totnes. He identified this reptilian trait in humanity well before the scientists linked the psychopath to the reptilian part of the brain and although shape shifting moved it a little further than I would want to go on this issue, he first warned us about those traits which have opened the door to us being aware of a group nestled within us that totally serves itself and is steeped historically in the business of living off of the rest of humanity. Name and shame could well be a way of protecting ourselves from their nefarious actions.

Originally posted by Screwed
reply to post by Xcalibur254

 

One pre-requisite of being human is the ability to feel empathy and love.
in my opinion of course.

These beings DO NOT HAVE THIS ABILITY!!!.

If you want to take that as meaning that they are aliens disguised as humans using a cloaking device then you can certainly take it that way.
If you want to think that they are shapeshifters you can certainly think that.

By MY definition these people who carry the psychopath gene are NOT human.
They LOOK human.

edit on 29-9-2011 by Screwed because: (no reason given)

Thank you!

You seem to be one of the few who understood the angle I was going for.

It has been proven that those people who exhibit an abnormally high tendency toward psychopathic traits have physically different brain structures which cause them to act in the manners described in the OP.
(i.e. compulsive lying, lack of empathy, superficial charm, arrogance and manipulativeness).

Whatever one wants to call this, the fact of the matter is a genetically caused difference in brain structure, making them different in physiological makeup than the majority has been linked to this behavior. As you seem to have already done, I was linking this to another study of the human brain which describes its different characteristics as "reptilian" and "mammalian".

I probably went overboard in linking it all to a far-fetched theory by David Icke, but I found the similarities in wording and description interesting enough to note.

the Billmeister

reply to post by Screwed


Actually it's really easy to define what a human is. Can a "psychopath" breed with what you would consider a human and produce viable offspring? Yes. Thus they are the same species. It's as simple as that. Then there's also the fact that this whole argument hinges on the hypothesis of the triune brain. Unfortunately, the triune brain is more of a pop psychology convention than something accepted by actual psychologists, neurologists, and neuroscientists. Even in its heyday the hypothesis was never widely accepted and today is considered outdated.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Screwed

 

Actually it's really easy to define what a human is. Can a "psychopath" breed with what you would consider a human and produce viable offspring? Yes. Thus they are the same species. It's as simple as that. Then there's also the fact that this whole argument hinges on the hypothesis of the triune brain. Unfortunately, the triune brain is more of a pop psychology convention than something accepted by actual psychologists, neurologists, and neuroscientists. Even in its heyday the hypothesis was never widely accepted and today is considered outdated.

So, given this line of thinking and logic we can assume that Horses in a field are not supposed to recognise that the donkey across the way is clearly different than them although looks very similar?

The one horse turns to the other and says "Hey Bill, that creature over there looks like one of us, let us go say hello to him".

"No Carl, says Bill. He may LOOK similar to us but he is not one of us! He is what is known as a Donkey. Donkeys can NEVER be horses and horses can never be donkeys".

"But Bill, says Carl,I heard somewhere that If I have sex with a donkey, it will get pregnant, therefore it is a horse"!

"Yes Carl, I can see how, in your simple minded approach you would think that but rest assured, A Horse is NOT a Donkey and a Donkey is NOT a horse,

Now, pass me that hay"!


Now if a being such as Oliver is possible then I suppose Chimps are Human too?

I am really struggling to follow you rationale behind this.
Are you entirely sure you know what it means to be human?
Perhaps this is where Language breaks down and the limitations of producing complex vibrational patterns using our mouth and tounge in order to express our thoughts and ideas become apparent.

HUMAN is just a word and that is all it will ever be.
It is how you define it that is going to be key to having any sort of meaningful discussion on the topic.

reply to post by Screwed


I knew you would try to bring this up. Notice how I said viable offspring. No matter the circumstances a mule will always be sterile.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


No not always, ALMOST ALWAYS!

Link

A Morroccan mule, which is supposed to be sterile, has baffled scientists by giving birth.

DNA tests say the foal's mother was a mule while the father was a donkey.

Mules are hybrids, a cross between two species, in this case, the horse and the donkey.

They are almost always unable to breed because their genetic make-up is so unusual. The foal inherited a mixture of horse and donkey chromosomes via the mother's ovum

The Society for the Protection of Animals of North Africa, told BBC News Online: "The discovery defies scientific wisdom because mules are supposed to be sterile."

The 14-year-old mother mule gave birth at the end of August, in a small hamlet in the region of Oulmes.

Vets from the Society for the Protection of Animals of North Africa visited the animal and took blood tests for analysis.

The Moroccan foal looks a bit like a baby donkey and a bit like a baby mule - but not exactly like either. Genetically, it is a quarter horse and three quarters donkey.

Using your line of reasoning, a mother who gives birth to a little girl who grows up to be sterile, unable to produce offspring is not a human?

Still, having trouble following your line of thinking.

Just to be clear,
I am of the position that it doesn't matter one way or the other if you can have sex with it,Can produce offspring, or marry it, it doesn't necessarily make it human or non human.

What makes us Human, if we have to use that word, is our ability to
"Feel" compassion,Love,and Empathy.

Until you are able/willing to define what it means to be human we are at an impass.
I have given my definition.
Seeing as how you don't agree with my stance I would assume you don't agree with my definition either?
So hard to have this conversation without clear definitions.
I tried.

reply to post by Screwed


I am giving you the biological definition of species. A species is defined as a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. This is the most basic way species is defined. We could then go on to look at similarities between morphology and DNA, but no matter which of these methods are used "psychopaths" are still part of Homo sapiens sapiens.

it is not a metaphor. icke is talkin full on lizards

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Screwed

 

I am giving you the biological definition of species. A species is defined as a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. This is the most basic way species is defined. We could then go on to look at similarities between morphology and DNA, but no matter which of these methods are used "psychopaths" are still part of Homo sapiens sapiens.

I would agree with you there.
This is why it is so important to make sure we are both talking about the same thing.

YOU are talking about whether or not we and psychopaths are of the same species.

I am talking about whether or not Psychopaths are HUMAN.

As I define human, they are clearly NOT!

Sometimes things are not always black or white.
I deal in percentages when things get confusing.

Chimpanzees are approx 98% human.
Is it possible that things like this don't necessarily go up or down in whole percentage points?
Why is it that we are looking for the missing link that falls neatly between the 98 and 100%?
Why is it not possible to have a being that is 98% human,98.5% human, 99% human, 99.5 percent human, 99.8 percent human, 99.9875% human and on and on we go?

If we can agree that it IS possible then all we are talking about is what percentage Psychopaths fall in.

they are not a different species,we give birth to them, if they were a different species then they would only be able to reproduce with other psychopaths and if we bred with them our offspring would be sterile hybrids

they are a variant of humanity like having red hair

I think Diana was murdered by her own, but I am kinda iffy about the Reptilian shape shifters( not ruling it out at all.) David Ike is very credible though.

reply to post by Billmeister


I really enjoyed this post, because it contains facts.
Comparing your post to Icke's "Elite Reptilian bloodlines controlling the world" is quite another thing altogether. I am sure if Icke was referring to an Elite Bloodline of inbred Psychopaths, that is what he would say. (It would actually make more sense). I'm afraid he believes in physical shape shifting reptilians disguised as human, bent on taking over the world an that is where it all falls apart for me.

As much as I hate to admit this on this forum and especially in this thread. If you buy into the reptilian/mammal race theory and I tend to do so sometimes. I honestly can relate myself to the reptilian gene pool. The following might sound ridiculous but are my reasons for believing so and are deeply personal but required to paint the picture. I take pride in my native american roots which I have a decent percentage of (and I considered most of the N.A. races to be of the mammal evolution line especially due to cultural folklore and etc). Most of my family (including me) possess RH negative blood, that of itself points to other slightly off topic conspiracy theories. I believe the reptilian bloodline I have inherited mostly comes from my fathers side and I will point out a few reasons I believe so in a moment. Most of the definition for a psychopath easily matches me and any other of the offspring on my fathers line. I have always had thoughts, even from a young age, that I cant determine the source of, that are along the lines that somehow I am something "slightly" more than human. I often have to fight with inner urges inside in which my mind screams that other humans are merely cattle of some sort. Now I am by far not a racist and I dont want people getting the wrong idea, I believe in equality of man and that we need to co-exist. I am merely stating some of the animal urges and thoughts I experience.

I often fight against strong behaviors and thoughts and have spent a great deal of time studying religions such as Hindi and Buddhism to find a inner calm (in addition to psychological help I receive) I myself often find myself naturally in leadership roles, and when I partake in an activity its often with great charisma. As detailed in the OP I often find myself in the position where I have the abilities to excel and will do anything it takes to stay ahead. I have also been in dire situations where i have been faced with moral choices and taken the road needed to persevere. I also posses a naturally high IQ and I am in the process of applying to special interest groups such as Mensa.

I would also like to mention the circumstances of my birth as further evidence in which I was carried for 10 months rather than 9 and born with scale like texture to my skin (it has been claimed that this was due to a dry birth and may or may not be discountable), in my opinion my skin appears scaly now, and is constantly dry (especially in extremities such as elbows etc) I am around 6ft and weigh 320lbs although I appear to be 180lbs which often leads to arguments (and me winning bets) with people. My body stays in semi muscular tone (other than a barely noticeable stomache) despite bad health, bad diet, and no exercise. I am extremely broad and have what many call a predator build. My hands are the first thing noticed and are large (my fist across the knuckles is around 8inches wide, cant tell exact due to curve) and resemble those of alligators and iguanas in my opinion. I am also left handed, however I am starting to become ambidextrous. When you put it all out there my genetics are designed to hunt.

I have trouble running bipedal however I am able to sprint at excessive speeds (for me) in a type of crawling (on all 4s) sprint that is animal like that feels comfortable. Often times I feel like I am a hunter of sorts. My teeth also appear to be mostly incisors or canines and are fang like in appearance both top and bottom ( scoring me points in the goth community often)

Returning to my paternal heritage, there is a strong family history of psychosis and psychotic behavior and many members of my family end up mentally unstable or criminally insane. In fact there is a long history of ultra violent habits by many of the line and at one point the line was integrated into Europes royalty until the families ancestor fled to america. (One brother brutally murdered another over a slave girl and was forced from the barony). Grudges across many generations of my paternal line have been documented to be long held tearing apart each generation of the family. This sadly does not reflect the further proof I have withheld and Im short on words

I am capable of producing feelings such as love and compassion but often if ever can not feel them from other humans. This also leads to a need for control and jealousy in relationships and I have taken to antisocial behavior both in family and outside relations. For these reasons I also do not actively seek a girlfriend. I also often find myself with desires to work in politics, management, religious and other leadership/power roles. I often crave military roles although I believe in non-violence. Now before you think me as some psycho. I tend to seek peace and often try to resolve hostile situations non violently however I know I am capable when pressed of meeting hostility with extreme prejudice. I try to be vegetarian but get sick without meat often. I am out of words in this post..

To sum the above up for these reasons and many more I believe to be part of the reptilian race although I see myself as a reptilian supporter of the mammal race.

I think that some are getting tied up in semantics.

It was never claimed that people with a smaller amygdyla (clinically proven to be tied with psychopathic behavior) are not Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

The comment was made by Srewed that he considers psychopaths as perhaps being not human.

Here is a definition of human:

hu·man   [hyoo-muhn or, often, yoo‐]
adjective
1. of, pertaining to, characteristic of, or having the nature of people: human frailty.
2. consisting of people: the human race.
3. of or pertaining to the social aspect of people: human affairs.
4. sympathetic; humane: a warmly human understanding.

noun
5. a human being.

Note the same root and origin as the word HUMANE:

hu·mane   [hyoo-meyn or, often, yoo-]
adjective
1. characterized by tenderness, compassion, and sympathy for people and animals, especially for the suffering or distressed: humane treatment of horses.
2. of or pertaining to humanistic studies.

I emphasize: characterized by tenderness, compassion, and sympathy for people and animals .
These are exactly the characteristics NOT displayed by the clinical psychopath due to the physical difference in their brain structure.

No one claimed that a psychopath was not Homo Sapiens Sapiens, which can be defined trough the interbreeding argument. What was stated is that they may not be considered human, because they do not display the particular characteristics which define one.

In any event, the point of my thread was to emphasize the reality that it may be difficult (or even impossible) for us to understand the actions and decisions of some people in power because they, essentially, are genetically and physically different from the 99% of us with a "normal"-sized amygdyla.

the Billmeister

reply to post by Billmeister


Yes human and humane have the same root and origin, but do you know what that origin. The term human comes from the Old French humain, which in term comes from the Latin humanus, which is the adjective form of homo. Also, such connections between human and humane probably won't hold up if you look outside the Romantic languages.

Ah, lord.

Look, psychopaths are human.

Whether they have acquired their wee shrivelled amygdala, or whether it was doomed to be on the runty side thanks to an unfortunate set of chromosomes is pretty much academic. For the purposes of this discussion, I'm going to set the origin of psychopathy aside; since regardless of how it's come by, this condition results in some pretty undesirable behavior.

Am I saying build a pyre? No.

Put a special little tattoo on their foreheads so everyone can see them coming? No.

Pre-screen candidates for managerial or administrative positions, and don't hire or elect these guys for positions of authority? Yup.

Just sayin'.

reply to post by mistermonculous


I completely disagree with your belief in screening people. As I stated previously, these people serve a purpose in positions of power. Do you remember in The Godfather where Michael tells Tom he's not a wartime consigliere? These people are our wartime consiglieres. They are able to make the tough decisions that need to be made, but may require sacrifices.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


Oh, reaaaallly?

Yes, unfettered self-interest makes for some sterling decision-making. If you're peddling massive amounts of contraband, and don't particularly care about outcomes or wide-spread harm resulting from your actions.

Look, shark-brained choices may be fine for criminal organizations, but I'd rather have someone whose decsion-making process involves things like taking the well-being of others into account setting policy and shaping society.

Screening, not ideal, granted. Still better than pyres or camps. Which, oddly, seem to spring up wherever these folks get ahold of the reigns in a serious way.