Lizard People Conspiracy

Well I'm glad that everyone agrees a conspiracy couldn't happen ,especially one consisting of 50% of the population keeping the rest down.  There would have to be roughly 50% of people smarter than the rest, they would have to have a will to power, and they would have to have a way to induct members, likely hidden in the open.

Our country and society wasn't founded on keeping a class down, that's common sense.  It would be similar to say that in 50s and 60s we kept over half the populace in positions of service and making gelatin foods for us and having them take care of our children. Preposterous.  Thats why they had wives in the 60s. This is especially clear when the argument is that this would be due to lizard genetics, which would reduce emotional responses and increase anger-based and predatory tendencies and likely hunting skills.  As we have seen time and time again from the visitors to this site, humans are never angry, never search out those in an apparent position to be abused, and certainly there is never a pecking order.  Such a system would have to have a universal motivator, something like human productivity/money or elitism, and would span most of mankind.

Now that we have established that such a large conspiracy can not exist, its time to debunk the long held belief that more overt Lizard men, consisting of something closer to 2-3% of people depending on the Age, have been controlling mankind, and have largely assimilated into human look alikes, and they have a plan.  Thoughts?

Quote from: Thork on May 21, 2013, 04:08:02 PM

I was disappointed to read this thread. I think John Davis needs to do more research. David Icke has lots and lots of evidence to support this and I don't get any vibe that you have studied his work.

I so hope you are being satirical. David Icke has lots of evidence to support the idea that shapeshifting reptillian humanoids from the lower tier of the fourth dimension are transgressing across the planet?

You really need to be on another level of delusional (maybe the lower tier of the fourth dimension?) if you believe in this pathetic conspiracy theory.

I do think the FES needs to move away from this underlying dogma that is conspiracies theories and start to rely move on and gather some sort of circumstantial evidence for their claims.

Indeed, any beings that could experience the fourth dimension but not travel it aside from momentum would be under the whim of the rest.

The only reason they were allowed is because Nixon was fine with embarrassing the previous administration before him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers

"President Nixon's first reaction to the publication was that since the study embarrassed the Johnson and Kennedy administrations, not his, he should do nothing. However, Kissinger convinced the president that not opposing publication set a negative precedent for future secrets.[5] The administration argued Ellsberg and Russo were guilty of a felony under the Espionage Act of 1917, because they had no authority to publish classified documents."

Fixed that for you.  Feeling particularly deceitful today, eh?

How is any of that relevant anyway?  The Pentagon Papers were actively top secret when they were leaked by Ellsberg.  That Nixon wasn't immediately embarrassed by the leak doesn't change the fact that top secret documents were leaked, something that you claim has never happened.

Quote from: John Davis on May 21, 2013, 01:52:09 PM

There is no way they could find 100 (or whatever the number be) questionable individuals - that even 100 liars exist is simply beyond imagination.

Except that the government is able to keep a successful secret of hundreds of CIA/NSA/DOD projects, involving tens of thousands of people. You seem to have forgotten about that.

Feel free to try and find an active Top Secret document on the internet. You won't be able to. Even Wikileaks only publishes "confidential" documents, or documents which have been declassified. They know what will happen to them if they published something which is actually secret.

Interesting!  I've never heard of people keeping secrets or telling lies.  Surely this is silliness and pessimism.  No one would ever believe that 100 liars exist in the world, let alone that half the world is comprised of them!

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 21, 2013, 02:34:00 PM

Quote from: John Davis on May 21, 2013, 01:52:09 PM

There is no way they could find 100 (or whatever the number be) questionable individuals - that even 100 liars exist is simply beyond imagination.

Except that the government is able to keep a successful secret of hundreds of CIA/NSA/DOD projects, involving tens of thousands of people. You seem to have forgotten about that.

Feel free to try and find an active Top Secret document on the internet. You won't be able to. Even Wikileaks only publishes "confidential" documents, or documents which have been declassified. They know what will happen to them if they published something which is actually secret.

Interesting!  I've never heard of people keeping secrets or telling lies.  Surely this is silliness and pessimism.  No one would ever believe that 100 liars exist in the world, let alone that half the world is comprised of them!

I didn't think there could be a rational Flat Earther. At least there is one person who can see through the illogical and fallacious reasoning and lay bare the huge implausibility of these grand conspiracies...

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 21, 2013, 02:34:00 PM

Quote from: John Davis on May 21, 2013, 01:52:09 PM

There is no way they could find 100 (or whatever the number be) questionable individuals - that even 100 liars exist is simply beyond imagination.

Except that the government is able to keep a successful secret of hundreds of CIA/NSA/DOD projects, involving tens of thousands of people. You seem to have forgotten about that.

Feel free to try and find an active Top Secret document on the internet. You won't be able to. Even Wikileaks only publishes "confidential" documents, or documents which have been declassified. They know what will happen to them if they published something which is actually secret.

Interesting!  I've never heard of people keeping secrets or telling lies.  Surely this is silliness and pessimism.  No one would ever believe that 100 liars exist in the world, let alone that half the world is comprised of them!

Wait, what?  I'm lost.

Quote from: RyanTG on May 22, 2013, 08:01:37 AM

Quote from: John Davis on May 22, 2013, 07:43:30 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 21, 2013, 02:34:00 PM

Quote from: John Davis on May 21, 2013, 01:52:09 PM

There is no way they could find 100 (or whatever the number be) questionable individuals - that even 100 liars exist is simply beyond imagination.

Except that the government is able to keep a successful secret of hundreds of CIA/NSA/DOD projects, involving tens of thousands of people. You seem to have forgotten about that.

Feel free to try and find an active Top Secret document on the internet. You won't be able to. Even Wikileaks only publishes "confidential" documents, or documents which have been declassified. They know what will happen to them if they published something which is actually secret.

Interesting!  I've never heard of people keeping secrets or telling lies.  Surely this is silliness and pessimism.  No one would ever believe that 100 liars exist in the world, let alone that half the world is comprised of them!

I didn't think there could be a rational Flat Earther. At least there is one person who can see through the illogical and fallacious reasoning and lay bare the huge implausibility of these grand conspiracies...

I think you need to read into it with a different mindset Ryan.

Apologies if I read into what he said incorrectly, he sounded like he was being sarcastic...

The conspiracy is large, though not consisting of 50% of the population. A conspiracy is the few secretly deceiving many.

A conspiracy is a group deceiving another person or group. 

No need to apologize Ryan. 

Saddam, where exactly did I lose you?

The conspiracy is large, though not consisting of 50% of the population. A conspiracy is the few secretly deceiving many.

Alright let me explain this to you.

Your name on this forum is hoppy.

In this example I am the few who want to deceive the others. I tell the others that your name is actually Mocky. I go out an tell everyone your name here is Mocky. Would anyone believe me? No, because for the all the others (many) they can observe for themselves your name is hoppy.

A conspiracy in which a few try to deceive the others that the earth's shape is actually a sphere while it is a flat earth, it isn't going to work. There are all these others who can observe the earth's shape and all of them will tell you the earth is a sphere.
Actually a very few do not believe the earth is a sphere (for whatever reason) and here they are.

Quote from: hoppy on May 22, 2013, 09:15:09 AM

The conspiracy is large, though not consisting of 50% of the population. A conspiracy is the few secretly deceiving many.

Alright let me explain this to you.

Your name on this forum is hoppy.

In this example I am the few who want to deceive the others. I tell the others that your name is actually Mocky. I go out an tell everyone your name here is Mocky. Would anyone believe me? No, because for the all the others (many) they can observe for themselves your name is hoppy.

A conspiracy in which a few try to deceive the others that the earth's shape is actually a sphere while it is a flat earth, it isn't going to work. There are all these others who can observe the earth's shape and all of them will tell you the earth is a sphere.
Actually a very few do not believe the earth is a sphere (for whatever reason) and here they are.

The RE conspiracy is deeply entrenched into peoples pyche. This indoctrination has lasted for hundreds of years and is not easy to shake. If you started telling your kids and grand kids that my name is Mocky, I don't think they would doubt you.

Quote from: Lolflatdisc on May 22, 2013, 09:45:43 AM

Quote from: hoppy on May 22, 2013, 09:15:09 AM

The conspiracy is large, though not consisting of 50% of the population. A conspiracy is the few secretly deceiving many.

Alright let me explain this to you.

Your name on this forum is hoppy.

In this example I am the few who want to deceive the others. I tell the others that your name is actually Mocky. I go out an tell everyone your name here is Mocky. Would anyone believe me? No, because for the all the others (many) they can observe for themselves your name is hoppy.

A conspiracy in which a few try to deceive the others that the earth's shape is actually a sphere while it is a flat earth, it isn't going to work. There are all these others who can observe the earth's shape and all of them will tell you the earth is a sphere.
Actually a very few do not believe the earth is a sphere (for whatever reason) and here they are.

The FE conspiracy is deeply entrenched into peoples pyche. This indoctrination has lasted for hundreds of years and is not easy to shake. If you started telling your kids and grand kids that my name is Mocky, I don't think they would doubt you.

If I would tell my kids and grand kids that what they see as hoppy is pronounced as mocky, then yes they could believe it, but then what they see as mocky I would have to come up with a different pronounciation for those letters. I would have to redo the whole alfabet for them. Problem is that whenever they go to school and/or interact with other people that my taught pronounciations do not match those of others. They would quickly find out they could not communicate with others about the things they see.

This is already what we see and what mankinds does. We all agree that certain combinations or symbols have a meaning. Arabs use a complete different way of speaking and writing. They all agreed that their symbols mean something, but they observe the same things as we do.
The same goes for Chinese and other languages then English.

However it does not matter if our words are different. If you see a car, you describe it with the word 'car', in my native language we would use a different word to describe the same thing, but the thing we both see and speak about the same thing. The observed is independent from the language we use.

And we have observed the earth to be a sphere and it matches with all those other findings. Basically we found the language of the universe and by what rules it works. 

The conspiracy is large, though not consisting of 50% of the population. A conspiracy is the few secretly deceiving many.

So most organized religions must be a conspiracy.

Quote from: hoppy on May 22, 2013, 09:52:09 AM

Quote from: Lolflatdisc on May 22, 2013, 09:45:43 AM

Quote from: hoppy on May 22, 2013, 09:15:09 AM

The conspiracy is large, though not consisting of 50% of the population. A conspiracy is the few secretly deceiving many.

Alright let me explain this to you.

Your name on this forum is hoppy.

In this example I am the few who want to deceive the others. I tell the others that your name is actually Mocky. I go out an tell everyone your name here is Mocky. Would anyone believe me? No, because for the all the others (many) they can observe for themselves your name is hoppy.

A conspiracy in which a few try to deceive the others that the earth's shape is actually a sphere while it is a flat earth, it isn't going to work. There are all these others who can observe the earth's shape and all of them will tell you the earth is a sphere.
Actually a very few do not believe the earth is a sphere (for whatever reason) and here they are.

The FE conspiracy is deeply entrenched into peoples pyche. This indoctrination has lasted for hundreds of years and is not easy to shake. If you started telling your kids and grand kids that my name is Mocky, I don't think they would doubt you.

If I would tell my kids and grand kids that what they see as hoppy is pronounced as mocky, then yes they could believe it, but then what they see as mocky I would have to come up with a different pronounciation for those letters. I would have to redo the whole alfabet for them. Problem is that whenever they go to school and/or interact with other people that my taught pronounciations do not match those of others. They would quickly find out they could not communicate with others about the things they see.

This is already what we see and what mankinds does. We all agree that certain combinations or symbols have a meaning. Arabs use a complete different way of speaking and writing. They all agreed that their symbols mean something, but they observe the same things as we do.
The same goes for Chinese and other languages then English.

However it does not matter if our words are different. If you see a car, you describe it with the word 'car', in my native language we would use a different word to describe the same thing, but the thing we both see and speak about the same thing. The observed is independent from the language we use.

And we have observed the earth to be a sphere and it matches with all those other findings. Basically we found the language of the universe and by what rules it works.

Thanks for pointing out my typographical error. Our perception of reality does not alter that reality. The earth is flat.

Our perception of reality does not alter that reality.

Not to be rude, but would you mind backing this up?

Thanks for pointing out my typographical error. Our perception of reality does not alter that reality. The earth is flat.

Reality is our perception. We have no way to check what we see is real. The only way to verify it, is if more persons can confirm the observations you make. Hence in science there is always independent peer-viewers. Someone who is going to check the work of others.

Quote from: hoppy on May 22, 2013, 11:06:10 AM

Our perception of reality does not alter that reality.

Not to be rude, but would you mind backing this up?

A quick example would.be, say a pot that is 160 deg F is sitting on the stove. I touch it and say it is hot, you touch and say it is not hot. The reality is, it is 160 deg despite whatever our perception is.

Quote from: John Davis on May 22, 2013, 11:20:57 AM

Quote from: hoppy on May 22, 2013, 11:06:10 AM

Our perception of reality does not alter that reality.

Not to be rude, but would you mind backing this up?

A quick example would.be, say a pot that is 160 deg F is sitting on the stove. I touch it and say it is hot, you touch and say it is not hot. The reality is, it is 160 deg despite whatever our perception is.

What about light?  Observation of photons clearly change their reality.

It is clear that either person would be subject to the preexisting belief that the pot would be "hot".   It is further stated that we would assume, based off our preconceived notions of instrumentalism, that said stove would read said value.

If we measure before hand, we are poisoning the results by putting said perception of the results in the the local sphere.  If we do not, the reality will collapse afterwards, and thus it would say little about the temperature before hand.  If measured while we touch it, our view is again skewed.

Its actually fairly similar to the age old question, if a tree falls in the woods and nobody hears it, does it make a sound?  No, given the assumption of trees not having a frame of reference.  The question itself is outside of science, according to some, as it is not falsifiable.

John, I think you would admit that the pot changed not. Even if our perception of it was hot or cold or niether. Our perception did not change the reality of the pot.

The reality of that pot is a 160 degree temperature.  The perception was that it's hot to one person and not to another.   These perceptions don't change the fact that the pot is 160 degrees in temperature.  Observation can have an effect on certain matter,  but the perception of what is happening does not change the reality of what is happening.

The reality of that pot is a 160 degree temperature.  The perception was that it's hot to one person and not to another.   These perceptions don't change the fact that the pot is 160 degrees in temperature.  Observation can have an effect on certain matter,  but the perception of what is happening does not change the reality of what is happening.

Observation can not be made without perception of what is happening.  They are one in the same;  If such can have an effect on matter, which it can, then we are forced to conclude that it changes the reality of happening.

Quote from: DuckDodgers on May 22, 2013, 01:50:55 PM

The reality of that pot is a 160 degree temperature.  The perception was that it's hot to one person and not to another.   These perceptions don't change the fact that the pot is 160 degrees in temperature.  Observation can have an effect on certain matter,  but the perception of what is happening does not change the reality of what is happening.

Observation can not be made without perception of what is happening.  They are one in the same;  If such can have an effect on matter, which it can, then we are forced to conclude that it changes the reality of happening.

You can observe a man at a table with a woman. Your perception can be that they are on a date and my perception can be that they are good friends.   Both perceptions of this event could very well be wrong,  but that doesn't change that they were observed at the table.

Quote from: John Davis on May 23, 2013, 06:55:43 AM

Quote from: DuckDodgers on May 22, 2013, 01:50:55 PM

The reality of that pot is a 160 degree temperature.  The perception was that it's hot to one person and not to another.   These perceptions don't change the fact that the pot is 160 degrees in temperature.  Observation can have an effect on certain matter,  but the perception of what is happening does not change the reality of what is happening.

Observation can not be made without perception of what is happening.  They are one in the same;  If such can have an effect on matter, which it can, then we are forced to conclude that it changes the reality of happening.

You can observe a man at a table with a woman. Your perception can be that they are on a date and my perception can be that they are good friends.   Both perceptions of this event could very well be wrong,  but that doesn't change that they were observed at the table.

Sure, but that brings up the question of my will;  you have done nothing to show that if i were to will hard enough, it would not change what happened.   Consider looking at it from this view:
Will power, and free will is simply our ability to navigate the probabilistic fields;  So to take, for analogy, from multiuniverse theory - there is some universe in which those two are indeed on a date, will simply lets us navigate there.  Of course, I wouldn't bring it up at the table, for they might not even be sure its a date.  Our will is simply the ability to navigate.

Such a powerful notion, repeated to us at all points, I would guess by 2035 the main concern will be to stop the spread of this belief using tactics similar to those used for evacuation or disease control.

Quote from: DuckDodgers on May 23, 2013, 07:03:56 AM

Quote from: John Davis on May 23, 2013, 06:55:43 AM

Quote from: DuckDodgers on May 22, 2013, 01:50:55 PM

The reality of that pot is a 160 degree temperature.  The perception was that it's hot to one person and not to another.   These perceptions don't change the fact that the pot is 160 degrees in temperature.  Observation can have an effect on certain matter,  but the perception of what is happening does not change the reality of what is happening.

Observation can not be made without perception of what is happening.  They are one in the same;  If such can have an effect on matter, which it can, then we are forced to conclude that it changes the reality of happening.

You can observe a man at a table with a woman. Your perception can be that they are on a date and my perception can be that they are good friends.   Both perceptions of this event could very well be wrong,  but that doesn't change that they were observed at the table.

Sure, but that brings up the question of my will;  you have done nothing to show that if i were to will hard enough, it would not change what happened.   Consider looking at it from this view:
Will power, and free will is simply our ability to navigate the probabilistic fields;  So to take, for analogy, from multiuniverse theory - there is some universe in which those two are indeed on a date, will simply lets us navigate there.  Of course, I wouldn't bring it up at the table, for they might not even be sure its a date.  Our will is simply the ability to navigate.

Such a powerful notion, repeated to us at all points, I would guess by 2035 the main concern will be to stop the spread of this belief using tactics similar to those used for evacuation or disease control.

Do you have an example from experience that demonstrates willing something to be true?   If the two are not on a date,  no amount of will power will change this fact.   Bringing up an alternate reality does not prove that they were on a date during your observation of them.   Not only that,  but it does not change the simple observation that they were at a table together.

Yes, but you can change your observation to the point that no table even exists.  Its just a thing, and people constantly see|unsee things.  The human brain works by guessing.  When you will yourself not to guess, you can change that observation to whatever your choose.

To the man insane who believes he is a super hero, he is a super hero for all exclusive purposes until a second point of view creates paradox for him.

The easiest thing to test willing out is a coin.  Simply flip it and practice your will.  Soon you will find your odds wildly in favor of the result you wish.  The first time this happened for me I had a total Rosencrantz and Guildenstern moment

Yes, but you can change your observation to the point that no table even exists.  Its just a thing, and people constantly see|unsee things.  The human brain works by guessing.  When you will yourself not to guess, you can change that observation to whatever your choose.

To the man insane who believes he is a super hero, he is a super hero for all exclusive purposes until a second point of view creates paradox for him.

The easiest thing to test willing out is a coin.  Simply flip it and practice your will.  Soon you will find your odds wildly in favor of the result you wish.  The first time this happened for me I had a total Rosencrantz and Guildenstern moment

What you're talking about with the table isn't the take ceasing to exist it fact but a willful ignorance to the existence of the table.   It is still there whether you will it to not be and create the delusion that it isn't.

Yes, but you can change your observation to the point that no table even exists.  Its just a thing, and people constantly see|unsee things.  The human brain works by guessing.  When you will yourself not to guess, you can change that observation to whatever your choose.

To the man insane who believes he is a super hero, he is a super hero for all exclusive purposes until a second point of view creates paradox for him.

The easiest thing to test willing out is a coin.  Simply flip it and practice your will.  Soon you will find your odds wildly in favor of the result you wish.  The first time this happened for me I had a total Rosencrantz and Guildenstern moment

I hope you're independently wealthy, if not then you need to spend a bit more time in casinos and less time on these forums.

From what I understand from popular culture, they don't take kindly to serendipitously lucky folks.  Besides, seems silly to use it to steal.

From what I understand from popular culture, they don't take kindly to serendipitously lucky folks.  Besides, seems silly to use it to steal.

How would that be stealing?

Because its a fixed game at that point.  Also money would be mostly worthless at that point to the "gambler" if he could be called that.