| Revision as of 17:50, 4 September 2004 editDiamonddavej (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,744 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 06:42, 20 October 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,247,812 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 6 WikiProject templates. The article is listed in the level 5 page: Conspiracy theorists.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
However strange Icke's views are, they deserve more credit than they get. They are very far outside of regular, especially larval human reality tunnels. |
|
|
|
{{Not a forum}} |
|
|
{{British English Oxford spelling}} |
|
|
{{Article history| action1 = GAN| action1date = 20:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)| action1link = Talk:David Icke/GA1| action1result = listed| action1oldid = 248261101 |
|
|
| action2 = GAR| action2date = 21:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)| action2link = Talk:David Icke/Archive 3#GA review| action2result = delisted| action2oldid = 256486178 |
|
|
| action3 = GAN| action3date = 15:12, 28 February, 2010 (UTC)| action3link = Talk:David Icke/GA2| action3result = listed| action3oldid = 346700889 |
|
|
| currentstatus = GA |
|
|
| topic = socsci |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=GA|vital=yes|listas=Icke, David|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography|sports-priority=Low|sports-work-group=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Football|importance=Low|England=Yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Paranormal}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Alternative Views|importance=high}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=High}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Arab-Israeli Arbitration Enforcement|relatedcontent=yes}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
He does require a stretch of the imagination every once in a while, but his historical analysis of the Royal Family of England, the Christian religion, etc. is very well supported. Even many of his 'reptilian' claims have large amounts of evidence to support them. |
|
|
|
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 200K |
|
|
|counter = 5 |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:David Icke/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Misplaced Pages:Featured article tools|1=David Icke}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Reptilians quotes == |
|
Did you forget to take your tablets today? ] 00:05, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
] added this section : |
|
Hahahaha... Wow, you can make immature jokes and be closed-minded... I'm so impressed... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:As of 2003 the reptilian bloodline encompassed 43 American presidents, three British and two Canadian prime ministers, several Sumerian kings and Egyptian pharaohs, and a smattering of celebrities, including ], ] and ]. Key bloodlines are the ]s, ]s, various European aristocratic families, the establishment families of the Eastern United States, and the British ].<ref name=Barkun2003p104/> |
|
Just pick up one of his books, and read the sections on history and politics, ignoring it whenever he mentions reptilians (since that's the hardest part of his research to accept--furthest out of our normal reality tunnels). You'll find that he makes a lot of accurate references... In fact, historically, his notions that Jesus probably didn't exist and that the World Trade Centre was done by the CIA are very well backed-up. It's the same thing I do when I read literature from religious scholars. Every time they mention some silly mythical being like 'God' (in the Christian sense) I ignore that bit and continue on, gathering what in the text I find intriguing and plausible... If you're religious and you make fun of Icke, it's almost hilariously hypocritical, considering that the fantastic assumptions made to believe in those myths as reality far transcend the 'weirdness' of Icke's claims... How in the name of God can you believe that demons from a place called 'hell' are behind all the world's evil, and deny the possibility that a more tangible creature like a reptiloid extraterrestrial might have had a bit more of an influence than 'the devil'? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The referenced page of Barkun2003 is and doesn't include any of those claims, nor could I find them in the rest of the chapter on Icke. Unfortunately, SlimVirgin isn't alive any more so I can't ask her. I don't want to simply delete as unfounded the work of a very experienced editor, but this needs fixing. |
|
Even from a Christian standpoint, if you were to accept the information provided in that enormously 'weird' book, couldn't the 'demons' constantly spoken of be explicable as a race of reptilian beings? ] |
|
|
|
] (]) 10:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::The diff you added only shows SV re-arranging the material. It appears to have been added much earlier. Looking back a little farther, say , there's a much more detailed reference that breaks down the sources. Not clear if that covers every claim, but more ground to cover at least. ] ] 13:42, 13 June 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I've never been able to find a single reliable source for the claim that Icke believes in this farcical "Reptilian" theory. I'm 99% sure it's simply a smear tactic used against him to put people off listening to the other (very legitimate) subjects he speaks about. A bunch of links to articles in far left rags claiming that he said this or that (with zero sources) isn't worthy of mentioning in an encyclopedia, nor does it make the claims true. All of these smears and falsified "beliefs" that have been pinned on him should be entirely removed from the article.<!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span> |
|
|
::::There seem to be thousands, including his own publications and many interviews where he promotes these claims. This includes many conservative outlets. I'm sorry, but since your claim appears to make zero sense on its face, perhaps you can clarify your position first? Are you saying he's being sarcastic the whole way through? ] ] 01:19, 27 August 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::@82.2.204.195 For some reason I can’t reply to the IP address directly, but in this interview<nowiki/>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlAjeTunopo he says that at 4:00. Note that Icke essentially replies that “The phrase ‘The world is run by shapeshifting lizards’ is a one line oversimplification without my backstory or context, if you read deeper into it and into my works you will understand it better.” but upon further examination it remains equally as false and baseless with no real or valid evidence. This isn’t a smear, those claims are real. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
::::Also note that the interviewer and others say that some of Icke’s other claims in the video are based on events that have actually happened so at least those theories and claims have got that going for them, that being they are based in part on reality, but the claim “Buckingham palace and the world is run by shapeshifting lizards and reptiles” is one he appears to genuinely agree with and has touted for years ] (]) 02:40, 14 May 2023 (UTC) |
|
:Khranus. I assume you are not from the UK. In the UK David Icke is widely believed to be a loony, and the number of people who take him seriously can probably be counted on one hand. ] 08:29, 27 Oct 2003 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{reflist talk}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Footnote 8 == |
|
:In Canada, where I live, the Queen is 'widely assumed to be a loony'... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the article linked at footnote 8 does not say that his publisher dropped him or why. ] (]) 00:02, 24 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
If your observations are correct, that just goes to show how many closed-minded people there are in the UK (and presumably the world over besides the UK, for the most part)... I don't 'believe' anything, personally, but I don't deny anything either. Alternative views shouldn't be treated as 'loony' just because they're outside your reality tunnels... In my opinion, for every ounce of 'loony' David Icke has got, ] had 900 ounces. Just look at what a deranged fuck she was... Then there's the Pope, the Mormon 'Prophet'... Jesus, about 90 or more per cent of this planet is completely 'loony', moreso than David Icke. The average American believes that an enormous, all-encompassing bearded white guy controls the universe, and sends 'angels' to earth to save us from 'demons' from hell... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Reptilian shapeshifters == |
|
In terms of Icke's views, I think that this quote basically sums up all the criticism he's received: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reptilian shapeshifters is linked to the wiki article on reptiles and there is no reference there to reptilian shapeshifters. ] (]) 00:04, 24 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
A Tibetan monk replied to a question about extraterrestrials with this: |
|
|
|
:{{done}} I broke it into two wikilinks. One to ] and the other to ]. ] (]) 23:11, 10 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== his new book not in the selected works == |
|
"Why do you deny the notion of extraterrestrial life? What is it about beings like this that you find so offensive? You believe in demons, spirits, and in Buddha, but you do not believe in something as simple as life? I tell you, this is what makes them so offensive to you--they are so tangible." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the dream was released this year |
|
It's the plausibility, the tangibility of these entites that so offends people these days. The majority of humans have their head in the clouds about 'gods' and 'saviours', etc., and yet illogically deny that something as worldly as a toolmaking reptilian species exists. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
can someone update the "selected works" ] (]) 22:54, 10 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
There's quite a lot of evidence to back up his claims as well. I'm not saying that they're necessarily 'true', but the probability that what he says is true is far higher than the probability that Jesus existed. And that's saying something, if not about his claims, than about Jesus. |
|
|
|
:{{cn}} ] (]) 23:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:{{done}} ] (]) 09:54, 17 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
When someone denies the existence of something despite overwhelming evidence that it is possible, it is called a delusion. Therefore, people who ridicule Icke's ideas are just as deluded, if not more deluded than he is, by definition. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==Short description== |
|
If you're confused by all this probability stuff, I suggest you read some stuff by Robert Anton Wilson: http://www.rawilson.com/main.shtml |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Short description generally follows the basic information contained in the lead of the article. He is not much known as a footballer. Icke seems to be best known as a conspiracy theorist. This article starts {{TQ|David Vaughan Icke (...) is an English conspiracy theorist and ...}} so a Short description of {{TQ|English conspiracy theorist (born 1952)}} is reasonable. — ] <sup>]</sup> 11:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
Particularly this: http://www.rawilson.com/trigger1.shtml |
|
|
|
:Agree. ] (]) 11:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Also agree, he never hit the big time as a footballer, was somewhat more successful as a BBC sports presenter, and then really hit the big time with his alternative (cough cough) theories.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 11:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
(Icke, by the way, is not very popular in the UK, but is apparently quite popular in ]. The reptilian theory is actually widely discussed in that nation, for whatever reason. The Japanese seem to have a modern knack for open-mindedness. Perhaps its due to the shock they received during WWII, demonstrating to them how dangerous dogma can be.) |
|
|
|
:::yup ] (]) 15:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Note as this was started today, at least give it until tomorrow to decide if there is a consensus. ] (]) 14:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
- ] |
|
|
|
* No disagreement. Restored to {{TQ|English conspiracy theorist (born 1952)}} — ] <sup>]</sup> 20:12, 7 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
* Agree per points mentioned above. He is primarily known as a conspiracy theorist. ] (]) 00:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
He is popular because his book fall into very popular genre of book reading called ]. ] 01:46, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
----- |
|
|
|
|
|
I deleted that text to replace it later with updated text. The original statement made didn't corroborate with historical evidence... |
|
|
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
Just researched your claim that Icke's supporters in the UK 'could be counted on one hand', and apparently, its unfounded. |
|
|
|
|
|
He is ridiculed much in the media, but apparently, he regularly sells out theaters in the United States and Britain... In fact, MOST of his talks sell out in Britain weeks before he appears... |
|
|
|
|
|
- ] |
|
|
|
|
|
Comedy is popular! ] 21:29, Nov 12, 2003 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------ |
|
|
|
|
|
A chunk of material has been moved from the article to ]: Icke is not the only one to propound theories about reptilians. -- ] 19:04, 27 Oct 2003 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
------ |
|
|
|
|
|
That skeptic's dictionary article is highly inaccurate. Clearly whoever wrote it knows nothing of secret societies, and especially of David Icke. Their general psuedo-biographical material about him is completely fabricated--and is very far from his actual position on the matter. This complete ignorance, shines when they say that he received his ideas about the illuminati from 'lizard-people'... |
|
|
|
|
|
The Skeptic's Dictionary is nothing but a pathetic attempt to deny anything that those 'sceptical' cowards find too frightening to believe in. I haven't read one article on that site that contained accurate information, nor have I seen any evidence from their ravings that they're anything more than Fundamentalist Materialists. ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For everyone considering 'debate' with Khranus, I refer you to ] and ]. ] 21:21, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
This is one of the more interesting things I've ever seen come out of the Misplaced Pages. What we have here is a scholarly debate with a nutcase. (Sorry!) How, in a forum where we cannot censor one another or prevent contribution in any way, are we to maintain credibility? I would be afraid to use the site as source material if I was aware that the article I'm reading may have been written by someone who declares themself "open minded" to the possibility that we are secretly ruled by aliens. |
|
|
|
|
|
: Which nutcase? Icke or Khranus? :-) Just so you know, the latter nutter is now banned. Good riddance, too! ] 00:07, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm from the UK and can reassure you that David Icke is not considered a loon by all. Infact it is mostly the media (who may fear that the truth will set you free!) who call David a loon. I was shocked to find that Khranus has been banned for I have read nothing here that warrents it. I find it disturbing that in the information age a single world view would be acceptable to anybody. just look at all the newspapers today talking about yesterday, not just in our own country but accross the globe - it is evident that more than one view can be correct at the same time. Being open minded meens listening to the debate and making up your own mind. It doesn't meen shutting up the people you disagree with and claiming a majority victory. |
|
|
Peace out ] |
|
|
---- |
|
|
I would challenge people to actually read one of his books (preferrably the biggest secret), and then come back and tell me that he's crazy. |
|
|
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
So is this Khranus messing around with the article again, or another Ickist? -] 06:12, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Is it Icke who designates the Evil Ones as "repti'''''ll'''''ian" rather than "repti'''''l'''''ian", or is it just our recent spell-challenged contributor? If not the latter, we need a little "''sic''" after each one.... - ] 06:35, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
Sorry bout that. I'll be sure to change it. ^_^ Don't be grumpy. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Page protected== |
|
|
Page protected per request ] on Rfpp: |
|
|
: ''David Icke - User:68.35.40.141 has made dozens of POV edits over the last two weeks, many of which are factually incorrect and/or wholly irrelevant (his last edit added the minute of Icke's birth). This user may very well be the banned User:Khranus. -Sean 05:50, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)'' |
|
|
Version: 05:19, 13 Feb 2004 -- ] 08:43, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not the one adding shitty skeptic's journal links that quote things that Icke NEVER SAID. ^_^ |
|
|
|
|
|
And where's the proof that what I added wasn't accurate? I do believe I'm the only person editing this so far that is familiar with Icke and I've added more relevant things than anyone so far. I dare you to prove my facts wrong. Some people are probably just angry that my article isn't making Icke out to be a nut. And no I'm not this Kraunas guy. Misplaced Pages is full of snobs it seems. Oh well its not like anyone will read this article anyway. After all this site does suck. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== READ HIM!! == |
|
|
|
|
|
WHATEVER your degree of faith in what you see, hear and read in mainstream media, this man's contribution is immense, and the mere fact that he provokes such an organised brouhaha in the press ought to make you skeptical of the skeptics. I have found very little to dispute at all, for what it's worth... it's chilling, but a lot better to be aware that SOMETHING organised is going on, than unquestioningly accepting what we are told !!! more power to his pen, and others like him.....sort the wheat from the chaff yourself, don't let anyone else make your mind up for you |
|
|
|
|
|
The more airtime us people with brains give nutters like Icke, the more people of weaker minds get sucked into the charade. Just ignore the loney. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== |
|
|
|
|
|
I hear what your saying. After reading this section of wikipedia im slightly consfused as to why this Kraunas user was banned in the first place! :/ |
|
|
|
|
|
his links to Robert Anton Wilson were very relevant here. |
|
|
READ all the Cosmic Triggers and also 'Prometheus Rising' (in fact just read as many of his works as you possibly can) |
|
|
|
|
|
I have read a lot of Icke's books and yes these skeptics need to read some of his work. |
|
|
I've been to skeptic meetings and had a laugh and a pint! since it was held in a pub. |
|
|
|
|
|
This problem of social trance that a lot of skeptics on Icke's work seem to be in is causing a great barrier of nothingness and complete sitting on a fence insanity. |
|
|
|
|
|
Living in London and seeing Icke speak at Brixton Academy with so many other UK and non-UK people was quite an experience. Also visiting the areas in London in question in Icke's 'The Biggest Secret' certainly puts a new light on things. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
|
|
|
I just wanted to point out that the page on him states that he once claimed to be a "son of god", however it, as well as the newspaper that ridiculed him for it decided not include the rest of the statement, "and so are we all". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
Icke may have ]. Particularly the time (early 90’s) when he changed carers suddenly and his claims were most extreme, the Son of God (ok, we all are) or Godhead would indicate psychotic break. He was “normal” before hand. Since then he appears residual, he may have ] personality disorder or he may still have positive symptoms. The later in life schizophrenia strikes, generally the milder and shorter lived are severe symptoms. The first psychotic episode is the time when hospitalisation may occur. Ike was about 39 when he began to profess his unusual beliefs. |
|
|
|
|
|
To me Icke parallels the mathematician ]. Nash described himself as the Son of God, the left foot of god on Earth and even the Emperor of the Antarctic. Like Icke, he saw patterns in the environment. He thought people wearing red ties were communists. Nash’s first indications of psychosis was the day he strode into the maths department with a newspaper and declared that the article with picture of the Pope meant, “Because the Popes hat is a triple crown, it indicates there are 3 communist in the Maths department” or something to that effect. Contrast this with Icke’s logic, “the car-rental company Avis is a front for the Brotherhood because Avis spelled backwards is Siva”. Thought becomes an associative mess called disordered thinking, distinctive of certain forms of schizophrenia. |
|
|
|
|
|
Too few realise is that schizophrenia is a spectrum condition, some peoples symptoms are mild enought not to merit hospitalisation. Much of the societies stereotyped ideas of insanity including strange mannerisms, rocking, pacing back and forth, odd facial expressions etc. are the side effects of older types of antipsychotic medication, ] and are not insanity itself. An untreated schizophrenic can be surprisingly “normal”. |
|
|
|
|
|
I recall a story about a conspiracy theorist that had sizeable following in the US. He began his lecture reasonably ok. Reiterating familiar paranoid ideas common to his books and radio shows. It all went down hill when he declared that the Mexicans, with help from the UN, had implanted a small dwarf in this lower intestines that spied on him and gave him gas. That was the end of his following. |
|
|
|
|
|
Is the fine line between insanity and eccentricity this, an insane person does not have a following? |
|
|
|
|
|
] 17:49, 04 Sep 2004 (UTC) |
|
The Short description generally follows the basic information contained in the lead of the article. He is not much known as a footballer. Icke seems to be best known as a conspiracy theorist. This article starts David Vaughan Icke (...) is an English conspiracy theorist and ...
so a Short description of English conspiracy theorist (born 1952)
is reasonable. — GhostInTheMachine 11:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
Done I broke it into two wikilinks. One to Reptile and the other to Shapeshifting. Cullen328 (talk) 23:11, 10 November 2023 (UTC)