PDA

View Full Version : Michio Kaku Confirms David Icke to Be Correct



SaxonPagan
Sunday, August 14th, 2011, 12:34 AM
rVWWQKU_-G0&feature=player_embedded
David Icke described the nature of reality in 1991, and now quantum physicists are confirming much of what Icke has been saying all along :)

-----------------

Here is one of the YouTube comments which follows the clip:

"I love people like Icke and others because they dont let others determine their perception of reality. They are awake. I wish more of us were like them instead of being caught up in the programming from the media and the education systems".

Sláine
Sunday, August 14th, 2011, 12:57 AM
rVWWQKU_-G0&feature=player_embedded
David Icke described the nature of reality in 1991, and now quantum physicists are confirming much of what Icke has been saying all along :)

-----------------

Here is one of the YouTube comments which follows the clip:

"I love people like Icke and others because they dont let others determine their perception of reality. They are awake. I wish more of us were like them instead of being caught up in the programming from the media and the education systems".

I'm afraid that the many worlds hypothesis linked to quantum mechanics predates 1991 by many years. In recent times this sort of scientific mumbo jumbo (beloved of crackpots like Icke) has become fashionable because certain physicists think they can use it to fudge a more complete mathematical treatment of the mechanisms of the universe.

SaxonPagan
Sunday, August 14th, 2011, 01:17 AM
Yes, I realise that the many worlds theory has been around since the seventies but it's become more popular of late and a large body of top physicists now take it seriously, which wasn't necessarily the case back in 1991.

I don't think David Icke would want to take credit for the theory itself but, having been ridiculed for stating it (and adapting it to the points he was making at the time) he's asserting that many experts in this field now think along similar lines to him.

So are you saying then, Slaine, that quantum mechanics is wrong and that everything can be explained using mathematics instead? I used to think this way too, but in recent years have changed my views somewhat.

Sláine
Sunday, August 14th, 2011, 01:47 AM
So are you saying then, Slaine, that quantum mechanics is wrong and that everything can be explained using mathematics instead? I used to think this way too, but in recent years have changed my views somewhat.

No. But this parallel universe business is a very different level of bullshit from looking at phenomena in the macro world like waves and saying stuff behaves like this at an atomic scale. However: its not being sold as such (didn't hawking say we no longer need god?). Who does need god though when you can have faith in parallel universes and get down with the likes of: David Icke...

Schopenhauer
Monday, August 15th, 2011, 10:51 PM
Science, much like the megalomaniacal Jehovah, can not tolerate any other god(s) before it. :D

While a healthy does of skepticism is invaluable, a blind faith in Science, and lets be frank, Science has taken on all the trappings of a religion, is just that, a form of blindness. Science says the Sun revolves around the Earth, so it must be so. Science says the Earth is flat, again so it must be so. Science says man can't fly, etc, etc, ect... When you allow others to define your universe you are no longer in control of your own destiny.

As for people no longer needing gods, that may be so. But only a certain kind of people are no longer in need of them. And we all know these types, don't we? They're the eggheads. The harebrained social engineers. The crackpot philosophers. The malcontents. These people whose lives are devoid of art and inspiration and who, in their hatred for those who create, seek to rob the world of its metaphysical wonder in order to make everyone else as miserable as they are.

Gods, being the products of elevated consciousnesses, exist in order to give man a glimpse of the unobtainable in order that he may he inspired to strive ever beyond his perceived limitations.

Now as for Quantum Physics, this is the true realm of magic and magicians. :thumbup

Sigurd
Tuesday, August 16th, 2011, 11:59 AM
So are you saying then, Slaine, that quantum mechanics is wrong and that everything can be explained using mathematics instead? I used to think this way too, but in recent years have changed my views somewhat.

Quantum mechanics has always had its shortcomings. ;)

http://img2.moonbuggy.org/imgstore/wanted-schroedingers-cat.jpg

velvet
Tuesday, August 16th, 2011, 01:59 PM
While a healthy does of skepticism is invaluable, a blind faith in Science, and lets be frank, Science has taken on all the trappings of a religion, is just that, a form of blindness. Science says the Sun revolves around the Earth, so it must be so. Science says the Earth is flat, again so it must be so. Science says man can't fly, etc, etc, ect... When you allow others to define your universe you are no longer in control of your own destiny.

That used to be for 1500+ years the realm of omni-god worshippers. Already the ancient Greek knew it better, until "god" came and told them otherwise.

And this "god" indeed no one needs.



As for people no longer needing gods, that may be so. But only a certain kind of people are no longer in need of them. And we all know these types, don't we? They're the eggheads. The harebrained social engineers. The crackpot philosophers. The malcontents. These people whose lives are devoid of art and inspiration and who, in their hatred for those who create, seek to rob the world of its metaphysical wonder in order to make everyone else as miserable as they are.

As well the domain of eggheaded "god" worshippers for millenia.



Gods, being the products of elevated consciousnesses, exist in order to give man a glimpse of the unobtainable in order that he may he inspired to strive ever beyond his perceived limitations.

Depends what kind of gods (and the plural is required in this context) one worships whether they help elevating the individual human or make them miserable.


Now as for Quantum Physics, this is the true realm of magic and magicians. :thumbup

Again a bit taken from the "metaphysical wonder" and added to the pile of knowledge and understanding.

Which is, what "meta" just means, outside the understood mechanisms. The quest for knowledge and understanding is a motivator in itself, it is what humans make human. And methinks, those who end their quest with the "ways of god are fathomless" are, in fact, the real poor ones who forgeit their own "divinity" in favour of a superstition-defined world view that doesnt even remotely touch on reality.

Gardisten
Saturday, August 20th, 2011, 09:34 AM
Science is not really one of my interests, but as it happens a few weeks back I began reading The Cosmic Code and have found it illuminating. I find it interesting how people seem to lap up this sort of stuff and simple-mindedly accept the fact that there is no God, that for there to be a Creator is an impossibility. While I still don't quite follow the science behind what's being discussed--that will require several more readings--one thing stands out clear as day from this. A significant number of the "scientists" who concern themselves with this issue are, in fact, Jewish. Why should I or anyone here be willing to accept the theories and "facts" that these scientists provide us, when it could well be simply another way by which certain elements in our society are trying to promote a Godless perception of our world?

Fiona
Saturday, August 20th, 2011, 10:34 AM
Science, much like the megalomaniacal Jehovah, can not tolerate any other god(s) before it. :D That's it. Older scientists don't like younger ones coming in and making their life's work into nothing by disproving everything they've ever said or worked on.

Gall Óglach
Saturday, August 20th, 2011, 10:47 AM
Multi-universe theory relates more to the position-momentum problem in quantum mechanics, rather then shape shifting lizard people that Icke rants about.


David Icke is a tool.

velvet
Saturday, August 20th, 2011, 11:58 AM
Science is not really one of my interests, but as it happens a few weeks back I began reading The Cosmic Code and have found it illuminating. I find it interesting how people seem to lap up this sort of stuff and simple-mindedly accept the fact that there is no God, that for there to be a Creator is an impossibility.

The problem with the (christian, monotheist, omni-everything, creator) god is that there is no hint whatsoever that "it" could exist somewhere out there.

And the next problem with "it" is, that christians (based on the already judaist fallacity - serving the question back, why would we believe anything that comes from Jews?), in their quest to argue for its existence, have removed it so far out of the world and reality, and even the multiverse itself, that it would be entirely irrelevant for the human existence even if it would exist.



While I still don't quite follow the science behind what's being discussed--that will require several more readings--one thing stands out clear as day from this. A significant number of the "scientists" who concern themselves with this issue are, in fact, Jewish. Why should I or anyone here be willing to accept the theories and "facts" that these scientists provide us, when it could well be simply another way by which certain elements in our society are trying to promote a Godless perception of our world?

Although I agree that there are way too many Jews in the field of science disseminating misinformation, they dont really invalidate the theories, since many of these theories are proven in experiments (and practical scientists are more often than not Europeans), can be repeated and observed. You can touch them, see them, and yet, there are people who say "I dont believe in science".

Which is the next problem that I have with religious simpletons (just returning yours from above) who prefer the mono-answer-to-everything over proof, facts, things you can touch and see, reality.

The "godless" perception of the world actually is a great gift (whatever its intention might have been) in regards to eradicating the perception of a mono-omni-god to make room for those gods that are relevant to humans, that are part of this world, this realm of existence, this our reality.

In regards to the universe, it is so complex, so wonderful and awesome, and came about in even more complex evolutionary stages (the universe we know today and can see is not what came about in the moment of the Big Bang, it went through cycles of construction and destruction, like every evolution, and it continues to evolve and change), that a creating god actually would destroy its beauty. The mechanisms and forces at work there, if you start understanding them, dont need a "hidden hand", no grand master plan, and yet, have created the most awesome structures. Why "poison" this grand quest for the understanding where we come from, what allowed us to come into existence, with a "god", specially one that doesnt help you at all to understand anything but has only one "answer" to everything (or rather its very human and powerhungry priests), god's ways are inscrutable?


That astrophysics, when you start to dive into them, and chemistry and all that, make HUGE headaches is imho no excuse to not to try :)

Schopenhauer
Sunday, August 21st, 2011, 03:57 AM
People seem to forget that ancient religions were once inextricably linked to scientific inquiry. Astronomy, for example, was once a one of the single most significant and life sustaining sciences to our ancient ancestors due to its importance in matters of agricultural planning. And lets not forget Pythagoras' cult of numbers either.

What's more, many of these ancient religions also served as forms od depth psychology as well.

You know I once asked my Aikido teacher what books I should read to learn about Shinto. He said go read about Quantum Physics. :D

As for Icke, I must admit to not knowing very much about him, but what I was able to glean from his Wiki is that he's a nut. Of course even nuts may occasionally be right about something every now and then. :D

Oslaf
Sunday, August 21st, 2011, 04:25 AM
I just can't buy the lizard people stuff...

In Children of the Matrix (2001), he added that the Anunnaki bred with another extraterrestrial race called the "Nordics", who had blond hair and blue eyes, to produce a race of human slave masters, the Aryans. The Aryans retain many reptilian traits, including cold-blooded attitudes, a desire for top-down control, and an obsession with ritual, lending them a tendency toward fascism, rationalism, and racism.[42] Lewis and Kahn write that, with the Nordic hypothesis, Icke is mirroring standard claims by the far right that the Aryan bloodline has ruled the Earth throughout history. For Icke, Sumerian Kings and Egyptian pharaohs have all been Aryan reptilian humanoids, as have 43 American presidents and the Queen Mother, who he wrote in 2001 was "seriously reptilian". All have taken part in Satanic rituals, paedophilia, kidnapping of children, drug parties and murder, needed to satisfy their reptilian blood lust, which allows them to retain their temporary human form.[43]
I'd love if this was true, though. :D I feel the need to satisfy my blood lust right now...

Schopenhauer
Sunday, August 21st, 2011, 04:58 AM
I just can't buy the lizard people stuff...

I'd love if this was true, though. :D I feel the need to satisfy my blood lust right now...

The alien lizard hybrid is pretty funny. But hey, if people are willing to believe it, I saw give it to them and in spades. They want to read about scaly forked tongued refugees from V interbreeding with Aryans, I say more power to them. And if someone like Icke can make a buck off their gullibility/stupidity, then who am I to fault his business acumen.

Gall Óglach
Sunday, August 21st, 2011, 09:42 AM
People seem to forget that ancient religions were once inextricably linked to scientific inquiry. Astronomy, for example, was once a one of the single most significant and life sustaining sciences to our ancient ancestors due to its importance in matters of agricultural planning. And lets not forget Pythagoras' cult of numbers either.



Linking natural philosophy to religion severly hampered progress. It wasn't until the likes of Galileo who were prepared to challenge the established religious dogma, that the real scientific revolution began.

Schopenhauer
Sunday, August 21st, 2011, 02:19 PM
Linking natural philosophy to religion severly hampered progress. It wasn't until the likes of Galileo who were prepared to challenge the established religious dogma, that the real scientific revolution began.

Progress was only hampered under reign of the Xtians.