North American Union:Mexico/U.S/Canada to become one huge country? · General Discussion Forum

xmarksthespot CEO, BS Comics

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I hope you don't consider yourself one of those [B]Rationales after that stunt you just pulled[/B]

A "rationale" is not a type of person.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
There are so many things wrong with that post, first of all you said better than I could "To my Knowledge" meaning limited to what you know. Now tell me how that equals implausible or "No Proof" like you've been claiming.
The science's, OMG, do you know how arrogant that came out. Let me get this straight "Science Goddess", Somehow you've bcome the authority of every form of research in [B] Science, Regardless if it's an independent investigation or a majorly founded one, please. [/B]

All things posted are opinion. I don't feel the need for a disclaimer. I am not privy to any proof of lizard people.

Are you asking me to prove there is no proof? Logical fallacy.

You further exemplify your inability to comprehend. I have background in molecular and evolutionary genetics. The lizard theory does not comply with established biological facts.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Did I claimed that or imply that, how did you come to this conclusion? Because I don't remeber posting support for the theory or icke for that matter. You on the the other hand claimed there was [B]No Evidence, supporting this theory, how did you arrive at this conclusion, Oh, I remember your a "Science goddess"[/B]

Here's our little discourse:

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Not that I believe icke...but why is that so stupid?

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Because it doesn't agree with the general consensus, duh!

^Here you deride general consensus that Icke's lizard theory has no factual support.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Or you know, because Icke's lizard people claims are stupid by the standards of rational people.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Or because, the general consensus believes it's irrationale

^Here you imply that Icke's claims are not irrational, but are only thought to be so. Implying that there is tangible basis for Icke's theory.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Whereas the irrational believe it's not only plausible but actual. Based on? Absolutely nothing.

^Here I state there is no proof of Icke's claims. As I am not in possession of any information substantiating these claims nor do I know of any.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Right, absolutely nothing, You must have researched this subject so throughly!? 🙄 😆

^Here you imply that the basis for my conclusion is lack of "research" in a derisive manner. For one to do so they would be privy to said information, the other party is lacking. Conversely one has done no research on the subject at hand either and is simply being a hypocrite.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
So you have conclusive unequivocal proof that Elizabeth Windsor I and II, Philip Mountbatten, George H Bush, George W Bush are reptilian humanoids? Do tell. Do share. Otherwise be quiet and return to the crackpot forum.

^Given your implications I ask for proof.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
LOL, part of the general consensus, I don't support the theory, that doesn't mean Icke is wrong. I'm just not into his work. You really jump the gun there, how are you arriving at these conclusions. because unlike you, I never claimed there was [B]No Proof.[/B]

You, like the general consensus do not support the lizard theory. You however deride the general consensus for not supporting the lizard theory. You are a hypocrite.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
quote a statement that implyed there was proof X, because your just making me laugh.

Your ineptitude makes everyone laugh. So I guess you win in bringing more joy to the world.

Emperor Ashtar Balloooooooooooooon

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
A "rationale" is not a type of person.

Thant's nice 🙂

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

All things posted are opinion. I don't feel the need for a disclaimer. I am not privy to any proof of lizard people.

When you said there is no proof, you were stating an opinion?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

Are you asking me to prove there is no proof? Logical fallacy.

Whew, thank god I wasn't asking for that, lol. Infact you said there was no proof, and proceeded to ask me to post proof, yeah I see your logic fallacy.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

You further exemplify your inability to comprehend. I have background in molecular and evolutionary genetics. The lizard theory does not comply with established biological facts..

You should have said that earlier, Just saying "the science's" doesn't exactly tell me what field now does it. And establisment means jack to me.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

Here's our little discourse:
^Here you deride general consensus that Icke's lizard theory has no factual support.

Okay.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

^Here you imply that Icke's claims are not irrational, but are only thought to be so. Implying that there is tangible basis for Icke's theory.

Really, because I see no mention of icke or his theory what so ever on that post. I just see mention of lizard people, which has many variations as a theory. So, How am I implying icke is rational?

Do you mean I'm implying the lizard theory is rational?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

^Here I state there is no proof of Icke's claims. As I am not in possession of any information substantiating these claims nor do I know of any..

So, how is their no proof of ickes claim, like you said in that post. despite the fact You admitt not ibeing in possesion of any information regarding this particular theory?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

^Here you imply that the basis for my conclusion is lack of "research" in a derisive manner. For one to do so they would be privy to said information, the other party is lacking. Conversely one has done no research on the subject at hand either and is simply being a hypocrite.

I have no research on the subject, based on what. Are you my neighbor,Because I do know about Ickes work. Oh, and I'm not implying it, you don't have any knowledge of his work, you said it yourself:

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

^Here I state there is no proof of Icke's claims. As I am not in possession of any information substantiating these claims nor do I know of any..

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

^Given your implications I ask for proof.
You, like the general do not support the lizard theory. You however deride the general consensus for not supporting the lizard theory. You are a hypocrite.
Your ineptitude makes everyone laugh. So I guess you win in bringing more joy to the world.

No, I deride the general consensus because they do not know "Jack" about the lizard theory. I don't support icke, But I've researched his work, unlike you. I drew this conclusion by examining the work at hand.

Though it wasn't a deep analysis, I admitt that. But, unlike you, I at least know the specifics of the theory.

xmarksthespot CEO, BS Comics

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Infact you said there was no proof, and proceeded to ask me yo post proof, yeah I see your logic fallacy.

You clearly have no idea what constitutes a logical fallacy.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
You should have said that earlier, the science's doesn't exactly tell me what field now does it. And establisment means jack to me.

Ah, so you're not only a conspiracy theorist and a hypocrite, you are also a Luddite.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Really, because I see no mention of icke or his theory what so ever on that post. I just see mention of lizard people, which has many variations as a theory. So, How am I implying icke is rational?

The general consensus does not believe in Icke's lizard people claim because:
"Icke's lizard people claims are stupid by the standards of rational people."
"Or because, the general consensus believes it's irrationale"

So you're saying that there was no implication there that the lizard theory isn't irrational, people just believe it to be so?
Okay...

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
So, how is their no proof of ickes claim, like you said in that post. if [B]Your not in possesion of any information regarding this particular theory?[/B]

So if I form a conclusion that there is no proof of unicorns, based on an opinion formulated by my background and the lack of evidence for unicorns in my possession:
I cannot state "There is no proof of unicorns." without qualifying it as an opinion.
I cannot state "There is no proof of unicorns." unless I have actually gone out and investigated whether unicorns exist, despite that I can formulate a conclusion on the existence of unicorns on other knowledge in my repertoire.

So basically all people must come to your conclusions or they are sheep. And all people must come to your conclusions through the same process you came to your conclusions. How fascistic.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I have no research on the subject, based on what. Are you my neighbor,Because I do know about Ickes work. Oh, and I'm not implying it, you don't have any knowledge of his work, you said it yourself:

Here you again exemplify poor comprehensive skills. Go back and read what I wrote. Then read it again. Then again. Until perhaps you actually grasp what I said.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Now, I deride the general consensus because yhey do not know "Jack" about the lizard thoery. I don't support icke, But I've researched his work, unlike you. I drew this conclusion by examining the work at hand.

Good, now get to work on those unicorns, while the general consensus lead productive lives.

You and your ilk have the conspiracy forum to play in. Keep the towards those who care nothing for your conspiracy in the conspiracy forum.

Emperor Ashtar Balloooooooooooooon

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
You clearly have no idea what constitutes a logical fallacy.
Ah, so you're not only a conspiracy theorist and a hypocrite, you are also a Luddite.

Whatever floats your boat, insults really don't help your point.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

The general consensus does not believe in Icke's lizard people claim because:
"Icke's lizard people claims are stupid by the standards of rational people."
"Or because, the general consensus believes it's irrationale"

Which are all opinions, you just proved my point, thank you. The general consensus draws opinions which they percieve to be facts. Case and point, You have no knowledge of ickes theory, Yet, claim it's unsupported, that's a logic fallacy. If you have no knowledge on his work, how is it unsupported.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

So you're saying that there was no implication there that the lizard theory isn't irrational, people just believe it to be so?
Okay...

Lol, where are you drawing these conclusions? My point is the general consensus is irrational because they often draw conclusions without reviewing the evidence.Something which you just did, you had no knowledge of ickes work yet claimed it's irrational.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

So if I form a conclusion that there is no proof of unicorns, based on an opinion formulated by my background and the lack of evidence for unicorns in my possession:
I cannot state "There is no proof of unicorns." without qualifying it as an opinion.
I cannot state "There is no proof of unicorns." unless I have actually gone out and investigated whether unicorns exist, despite that I can formulate a conclusion on the existence of unicorns on other knowledge in my repertoire.

Your very arrogant, lol. Your particular expertize has no bearing on what I'm saying, since:

1)You have not looked at the mans work
2)Your not even covering the field of science that relates to ickes work regarding these lizards.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

So basically all people must come to your conclusions or they are sheep. And all people must come to your conclusions through the same process you came to your conclusions. How fascistic.
Here you again exemplify poor comprehensive skills. Go back and read what I wrote. Then read it again. Then again. Until perhaps you actually grasp what I said.
Good, now get to work on those unicorns, while the general consensus lead productive lives.

Productive lives, right. Your drew several wrong conclusions supported by huge assumptions. You haven't made so much as a point, except to prove your an ignorant sheeep, lol. Your critique his work despite not knowing it,lol.

xmarksthespot CEO, BS Comics

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Which are all opinions, you just proved my point, thank you. The general consensus draws opinions which they percieve to be facts. Case and point, You have no knowledge of ickes thory, yet claim it's unsupported, that's a logicl fallacy. If you have no knowledge on his work, how is it unsupported.

I never said I have no knowledge of Icke's lizard theory. I said to my knowledge there is no proof of it. I know the basic premise of the theory and it doesn't comply with established scientific knowledge.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Lol,where are you drawing these conclusions? My point is the general consensus is irrational because they often draw conclusions without reviewing the evidence.Something which you just did, you had no knowledge of ickes work yet claimed it's irrational.

If it's your point it's not what you said. What you said was:
"Or because, the general consensus believes it's irrationale"
You stated that the general consensus do not support the theory that for example the Queen is a reptilian humanoid, only because they believe it to be irrational. In doing so you imply that the scenario could be rational, and in doing so you provoke the question of proof.

I never said I have no knowledge of Icke's lizard theory. I said to my knowledge there is no proof of it. I know the basic premise of the theory and it doesn't comply to my scientific knowledge.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Your very arrogant, lol. Your particular expertize has no bearing on what I'm saying, since:
1)You have not looked at the mans work
2)Your not even covering the field of science that relates to ickes work
Productive lives, right. Your drew several wrong conclusions supported by huge assumptions.

I don't need to investigate Icke's lizard work to determine my conclusions based on a broad scientific background. Pray tell what field of science relates to Icke's lizard people? He's a former footballer, and tv presenter.

You're very arrogant. You believe the only routes to drawing a conclusion are through yours.

There is a conspiracy forum which you've been relegated to. Stay there.

Emperor Ashtar Balloooooooooooooon

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I never said I have no knowledge of Icke's lizard theory. I said to my knowledge there is no proof of it. I know the basic premise of the theory and it doesn't comply with established scientific knowledge.

No, you said :

As I am not in possession of any information substantiating these claims nor do I know of any.. I.E. I have no idea what I'm talking about.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

If it's your point it's not what you said. What you said was:
"Or because, the general consensus believes it's irrationale"
You stated that the general consensus do not support the theory that for example the Queen is a reptilian humanoid, only because they believe it to be irrational. In doing so you imply that the scenario could be rational.

I made no mention of icke or his theory, you did remember this:
So you have conclusive unequivocal proof that Elizabeth Windsor I and II, Philip Mountbatten, George H Bush, George W Bush are reptilian humanoids? Do tell. Do share. Otherwise be quiet and return to the crackpot forum.

Prior to that, I made no mention of icke. Maybe you should get some rest,, because your making less sense.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

I never said I have no knowledge of Icke's lizard theory. I said to my knowledge there is no proof of it. I know the basic premise of the theory and it doesn't comply to my scientific knowledge.
I don't need to investigate Icke's lizard work to determine my conclusions based on a broad scientific background. Pray tell what field of science relates to Icke's lizard people?

Quantum physics, he believes they are 5th dimensional lizards afterall. What does your expertise in your particualr field have to do with that?

The irony is that's the basic premise of it, yet, you got it wrong,lol.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

You're very arrogant. You believe the only routes to drawing a conclusion are through yours.
There is a conspiracy forum which you've been relegated to. Stay there.

No, your arrogant, you haven't even looked at his work and drew a conclusion.

xmarksthespot CEO, BS Comics

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
No, you said :
[B]As I am not in possession of any information substantiating these claims nor do I know of any.. I.E. I have no idea what I'm talking about.[/B]

Your lack of comprehensive skills are not my problem.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I made no mention of icke or his theory, you did remember this:
[B]So you have conclusive unequivocal proof that Elizabeth Windsor I and II, Philip Mountbatten, George H Bush, George W Bush are reptilian humanoids? Do tell. Do share. Otherwise be quiet and return to the crackpot forum.
Prior to that, I made no mention of icke. Maybe you should get some rest,, because your making less sense.[/B]

I see so you're simply going to ignore the context of the posts in this thread, and simply rely on not having actually said the word Icke, when it's clear throughout the discourse that it is specifically with regard to Icke's lizard notion.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Quantum physics, he believes they are 5th dimensional lizards afterall. What does your expertise in your particualr field have to do with that?
The irony is that's the basic premise of it, yet, you got it wrong,lol.

Call me a skeptic but I doubt Icke has any scholastic achievements in quantum physics. Nor you for that matter.

Here's some biology for you if an adult humanoid is genetically H. sapiens, then they're human. Species cannot interbreed to produce fertile genetic offsping.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
No, your arrogant, you haven't even looked at his work and drew a conclusion.

You believe the only routes to drawing a conclusion are through yours.

Emperor Ashtar Balloooooooooooooon

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Your lack of comprehensive skills are not my problem.

🙂

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

I see so you're simply going to ignore the context of the posts in this thread, and simply rely on not having actually said the word Icke, when it's clear throughout the discourse that it is specifically with regard to Icke's lizard notion.

It's not that, your claiming I support icke is rational because I belive the general consesus is not rational. Problem is I never mentioned icke prior to you asking me to prove Elizabeth Windsor I and II, Philip Mountbatten, George H Bush, George W Bush are reptilian humanoids.

Infact the bulk of my argument was that the general consensus is ignorant because they adhere to preconcived notions as if they were fact without looking at both sides. You just proved this beautifully.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

Call me a skeptic but I doubt Icke has any scholastic achievements in quantum physics. Nor you for that matter.

Case and point, I don't care about your opinions. If you disagree with icke, give me a reason regarding his findings, not you or the masses opinion on his character.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

Here's some biology for you if an adult humanoid is genetically H. sapiens, then they're human. Species cannot interbreed to produce fertile genetic offsping.

What does that have to do with quantum physics?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

You believe the only routes to drawing a conclusion are through yours.

No, I don't.

xmarksthespot CEO, BS Comics

You know what, I've realised what an incredible waste of time it is to engage in discourse with you. Considering you believe the only routes to drawing a conclusion are through yours. So I'm just going to agree to disagree.

You go ahead and believe in your crackpot theories about the RAND corporation, reverse-vampires, the Illuminati, and the mole people, and tell yourself how much better you are than "the general consensus" for not believing in "preconceived notions" like the Queen is human, while you waste your time investigating Icke and his ilk.

Meanwhile I'll choose not to.

But from now on keep your BS and your unjustified contempt for those who don't give a crap about it in the conspiracy forum where it belongs. K? Cool.

Emperor Ashtar Balloooooooooooooon

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
You know what, I've realised what an incredible waste of time it is to engage in discourse with you. Considering you believe the only routes to drawing a conclusion are through yours. So I'm just going to agree to disagree.
You go ahead and believe in your crackpot theories about the RAND corporation, reverse-vampires, the Illuminati, and the mole people, and tell yourself how much better you are than "the general consensus" for not believing in "preconceived notions" like the Queen is human, while you waste your time investigating Icke and his ilk.
Meanwhile I'll choose not to.
But from now on keep your BS and your unjustified contempt for those who don't give a crap about it in the conspiracy forum where it belongs. K? Cool.

LOL, I don't believe I'm better than anyone. I just think the masses are sheep. You can critisize it all you want, But, it's never going to change facts.

And I don't think your a moderater, so you have no right to tell me where to post.

xmarksthespot CEO, BS Comics

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
LOL, I don't believe I'm better than anyone.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I just think the masses are sheep.

Hmm so a person can contradict themself within a single line.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
You can critisize it all you want, But, it's never going to change facts.

Hypocrite. Your facts are only your opinions.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
And I don't think your a moderater, so you have no right to tell me where to post.

Silly boy, I don't need to be a mod I'm part of the Illuminati.

Oh and just by the by, the very human genetic history of hemophilia in the European royal families is well documented.

Deano Senior Member

Originally posted by lord xyz
He says it on an episode of Penn and Teller: Bullshit. People who have seen that will agree. He also says Dick Cheney, Bush Family, British Royal Family big time, are part of this reptillian race.

no, he says that he believes they are part of this ET race. But he does NOY say he has personally seen them in that form

Deano Senior Member

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
You know what, I've realised what an incredible waste of time it is to engage in discourse with you. Considering you believe the only routes to drawing a conclusion are through yours. So I'm just going to agree to disagree.
You go ahead and believe in your crackpot theories about the RAND corporation, reverse-vampires, the Illuminati, and the mole people, and tell yourself how much better you are than "the general consensus" for not believing in "preconceived notions" like the Queen is human, while you waste your time investigating Icke and his ilk.
Meanwhile I'll choose not to.
But from now on keep your BS and your unjustified contempt for those who don't give a crap about it in the conspiracy forum where it belongs. K? Cool.

if you dont give a crap then why keep stretching the argument? you have already proved your ignorance. you know nothing of icke, yet continue to ridicule. you must be god and know all there is to know.

xmarksthespot CEO, BS Comics

Originally posted by Deano
if you dont give a crap then why keep stretching the argument? you have already proved your ignorance. you know nothing of icke, yet continue to ridicule.

Oh indeed, "I prove my ignorance" by not devoting huge amounts of time to investigating whether or not the royal family are extradimensional extraterrestrial shapeshifting reptilian humanoids. I haven't looked into whether or not pixies or ogres or leprechauns or dragons exist either. But then I'm going to guess you haven't either. How ignorant you are.

Originally posted by Deano
you must be god and know all there is to know.

How ironic considering your general attitude in discourse with people who don't believe your stolen words, your scrolling signature line, your constant attempt at labelling others as ignorant e.g. see above, because they don't waste their time reading everything and anything about mind control microchip injections, lizard people, the Bilderberg group etc. I see hypocrisy is a common theme among conspiracy theory devotees.

LuckyLover Senior Member

Originally posted by Fishy
Oh yes because that is of course exactly what will happen if you have open borders...

Actually, it is. U.S corporations already do it 🙂

Shalimar_fox The Body Beautiful

oh no.great that mean .

BobbyD Animal Lover

Re: North American Union:Mexico/U.S/Canada to become one huge country?

Originally posted by long pig
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14965
I'm sure most of you have heard of the super high-way that will stretch from Mexico to Canada and how Canada/Mexico/United States will basically become one large nation. Are you for a North American Union or are you against it?

The sum of all 3 is 2 countries already. 😂

I'll explain....

There are so many illegal aliens in this country from Mexico that it is already Mexicana. There's one country.

And Canadians and Americans love each other so that is a country right there. There's #2.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. 😆

Deano Senior Member

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Oh indeed, "I prove my ignorance" by not devoting huge amounts of time to investigating whether or not the royal family are extradimensional extraterrestrial shapeshifting reptilian humanoids. I haven't looked into whether or not pixies or ogres or leprechauns or dragons exist either. But then I'm going to guess you haven't either. How ignorant you are.How ironic considering your general attitude in discourse with people who don't believe your stolen words, your scrolling signature line, your constant attempt at labelling others as ignorant e.g. see above, because they don't waste their time reading everything and anything about mind control microchip injections, lizard people, the Bilderberg group etc. I see hypocrisy is a common theme among conspiracy theory devotees.

you like to come and show off and be arrogant by arguing about something you knownothing about. funny that. i advise against it.

Gravitational waves analysis shows extraterrestrial entities all around us in higher dimensions

They are all around us. Just next to us is where they are reacting with us. But they exist in higher spatial dimensions. Gravitational wave analysis manifests the higher dimensions that are real but impossible for our current technologies to perceive.'