David Icke, Love Not Fear is The Answer |460|

Alex

Administrator
I’ve only just come across Skeptiko and was really enjoying some of the earlier episodes with people like Dean Radin, Rupert Sheldrake and ‘sceptics’ such as James Alcock and Stephen Novella. These interviews were really informative, insightful and constructive.

So I thought I’d listen to more recent episodes and came across the one on David Icke. Where did the emphasis on peer-reviewed science and critical thinking go?! That’s the strength of parapsychology. However, well-evidenced science certainly isn’t Icke’s strong point as he seems to grab onto whatever theory might support his global conspiracy schtick even if it’s only one or two lone doctors on YouTube. As I write, the health service in the UK is at breaking point because of COVID-19. I know people who’ve been seriously ill with COVID-19, and I have relatives who work in the NHS, and this first-hand knowledge (as well as an ability for critical thinking) makes me certain that this is not made up.

I’m not in favour of banning anyone, but you don’t have to give Icke and similar airtime, particularly with such a fawning attitude and lack of critical questioning. Many of his views are harmless (some I’d even support) but when we’re dealing with a global health crisis (and indeed global warming) they are downright dangerous.

What especially concerns me is people saying in this thread that they’re not wearing masks or practising social distancing because of theories such as these. You’re welcome to hold different views (hey and don’t take the vaccine if you don’t want to), but, out of compassion, kindness, respect for those who hold differing views, and the precautionary principle, if nothing else, please help to protect others’ health by following the guidelines. Thanks for listening! Love and peace.
hi Mike... do you think masks have been shown to be efficacious outside of the lab. every peer-reviewed study of masks used in clinical settings I've seen suggest that they don't. the bottom line is that they work in the lab they don't work in clinical or real-world settings. has been shown over and over again.

by the way I still do an occasional interview in the parapsychology area... just did one with stephen braude

also and recently published one with mark pitstick... which by the way was probably a good segue into your "beef" with the show. if you the post in that thread I will respond.
 
hi Mike... do you think masks have been shown to be efficacious outside of the lab. every peer-reviewed study of masks used in clinical settings I've seen suggest that they don't. the bottom line is that they work in the lab they don't work in clinical or real-world settings. has been shown over and over again.

by the way I still do an occasional interview in the parapsychology area... just did one with stephen braude

also and recently published one with mark pitstick... which by the way was probably a good segue into your "beef" with the show. if you the post in that thread I will respond.
Hi Alex,

Yes, I do believe that masks are helpful outside the lab. Sorry to name-drop again but I work with Cath Noakes at the University of Leeds. She's been advising the UK government on this and her view is that they help, but don't eliminate, transmission. And, given that the virus is transmitted in part in air droplets, this is kind of logical. Bottom line is that I know her and I trust her expert opinion.

Thanks for letting me know about the other shows. I'll check them out.

Mike
 
I would be persuaded the NHS is "at the breaking point" if you provided some evidence to support that assertion.
Numerous doctors, nurses, and those in charge of hospitals have said so. Other treatments such as operations for cancer are being cancelled to cope with the surge in cases. I have relatives in the NHS who confirm what is being shown on the news. Ultimately, I believe these sources over David Icke and his few cherry-picked sources that do not bear scrutiny. And I do not consider following a few simple guidelines to be an attack on fundamental liberties when those actions save lives. Like someone else on this forum said, it's no different from being told to wear a seatbelt.
 
Numerous doctors, nurses, and those in charge of hospitals have said so.
Anecdotes you heard is not evidence.

Evidence of your assertion would be legitimate statistical and financial data showing that the NHS "is at the breaking point".

You haven't bothered to even glance at the year's-worth of in-depth examination people on this forum have already conducted on this subject.

If you are unwilling to provide evidence for your assertions, stop lecturing us like a self-righteous Schoolmarm.
 
Anecdotes you heard is not evidence.

Evidence of your assertion would be legitimate statistical and financial data showing that the NHS "is at the breaking point".

You haven't bothered to even glance at the year's-worth of in-depth examination people on this forum have already conducted on this subject.

If you are unwilling to provide evidence for your assertions, stop lecturing us like a self-righteous Schoolmarm.
Classic high horse.

Mike, you'll have to understand Charlie's typical bluster when it comes to discussing, well, anything.

While he's quick to deride you for "anecdotes" and scold you for not looking at the "year's worth of in-depth" analysis here, you'll find the evidence he's referring to is significantly weaker than your "anecdote". To whit, much of the "evidence" are random video anecdotes from supposed "experts" who are sympathetic to the cause. Nothing has been established to any standard of rigor. Lots of good questions have been asked and concerns have been raised, but as is with most conspiracies they are light on facts and dismissive of any/all challenges.
 
Classic high horse.

Mike, you'll have to understand Charlie's typical bluster when it comes to discussing, well, anything.

While he's quick to deride you for "anecdotes" and scold you for not looking at the "year's worth of in-depth" analysis here, you'll find the evidence he's referring to is significantly weaker than your "anecdote". To whit, much of the "evidence" are random video anecdotes from supposed "experts" who are sympathetic to the cause. Nothing has been established to any standard of rigor. Lots of good questions have been asked and concerns have been raised, but as is with most conspiracies they are light on facts and dismissive of any/all challenges.
Thank you for that. That's been pretty much my conclusion too.
 
Hi Alex,

Yes, I do believe that masks are helpful outside the lab. Sorry to name-drop again but I work with Cath Noakes at the University of Leeds. She's been advising the UK government on this and her view is that they help, but don't eliminate, transmission. And, given that the virus is transmitted in part in air droplets, this is kind of logical. Bottom line is that I know her and I trust her expert opinion.

Thanks for letting me know about the other shows. I'll check them out.

Mike
Of course you are going to shill for the UK government when you are associating with them via their advisors. That makes sense of your comments and general attitude about the mask and why you think everyone should wear one.

You trust the experts, fair enough, but what of the many studies that have been done about the efficacy of masks, as Alex has pointed out? Why not consider them? You see, you cannot force people to follow guidance that is based on completely denying the other half of experts opinions on the matter, when people can see the censorship quite clearly. The Great Barrington Declaration for one, completely memory holed and denied. Numerous experts also being harassed, fired etc, all over the world, not just in UK.

At the end of the day, people are going to react very poorly when government restrictions enable useful idiots in the population to harass them, because they have become hysterical due to the media and government. I don't think you have a grasp of just how much resentment people have towards everyone involved here.

I actually suggest caution to your colleagues and others who have been advising the government on this whole thing, because they have been KEY participants in destroying this countries economy, social cohesion, education of kids, along with so many other variables. You may think your colleagues are doing good in the name of stopping COVID, but I can assure you, a sizeable percentage of the population genuinely have disdain for the 'scientific advisors' in general. That's not good. We want people to appreciate science, but the longer the 'experts' continue to have tunnel vision, the more extreme the reaction will be from those who are opposed to them.
 
I would be persuaded the NHS is "at the breaking point" if you provided some evidence to support that assertion.
It's constantly at breaking point in the UK Charlie.

Every winter pre COVID, there were headlines in the papers convincing people that the NHS was falling apart and in need of more money. More money hasn't seemed to have helped in the case of the Nightingale hospitals, where quite a number either lay empty, or hardly in use as intended etc. £220 million spent. And the reason that they aren't being used as spare capacity, which is basically the excuse used to constantly impose restrictions on people, is that they haven't got the Staff!

You think some expert would have told the government at the time about that one......
 
Last edited:
Numerous doctors, nurses, and those in charge of hospitals have said so. Other treatments such as operations for cancer are being cancelled to cope with the surge in cases.
Exactly. And that is disgusting. Everything in general is being 'cancelled' in the name of COVID. Did these people in charge of hospitals ever consider that COVID is not the be all and end all of the world? Of course you will probably tell me that since I'm not an 'expert' that I don't have the credentials to comment on the situation, but I don't care. When I'm forced to pay for a service, with no ability to opt out, I can comment all I like.

Mike Daw said:
I have relatives in the NHS who confirm what is being shown on the news. .
And I've seen NHS staff dancing around like idiots in empty hospitals. Do you realise how that makes your relatives look to the general public? If you asked a random selection, you'd get a few who think it's funny and just light relief for staff, but I think you'd get many more who at best, think it's unprofessional, and at worst, are enraged by it.

EDIT- Just to be fair, I know you made that comment based on Icke. I do not deny COVID exists btw.
 
Last edited:
In the longer term, the chief medical officer says we all hope the vaccination programme will mean we don’t need restrictions in the future.

But he warns the virus "is not going to go away", saying we "shouldn’t kid ourselves that this just disappears with spring" - although the risks will go down.

“Hopefully we’ll have spring, summer, autumn, possibly winter as well, with almost nothing in place, once the full vaccination programme is through. But we just need to be aware of the fact this is not a problem that just disappears.”

Screenshot 2021-01-05 at 17.57.44.png
Press conference from the Government tonight.


One of your beloved experts there Mike, already hinting at the probable continuation of 'restrictions' i.e lockdowns, for the foreseeable future, despite vaccines now being available.

And you wonder why people are not following the official guidance anymore.
 

Alex

Administrator
Hi Alex,

Yes, I do believe that masks are helpful outside the lab. Sorry to name-drop again but I work with Cath Noakes at the University of Leeds. She's been advising the UK government on this and her view is that they help, but don't eliminate, transmission. And, given that the virus is transmitted in part in air droplets, this is kind of logical. Bottom line is that I know her and I trust her expert opinion.

Thanks for letting me know about the other shows. I'll check them out.

Mike
here's a good vid on the mask thing:
 
I find what is interesting with David Ike is that he is being proven right. Like him or loathe him he is on record as stating a pandemic would galvanise governments to primarily restrict freedoms and then bring in technology that will lead to further control of the population(s). It's very similar to Alex Jones expounding the prison planet theory, albeit David believes the human spirit and consciousness will triumph over the (reptilian) elites that seek to control us, where as Alex cares for politics and money (in my opinion).

I think Alex was a bit soft on David compared to other guests he's had on,At least he owned up to his being a fan. I would have liked Alex to draw him further on the ET stuff. David didn't seem to want to be drawn on it all, and certainly didn't stray in to the Annunaki reptilian stuff which he's written about. I don't think it got to Level 3, alas, which was down to David's interview style.
 
I find what is interesting with David Ike is that he is being proven right. .
Yeah, if you bypass the part where he said, "It's not a real virus.." he's batting 1.000. Everything else he was right about was written into the Patriot Act 20 years ago. Or 40 years ago when I was a strategic planner at Los Alamos. and wrote it all up in a white paper to Congress. "Governments restricting freedoms and then bringing in technology to further control of the population(s)," is old news. Is the virus real? Is that still up for debate? Really? If this is site is about, "follow the data where is leads," Alex and his remaining listeners have fallen off the road following frauds like David Icke.
 
Yeah, if you bypass the part where he said, "It's not a real virus.." he's batting 1.000. Everything else he was right about was written into the Patriot Act 20 years ago. Or 40 years ago when I was a strategic planner at Los Alamos. and wrote it all up in a white paper to Congress. "Governments restricting freedoms and then bringing in technology to further control of the population(s)," is old news. Is the virus real? Is that still up for debate? Really? If this is site is about, "follow the data where is leads," Alex and his remaining listeners have fallen off the road following frauds like David Icke.
Not everyone has everything right. Not everyone that has something right is able to include that "rightness" into a fuller picture. But when they don't, is it wise to go on a crusade castigating them? I wouldn't. Take, for example, the excellent work related to family constellations. Then consider the traditions of the Norse that have played a significant role in western culture where the impact of family constellations is heightened by the centuries of beliefs held by the Norse (and likely dating back to the Indo Europeans).

When the impact of "the family constellation" aspect of trauma is viewed as a component of a greater overall picture, albeit for many a significant one, and as an example, the work Dr. Tom Zinser has done suggesting additional critically impactful components comprising the fuller spectrum of trauma, folks who have experienced trauma related to these other components and treated with the fuller spectrum in mind likely experience greater relief.

But there's no need to attack the discoverers and therapists that focus on the family constellation component because they seem to de-emphasize (maybe ignore) the other components because what they have brought to the table has been quite important. Something I thank you for in my prayers by the way.
 

Alex

Administrator
I think Alex was a bit soft on David compared to other guests he's had on,At least he owned up to his being a fan. I would have liked Alex to draw him further on the ET stuff. David didn't seem to want to be drawn on it all, and certainly didn't stray in to the Annunaki reptilian stuff which he's written about. I don't think it got to Level 3, alas, which was down to David's interview style.
agree on both counts

I think I had him back peddling on "there is no virus thing" shoulda gone further.

shoulda pursued the reptilian thing.
 
Yeah, if you bypass the part where he said, "It's not a real virus.." he's batting 1.000. Everything else he was right about was written into the Patriot Act 20 years ago. Or 40 years ago when I was a strategic planner at Los Alamos. and wrote it all up in a white paper to Congress. "Governments restricting freedoms and then bringing in technology to further control of the population(s)," is old news. Is the virus real? Is that still up for debate? Really? If this is site is about, "follow the data where is leads," Alex and his remaining listeners have fallen off the road following frauds like David Icke.
Oh please, just because Alex interviewed David Icke, doesn't mean he agrees with everything said by him. If you actually paid attention to what was going on, you'd find that Alex and many of us do understand that there is a virus, and that we don't necessarily follow the "NO VIRUS COS ITS NOT BEEN ISOLATED" camp.

But I guess these little nuances are lost by people like you, who would rather argue with silly uninformed points like this, sidestepping the real discussion, rather than explore the terrifying future we all await.

Do you have anything to add on the future that we all await?
 

Alex

Administrator
I find what is interesting with David Ike is that he is being proven right. Like him or loathe him he is on record as stating a pandemic would galvanise governments to primarily restrict freedoms and then bring in technology that will lead to further control of the population(s).
agreed! I don't think he gets enough credit for this. then again, it is disappointing that he hasn't course corrected on the "there is no virus thing."
 

Alex

Administrator
You trust the experts, fair enough, but what of the many studies that have been done about the efficacy of masks, as Alex has pointed out? Why not consider them? You see, you cannot force people to follow guidance that is based on completely denying the other half of experts opinions on the matter, when people can see the censorship quite clearly.
well put.

the other thing they have managed to slip into the narrative / collective consciousness is the idea that the mask question is equivalent to the mask mandate public health policy issue.

I mean, I don't give a shit if people want to wear masks... but I think under any non-PLANdemic situation (i.e. a "normal" pandemic) there would be a different standard for mandate versus voluntary use.
 
Top