Sedevacantes by definition, do not believe that B16 is a valid pope. They believe that he is an imposter pope. It's that simple
The people calling me all kinds of names for posting the constant teaching of the Church, have fallen into the same mistake as the sedevacantes, a conundrum (When Catholics who follow antiquity/tradition, do not even need step into debate on those two simplistic, false, conclusions.) Sedevacantesism (he is not a pope because he teaches error) or Papalolotry (he can't teach error because he is the pope).
That's classic dissembling, there.
Again:
DO YOU CONSIDER HIM TO BE A VALID POPE?
IS HE YOUR POPE?
It's disingenuous for you to complain about name-calling when you're doing it yourself. (Papalotrists). Quit shouting how you're following tradition and just answer the questions.
Lorica he has already answered.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2687771/posts?page=22#22
“all 5 Vatican II popes are not even Catholic. Pope St. Pius X would have excommunicated all five before they even became bishops.”
What we need in these threads is for people like you and me to confront him with his previous statements so that new readers will understand where he is coming from and the kind of bad material he posts...really simple...thanks.