ahhh... I'm not sure... But I think he is implying that there are three different scenarios that could have happened (two of which are wrong anyway).
1) That lavos was part of the planet, and was created by it... (then again, who knows) THis is obviously wrong because we see lavos crashing.
2) This one is impossiple to decifer. I think he means that Lavos was destroyed by the planet, or vice versa...
3) Lavos came to earth or was sent by an outside force.
Really, these fractured comments could be interpreted in different ways, so it is hard to 'translate'.
I think maybe he is one of those French Canadians who havent learnt English very well.
I'm not sure why he said 'thank', though.
Maybe he was like: Thanks, I know I rule. I just showeed you the real truth. You will bow down to me.
It's a shame we cant work out this defining theory.
Either that or he is very, fataly wrong.