Debunking the notion that those who believe official government denials are "skeptics"

a reply to: learnatic

Ah ok. Personally I do not think it gives them a high moral ground. I have no problem with someone being a "believer". My problem is when they act like it is fact, and demand you accept it as such.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: debonkers

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: learnatic
a reply to: debonkers

Those who accept the notion of alien contact being true, have basically ceded the high ground on this, seldom challenging their opponents on their claims of the skeptical position.

It would be helpfull if someone could suggest how this might be achieved.

The only way it can be done is by finding a case that can be proven actually occurred and where aliens is the only explanation. There is no such case.

Proven to who? You? Proven to a jury of one's peers? Proven to Neil Degrasse Tyson?

Because it's certainly been proven to millions of people who experienced alien contact first hand.

I can prove to you iron exists. Can you prove to me aliens have visited Earth? No? Thought not. Thanks. When you get evidence let me know.

There are mountains of evidence. It doesn't rise to the level of proof for you? That's on you. You are certainly within your rights to disbelieve anything you want. You do not have to believe it for it to be true.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: learnatic

Ah ok. Personally I do not think it gives them a high moral ground. I have no problem with someone being a "believer". My problem is when they act like it is fact, and demand you accept it as such.

Well, it is a fact, but no one is demanding you accept it as such.

Do you expect the people who know alien contact to be true to act like it isn't? Wouldn't that be lying?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: KnightLight

No, it's not. If aliens came to Earth 2 million years ago and there is zero evidence for it then there is zero evidence, ergo, it did not happen.

I work in healthcare, if I work with a patient and I do not chart what I did then I did not do it, end of story, insurance is not reimbursing for my work. Evidence or it did not happen.

No If Aliens came to earth 2 million years ago and there is no evidence it still happened. You just won't notice it. Same for your doctor/Nurse story.. Whether anyone knows you did something or not you still did it.

This is something I am not skeptic about. Things that happened did happen whether I see them or not. I Believe in an objective reality.


The doublespeak you spoke was thus:

I'm not saying they havn't , but there is no evidence so they havn't.. That means you are saying they havn't...

Odd belief that you have to know about something for it to be real.

a reply to: debonkers

It seems like we have a hole in our knowledge which has left us unable to explain a residue of UFO sightings reports and unusual experiences. Being curious humans, and disliking the holes in knowledge, we try and carpet over the hole with an explanation we find attractive.

You've chosen aliens because it appeals to you; it makes sense in your mind. It doesn't[ make the decision 'skeptical' or the thinking that led you there either. Being sceptical/skeptical means avoiding filling the holes with what suits us best. Sure, maybe some reports were (or are) of aliens? It's possible whilst we don't know enough to say no for sure. The thing is, none of the most puzzling, 'unidentified' reports really tell us that aliens were responsible.

Even if we rule out conventional explanations and discount operations by Intel groups, there still isn't enough information to say with certainty that any specific report has the explanation of 'aliens.'

a reply to: Kandinsky

Exactly

a reply to: debonkers

No, there is literally zero evidence. As in actually zero.

originally posted by: debonkers

Do you expect the people who know alien contact to be true to act like it isn't? Wouldn't that be lying?

How would you know alien contact was true?

originally posted by: KnightLight

No If Aliens came to earth 2 million years ago and there is no evidence it still happened. You just won't notice it. Same for your doctor/Nurse story.. Whether anyone knows you did something or not you still did it.

Through no fault of your own that discussion can't continue I don't think.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
Through no fault of your own that discussion can't continue I don't think.

We have different beliefs on the best way to look at reality. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to see it, it still fell.

originally posted by: KnightLight

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
Through no fault of your own that discussion can't continue I don't think.

We have different beliefs on the best way to look at reality. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to see it, it still fell.

Which is not at all the point I was trying to make, I agree with that statement.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

Which is not at all the point I was trying to make, I agree with that statement.

Then why would you say this:

No, it's not. If aliens came to Earth 2 million years ago and there is zero evidence for it then there is zero evidence, ergo, it did not happen.

and

I work in healthcare, if I work with a patient and I do not chart what I did then I did not do it, end of story

Are you talking about good work practice instead of reality??

Because I think we have found out why we don't see the same. You are trying to simplify your life, by saying without evidence it doesn't exist, but I think that's absurd. It may very well exist, but without any evidence you just wouldn't know about it, and shouldn't believe it, but it would still be true..

I don't need that simplification, because I don't need to know either way.. I'm just watching the movie.

a reply to: KnightLight

As I said no point in continuing with that discussion, best case scenario it derails the thread, worst case we go in circles and it derails the thread.

a reply to: debonkers

No, the true skeptics are those that doubt the official accepted opinion. Those who hold to the position that alien contact has occurred and is occurring? They are the true skeptics.

I don't call myself a skeptic but I am a former believer , where does that put me in the scale of things ?
I used to believe much of what you likely believe but there comes a point when belief is no longer enough , I see no evidence for ET visitation but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened , perhaps it has but until someone can produce satisfactory evidence I'm no longer prepared to believe.

You mention the Phoenix lights , yeah I used to believe that was ET too but over the years came to realise the more prosaic answer of flares was the real answer , evidence presented in the recent thread on the first event made me see that that too had a more down to Earth explanation.

I don't believe everything the government says
I do believe ET are out there
I remain unconvinced that they have come to our little backwater yet , and perhaps that's a good thing and the reason we are who we are.

a reply to: debonkers

No, the true skeptics are those that doubt the official accepted opinion. Those who hold to the position that alien contact has occurred and is occurring? They are the true skeptics.

Haha wow I missed that..

Well this is the wrong thread for me

originally posted by: KnightLight
a reply to: debonkers

No, the true skeptics are those that doubt the official accepted opinion. Those who hold to the position that alien contact has occurred and is occurring? They are the true skeptics.

Haha wow I missed that..

Well this is the wrong thread for me

Now do you understand what I was saying earlier? The people they are bashing are actual skeptics (like you).

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Okay. If you work in healthcare, and you give meds to a patient without documenting it for insurance, has the patient received the medicine?

Clearly, from the patient's experience, it did happen. Can you prove it to the insurance company? Maybe not. But it Did Happen and both you and the patient know it. To say otherwise is to deny reality. Insurance Companies in this instance are not able to make it "not happen" for either you or the patient. They may not be obligated to "believe" you, but their legalistic interpretation shouldn't inspire you to give the patient a second dose.

Heck, Insurance Companies don't believe you because they have a vested interest not to. Perhaps that is worth considering?

Or not. You decide, as you will.



AB

a reply to: debonkers

Well, SKEPTICS, to me, are a bunch of guys who are skeptical and cast doubts to EVERYTHING in a REASONABLE way. If someone is just skepticalof government while not UFOs, he/she is a believer not a skeptic. If someone is just skeptical of UFOs while not government, he/she is a believer not a skeptic. In this way, most who claim SKEPTICS are in fact believers.

originally posted by: debonkers


Your rant belongs in the rant forum.


One of the worst generalizing rants I have read in while,

All believe in this and that, bla bla bla.

Sorry I think your cheese slid right of cracker as you seem to have a few members of ATS in mind when posting this and I assume its because the recent Phoenix lights thread, better suited in the rant forum as nothing your saying sounds like thinking but a lot like ranting about your belief what a skeptic is which in turn say is a believer but is the opposite of what you believe or like so many hat say they know from first hand experience.

A person who questions ones claims is a believer of denials by the government?


Really?

a reply to: debonkers

i think i can explain it:

some "skeptics" are people who believe "popular" opinion does not necessarily equal reality. there is a difference between popular opinion and reality. popular opinion only requires social engineers to manipulate it, whereas reality requires reality (trademark, copyright). in the mind of some "skeptics" ufology looks like popular opinion, socially engineered. they believe this because diligent debunking of some high profile cases, has rendered some evidence, provided as support for ufology, as pure, unadulterated bunk.

this is further complicated by the rise in technology. as technology increases, the probability that it may be human engineered craft, also increases (regardless of whether that tech may have been the product of some ET help or not). just the fact that technology has skyrocketed, is enough to raise the question, and once the question is raised, the skeptical mind is going to retain it as evidence.