The hatred of debunkers

I get what we're saying here. There are the true believers, and sometimes the picture threads are laced with hyperbole-such as this is definitely this....when it should be...hey look at this anomaly..it looks like a....

But this is where I dislike the debunkers and skeptics. Many times they just jump in with the opposing view like they know they are correct...as if the rest of us are stupid for even contemplating an opposing view.

The all seeing eye thread is a good example. Many it's a rock posts there. Yes, Einsteins, we know they are rocks, thanks for not discussing the odd triangular formations. 911...many debunkers that will label anyone with a single question a truther. UFO...lots of debunkers telling us that interstellar travel is impossible. Etc. It's as if debunkers can't wait to post a negative comment, and then of course they'll tell us they are just being realists.

Thank god, people like George Washington, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, Henry Ford, Martin Luther King Jr., Ghandi, and every other great person in history were not realists.

I do not hate debunkers. I agree that they serve a useful purpose even on a conspiracy site (regardless of their intentions).

On the other hand, conspiracy theorists have their work cut out for them as it is. The amount of work and time that has been put into even clearing a spot where we can meet and speak with reasonable comfort is no small thing.

Just about every other forum and site on the internet is wide open for conspiracy debunkers. You cannot pick a random forum and start talking about conspiracies without getting attacked and ridiculed from every side. And they will not care if you have any valid points or not.

a reply to: Eunuchorn
What a horrible moto to live by

a reply to: BrianFlanders

You cannot pick a random forum and start talking about conspiracies without getting attacked and ridiculed from every side. And they will not care if you have any valid points or not.

That's because not every event that happens can possibly be a conspiracy.

Can you show us a real conspiracy that has been brought to light by ATS?

Isn't this the point of the thread when Phage enters?

a reply to: stirling

True. People also star these people's posts just because of who posted it. Nothing to do with the content. So many times I've read posts and typed the response:

"Why don't you s**k him off too?"

But deleted it as I thought I may get banned or something.

Thing is I can imagine most of these debunkers are sat all day at their computer, dirty tissues strewn around a musty room, in a putrid hell hole of a flat. That thought is enough to keep me sane.

originally posted by: sputniksteve
Isn't this the point of the thread when Phage enters?

Why don't you just......

hahaha

See above

a reply to: and14263

Hi ... In defence of Phage
Some things I strongly disagree with ... Yet he gives of his scientific knowledge honestly
If there are things his scientific knowledge can not answer he is honest enough to say he does know

There are many things Scientists can not answer
This is why Scientists with integrity spend their lives attempting to find answers to questions

But you are correct that a few will just star him for the sake of starring him
My goodness he has that many stars he will soon become his own galaxy

a reply to: artistpoet

I wasn't specifically referring to that member. There was however a moment of perfect timing which had to be taken advantage of.

a reply to: and14263

Hi ... I hope you do not think my prior post was a dig at you in any way ... I respect your thinking
And did find your comment amusing

Regards a/p

a reply to: artistpoet

Check your inbox

a reply to: and14263

I did ... but there is no message from you
Perhaps you sent one to someone else or the system is slow

Here's my one beef with debunkers. Let's assume for a minute that alien abductions do occur, let's assume for a second that people do experience things outside what most of us do. They have no proof to offer others, all they possess are their own experiences. They aren't trying to prove anything to anyone, just find others who know what they experienced first hand, and may have done so as well. Warn others about what's out there from their own personal experiences. If one considers what abduction and the like is, it would be a very harrowing experience, with helplessness and trauma akin to that of a rape victim.

If such a person comes on, sharing their experience and wishing to discuss it with others, who likewise may have dealt with similar experiences. There is no reason to be demanding proof, calling them liars, and destroying their thread.

originally posted by: AshOnMyTomatoes

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

originally posted by: AshOnMyTomatoes

originally posted by: stirling
many threads get devolved into useless arguments over the validity of stated premise rather than discussing the posted theory....

I'd say the second half of your sentence directly contradicts the first.

Unless what you really mean is "many threads get distracted from abject fantasy by discussion of facts."

Do you not see the irony of your posts?


The sour attitude you have brought into this thread is exactly the type of "debunking" people have found to be pointless!


Stirling made a good point that was easily comprehendible but you've decided to twist it in a fashion of "I'll debunk your message"...


To what gain?

I know exactly what Stirling meant.
So did others.


Is your reading comprehension lacking...
Or are you intentionally being obtuse.

Because I know exactly the kind of thing Stirling is talking about too. For example, I was involved in a thread a week or two ago whose premise was "Pyramid power: what did the ancients use it for?"

Note that it was not called "Pyramid power: does it exist?"

You can't have a discussion about the factual uses of a made-up phenomenon. This is the sort of thing anti-debunkers are defending.

Bullseye! I had a similar experience in a thread that was trying to establish "the true purpose of chemtrails". Ahem. Surely one must find something before deciding what it is for?

originally posted by: Puppylove
Here's my one beef with debunkers. Let's assume for a minute that alien abductions do occur, let's assume for a second that people do experience things outside what most of us do. They have no proof to offer others, all they possess are their own experiences. They aren't trying to prove anything to anyone, just find others who know what they experienced first hand, and may have done so as well. Warn others about what's out there from their own personal experiences. If one considers what abduction and the like is, it would be a very harrowing experience, with helplessness and trauma akin to that of a rape victim.

If such a person comes on, sharing their experience and wishing to discuss it with others, who likewise may have dealt with similar experiences. There is no reason to be demanding proof, calling them liars, and destroying their thread.

I'd say it's impossible to debunk another's experience. Sure you might think they are full of crap, but that caries no more weight than the initial comment. To actually debunk something, you have to take a statement made, provide a reputable source that refutes that statement, and present a logical argument for why you feel it's bunk. I have seen the type of thing you are referring to, but I don't put that in the same category. I'd say that's just disagreeing. (IMHO)

(for the record, I didn't debunk your post, just disagreed with a part of it)

I think the meaning of "debunker" has somehow changed in many people's eyes. A post can only be debunked if it contains bunk in the first place.

Many consider the OS of 9/11 to be bunk. 9/11 CTers have been debunking, or trying to debunk, that for over a decade. What's wrong with debunking?

Once the bunk is removed, what's left is the truth. It concerns me that people are so fervently AGAINST the removal of bunk. That seems like a sinister agenda sll of its own.

originally posted by: network dude
To actually debunk something, you have to take a statement made, provide a reputable source that refutes that statement, and present a logical argument for why you feel it's bunk.

Unless you happen to be James Randi, king of debunkers. Then you get to use lies and cheap publicity stunts to "debunk".

“There’s no doubt he’s made misstatements. Sometimes in order to get to a truth you bend the truth. And in Randi’s case sometimes he bends it too far. The irony is he’s leading a sceptical movement that’s calling it out when other people are lying.” -Justin Weinstein

www.telegraph.co.uk...

👣

a reply to: BlueMule

That's a good illustration of what I was saying in my previous post. When he was lying and faking he wasn't debunking at all, precisely the opposite. To debunk one must get rid of bunk, not add to it.

a reply to: network dude

I'm not sure I count harassment, making impossible to meet demands, and throwing accusations at someone who quite possibly has suffered severe trauma related to the incident being discussed quite counts as merely "disagreeing" with them. Nor do I think disrupting people trying to talk with others by doing these things is appropriate either. Maybe that's just me though.

It may not technically be "debunking" but it's certainly treated as if it falls under the same umbrella.

a reply to: Puppylove

It's the internet. Worse yet, anonymous internet. A place where it's much easier to forget that others have feelings.
I can't speak for others, only myself. And I am not without fault. Try not to let that stuff get to you. And if you feel it's antagonistic, alert it. I promise the mods here are some of the best you will find on any site. they just don't see everything all the time.