Debunkers: You've lost credibility and will continue to lose

a reply to: Malisa

Perhaps the problem is with the labels.

Are "debunkers" simply to be taken as the converse of "believers?"

a reply to: Malisa

Your mindset regarding debunkers seems to be pretty fixed.

I love the way Michio Kaku look at this

a reply to: Memenquay

Do I have to listen to him or can you provide a summary?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Memenquay

Do I have to listen to him or can you provide a summary?

oooh Page.. LoL it would only take 3.33 min of your time
but it's something like this (in my bad English)

"that we now reach a point where the proof (of UFO’s) that use to be with the believers… now has shifted to the military and the government"

a reply to: Memenquay

So...the military has said that UFOs are of alien origin? All of them? Any of them?

originally posted by: moebius
a reply to: Malisa

Your mindset regarding debunkers seems to be pretty fixed.

Not really, you just disliked my answer : )

This is what i said at first < 3

However that's now how it worksmost of the time.

Most debunkers, not just on this UFO stuff, would just reference things someone else said, the reality and what is considered proof in these fields are basically just "someone said it enough times that people believe it and so it is considered solved and fact or absolute truth"

See?

"Most" means some and maybe tons but not all of them

Did i just debunk your statement about me?

Stating that a video is real is categorically not the same as saying "the claims made by UFO nuts about the video content are true".

Debunkers will always succeed when the alien lovers fail to distinguish between what they want to be real and reality.

a reply to: DJMSN

if you accept the "unidentified" designation, and take into account all that "weird" stuff they do (if you believe eye witnesses), it is far more rational to state "it's aliens"..then to say..."it's earthly secret black budget tech".

As the OP stated, there is absolutely no reason why a holder of such "unseen" tech would try to keep it a secret from the rest of the world, and then flaunt it in front of hundreds of witnesses, practically admitting what you try to hide all this time. Also, if you accept the stated performances of these things, it's laughable to suggest we could potentially have such tech. Physics is at least 100 years from where we are now, and I'm not even talking about the public sector.

And please..no crap about psyops. Creating a psyop of that magnitude, for at least 50 years, all over the world, would have to include thousands and thousands of people, spanning all continents. Talk about unrealistic.

If these latest Navy videos are truly unidentified, equally to joe public and the navy alike, then by all means...aliens all the way...certainly not something of this civilization we created today.

I'm also open to the idea it's a hidden Earthly civ. Non-human, or non Earth human.

99% of the UFO mythology that believers cling to was made up out of whole cloth by people connected to the government to hide classifed projects and lure in spies and potential defectors.

The other 1% is people having real anomalous experiences they can't explain.

You should thank debunkers for helping you separate the wheat from the chaff.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Malisa

Perhaps the problem is with the labels.

Are "debunkers" simply to be taken as the converse of "believers?"

True, take me I think I believe what I experienced, yet I am always looking for concrete proof to corroborate those experiences as reality. So what label should be put on me?

a reply to: Visiting ESB

The Navy has not publicly released characterizations or descriptions, nor released any hypothesis or conclusions in reference to any reported sightings/observations. As the investigation of UAP sightings is ongoing, we will not discuss individual sighting reports/observations. However, all possible sources of information pertaining to any individual sighting reports/observations are considered in the respective investigations. The information obtained from each individual report of any suspected training range incursion will continue to be investigated in its own right. The information obtained in these reports will be catalogued and analyzed for the purpose of identifying any hazard to our aviators. This process could involve multiple Department of Defense and Intelligence Community organizations. Any report generated as a result of these investigations will, by necessity, include classified information on military operations. Therefore, no release of information to the general public is expected.

As the videos are FLIR the distance or shape of objects is hard to work out as its a heat profile and won't be the actual shape of the object

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
I think the UFO crowd needs to get better at debunking the debunkers. That should solve your problem.

I just ignore the debunkers for the most part. One or two sentences in, it's not hard to tell if they have a point or not.

For the most part "debunkers" are simply in denial about certain inconvenient facts.

The very problem with debunkers is: Most if not all are arm chair warriors who only regurgitate the information that was taught and told to them, and a possibility of any thing outside of their space is quite impossable!

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Visiting ESB

Why would an alien ship need lights on the outside of it?
Humans put lights on their craft specifically so that those craft can be seen.
If the aliens want to be seen why do they not land?

They don't care if they're seen. They just don't want anyone running into them.

originally posted by: Malisa
That fixed mindset is exactly what i refuse, imagine if everyone had been set so strong on flat earth or things can't fly and all the other zillion things that were considered dumb and fake throughout history?

And yet here we are still repeating that same mistake over and over..

I agree, a fixed mindset is a bad thing in general.

Having said that, in order to solve mysteries, we have to use logic/science and facts. Without this "framework" all that is left is an incoherent mess.

As you've pointed out, our knowledge and understanding of what is around us is not always complete or 100% accurate. It was even less so in the past, but over time it has improved due to the nature of scientific study, which is essentially self correcting.

To put it another way, it may not be perfect, but it's the best chance we have of understanding the world/universe around us.

Regarding debunkers/debunking - There are debunkers and there are debunkers. Some will have real knowledge of the subjects they are writing about, and others will not. The two should not be confused.

Either way it boils down to this IMO: If the case at hand is genuinely something unusual, then it will stand on it's own merits, and will NOT be debunkable. So debunkers are helping, by testing the strength. The alternative, is to declare all cases (even those that could easily be birds/aircraft/satellites/etc) as possibilities, and how does that help any one? IMO it just muddies the waters even more.

Now, there are plenty of cases that can not be debunked simply because there is not enough information/data - an out of focus photograph of "something" can not be debunked, and proves nothing for example. You can not say "because it can't be debunked, it must be evidence for the ET hypothesis", since it might not be.

Indeed, I would argue that every time another photo or piece of footage that fails to show anything unusual, is added to the already gigantic pile of such "evidence", it only strengthens the case that people like me support: That, what most people submit as a "UFO" picture/report/video, is simply something mundane.

Why? Because, if there was really something to the ET hypothesis, then with all the cameras/photographs/footage out there, then there should be incontrovertible evidence in the form of a photograph/footage by now. There are more (and better) cameras now than ever before, so it is reasonable to to say that.

Then there is the "other pile" of photos/footage which are obviously mundane things like birds/aircraft/etc., which lends even more weight to the idea that people think mundane things are UFOs, and that the ET hypothesis is wrong.

Either way, without the debunkes to sweep away all the crap, the whole subject would be in even more disarray than it's in already. Nothing much has changed in 50 years if you are a believer in the ETH. However, if you look at the mystery from another angle, which is more logical and fact based, then there has been progress (much to the annoyance of the "other side"):

1 Our understanding of the atmosphere and atmospheric phenomena has improved, giving us the tools to weed out many of the natural and man-made phenomena that are often misidentified by the public.

2 Our understanding of the way people perceive the world around them has greatly improved, and answers many previous questions about the inability in general of people to correctly identify atmospheric objects/phenomena, which is probably the most important (yet almost totally ignored/overlooked) aspect of the whole subject.

3 The mounting pile of "nothing" and "obvious mundane things" photographs/footage - so many, but where are incontrovertible photographs/footage which should also be there if there is anything to the ETH, especially considering the improvements in camera tech?

These are all real/fact based arguments which suggest that the ETH is wrong.

On the other hand, those who believe in the ETH have ZERO fact based evidence to back up their beliefs.

Many people on here are under the impression that "better cameras" will lead to the incontrovertible evidence they want, and have been for a long time. The irony is that, as cameras have improved, what were previously out of focus/blurred/fuzzy images, are now clear (or clearer) images of birds/aircraft/etc., lending weight to "there are no aliens" hypothesis.

Personally, I have no problems with aliens existing or having existed. I think it's likely given the size of the universe and enormity of time that has passed. I just have yet to see any realistic evidence for them being here. Instead, I see plenty of evidence that people in general often look up and misidentify normal/everyday objects. I say this as someone who has investigated atmospheric phenomena, and how people perceive these phenomena, for over two decades.

I'm not someone who follows blindly, but someone who actually goes out there, images the sky, and then tries to put the pieces of the puzzle together, while checking if the observations fit what is already known about the phenomena in question. Crucially, I have built up at least a basic understanding of how the atmosphere and atmospheric phenomena work, which is something that is lacking in most other people who have an interest in UFOs. UFOs after all are an atmospheric phenomena, so how can you (or anyone) have even a hope of understanding them if you do not understand how the atmosphere works? It would be a bit like trying to understand fish, when you don't understand seas, rivers, lakes, streams, or ponds - not a good basis to start any even moderately serious investigation!

That is why this field of study NEEDS people like me (skeptics/debunkers), to call out the obvious - what may not be obvious to one person, can be glaringly obvious to another who has a deeper knowledge of a particular subject.

originally posted by: Malisa
I will never assume anything either way, because assumptions, as history keeps showing us all, are still the mother of all f*k ups

Yes, I once again agree wholeheartedly.

So where do you stand then? I only ask because if you are on the side of the ETH, then it's highly likely that you yourself are making assumptions. I would hate to make an assumption!

If there were no assumptions, and people on here just dealt with accepted facts, then this site would be a whole lot more boring (not good for the owners of ATS at all!), but I think a lot more progress in this field would be made.

The real problem (one of a few actually), is that there are plenty of people on here, who, if presented with a fact, refuse to acknowledge that fact, when it conflicts with their beliefs/expectations. So there is a need here for debunkers, who have a reasonably deep knowledge of the subjects involved, and can point out the facts that have a direct bearing on the credibility of a particular case.

That is my 2 cents, and I'll leave you all to think on the points I've touched on here. It is rare that I have the time to spend here with so much else going on in my life right now, so I'll likely leave it for the other "logical thinkers" to pick up on any of the points here, should they be raised.

To put the debunker failure in perspective:

Lone gunman #1
For 50 plus years the lone gun club has failed miserably to prove that LHO fired shots at JFK that day.

Lone gunman #2
For 50 plus years the lone gun club has failed miserably to prove that LHO fired shots at JD Tippit that day.

Lone gunman #3
For 50 plus years the lone gun club has failed miserably to prove that J Ruby fired shots at LHO that day ALL ON HIS OWN ACCORD.

originally posted by: odzeandennz
There's no UFOs .

Because we don't know what they are, doesn't make aliens.
The last people you should trust are the navy or government..


Where are thise ufo? It seems as video technologies advance we mysteriously see less ufos

Of cause there are ufos! The are unidentified flying objects!

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
I think the UFO crowd needs to get better at debunking the debunkers. That should solve your problem.

Seriously, it's not hard to debunk most debunkers because they use belief as much as the ufos are ET believers do.

originally posted by: mirageman
The government wouldn't tell you the truth you wanted to hear for 70 years. The government lies..

The government says they have video of things they can't explain in the sky and you now believe them unconditionally.

Meanwhile the debunkers still debunked the Roswell slides in 2015. Because they were not of an alien body but a mummified child.

So what exactly is your point?

Well, it's conman knowledge that governments has lied about ufos in certain cases. Be it stupid explanations or not releasing certain things.