Skeptics who are skeptical just to maintain skepticism

Originally posted by Mike_A
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry

 

how many people have we condemned to prison on the pretense of being identified by an eyewitness?

I knew someone would say this...

Interesting that you would say that, Mike_A. I'm beginning to suspect many of the anti-skepticism threads are made by the same person, under different accounts. Look at some of these threads, and you will notice the OPs use the same argument each time. That is we should take the testimony of certain individuals at face-value because of who those individuals are; and eye-witness testimony is enough to send someone to prison therefore it should be enough for science. They are not making similar arguments, but the same argument. Looking through these threads, you will notice other similarities.

reply to post by InfaRedMan


"I find it curious that most of these skeptic bashing threads come from new members with no established network of friends on the board. Lone gunmen that think they are saving the day by shooting verbal buckshot at illusory villains... Burning with an intense need to be someones hero... a front line soldier of UFOlogy." (Infaredman)



Dude that ruuuuuuules!!!!!!!

[edit on 24-7-2009 by spinalremain]

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
I'm beginning to suspect many of the anti-skepticism threads are made by the same person, under different accounts. Look at some of these threads, and you will notice the OPs use the same argument each time. That is we should take the testimony of certain individuals at face-value because of who those individuals are; and eye-witness testimony is enough to send someone to prison therefore it should be enough for science. They are not making similar arguments, but the same argument. Looking through these threads, you will notice other similarities.

I think you've nailed it.

Perhaps the op has done all this before.....

Originally posted by FireMoon
Yes...attack the ego. Excellent chess move. I like it, unfortunately, its pretty unoriginal. That usually is a person's last ditch effort before they start throwing punches. Just so you know, I didn't bring up the Shag Harbor case. That was done by another poster, therefore, the use of Kryptonite is ineffectual.

Yes, it was me, only you failed to notice it and it was the crux of the ponit i was making about how selective skeptics are in exactly the same way believers are, but in your headlong rush to promote your own view of the world you don;t notice such things... really does sum up your whole slap dash attitude up

Slap dash attitude. That's a new one on me. I would actually reuse it if it made any sense. Now, I'm not one to attack spelling errors, but, if you want to make a point, the best thing to do is actually learn how to spell the word. Oh, and there's no promotion here...just an exchange of ideas. If you check it out thoroughly, you will see that I have agreed with many people who have made counterpoints to my initial argument. Therefore, as I said before, this is an exchange of ideas and not a testosterone war. I hope you don't see it that way.

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
I find it curious that most of these skeptic bashing threads come from new members with no established network of friends on the board...

Just further evidence these threads are credited by a, for lack of a better term, drive-by member, creating account after account to spread their gospel with every bit of the zeal of a religious fundamentalist.

And really, I do not know why we indulge this, over and over again.

Originally posted by FireMoon
Come, on then EvolvedMinistry, who by your very choice of nickname are a shrinks delight, no sign of a super ego there is there?...

Answer me why when the skeptic say... show me the data ..and the data is presented, as in the Shag Harbour case, there is a deafening silence from you and your compadres? Gawd knows I've tried to get a few threads started on such incidents and they are dead inside a day because there is absolutely no counter evidence posted at all.. Why is that?

Have you read the post i added to the Bob White object research where i conclude that. I can find no corrabarative evidence to support the loss of a single British Spitfire over Denmark, during WW2? Where I point out how unusual it would be to have Spitfires over Denmark and how it could only have happened to a standard Spitfire after November 1944 and how i went through the complete archive held in Denmark and contacted a couple of Luftwaffe ex servicemen organisations to ask if any pilots or flak groups might have a record of bringing down a Spitfire over Denmark...

My conclusions on that should leave no-one in doubt about my serious approach and my willingness to provide data , even when it might not support the tale being told..

So what have you in your advanced state of understanding ever done, in terms of empirical research ion the subject? Are you like me, a trained interviewer? Do you regularly, as i do, because i have a certain way about me, have people tell you stories about their lives they haven;t even told their families or partners?

I don't believe anything at all, i only accept models that seem to fit best. That is actually what science does. it is not as many would have you believe a base line of credible provable facts... If in 1947 you asked astronomers where life might exist outside Earth in the Solar System , the vast majority would have picked Venus or Mars and told you you were barking mad to suggest one of the Gas Giant's moons might actually be the best bet...

The objection many of us who have actually studied the UFO phenomenon to a large number of the so called skeptics, is simple. They are often just arrogant idiots who believe they are experts on UFOs based wholly on the premise that *It's a stupid idea therefore, i know they can't be true, ipso facto, all data pertaining to UFOs, is either hoaxed or wrong*

That is as much a belief system as following the Great prophet Zarquod whatever, you might like to dress it up as..

Back in the early 70s, all UFOs were swamp gas or methane etc etc.. Then came the UFO researcher who identified triboluminescence/fractoluminesence do you know what his name was what the book was called? You should because your fellow skeptics are only too happy to use his explanation time after time, funny how i have never once seen a single one of them quote his work , or for that matter, his name. And no, looking up those terms on wiki won't help you..

if you cannot see the ultimate irony in skeptics using the guys research after they had been saying for all those years, *The UFO phenomena has absolutely no scientific value at all" you are indeed, condemned to forever be a total prune

[edit on 24-7-2009 by FireMoon]

Oh, and by the way...you did present good counter evidence for and against skepticism. So, I didn't miss anything that you had said, it was the way that you had said it.

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry

TO THE SKEPTICS, IF YOU WANT TO STUNT YOUR OWN GROWTH, BY ALL MEANS...CONTINUE ON YOUR PATH. BUT DON'T UNDERMINE THE EVOLUTION OF OTHERS BECAUSE YOUR PATHETIC IDEA OF REALITY IS DETERMINED BY YOUR OWN LIMITED AND OUTDATED KNOWLEDGE.

"There lives more faith in honest doubt, believe me, than in half the creeds"
~Alfred Lord Tennyson


"put that on a cracker, clementine......" ~~~~ Ted Snisha

Originally posted by JScytale

Originally posted by zorgon
The blind 'debunkers and trolls' far outnumber the "good and thoughtful" believers and researchers by such high numbers that those believers quickly get a "beat down" by the blind debunkers on some threads, even when that believer brings up fair and valid points.

can I have some of what you're smoking? because believers are the vast majority on these forums, blind debunkers are not all that common, and skeptics are a moderate sized group.

Oh now...no reason to make inferences on a person's sanity by making references to drug use. ATS is full of both sides which is the reason why I generally tend to stay in the middle. Here's the problem, many people in forums such as these have extreme numbers of people looking to tear someone else's ideas apart and typically, the skeptics/debunkers seem to not only lack conscience about what they say, but have the numbers to continue making attacks until the post is abandoned out of desperation. Either way, we're all people who need to learn to accept that others have their own way of looking at things.

If the believers and debunkers could actually get along, then we'd not only have the scientific approach to finding new ideas, but, we'd also have the people who push to promote many of those new ideas and bring them to the mainstream. There are many smart people on these boards who choose to utilize their talents for the wrong things. A common goal is necessary to push our evolutionary thought processes to new heights.

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry


LMAO at you! you joined 2 weeks ago. You're judging the validity of ATS now? Go away.

Originally posted by Mike_A
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry

 

how many people have we condemned to prison on the pretense of being identified by an eyewitness?

I knew someone would say this; my first post, page 2, paragraph eight.

Fourth, personal testimonial is just not good evidence from a scientific standpoint. I’m sure someone will say “well you can be convicted of murder on the basis of personal testimonial” but that is law not science (is it even true anyway?!). Memory is just too susceptible to suggestion, bias etc to be reliable for this purpose.

It’s a fallacious argument.

You need a DEFINITIVE argument from which to attack. I claim no absolutes.

So what did you mean when you said;

when idiots like these troll the boards and put into question the experience, research, and hard work of people who have developed a lifetime of credibility (Buzz Aldrin, Edgar Mitchell, former Presidents, politicians, countless numbers of pilots, police officers, military personnel) then I have to question the credibility of the FOOLS
…
Who is going to have enough credibility for you people to finally accept that there are things going on that you are not aware of?


What does that mean if not “I believe what these people claim”? If you don’t believe then you’re calling yourself a fool.

So no you can’t just brush off my criticisms by moving the goal posts and changing what you claim to believe. You said that it was wrong to not believe these people, my criticisms on that stand; you also inferred an explanation from something you claim people are unaware of and my criticisms of that also stand. Your definition of an unreasonable sceptic as someone who doesn’t accept the supposed evidence referenced in your first post is fundamentally flawed.


[edit on 24-7-2009 by Mike_A]

Well, it would be a fallacious argument if it were not based on reality. By the way, forensics is a science, which is the reason why we call it forensic science. Yes, even eyewitness testimony falls under the category of forensics. Sorry to correct you there. You looked as if you were almost making ground.

And yes...I still claim no absolutes. I tend to find common ground even with the worst of my enemies. To claim full knowledge of anything is proof that you really know nothing.

And yes...I can believe anything that I choose. I can turn on a dime which merely means that I am open minded. It must really anger you that I don't take sides and tend to find a middle ground where compromise is a possibility. Sorry that you're locked into this phase where you need an enemy to attack. You see, I can even find wisdom in some of your posts and can easily agree with many of your statements. This is the process of assimilation where all possibilities must be entertained. If you choose to shut me out, then you may be missing out on pieces of a puzzle that you never even knew existed.

Just a thought.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
What is this, the hundredth thread like this this summer.

Who flags this crap anyway? It's getting like being in a Kindergarten class around here. What part of debate and discussion is so hard to understand?

Debate is how you arrive at truth. Unless truth is not what you want? Do you want myth's and fabrications to fill in some void?

Skeptics are of equal importance in finding the truth. Skeptics are not trying to disprove anything. They are in fact trying to filter the truth from lies. Anyone who is not a Skeptic is helping to bury the truth under a mountain of lies and disinformation. In the end, these Skeptics are who will find the real facts and help get rid of the nonsense and pure fabrications.

People who don't realize this are propagandist's and disinfo-artist's best buddies in fact. You make their job's easy.

And yet you're here, participating in this thread which is so far beneath your intelligence. So, do you have anything to say or add which could enlighten the rest of us, or are you merely here to criticize a thread that you took time to post a thought on?

You might want to entertain the idea that you thrive on this content...just like everyone else.

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry


You started this thread attacking ppl you neither converse with or know? You attacked people. It was you. The reason you are able to turn on a dime on any issue is because you have no heart or sense of self. You tend to take the stronger side. I used to feel sorry for you spineless guys in school when I watched you say one thing then kiss ass to another, You're probably a self procalaimed Indigo. I know what you are. You're a guy who thinks he's got so much more to offer than anyone else that he trolls random internet sites trying to astound people with his open mind. Stop there and become part of the ATS community before you start lumping people together as stupid debunkers. If you had any real sense of yourself you would understand that the debunkers only get under your skin because yours is thin.

Watch the op blow up....

Clock's ticking.....

Originally posted by Melyanna Tengwesta
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry

 

Star & flag!

Skeptics are so prepared to fight to keep their Illusions alive

I sometimes wonder ...... are skeptics those people that are not capable nor willing to connected the dots? To gather ALL kind of info and just do not SEE the bigger picture?

Is it age? Culture? Ego? Fear?

Although I believe its a bit of everything, it doesn't matter realy. It's true every single Soul has to walk their own Path and carry their own Consiouness.

May the Light guide them well!

I like your post and thanks for replying. I couldn't agree more and think that its probably a combination of everything that you have listed. You could also add insecurity to that list.

Originally posted by Nohup

Originally posted by Lazyninja
Since ufology was turned into a money making circus, you cannot blame people for being suspicious of greed in this day and age. People like Stephen Greer pimping ex army and navy people to make some bucks does not inspire belief in the cynical heart.

Believe me, there's not a lot of money to be made with UFOs unless you can somehow form a cult, and that takes a lot of time. You can make a lot more money with an Oprah self-help book rather than a UFO book.

One of the reasons why the research in the UFO field is so lousy is that there's no money in it. If there was, we'd have the whole thing figured out in a week.

Excellent statement. There's not much money and there's a whole lot of fallout for bringing facts to the public domain. There's definitely much more risk than reward.

Originally posted by Overload
Umm...Yes.....I heard that this was the bash the debunkers thread....

While I do not agree with the "trolls" around here, skeptics are a positive in my eyes....helps us stick to the facts,be on our toes, and all that sort of stuff.

They are good for "us". Kinda like eating you green vegetables, nobody likes 'em, but ya gotta have'um.

S+F

Not a bad thought. However, although the title says skepticism, I am focused primarily on debunkers.

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by DoomsdayRex

 

did you miss the memo ?

if it wasnt for us ` evil skeptics ` - humanity would have " evolved " to the next level and raised our vibrations to the 5th dimensuion - so our benelolant space brothers would come and fix all our problems for us

No one called the skeptics evil. That was a label that you adopted on your own. Freudian slip maybe?

"skeptics fight to keep their illusions alive"



Where do I start?
I'm going to start by asking you what illusions skeptics live with? Skeptics believe what they can see and know, but they have illusions?
Are you even aware that you're sounding like a dime-store new age novel? You made this thread and still haven't given us any evidence of anything.
OK, you hate skeptics and debunkers. You have nothing positive to add to the believer side of the discussion other than your anger. End of thread.

reply to post by Hemisphere


I'll try to keep this simple. If you've looked over the posts, you will see that I admit that a healthy dose of skepticism is needed in order to weed out false information. I have agreed with many members who are skeptical, therefore, I am not set in my opinions and choose to entertain all ideas.

This post is dedicated to those who purposefully choose to attack the validity of others when they have no pretense to do so, or, no facts to support their arguments.

Thanks for your post.

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by Mike_A
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry

 

how many people have we condemned to prison on the pretense of being identified by an eyewitness?

I knew someone would say this...

Interesting that you would say that, Mike_A. I'm beginning to suspect many of the anti-skepticism threads are made by the same person, under different accounts. Look at some of these threads, and you will notice the OPs use the same argument each time. That is we should take the testimony of certain individuals at face-value because of who those individuals are; and eye-witness testimony is enough to send someone to prison therefore it should be enough for science. They are not making similar arguments, but the same argument. Looking through these threads, you will notice other similarities.

Hmmm...well, your suspicion would be wrong. This is my first post to ATS as a result of seeing non-stop attacks made by those who claim to be skeptics. Now, please give me an original idea that I could use to make the debunkers see the light. If we are complaining about the same things, then, maybe you should accept or research the pattern of what we are referring to. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?

I can clearly see that you have not read most of the posts that I have made on this board. Again, I have clearly agreed with many of the skeptics who have taken the time to leave their comments. This isn't really about the skeptics, its about the blood thirsty debunkers. And unfortunately for many of you skeptics, debunkers hide under the same name as people like yourselves.

Consider that when you are posting on boards and you see nothing but attacks flying back and fourth. Maybe the skeptics should do their best to expose the debunkers for whom they are to keep YOU from getting a bad name.

You might want to entertain that thought.