Are most skeptics simply people who haven't researched Ufology much?

Originally posted by cosmicpixie
Informed skepticism is another matter but you don't see alot of that, it's mostly just people making snidey comments which betrays their lack of study on the subject .

Making snidey comments is not being a sceptic, it's being an opponent to what is presented without pointing any reason why and/or their own opinion about the subject.

reply to post by expat2368

You forgot the sceptics that want good proofs about any information that is presented and just do not accept anything just because someone said or wrote it.

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


yes I agree there's alot of rubbish written, I am discriminating and impartial when I read/research and try to investigate fully before forming some sort of opinion about what I've read. I also read alot of ancient texts which talks about these kind of events which is always fascinating. Tim Good is great, I have all his books.

To whoever asked me to list the books do you seriously think I'm going to sit here and type out 50 book titles ? There are probably hundreds more I haven't read too. And no, nothing to do with Astrology and that comment was a bit of a pointless dig at one of my interests which is just a bit pretty really !

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by cosmicpixie
Informed skepticism is another matter but you don't see alot of that, it's mostly just people making snidey comments which betrays their lack of study on the subject .

Making snidey comments is not being a sceptic, it's being an opponent to what is presented without pointing any reason why and/or their own opinion about the subject.

Well I'd disagree- there are plenty of occasions where skeptics make snidey comments simply because they think UFO believers are nutcases , so they say something to ridicule the fact you believe.... it's a kind of insulting response rather than one coming from some intellectual difference of opinion. And it's a fact that trying to back up why you believe in this that or the other would mean sitting down and typing out the equivalent of about 100 books of research to present a decent case for the skeptic to chew on ! Who can do that on one little thread............!

We seem to be averaging about a thread per week concerning a UFO/alien believer's problems with skeptics. As usual, the contention is that skeptics just haven't done any research.

The alien believer's "research" appears to involve serving their confirmation bias by watching tons of web videos and looking up things such as those referenced in the OP ("Wow" signal, etc.). Such things solidify a preconceived belief without the need for tangible evidence.

The true skeptic requires tangible evidence to become convinced. Cynics (note... not skeptics) have a preconceived bias against UFO/alien believers and are prone to ridiculing them. A proper skeptic - and all cynics - know that there still remains no tangible evidence to prove an unquestionable presence of alien life forms. While human logic assumes that there must be life elsewhere, the search goes on and should continue to, but so far we've turned up a huge goose egg everywhere we've looked. "Ufology" simply provides a convenient shortcut around that unpleasant fact and satiates the believers with whatever their imagination might conceive about alien life forms.

For someone such as myself, it's not that I have not researched, but that "ufology" is barely pseudoscientific and devoid of tangible evidence. True skeptics need something more than web videos, personal accounts and claims and anomalies such as the "wow" signal to confirm the presence of alien life.

[edit on 1-5-2010 by traditionaldrummer]

Originally posted by cosmicpixie
Well I'd disagree- there are plenty of occasions where skeptics make snidey comments simply because they think UFO believers are nutcases , so they say something to ridicule the fact you believe.... it's a kind of insulting response rather than one coming from some intellectual difference of opinion.

OK, I will rephrase it.

When someone posts (or says) some "snidey comments" then, even if they usualy act like sceptics, they are not acting as one when they do that. If the person writing or saying that is acting sceptical about the subject being discussed that doesn't mean he/she is a real sceptic, but posting/saying something like that shows that he/she is not, at least for the moment.

If you stopped and really listened to yourselves, you'll realize you express yourselves very similar to religious fanatics (not the terror kind). They preach about God, and how there can be no other possibility for creation or life. What I've experienced in most interactions with UFO-believers, is that most of them seem to agree on the topic of religion, particular about how narrow-minded religious people are. Yet, I see most of the same "narrow-minded" beliefs subjected by these individuals to most religious believers. Except replace the word "God" with "aliens". Is it so difficult to believe that, perhaps UFOs are not aliens? Have you considered military testing? Time-travellers? Perhaps that people lie? Someone mentioned in a previous post how often people lie and for the numerous reasons for doing so. Brilliantly put.

Just because someone doesn't succumb to your beliefs, despite all the evidence you present them with, doesn't make them less intelligent or more close-minded than you (sounds like another topic that gets attacked a lot, huh?). We are a curious species. We look at a situation, and try to find several solutions and explanations. What has been evident in the past, is that the simplest and most logical explanation is often true.

Originally posted by Viper2
I really wonder if most of the skeptics out there are simply just people who haven't read much information or seen many documentaries regarding UFOs and ETs. And maybe because of this when the hear the word "UFO" or "ET" they immediately think it's fake like Santa Claus or Leprechauns.

I can't speak for all skeptics but as a skeptic I have a POV. I'm not a hardnosed skeptic but I'm not a blind believer, or believer, period. Any outrageous claim should immediately trigger doubt if it's not accompanied by irrefutable evidence. So, most skeptics are individuals who have not had certain experiences and when told by others of their experience tend to doubt that said experience(s) did not occur as related. This is normal and doesn't make the skeptic a pariah. Some skeptics, such as myself, are aware that beliefs are created by mental-conditioning so most humans accept at face value whatever is told them without pressing for the evidence. I've had 5/6 solid sightings, videotaped one UFO but I'm still a normal skeptic.

For example, how many skeptics out there have really looked into all the evidence and testimonies out there about Roswell? How many of them have read about the Drake Equation? How many of them have read about the WOW Signal? How many of them have read about the Travis Walton Abduction? If they did read about all these things, would they really be that skeptical?

Makes you think.

Here is where you show your mental weakness. Roswell UFO crash/alien/disc retrieval all falls into fantasy. Serious, deep research will prove the fantasy it has become. Drake equation? Here is a just-as-good equation: zero+zero=zero. Wow signal? Not evidence of anything connected with aliens whether far away of hovering over the SETI antenna. Travis Walton "abduction"? Deep, serious research results in hoax. If skeptics read about these things as presented it would solidify their skepticness and would even result in a hard-nosed skeptic. Robert Sheaffer is the best example.


[edit on 1-5-2010 by The Shrike]

Originally posted by The Shrike
I can't speak for all skeptics but as a skeptic I have a POV. I'm not a hardnosed skeptic but I'm not a blind believer, or believer, period. Any outrageous claim should immediately trigger doubt if it's not accompanied by irrefutable evidence...

Often, skeptics are attacked for having any point of view. This may be do to both a misunderstanding of skepticism's philosophies and an attempt to remove skeptics from the discussion.

Despite what some may believe, skeptics are allowed a viewpoint. This viewpoint must be beholden to the evidence as it stands. But a skeptic must not be married to that viewpoint; the skeptic must always be willing to consider new evidence and change their views as the evidence demands.

And the skeptic must always question; this is very foundation of science (science and skepticism are inseparable). A skeptic cannot accept any claim without proper evidence, from minor scientific claims to the most extraordinary supernatural claim. This is what drives the conflict between skeptics and believers; claims of the supernatural depend not on evidence but personal credulity, anecdotes and hearsay, none of which the skeptic can accept.

Originally posted by cosmicpixie
Well I'd disagree- there are plenty of occasions where skeptics make snidey comments simply because they think UFO believers are nutcases , so they say something to ridicule the fact you believe...

People make rude comments whenever there is a disagreement. It is not endemic to skepticism but the human race as a whole. UFO believers do the same thing, directed at the "ignorant" and "blind" who don't believe like they believe.

The skeptic/believer debate has been discussed a zillion times here. Please contribute to one of the ongoing ones as this does not add anything new to the debate.

Here.
Here.
Here.
Here.

Full search result.


Thread closed.

[edit on May 2nd 2010 by greeneyedleo]