Just Can't Take Debunkers Seriously

I just finished re-reading the 1950 book; "The Flying Saucers are Real" by Donald Keyhoe.

I understand that their argument is we have not one shred of evidence, like a retrieved vehicle or little grey men.

But to me the written word and millions of sightings are "send them to the death penalty", type of evidence that is simply overwhelming and has been for decades, if not most likely thousands of years.

I expect little or no discussions of this because it has been "topiced" ad nausea m. Like politics, this is so polarizing the I am to the point that I just can't get behind the opposing position.

I have always kept an equal and opposite mind but from my vantage point EBE's are very real.

reply to post by copper5661


Copper5661.....

"The Flying Saucers are Real" by Donald Keyhole.

Donald who?

Ahh the perils of the auto word correction when typing a peace..

I am not this chick with a 9 month year old baby.

Sorry, misspelled my own OP.

reply to post by copper5661


Copper5661.....

I expect little or no discussions of this because it has been "topiced" ad nausea

Well.....now that you mention it, it is about the 7,000th thread about skeptics vs debunkers.

Just out of interest.....

What is your own definition of a "debunker"?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by copper5661


Thanks for the stirring of old memories. I just checked my book case. It contains about ten-shelf feet of mostly older books dealing with UFOs. Hardly any are newer than ten years. A debunker must claim that every one of those-and actually any books, videos and even words put forth since is totally false or wrong in one fashion or another. How can one accept that argument?

My argument is that there can be no argument. 'Never should have been from early on in the sightings. The debunkers have been over whelmed with the sheer weight of the UFO data. Rejecting every single bit of data does not make their case or even make sense.

Denial is not an argument.

We can only wonder why they would persist with such anthropocentric views.

(I've overlooking those that get a paycheck for debunking or denying the reality of the UFO phenomena.)

Originally posted by copper5661
I understand that their argument is we have not one shred of evidence, like a retrieved vehicle or little grey men.

You're woefully ignorant of the current state of UFOlogy and a debunker's view of it. Most people agree that there is evidence. Some would even agree that there is a lot of it. The problem is, evidence of what? Aliens? Why? Because they're "the only logical choice remaining?" That's hardly the case. In fact, there is essentially no good, verifiable evidence that makes a direct link with aliens of any sort. There are stories. There are curiosities. But nothing having anything specifically to do with aliens.

And that's where the debunking is necessary. Anybody who pops up and says with conviction that such and such a bit of evidence is "clear proof of aliens" is just plain wrong. That's the kind of bunk that needs to be done away with if we're going to actually figure out what at least some of the evidence might be pointing to. Let's not start from a position of, "I know it's aliens, let's fit this into the proof." Let's start without any foolish preconceptions and see where it leads us. Because the whole aliens thing has led us exactly nowhere for at least 50 years.

Read more. Educate yourself. And stop supporting bunk.

Originally posted by copper5661

I understand that their argument is we have not one shred of evidence, like a retrieved vehicle or little grey men.

But to me the written word and millions of sightings are "send them to the death penalty", type of evidence that is simply overwhelming and has been for decades, if not most likely thousands of years.

It is quite funny though, over these thousands of years and millions of sightings that there is no actual evidence.
Speculation and heresay is a plenty however.

And you know debunkers probably can't take some believers all that seriously too. Especially those that don't at the least bring something to the table or when they do it is based on fiction because they have nothing to bring.

reply to post by pazcat

It is quite funny though, over these thousands of years and millions of sightings that there is no actual evidence.

No evidence that we have been shown may be closer to the truth...
It is know that certain agengies are quick to close off certain sites and have taken evidence away...

Is it evidence of weather balloons, blackop equipment or alien craft???

We don't know and they aint telling !!!

reply to post by copper5661
I think a lot of people feel that way from time to time. There are one or two debunkers who are focused only on presenting an idea that all UFO reports are hallucination/misidentification/ignorance etc. I can think of two groups who are very active in this endeavour...

At the same time, if any reports or sightings can be 'debunked,' it's a good thing. Who needs to make fools of themselves championing a UFO that was a rocket stage? Likewise, it'd be embarrassing to use a flock of birds or a few balloons as evidence of UFO waves. As much as some guys want to write off the UFO subject...others are here to expand and exploit it with shonky videos of BS, fakery and outright lies.

Project Camelot and Exopolitics are a good example, without debunkers they'd have a free ride to peddle their deluded and contrived crap with more success.

I try and stand over in the corner and do my best to think for myself in spite of debunkers, believers and skeptics....ufological Switzerland

these are some of the thoughts I entertain, and are reflective of personal information I have been exposed to as well as experiences I have garnered.

Originally posted by Blue Shift
In fact, there is essentially no good, verifiable evidence that makes a direct link with aliens of any sort. There are stories. There are curiosities. But nothing having anything specifically to do with aliens.

I do not share these same sentiments My opinion is Diametrical in relation.

And that's where the debunking is necessary.

Debunkers who find debunking to be necessity, find it necessary to debunk. Many debunkers are Purposefully focussing their efforts to find and amplify faults, while assuming prolixly the intentions of others, and disregarding possibilities.

2 pieces to a puzzle have 8 sides total, and yes, 15 out of 16 times these can be debunked as not being pieces to the same puzzle, but once out of 16 times those sides line up and fit. Debunkers only really have statistics on their side, compartmentalizing separatists to some degree.

Anybody who pops up and says with conviction that such and such a bit of evidence is "clear proof of aliens" is just plain wrong.

And this is what Debunkers do, a precondition before the discussion even starts. Someone comes and says "I have some evidence/proof" and debunkers say "you are just plain wrong".

these are some of the thoughts I have on this subject and thoughts I had while reading the sentences

Read more. Educate yourself. And stop supporting bunk.

but when do we actually get permitted to apply what it is we have educated ourselves about, and when are we permitted to share it? It's difficult to describe the concept of eight if some are not willing to accept the existance of the concept of three.

one, two, three, fou ...wait a minute, three may not be real...

these are some of the thoughts I entertain,
-ET

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher


Esoteric Teacher.....

Debunkers only really have statistics on their side

Ummm.....

Sometimes they have appalling videos of "orby blinkies" "on their side"!

Cheers mate
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher


You know, I seem to be experiencing the "opposite" of this!

I am skeptical by nature (yum cliche!) I demand of myself to be open to the possibilities. At the same time, I demand evidence of those possibilities.

Now the problem, "believers" (for lack of a better term, apologies) seem to assume I am this "personality" you have described.

So now what? (Honest question, as usual.) I mean, all that needs to happen is for folks to be less reactionary. Oh, and research. (That last one is way harder, methinks.)

All right now class. Who can answer this one? What scientist went from skeptic/debunker to Ufologist during
the course of his investigations of the UFO phenomena for the U.S. military. anyone!


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/389e3563f5f2.jpg[/atsimg]

Please! Please this just has to be evidence. If this isn't an alien then WT

Originally posted by randyvs
All right now class. Who can answer this one? What scientist went from skeptic/debunker to Ufologist during
the course of his investigations of the UFO phenomena for the U.S. military. anyone!

Randyvs.....

Hynek.....

Page 159
UFOs
Leslie Kean

Cheers
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by randyvs
I think that Sumerian figure is more like a 'belief mirror.'

A lot of people have a belief in ancient aliens/astronauts and see that figure as evidence for their beliefs.

Where are the elephant-headed aliens (Ganesh), bird-headed aliens (Thoth) or monkey-headed aliens (Hanuman). Why not multi-armed aliens (Kali)?

My point here is if we're gonna pick out some figures as proof of ancient alien overlords, we need to explain why the other bizarre looking figures from the same place or time aren't aliens.

If the'd look themselves up in the mirror, there, they would find that shred of evidence they're looking.

reply to post by tikoymanila


I always thought that mirror technology came from Aliens!

Or are you saying that a carbon based life-form did not form on a planet that hosts carbon based lifeforms?

(And "debunkers" can't be taken seriously? I am sorry, but I am not from space. If I am, where is my ship I want to go home.)

reply to post by copper5661


What you refer to as "debunkers" might better be called the "best friends" of hopeful believers. Because the people who spend their time and resources to take a long, hard, thorough look at the evidence are the ones who keep the subject viable, if only on the fringes of the mainstream.

Without debunking the world would flood with the misinterpreted, misunderstood, and flat out faked. And that would destroy all credibility for those who seek to believe.

So, thank a debunker today.