Skeptics and debunkers are very important for the Alien/UFO field

reply to post by Imtor


I'm pretty sure you've got that wrong way 'round.

The believer zealot, from what's in the public forum, is usually the one that goes all multicolored out of touch with reality contrary and in spite of any and all evidence presented where even hoaxers have been caught cold, they'll still argue and still claim that whatever it is that they're claiming is real, is still real.

Blind Faith: It's real fosho!
Skeptic: Sorry to say, but, it's been proven a hoax and here's the confession of the hoaxer, plus how they did it.
Blind Faith: You're just trying to trick me! You're a disinfo Agent! Ima go make a website about this so everyone knows it's real fosho.

yup.

reply to post by Druscilla


Some are blind believers but there are also skeptics who really try hard to sound 'rational' and think they are the ones that discover America (as if someone else couldn't give the same explanations if they were just as biased) as the given skeptic by giving explanations about the most real cases that remain unexplained.

You seem to not understand that real skeptic means denying everything. If you are only thinking critically and sometimes agreeing with the unexplained, then you are not a skeptic. For a skeptic everything is explainable and they would put cheesy explanations from other cases just to call it 'normal'. You try to defend the skeptics because you call yourself a skeptic, unless you deny everything - you are not one. Blind believers are in most cases new to the topic and they do not know what to believe and what not. I know it cause I also believed all when I was new to it.

Nice thread. I am not a believer of alien abduction, intervention or visitation and I have my reasons for that. That is not to say I am a cynic or a debunker...I am a real skeptic. I try to keep an open mind (but not so open my brains fall out). I listen to stories and points of view and watch videos and try to give an honest opinion. If I honestly don't know what I am looking at I'll say "I have no idea what that is, but it kinda looks like ______". I will not crash someone else's ideas when I myself don't actually "know" the answers.

That being said, I like to tell people I live with madness....the madness of infinite possibility. I accept there are things out there in the world and in the universe (multi-verse?) that defy current explanations. I accept that in this big universe, that just about anything is possible (but not necessarily probable...there IS a difference).

I have a lot of confidence in science. It might not have an explanation yet, but I am comfortable in knowing it eventually will.

I read science (to the limits of my capacity to comprehend it), I read philosophy, theology and even some fringy, new age and pseudo science.

I have my own "weird" theories about things...but it has less to do with paranormal and more to do with our brains and our very limited 5 senses...but that is another topic.

Originally posted by Imtor
reply to post by Druscilla

 

Some are blind believers but there are also skeptics who really try hard to sound 'rational' and think they are the ones that discover America (as if someone else couldn't give the same explanations if they were just as biased) as the given skeptic by giving explanations about the most real cases that remain unexplained.

You seem to not understand that real skeptic means denying everything. If you are only thinking critically and sometimes agreeing with the unexplained, then you are not a skeptic. For a skeptic everything is explainable. You try to defend the skeptics because you call yourself a skeptic, unless you deny everything - you are not. I am not defending believers who are doing the same but from the opposite - denying eveyrthing that's not what they believe in.

edit on 8-5-2012 by Imtor because: (no reason given)

That is not true....

A "skeptic" seeks proof and will accept that proof when it is presented in an undeniable fashion...

A "de-bunker" will not believe the facts even when you bash them over the head with several of them...

A "cynic" is just a really arrogant and mean ass debunker....LOL...

reply to post by Damrod


Skeptics in their real meaning are not open minded, they are the ones making websites that recklessly lie on behalf of real cases. I am not saying they are always harmful, sometimes real hoaxers are exposed but I've seen Rendlesham forest, Phoenix lights, Cash Landrum Case and others being called absolutely ridiculous things just to be explainable.

There is no such thing as debunker != skeptic, they are one and the same. You are just open-minded, less than others but still, and there is nothing wrong in that.

reply to post by Imtor


LOL...well thanks...I think...(?)

In reference to those examples you have given...the Phoenix lights. I have seen the footage and heard the endless back and forth arguments for years. Me personally? The military flare explanation sounds logical, solid and fair. I have watched it over and over and over and I cannot find flaw with that explanation...to me...it perfectly explains what my eyes are seeing....I am not going to get brutish and vulgar to those that don't want to accept that explanation...but to me...it is explained....well and solid...but that's just me.

Rendelsham Forest...alot of that is anecdotal evidence...yes from very well respected and accredited people...so...I have no opinion on that....I don't know what they saw....experimental craft?...perhaps.

reply to post by Damrod


I'm not saying aliens, I also have my doubts about some parts of Rendlesham incident but this makes no reason to start thinking of various explanations to call it ;case solved;. For example the part where he touched the craft and he visualized in his mind some binary code and he even wrote that down, then this binary code decoded by some computer programist.. well.. it's getting too far. But there can be always lies mixed with truth to discredit the whole case so one cannot be sure like that what's true and what not.

The flares of the Phoenix lights were released they say 2 hours after the first ones, the mayor that ridiculed the case by showing in an alien costume saying people take it too seriously, later confessed there was indeed a presence of some unknown aircraft. How honest he's been idk.

reply to post by Imtor


Very good.

I added a third line to my signature just because of this thread...."I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing." Socrates

I have no idea what these people experienced....I have been in heated moments of confusion and chaos and our brains behave in odd and strange ways....(I read a lot of Jung, Freud and recently Dr. Michael Persinger, Dr. Stanislav Graf, Dr. Karl Pribram).

Our brain is a weird and complex and funny thing....here is an organ that deciphers our reality that is completely cut off from it (sealed in your skull) and relies on 5 simple sources (our senses) to feed it information and allow it to build the reality you know....

fascinating crap when you really get into it...

But enough of that...I am not here to debate...I am here to give kudos to the people that respect us skeptics....we are not always the enemy....


Edit to add....to clarify Socrates statement...we no nothing is a measurement. If the vast knowledge of the universe could fit into a 55 galon drum...we know but a thimble full....

Pseudo-skeptics / closed-minded skeptics

*Automatically dismisses and denies all claims that contradict materialism and orthodoxy

*Is not interested in truth, evidence or facts, only in defending orthodoxy and the status quo

*Ignores anything that doesn't fit their a priori beliefs and assumptions

*Scoffs and ridicules their targets instead of providing solid arguments and giving honest consideration

*Has a know-it-all-attitude, never asks questions about things they don't understand, never admits that they don't know something

*Insists that everything unknown and unexplained must have a conventional materialistic explanation

*Is judgmental and quick to draw conclusions about things they know little or nothing about

*Uses semantics and word games with their own rules of logic to try to win arguments

*Is unable to adapt and update their paradigms to new evidence

Sounds like someone I recently tried to have a dialog with here.

In regards to the OP: You are entirely correct. The problem is that many skeptics don't practice true skepticism, and are so narrow minded they are incapable of embracing any idea that is outside of their notion of what constitutes reality. TRUE skeptics are invaluable, and I regard them highly.

Good post, I agree.

However, I would change "skeptics" to skepticism, because the more rational of those who believe there is a physical UFO phenomenon can be skeptical as well, and also eliminate hoaxes and misidentifications.

Basically, my point is this: You don't necessarily have to be a skeptic to eliminate the crappy claims and cases - not all believers are the kind of people that will believe almost anything as you pointed out in the OP. Some believers can use rational thinking and skepticism and still come to the conclusion that UFOs are real.

Originally posted by karl 12

Pseudo-skeptics / closed-minded skeptics

*Automatically dismisses and denies all claims that contradict materialism and orthodoxy

*Is not interested in truth, evidence or facts, only in defending orthodoxy and the status quo

*Ignores anything that doesn't fit their a priori beliefs and assumptions

*Scoffs and ridicules their targets instead of providing solid arguments and giving honest consideration

*Has a know-it-all-attitude, never asks questions about things they don't understand, never admits that they don't know something

*Insists that everything unknown and unexplained must have a conventional materialistic explanation

*Is judgmental and quick to draw conclusions about things they know little or nothing about

*Uses semantics and word games with their own rules of logic to try to win arguments

*Is unable to adapt and update their paradigms to new evidence

Link

Cheers.
what i find interesting is that these characteristics are purely the perception of the believer and unfair ones at that.
they are nothing short of a knee-jerk reaction to people not believing the latest light-in-the-sky video the believer posted.
i mean 90% of that crap could be pinned to the believer and still be more accurate than the person they are trying to stick it to.
i've attempted to debate believers and had nearly all those things happen, and people call me a debunker because i'm more willing to accept mundane explanations before more paranormal ones, because experience has taught me that the mundane is the answer at least 9 out of 10 and the last is "i don't know".
given that the paranormal tends toward the poor evidence or lack of concrete evidence, it makes it harder to accept aliens or paranormal answers.

it is funny but when i hear people called close-minded i often just replace it with "you don't agree with my nonsense!" sure there really are close-minded people, but the term is slung around so often you'd think it was a dead cat.
my biggest issue is that the UFO field lacks the level of critical thinking that it pretends it aspires to. thus it ends up turning all skeptics into so called pseudo-skeptics due to the growing number of gullible believers who post junk that skeptics mechanically assess to be mundane.

TL;DR: blame believers for the development of "pseudo-skeptics", believers who believe anything frustrate skeptics looking for deep study of UFO and other paranormal phenomena.

reply to post by demongoat


Weeeeeell, if you think that all skeptics are legit and not pseudos and not paid to make some crappy articles (some of them)... then you are very delusional. Just like there are useless believers, there are useless debunkers and they are pseudos.

Originally posted by mcrath2012
One thing that I have rediscovered on visiting this and other UFO related forums is that Skeptics, and respectful debunkers form the backbone of the debate. Without them, there are just too many cultist believers, too many charlatans, and just too many fantastic, crazy ideas floating around. Without criticism, all the good research and genuine cases will be comprehensively lost under the rubble of egoistic believers, every new person claiming to have had contact, and professional charlatans, who make money off people's genuine curiosity, and faith. (Faith in good/intelligence beyond the humanity and the human Gods < --- This is an important reason behind many humans' interest in the Alien/UFO field).

So, as long as they do not troll and are not obnoxious, skeptics should be treated as a respectful part of the UFO research. Willingness to accept and understand criticism is a hallmark of any genuinely exploratory, out of the mainstream idea (scientific fields, spiritual explorations, individuals, ideologies etc.).

Every case needs to be thoroughly investigated, every fantastic claim thoroughly analyzed and debunked appropriately, or pretty soon, you will just have a mess of random imaginations, and boring/egoistical stories from people's dreams.
More skepticism exists here than many political forums, and it should be maintained that way.

edit on 7-5-2012 by mcrath2012 because: (no reason given)

What's funny is that the two should be one person.

Any person studying something as potentially groundbreaking as the UFO phenomenon should have the curiosity to go forward and research something and also the skepticism to keep them from making sensational claims.

There shouldn't be two teams of people arguing one way or another, there is only one truth. So instead of all people being motivated to find truth it's turned into an issue of whose right and whose wrong. Something that could be the greatest discovery in the history of humanity has become... an ego contest.

Originally posted by txMEGAlithic
I am not skeptical (I do not doubt aliens exist and are visiting us). We are in the same boat together you just feel smarter saying you're a skeptic and I feel smart for saying I'm not, but our definitions of the word aren't even the same (clearly) I would define you as objective or extremely so. You believe in aliens, yes? Not believing every youtube vid that comes along is a good thing. It doesn't make you a skeptic, as in doubting it all.

But a good skeptic doesn't necessarily need to "believe" or "NOT believe" in alien visitation. A good skeptic is just looking at the evidence and tries to affirm that evidence or not. They should believe in the possibility that aliens are visiting the Earth, but believing in the "possibility" is not the same as either believing or not believing.

A good skeptic should separate himself from believing anything. Critical skepticism of an alien visitation report should have nothing to do with belief in alien visitation or not. There is too much emotion in "belief". Critical skepticism needs to be cold and emotionless.

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by txMEGAlithic
I am not skeptical (I do not doubt aliens exist and are visiting us). We are in the same boat together you just feel smarter saying you're a skeptic and I feel smart for saying I'm not, but our definitions of the word aren't even the same (clearly) I would define you as objective or extremely so. You believe in aliens, yes? Not believing every youtube vid that comes along is a good thing. It doesn't make you a skeptic, as in doubting it all.

But a good skeptic doesn't necessarily need to "believe" or "NOT believe" in alien visitation. A good skeptic is just looking at the evidence and tries to affirm that evidence or not. They should believe in the possibility that aliens are visiting the Earth, but believing in the "possibility" is not the same as either believing or not believing.

A good skeptic should separate himself from believing anything. Critical skepticism of an alien visitation report should have nothing to do with belief in alien visitation or not. There is too much emotion in "belief". Critical skepticism needs to be cold and emotionless.

Excellent observation. What's interesting about what you have said here, is that some of the greatest (and most skeptical) minds in UFOlogy have practiced exactly what you are suggesting (Namely Hynek and Vallee) and their work is largely ignored by both pseudo skeptics and blanket believers alike due to the conclusions they arrived at. Sometimes the truth hurts

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
Most people dont even realize what a skeptic really is. A skeptic is someone who is looking for the truth and does it by questioning all the evidence. Being a skeptic does not automatically mean you have an agenda. You can be a skeptic AND believe in aliens and flying saucers etc.

So being a skeptic just means you are going to do everything you can not to be fooled or mistaken. Being a skeptic is about staying out of denial even if you want something to be true. I believe there might be something out there but i dont let that cloud my judgment when looking into cases.

Non skeptics shouldn't even get into the debate because without critical thinking they bring nothing to the table.

edit on 7-5-2012 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

+

Originally posted by Damrod
A "skeptic" seeks proof and will accept that proof when it is presented in an undeniable fashion...

+

Originally posted by demongoat
Cheers.
what i find interesting is that these characteristics are purely the perception of the believer and unfair ones at that.
they are nothing short of a knee-jerk reaction to people not believing the latest light-in-the-sky video the believer posted.
i mean 90% of that crap could be pinned to the believer and still be more accurate than the person they are trying to stick it to.
i've attempted to debate believers and had nearly all those things happen, and people call me a debunker because i'm more willing to accept mundane explanations before more paranormal ones, because experience has taught me that the mundane is the answer at least 9 out of 10 and the last is "i don't know".
given that the paranormal tends toward the poor evidence or lack of concrete evidence, it makes it harder to accept aliens or paranormal answers.

it is funny but when i hear people called close-minded i often just replace it with "you don't agree with my nonsense!" sure there really are close-minded people, but the term is slung around so often you'd think it was a dead cat.
my biggest issue is that the UFO field lacks the level of critical thinking that it pretends it aspires to. thus it ends up turning all skeptics into so called pseudo-skeptics due to the growing number of gullible believers who post junk that skeptics mechanically assess to be mundane.

TL;DR: blame believers for the development of "pseudo-skeptics", believers who believe anything frustrate skeptics looking for deep study of UFO and other paranormal phenomena.

I found these posts to offer the most salient points. Having as open an mind as possible is essential in studying this fascinating if problematic phenomenon.

Really good responses in this thread. Even though the Alien/UFO topic is considered strange and loony by many, it also attracts lots of intelligent believers and skeptics due to the myriad of possibilities that arise once you start thinking about intelligences beyond the human level. Personally, I am not in the believer category yet, but just researching this field has opened my mind to so many imaginations and possibilities.
Even if it all turns out to be a mirage, the UFO topic has already contributed to lots of creativity and rational discourse on life beyond the Earth. It has led to scientists and artists discussing themes that would have been normally considered taboo. Now, even the mainstream is latching on to some of the ideas given life by the UFO research. For ex. the idea of an Alien group seeding humans and then monitoring their process. The idea of Aliens with a very similar humanoid form. The idea of Earth as a perfect setting for an extremely advanced species to seed life, manipulate and improve genetic code to achieve a myriad of goals ranging from pure good to pure evil. The idea that we can postulate about genetic code being created by an intelligent group, we can postulate about creation, life, destiny etc. in terms of science and religion, without the need of religion and superstitions.
As long as we do not start believing in these ideas without significant evidence, and carry on with rational skepticism, and creative imaginations, the UFO field would prove to be a good thing for the humanity.
If someday, the Alien presence does turn out to be true, we can be mentally better prepared to face the new realities.

I really like that many posters here understand the inherent role of skepticism for any genuine researcher. Many people start paying attention to these unconventional fields because they are skeptical of the mainstream discourse. They are skeptical of the human desire to have concrete answers, and using science to propagate their own limited versions of the life and existence. Many of our well respected scientists also tend to get ahead of themselves, and start presenting their ideas and imaginations as concrete theories.

That is what brought me to this field too, when I realized that so much of what I thought was concrete science were simply human speculations and quick conclusions. The more I read about the progress in theoretical physics, and the more I became familiar with how humans have come to their conclusions about space, time, universe and biological aspects of life etc. the more I became convinced that science does have all the answers, its just that humans have a tendency to ignore the limitations of our testing, results and evidence, and start making big conclusions. If I could read about their speculations and judge them with a healthy dose of skepticism, why couldn't I explore the UFO/Alien field and maintain the skeptical, critical approach and still learn something. When I was younger, I used to laugh at the flying saucers, alien probes etc. but now I can explore these fields with inner resolve, as long as I pay full attention to my own skepticism and that brought forth by many intelligent skeptics involved in this field.

A UFO/Alien researcher or a believer has to respect skepticism and be rationally self-critical, since these are the things that originally brought many to this field. Skepticism leads to imagination, and imagination leads to exploration in unconventional fields. As many learned people have said before, keep your mind open, but not so much that it falls out. There are many layers of realities within our limited human life. There could be way more in the life and existence outside Earth, outside the human sphere. If we are not skeptic, and do not respect science in its purest form, then we will end up being deceived, either deliberately or by our own minds.

I wanted to reply to individual posts in this thread and many others on this forum, but there are just too many calm, rational opinions to appreciate. I would just say that having these kind of mediums is extremely important for the human mind to evolve as an individual and as a civilization.