ATS from a Sceptics Perspective.

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by yourmaker

 

we wouldn't be where we are today as a species without people like you, or people like me

It's depressing how true this statement is.

Explain.

reply to post by yourmaker

Explain.

Well, I suppose that all hinges on whether your other post was addressed to OP or not.

Honestly I just assumed it was.... was I correct?

If you are the least bit skeptical people ask "Why are you on a conspiracy site?" but my answer to those people are if EVERYONE on here believed EVERY conspiracy theory posted, why even have a site like this? Would you have a disclaimer stating "If you don't agree with any OP's theory, you are not welcome here!"
On my personal level, all kinds of unexplainable things have happened to me (mainly paranormal) but I cannot and WON'T make myself believe something as fact when in the back of my mind a little voice is telling me 'there might be a scientific explanation"
I would love to KNOW if there are real ghosts, intelligent life on other planets and I keep an open mind but do I want to say there is no room for OTHER possible reasons and for this I will remain a skeptic till proven otherwise.
This doesn't mean I will make fun of others, it means I will give others ideas of what I think it MIGHT be.
Like 9-11 being an inside job, I have asked the same questions (like the one poster) and asked where all the people went and was told stories like "they never existed in the first place, some conspiracy theories are just so far out there that common sense should be enough to debunk it!
Sorry for the long rant, I just agree with what you said and hate being labeled names because I don't think a rock looks like an alligator on Mars...

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


Your poor sense of irony is hilarious I am quite happy to let you continue with your personal attacks and bazar arguments against me because all you are doing is reinforcing my OP and giving me a good chortle.

Your posts really don’t make much sense you’re saying that because I am not sceptical of the same things that you are sceptical of I am therefore not a sceptic and your trying to shout me down because of it. I am sceptical of many random, baseless and funny conspiracies that does make me a sceptic. You just don’t like it because my scepticism and your scepticism are at polar opposites.

Also that was a very selective choice of my previous threads to pick out I would point out that the one about 9/11 was basically calling for better debate, my views on Gun control have changed I am now actually pro-second amendment and yes during the last presidential election Ron Paul threads were doing my head in. You probably also noticed that I have a thread about satanic influence in the Vatican, UK special forces inside Syria, the “mutant” theory of Roswell, assassination of Neil Haywood and I even have a thread about Alex Jones making a good point.

Funny you didn’t mention them…..

You see I would describe myself as quite a moderate conspiracy theorist, I might not rant about 9/11 being a inside job, fluoride making us stupid, the NWO and getting a fuzzy feeling in my penis every time I see a youtube video of a flying dustbin lid but I am all the same a conspiracy theorist just a very moderate and sceptical one.

Anyway please, I encourage you to respond to this post because again all you are doing is demonstrating my point perfectly.

PS

Are you Pierce Morgan?

yup!

Originally posted by Majic
Quiet Riot

Just a reminder, from the top of each page of every thread in this forum:

[color=#67BC90]Rant: Let loose some steam and get it off your chest! This is the place to rant about anything that does not attack other members, the staff, or ATS itself.

Emphasis mine.

Yes, this is Rant, and rants are very much on-topic and okay here, and the OP very much qualifies. And yes, we do tend to be more relaxed about some of the rules, but...

This is still an ATS forum, and even here, the AboveTopSecret.com Terms And Conditions Of Use still apply, and even here, direct ad hominem attacks are not appropriate. And, of course, they are never appropriate anywhere else on ATS, either.

If anyone has any questions or concerns about this or just wants to chat, I normally ask members to send me a private message to avoid going off topic, but since this is Rant and the issue is kind of on-topic anyway, we can talk about it here if anyone wants to.

I can say I do very much sympathize with both sides of the "skeptic/believer divide" -- though I really don't think it needs to be that way.

Am I wrong? You decide.

P.S. Labeling members as "shills", whatever one may think, is not recommended for a long and happy membership. Tactics like those are precisely what actual shills would use, which can lead to unfortunate outcomes. Just sayin'

edit on 4/22/2013 by Majic because: (no reason given)

The TC's apply ???? Why are personal insults like paid shill, troll, or disinfo agent , etc even allowed? In other forums ?

I have made many erroneous statement's in good intent but am not an expert, a true sceptic (and by that I mean an intelligent and constructive criticism such as that they don't pull the poster to pieces but provide information as to why they disbelieve is a necessity this site could not do without (unless we all wanted to live in the pink clouds flying around on winged elephants as I am certain some do - I have been a bit guilty of misguided belief myself).

A good skeptic act's as an educator to the poster they are criticizing and there argument's help to build healthy debate that can if the poster is proven right enforce the original post but if the poster is wrong help to create a new avenue of investigation, some of us though (myself included) hate to have our cherished belief's destroyed and while we laugh off a stupid critic an intelligent one get's us to think and adapt.

So We Need Critics but We Need Good one's not grammar teacher's criticizing the misplace semi colon or variant spelling as I have seen on a lot of thread's, (though even though i am not perfect it is infuriating trying to read a post in pidgin English).

From my standpoint, the skeptic arguments are obvious. I share them. However, I do not need 86 posts citing the same one liner objections to a point of plurality expressed over and over with sarcasm, pseudo-scientific methods and laughing emoticons. It is like trying to ascertain string theory dimensionality by asking questions in a high school hallway after the bell has rung.

All the chest pounding, while not irrelevant or necessarily incorrect, also adds no Value or Clarity. It is posturing and not even valuable as personal reflection - which I enjoy hearing. It does not improve my knowledge of the world around me. And some people think of it as their mission to lamblast anything which is counter to their world model, until a specific set of subjects they hate is sufficiently dead (Inverse Negation Fallacy). Sans any evidence whatsoever. This simply clouds everyone's ability to ascertain new information on a particular subject and renders the forum useless - and achieves the real goal, of simply robbing quality experience from those people they disdain.

None of that is skepticism. Be cautious.

Being correct does not necessarily make right, does not make for utility, and does not in any way indicate integrity. Clarity and Value are the hallmark traits of a true skeptic. A true skeptic should be traveling the world with mud under his or her fingernails and compassion in their heart. Witnessing that which no one else has.

Let's let some of these things, like a band with a new song, get some air and time to breathe - before the same 9 persons immediately start screaming as loudly as possible the moment the first note is played, smashing the amplifiers, guitars and grabbing the microphone from the singer - to scream the same old thing over and over and over in the the mic.

We got it already - you're a rocket scientist.....

Most of this bunk material will falsify itself through added facts. It does not warrant activism. Because in the end, activism will eventually fall prey to the Activist's Dilemma, - one will eventually be wrong on something of critical importance... and all the being correct, up and to that day will not outweigh the enormous damage that that one incident of being wrong, will bear.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Lmao! This is a comedy piece right? A bit of humor in the afternoon? For the last couple of years skeptics have been by and large unreasonable, rude and often down right ignorant. After such antics, people stop caring. What this whine is about, is about the fact that more and more people are ignoring the unskeptical skeptics.

Being "skeptical" means that "your not sure" or "doubtful", not the opposite of believing, the opposite of believing after all is "disbelief".


The real problem is, is that there isn't that many real skeptics around here. By claiming to be skeptics when they are not, they are trying to take the intellectual high ground they themselves have no interest to uphold.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Your poor sense of irony is hilarious I am quite happy to let you continue with your personal attacks and bazar arguments against me because all you are doing is reinforcing my OP and giving me a good chortle.

Shout it all from the rooftops... it's not going to make it any more true.

Your posts really don’t make much sense

Again, just because you say it, doesn't make it true.

you’re saying that because I am not sceptical of the same things that you are sceptical of I am therefore not a sceptic and your trying to shout me down because of it.

Essentially, yes.

In your op, you never mentioned a single thing that you were sceptical of, just some things that you are NOT sceptical of.

You take the position of sceptic, and yet it took a dozen posts, as well as some chiding to get you to actually admit what you ARE sceptical of.

You call yourself a sceptic, and the first thing you do in this thread, is tell people that you agree with the official story of the several conspiracy theories that you happen to mention, this is not the actions of a sceptic, but of someone who does nothing but attempt to attack sceptics.

And in addition to this, you are setting yourself up as a sceptic in your Opening Post, and then talking about some conspiracy theorist that apparently are NOT sceptics.

As if one can only be a sceptic, if we all agree on WHAT to be sceptical about, with YOU.

I am sceptical of many random, baseless and funny conspiracies that does make me a sceptic. You just don’t like it because my scepticism and your scepticism are at polar opposites.

You are still not using the word sceptic correctly.

Also that was a very selective choice of my previous threads to pick out I would point out that the one about 9/11 was basically calling for better debate

You must have missed the part where I quoted you as saying that YOU were right, and those who are sceptical about the official story of 9/11 were wrong, with no evidence at all.

Tell me, how is this sceptical?

my views on Gun control have changed I am now actually pro-second amendment

So, what are your views on the Bankers wanting to disarm the population?

and yes during the last presidential election Ron Paul threads were doing my head in.

So?

You probably also noticed that I have a thread about satanic influence in the Vatican, UK special forces inside Syria, the “mutant” theory of Roswell, assassination of Neil Haywood and I even have a thread about Alex Jones making a good point.

I saw the one about you saying that AJ made a good point, although from the tone of that thread, you seem to be admitting it through gritted teeth.

The other three? Maybe they aren't on your post list anymore.... I didn't see them.

You see I would describe myself as quite a moderate conspiracy theorist, I might not rant about 9/11 being a inside job, fluoride making us stupid, the NWO and getting a fuzzy feeling in my penis every time I see a youtube video of a flying dustbin lid but I am all the same a conspiracy theorist just a very moderate and sceptical one.

IF you wanted to call yourself a sceptic in a thread about being a sceptic.....

Don't open the post with conspiracy theories that you don't believe it.

IT sort of stinks to the heavens of falsehood, and purposeful manipulation.

Anyway please, I encourage you to respond to this post because again all you are doing is demonstrating my point perfectly.

Hardly, I'm taking you to task on your poor use of language.

And proving you wrong about your own perspective and opinions.

Are you Pierce Morgan?

yup!

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Why do you let other individual's ignorrance affect you this way? This thread is already 3 pages long but after reading the first page, I just have to ask. It's just an individual perspective and that one person who shares these thoughts with others does not make them any more right or wrong. Might is not right. The point is to deny ignorrance. Sometimes you need to state your point, whether accepted or rejected. Personally, there are times when I'm in a forum and I legitimately believe something until a " Skeptic " or whatever have you comes in and helps open a different door of perspective. For me that is priceless. Ultimately, it doesn't matter either way.

Making one ripple in a Chaotic Ocean of Voices is more powerful than all the sourcing and proof you can display.

Someone, even the most die hard Conspiracy Theorists are always listening.

So here's to making ripples!

sulaw~

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


AMEN!!! Couldnt have said it better if I tried.

So, this is basically the "If you believe the Mainstream Media, then you are a Sceptic" thread?

IS this what it's all about?

Calling yourself a sceptic for that Faux Moral High ground?

Meanwhile, the people who are actually SCEPTICAL of the MSM, are.... what exactly? Crazy?

I'm also a skeptic and happy to affiliate with skeptics rather than people like the group who are assembling to alert the world to a government UFO cover-up next week ...

The hearing panel will be headlined by former congressman Merrill Cook (R – Utah) who was once banned from his own party’s offices after a profanity-laced tirade and was famously plagued during his few years in Congress by reports of erratic behavior leveled by his own staff. “Merrill has taken up permanent residence in whacko land,” Cook’s chief of staff Janet Jenson wrote in an intra-office e-mail in 2000. ”If he asks you to fax his underwear to the speaker’s office, please just do it.”

www.parapolitical.com...

When the day comes - and it will - when the insane finally take over, I'll still happily be in the minority of reason.

I hope this helps clear up any misconceptions about being skeptical,for if one truly desires to be skeptical one should consider arming ones self with the proper tools.This link should help www.abovetopsecret.com... . Now i am not saying i have all the answers to exploring the universe around me,this is just to show one of the tools that i have found useful in thinking outside the box,and part of thinking outside the box is remaining skeptical about just accepting everything i read,watch,or listen to at face value!

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
So, this is basically the "If you believe the Mainstream Media, then you are a Sceptic" thread?

IS this what it's all about?

Calling yourself a sceptic for that Faux Moral High ground?

Meanwhile, the people who are actually SCEPTICAL of the MSM, are.... what exactly? Crazy?

You are not crazy (although I am not qualified to tell you that if you have doubt speak with your physician) I would describe you as a individual who is sceptical of the MSN, Government and “official” version of events.

I on the other hand, am also a sceptic just that I am sceptical of what many would commonly recognise as a “conspiracy theory” (ie. 9/11 false flag), I am actually quite sceptical of the MSN like you are, I just balance up all the evidence.

So yes we are both sceptics we are just sceptical of different things like I have said to you before, that’s amazing because it promotes some very interesting debates.

Without skeptics to keep things in check, it would really be lunatics running the asylum. Personally, I'm grateful for skeptics on the board. We mods run the gambit from believers to skeptics too. (I'm probably more in the middle).

reply to post by Gazrok


couldnt agree more