It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
skep·tic noun \ˈskep-tik\
: a person who questions or doubts something (such as a claim or statement) : a person who often questions or doubts things
Full Definition of SKEPTIC
1: an adherent or advocate of skepticism
2: a person disposed to skepticism especially regarding religion or religious principles
Skeptics have pointed out flaws in the researchers' methods.
You can believe in ghosts if you like, but I'm still a skeptic.
He is a skeptic and a cynic.
originally posted by: PHDIKOULAS
so whats the consensus?hoax-senile old man or an honest man being fed false data?
originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
a reply to: AboveBoard
I can't agree with your assessments. In a general sense, issues of level of belief or doubt would apply to skeptic. Debunking is more about facts.
Skepticism would be more about the quality of evidence [facts]
an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object
A debunker need not offer facts, but rather just suggest alternative explanations, no matter how likely.
This is why I dislike the term - it has come to imply a half-hearted attempt to explain something away as opposed to proving a more likely explanation, or completely disproving the claimed explanation.
Maybe, it would depend on what you mean by that. If you mean using words according to what they actually mean, then yes. It's key to communication. If you're using the term to deflect, then have a look a this, english.stackexchange.com...
The process of "debunking" is fairly neutral if it is simply based in fact-finding, so I totally give you that.
Shall we use new terms?
So, while it is true that the technical definition of "debunk" is simply to "show as false" (like a belief or theory), Friedman has repeatedly established a definition of "Debunker" in ufology as a particular type of person that obfuscates, mocks, etc. You can dislike him or his definition - that's no skin off my back.
Shall we use new terms?
originally posted by: OrionsGem
originally posted by: RedParrotHead
a reply to: skyblueworld
no point silencing a dying man
...unless the secrets he holds are still important to someone, his surviving family could be threatened.
Your forgetting that many of these insiders claim that they are being sanctioned from the higher ups to release this information....they are slowly allowing this info to leak out in order to acclimate us to this reality...