The hatred of debunkers

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: network dude

I'm not sure I count harassment, making impossible to meet demands, and throwing accusations at someone who quite possibly has suffered severe trauma related to the incident being discussed quite counts as merely "disagreeing" with them. Nor do I think disrupting people trying to talk with others by doing these things is appropriate either. Maybe that's just me though.

It may not technically be "debunking" but it's certainly treated as if it falls under the same umbrella.

Many times when someone asks for impossible to meet demands it is because they are trying to show the person they are arguing with an error in their reasoning. Also, someone who has been personally and emotionally affected by a situation probably isn't the best go to source for valid info. Emotions tend to cloud rational judgment. I know that sounds harsh, but it's true.

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: BrianFlanders

You cannot pick a random forum and start talking about conspiracies without getting attacked and ridiculed from every side. And they will not care if you have any valid points or not.

That's because not every event that happens can possibly be a conspiracy.

Of course it can't. But you cannot even mention it on most forums because people are terrified of the possibility. And also because if you can prove one single conspiracy, it seriously undermines collectivism. And most people are pathological collectivists. Which is why they mindlessly attack conspiracy theorists regardless of who they are, what they've said or how they've said it.

Why? Because they're supposed to. The biggest conspiracy in the world is the conspiracy to bury anything that isn't sanctioned by TPTB.

because the pyramid builders couldnt divide two numbers ( yet could build mind boggling structures)
because his wife was in the photo and over it was exposed (so go duplicate the sol space man with a polaroid)
because you haven't read all the scientific literature (which they offer no links)
because science would of discovered it by now ( which is laziest throw way line I have ever red0
because I only need to post a one liner im so cool ( because im a shareholder)
because the box im thinking in doesn't have windows ( so go buy a pair a scissors)

Bunkers will make up anything. They are the flip side of the coin of the types who will believe anything. One cant exist without the other.

I debunk without emotion. All the emotion seems to eminate from the debunked when I expose their foolishness to the world.

the problem with this is that debunkers have become completely superfluous. my theory behind this is that with disinformation floating out in every crevice of ufology it should be obvious where the "bunk" lies. debunkers are synonymous with "disinfo agents" because both are used to discredit valid researchers and contactees. however the government is moving away from this model because the stories that were planted as far back as the 40s are starting to take shape. just look, everyone is concerned with aliens and not black government projects. it only took about 2 "debunkers" (willy moore and doty) to create a whole ufo mythos so debunkers become irrelvant, but more than likely what they should be called are "anti-ignorance gurus" or "beacons" anything other than this horrible term.

A new business model to separate this "bunk" has been established:
Bunk Police

also debunkers tend to be very rude in their dealings with people, hinting at anti social and passive aggressive tendancies.

The easiest position, and certainly the lazy way,is the one taken by the worst of the intellectual bullies, whose numbers here are high: simply fold arms across chest,project nose skyward and say "Prove it". They position themselves as final judges, as the arbiters of truth. Meanwhile, someone is working hard to convince this type of one thing or another,only to be met with "cite your sources" or "your data is faulty". In chess the player forcing moves from his opponent is said to have the tempo. The intellectual bullies will achieve erections at the mention of chess, because they think that particular game runs in their veins. And finally the intellectual bully will dismiss his hapless and mismatched adversary; this has been a total waste of his time...
Then we have the authoritarians, of whom there are many here. They are very busy fighting against all things not black and white. And that's a lot to fight against. Ethnocentric to the bone, they will have nothing to do with a perception of a world that clicks one degree away from theirs.

a reply to: Reddaysun

And we have contrarians, for whom disagreement is life's breath. Altogether a sumptuous banquet of conflict, Muah!