originally posted by: Malisa
That fixed mindset is exactly what i refuse, imagine if everyone had been set so strong on flat earth or things can't fly and all the other zillion
things that were considered dumb and fake throughout history?
And yet here we are still repeating that same mistake over and over..
I agree, a fixed mindset is a bad thing in general.
Having said that, in order to solve mysteries, we have to use logic/science and facts. Without this "framework" all that is left is an incoherent
As you've pointed out, our knowledge and understanding of what is around us is not always complete or 100% accurate. It was even less so in the past,
but over time it has improved due to the nature of scientific study, which is essentially self correcting.
To put it another way, it may not be perfect, but it's the best chance we have of understanding the world/universe around us.
Regarding debunkers/debunking - There are debunkers and there are debunkers. Some will have real knowledge of the subjects they are writing about, and
others will not. The two should not be confused.
Either way it boils down to this IMO: If the case at hand is genuinely something unusual, then it will stand on it's own merits, and will NOT
be debunkable. So debunkers are helping, by testing the strength. The alternative, is to declare all cases (even those that could easily be
birds/aircraft/satellites/etc) as possibilities, and how does that help any one? IMO it just muddies the waters even more.
Now, there are plenty of cases that can not be debunked simply because there is not enough information/data - an out of focus photograph of
"something" can not be debunked, and proves nothing for example. You can not say "because it can't be debunked, it must be evidence for the ET
hypothesis", since it might not be.
Indeed, I would argue that every time another photo or piece of footage that fails
to show anything unusual, is added to the already gigantic
pile of such "evidence", it only strengthens the case that people like me support: That, what most people submit as a "UFO" picture/report/video, is
simply something mundane.
Why? Because, if there was really something to the ET hypothesis, then with all the cameras/photographs/footage out there, then there should be
incontrovertible evidence in the form of a photograph/footage by now. There are more (and better) cameras now than ever before, so it is reasonable to
to say that.
Then there is the "other pile" of photos/footage which are obviously
mundane things like birds/aircraft/etc., which lends even more weight to
the idea that people think mundane things are UFOs, and that the ET hypothesis is wrong.
Either way, without the debunkes to sweep away all the crap, the whole subject would be in even more disarray than it's in already. Nothing much has
changed in 50 years if you are a believer in the ETH. However, if you look at the mystery from another angle, which is more logical and fact based,
then there has been progress (much to the annoyance of the "other side"):
1 Our understanding of the atmosphere and atmospheric phenomena has improved, giving us the tools to weed out many of the natural and man-made
phenomena that are often
misidentified by the public.
2 Our understanding of the way people perceive the world around them has greatly improved, and answers many previous questions about the inability in
general of people to correctly identify atmospheric objects/phenomena, which is probably the most important (yet almost totally ignored/overlooked)
aspect of the whole subject.
3 The mounting pile of "nothing" and "obvious mundane things" photographs/footage - so many, but where are incontrovertible photographs/footage which
also be there if there is anything to the ETH, especially considering the improvements in camera tech?
These are all real/fact based arguments which suggest that the ETH is wrong.
On the other hand, those who believe in the ETH have ZERO fact based evidence
to back up their beliefs.
Many people on here are under the impression that "better cameras" will lead to the incontrovertible evidence they want, and have been for a long
time. The irony is that, as cameras have improved, what were previously out of focus/blurred/fuzzy images, are now clear (or clearer) images of
birds/aircraft/etc., lending weight to "there are no aliens" hypothesis.
Personally, I have no problems with aliens existing or having existed. I think it's likely given the size of the universe and enormity of time that
has passed. I just have yet to see any realistic evidence for them being here. Instead, I see plenty of evidence that people in general often look up
and misidentify normal/everyday objects. I say this as someone who has investigated atmospheric phenomena, and how people perceive these phenomena,
for over two decades.
I'm not someone who follows blindly, but someone who actually goes out there, images the sky, and then tries to put the pieces of the puzzle together,
while checking if the observations fit what is already known about the phenomena in question. Crucially, I have built up at least a basic
understanding of how the atmosphere and atmospheric phenomena work, which is something that is lacking in most other people who have an interest in
UFOs. UFOs after all are an atmospheric phenomena, so how can you (or anyone) have even a hope of understanding them if you do not understand how the
atmosphere works? It would be a bit like trying to understand fish, when you don't understand seas, rivers, lakes, streams, or ponds - not a good
basis to start any even moderately serious investigation!
That is why this field of study NEEDS
people like me (skeptics/debunkers), to call out the obvious - what may not be obvious to one person, can
be glaringly obvious to another who has a deeper knowledge of a particular subject.
originally posted by: Malisa
I will never assume anything either way, because assumptions, as history keeps showing us all, are still the mother of all f*k ups
Yes, I once again agree wholeheartedly.
So where do you stand then? I only ask because if you are on the side of the ETH, then it's highly likely
that you yourself are making
assumptions. I would hate to make an assumption!
If there were no assumptions, and people on here just dealt with accepted facts, then this site would be a whole lot more boring (not good for the
owners of ATS at all!), but I think a lot more progress in this field would be made.
The real problem (one of a few actually), is that there are plenty of people on here, who, if presented with a fact, refuse to acknowledge that fact,
when it conflicts with their beliefs/expectations. So there is a need here for debunkers, who have a reasonably deep knowledge of the subjects
involved, and can point out the facts that have a direct bearing on the credibility of a particular case.
That is my 2 cents, and I'll leave you all to think on the points I've touched on here. It is rare that I have the time to spend here with so much
else going on in my life right now, so I'll likely leave it for the other "logical thinkers" to pick up on any of the points here, should they be
edit on 26-9-2019 by FireballStorm because: added a few words to clarify my points