Debunkers: You've lost credibility and will continue to lose

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
I think the UFO crowd needs to get better at debunking the debunkers. That should solve your problem.

I just ignore the debunkers for the most part. One or two sentences in, it's not hard to tell if they have a point or not.

For the most part "debunkers" are simply in denial about certain inconvenient facts.

For the most part critics of debunkers in blanket statements are the easiest to debunk because they are the perpetrator of bunk. There is no such thing as an inconvenient facts. That's an oxymoron. Facts being based on truth don't need to be inconvenient, they just are! Believers do not work with or depend on facts 'cause if they could then they wouldn't be believers. Get it?

originally posted by: mirageman
The government wouldn't tell you the truth you wanted to hear for 70 years. The government lies..

So what exactly is your point?

Of course the government lies. Who here actually believes the government is going to make a 100% admission? No one. However, there are those that have been associated with the government who woke up one day and developed a conscience and decided to expose what they knew, were made aware of, or were witness to.

There are also hundreds of thousands of people not associated with the government and who have never been associated with the government who have brought to light detailed accounts of UAPs, photos, video, stories of close encounters, and even abductions.

There are also false reports, false photos, and false videos that are easily debunked and agreed upon by both believers and non believers.

There are plenty of reports right here on ATS that are so overwhelmingly impossible to debunk and I find it amazingly ironic when those threads pop up never once does one of the armchair ATS bebunkers show up. You guys pick and choose where you want to spew rubbish.

So the OPs point is pretty clear and he even states so in his own words:

" You've frequently provided weak and often laughable "explanations" to this mystery."

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit

originally posted by: mirageman

So what exactly is your point?

Their point seems to be the most childish, unnecessary and pointless point of all: the creation of warring Tribes on the UFO/Aliens forum. Unless they're ten-years-old, there's no excuse (no offence to 10-year-olds).

I'll just keep pointing out your and the others' ongoing hypocrisy with your own words where you told another poster a short while back about how nice it was to be "polite". And here you are (yet again) illustrating just how impolite you actually are.

If you want polite discourse then start by being polite.

a reply to: FireballStorm

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.

The best reply I've had the pleasure to read. You cover a lot of bases, and you hit a homerun! My hat's off to you, thank you.

originally posted by: FireballStorm

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.
snip
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.

I thought I would use your fine words to include some material that I've put together for my article "I'm A UFO Hunter" and I hope that you don't mind.

This article is aimed at those of you that carry a digicam or camcorder. I'm a UFO Hunter. By that I mean that whenever I'm outside I sky-watch so that instead of waiting to videotape UFOs accidentally, I make an effort to improve my chances looking for that elusive target.  It takes an effort to constantly look up but doing so additionally provides many pleasant aerial surprises that most fail to notice. I wear Polarized sunglasses which make it easier to locate objects in the sky as the glasses not only prevent glare, keeping your eyes from being fatigued, but also at certain angles they darken the sky making everything in the sky stand out, especially white or silvery objects.  Get curious about everything that you see overhead and don't rule out anything out of hand until you've gone through a mental check of possibilities.  These include balloons, debris, birds, and aircraft.  Airplanes at high altitudes may make you think twice since, usually, the wings are not as noticeable as the fuselage but recognition is almost instantaneous no matter how high it is.  Helicopters are rarely seen at high altitudes and their loud engines will precede their appearance.  Not so with balloons which will be the ones that will make you reach for your camcorder.

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
To put the debunker failure in perspective:

Lone gunman #1
For 50 plus years the lone gun club has failed miserably to prove that LHO fired shots at JFK that day.

Lone gunman #2
For 50 plus years the lone gun club has failed miserably to prove that LHO fired shots at JD Tippit that day.

Lone gunman #3
For 50 plus years the lone gun club has failed miserably to prove that J Ruby fired shots at LHO that day ALL ON HIS OWN ACCORD.

If this wasn't the Aliens and UFOs forum I could get into some neat discussions based on your assertions. I know there's a forum for conspiracies but I don't want to deal with some new nuts. However, for the sake of discussion, I don't remember debunking in the JFK assassination. You got believers and disbelievers and that forum brings them together but little if any debunkers challenge each other because not one of them knows the why of the event. You can't debunk theories wild and sane. There are facts which are questioned but, again, no sure answers. LHO is accused of using the Manlicher-Carcano that was found but I've seen a video of an official film that shows the other rifle that was shown leaning on a surface. Perhaps this is news to the members who haven't learned that there was, indeed a 2nd rifle found. Will there be debunking?

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
Ignorant and uninformed title. Any worthwhile "debunker" on this forum doesn't deny the existence of UFOs. Meaning objects that can't be identified. It's the huge leap of faith/belief to say these objects are piloted by alien beings, that's the issue. There's been 7+ decades and thousands of opportunities for providing real evidence of visiting aliens but it's never there. These are physical interactions that require physical evidence.

Hardcore believers make alien visitation to be commonplace and a non-issue. I think the importance of discovering intelligent alien life in our universe and the meaning escapes this group.

It's not about denial or this ridiculous fear or other nonsense. It's understanding the incredible impact and meaning it would have. Why should anyone leave this to stories or lightweight evidence? Just because you hope and want it to be true, doesn't make it so. 

I'm sure you know that believers are mentally conditioned and unable to become non-believers. Cult deprogrammers go through one hell of time in trying to de-program cult members. The mind, when set, is almost inviolable. Biased parents, biased teachers, biased TV programming, etc., set the impressionable mind. How some of us are not affected by this vast programming is a "gift" from somewhere. We are fortunate to have escaped and enjoy our unfettered selves.

When Whitley Strieber published his book "Communion" in 1987 the cover of the book showing a fanciful alien, millions were conditioned by the book's appearance worldwide. Even though the alien's face changed on various printing it just reinforced tales including the various different details. There were never aliens and there was never a real abduction. C'mon, an author of terror tales? Expected and it has made him a fortune without having to offer any evidence, just good creating which resulted in conditioning.

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: Hunkadinka

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Visiting ESB

Why would an alien ship need lights on the outside of it?

Humans put lights on their craft specifically so that those craft can be seen.

If the aliens want to be seen why do they not land?

Maybe they just like the attention, who knows?

Better ask them lol, asking a human why aliens would do this or that doesn't really get you anywhere

Maybe they just want people to see them, but they are not willing to talk to anyone or care to talk, they just want to be 'seen' for whatever reason we don't know

No earthling can answer the questions. To come up with guesses is just an exercise in futility. And who says we know how many types of alleged aliens there are? While we are only one race, human earthlings, but we have a variety: white, black, "yellow", orientals, hispanics, german, irish, etc.

However races are not species, color of skin doesn't mean different species

There could be zillions of different alien species, or just one, or two, who knows

That was the gist of my reply=variety

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: Hunkadinka

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Malisa

I mean i know your job is to debunk things

Sure it is. Read my sig.

Do you like bunk?

Well that's a dummy question LMFAO!

10:

I like to be clear of mind, not just go crazy on something because i can't figure out otherwise
snip

Your replies indicate that you fall short of being clear of mind. I am of the opinion that you like and savor bunk, it's all over your comments. Try to do better. Think more like Phage, Harte, Arbitrageur, Armap and, hell, even me!

LMFAO!

You sound a bit butt hurt here, i'm sorry you can't see things as they are

Maybe even you failed at being an honest debunker and have used the bias to destroy things you didn't like or understood in the past, and now you hate me because i said clearly some people are fake and lame debunkers?

Anyway i would not follow Phage at all, he is just repeating stuff some other people figured out, he doesn't even know if the other people were right or not but it was "the accepted answer" so he just repeats it blindly, like a religion

I suggest you don't mix some names with other's trying to make them all equal

.. That's a terrible approach, when looking for validation : P

Only people who feel they lack look for validation by the way, everyone else post their own views without referencing someone else with "higher credentials" in an attempt to make themselves look credible

Well, it looks like you've made up your, actually, closed mind and don't show any desire to be elucidated. So I'll sign off and not reply to your future comments. Ciao.

originally posted by: Hunkadinka

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: Hunkadinka

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Malisa

I mean i know your job is to debunk things

Sure it is. Read my sig.

Do you like bunk?

Well that's a dummy question LMFAO!

10:

I like to be clear of mind, not just go crazy on something because i can't figure out otherwise
snip

Your replies indicate that you fall short of being clear of mind. I am of the opinion that you like and savor bunk, it's all over your comments. Try to do better. Think more like Phage, Harte, Arbitrageur, Armap and, hell, even me!

LMFAO!

You sound a bit butt hurt here, i'm sorry you can't see things as they are

Maybe even you failed at being an honest debunker and have used the bias to destroy things you didn't like or understood in the past, and now you hate me because i said clearly some people are fake and lame debunkers?

Anyway i would not follow Phage at all, he is just repeating stuff some other people figured out, he doesn't even know if the other people were right or not but it was "the accepted answer" so he just repeats it blindly, like a religion

I suggest you don't mix some names with other's trying to make them all equal

.. That's a terrible approach, when looking for validation : P

Only people who feel they lack look for validation by the way, everyone else post their own views without referencing someone else with "higher credentials" in an attempt to make themselves look credible

Well, it looks like you've made up your, actually, closed mind and don't show any desire to be elucidated. So I'll sign off and not reply to your future comments. Ciao.

I didn't LMFAO!

See? You are kind of fixed already, if i don't agree with you then i'm wrong : )



You can't take any criticism, big ego and all that stuff has consequences in people's brains

My hear it's like... half broken, maybe.. or maybe not...

Life's a mess mister, you can't be on top following that road < 3

originally posted by: 1point92AU

originally posted by: mirageman
The government wouldn't tell you the truth you wanted to hear for 70 years. The government lies..

So what exactly is your point?

Of course the government lies. Who here actually believes the government is going to make a 100% admission? No one. However, there are those that have been associated with the government who woke up one day and developed a conscience and decided to expose what they knew, were made aware of, or were witness to.

ALL governments lie, they have to. They're not going to divulge details that may put them at risk. But they're not lying about UFOs because governments, like us, don't know anything special. They've learned what they know from us, from the possibly thousands of file cabinets stuffed with reports from the 1940s on. Throw in emulsion films: stills and movies, videos, and digital files. We are the governments' source. So how do you come up with a 100% admission? No one has exposed anything UFOlogy-wise that we can take to the bank. The worst scenario was the alleged claims that NASA doctored photos. Some of the claims are true but no one has explained the certainty.

There are also hundreds of thousands of people not associated with the government and who have never been associated with the government who have brought to light detailed accounts of UAPs, photos, video, stories of close encounters, and even abductions.

A claim you cannot support with irrefutable evidence. It may be, but you can't prove. You know where hearsay takes you.

There are also false reports, false photos, and false videos that are easily debunked and agreed upon by both believers and non believers.

There are plenty of reports right here on ATS that are so overwhelmingly impossible to debunk and I find it amazingly ironic when those threads pop up never once does one of the armchair ATS bebunkers show up. You guys pick and choose where you want to spew rubbish.

Link to some of those non-existent reports so we non-existent debunkers can get a crack at ''em.

So the OPs point is pretty clear and he even states so in his own words:

" You've frequently provided weak and often laughable "explanations" to this mystery."

originally posted by: Hunkadinka

originally posted by: 1point92AU

originally posted by: mirageman
The government wouldn't tell you the truth you wanted to hear for 70 years. The government lies..

So what exactly is your point?

Of course the government lies. Who here actually believes the government is going to make a 100% admission? No one. However, there are those that have been associated with the government who woke up one day and developed a conscience and decided to expose what they knew, were made aware of, or were witness to.

ALL governments lie, they have to. They're not going to divulge details that may put them at risk. But they're not lying about UFOs because governments, like us, don't know anything special. They've learned what they know from us, from the possibly thousands of file cabinets stuffed with reports from the 1940s on. Throw in emulsion films: stills and movies, videos, and digital files. We are the governments' source. So how do you come up with a 100% admission? No one has exposed anything UFOlogy-wise that we can take to the bank. The worst scenario was the alleged claims that NASA doctored photos. Some of the claims are true but no one has explained the certainty.

There are also hundreds of thousands of people not associated with the government and who have never been associated with the government who have brought to light detailed accounts of UAPs, photos, video, stories of close encounters, and even abductions.

A claim you cannot support with irrefutable evidence. It may be, but you can't prove. You know where hearsay takes you.

There are also false reports, false photos, and false videos that are easily debunked and agreed upon by both believers and non believers.

There are plenty of reports right here on ATS that are so overwhelmingly impossible to debunk and I find it amazingly ironic when those threads pop up never once does one of the armchair ATS bebunkers show up. You guys pick and choose where you want to spew rubbish.

Link to some of those non-existent reports so we non-existent debunkers can get a crack at ''em.

So the OPs point is pretty clear and he even states so in his own words:

" You've frequently provided weak and often laughable "explanations" to this mystery."

Link to some of those non-existent reports so we non-existent debunkers can get a crack at ''em.

Oh you are a debunker alright, just not the one you think you are, but in your eyes you are the right one

< 3

a reply to: Hunkadinka

ALL governments lie, they have to. They're not going to divulge details that may put them at risk. But they're not lying about UFOs because governments, like us, don't know anything special. They've learned what they know from us, from the possibly thousands of file cabinets stuffed with reports from the 1940s on. Throw in emulsion films: stills and movies, videos, and digital files. We are the governments' source. So how do you come up with a 100% admission? No one has exposed anything UFOlogy-wise that we can take to the bank. The worst scenario was the alleged claims that NASA doctored photos. Some of the claims are true but no one has explained the certainty.

If you actually bothered to do just a little research on the subject, you eould know governments lie about ufos! Be it coming out with stupid explanations for various cases, to missing or suppressed information on certain cases!

Seriously! Actually do some research!

originally posted by: Hunkadinka

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: DJMSN

if you accept the "unidentified" designation, and take into account all that "weird" stuff they do (if you believe eye witnesses), it is far more rational to state "it's aliens"..then to say..."it's earthly secret black budget tech".
snip

Oh, please! It is irrational to state "it's aliens". It's rational to say, in all honesty, we don't know. Until you know, stay neutral.

If everybody always stayed neutral, we would have never achieved what we did. Dreamers and visionaries progress the human race.

And in any case...staying neutral is...easy. Taking a stand and expressing your bias takes way more courage.

a reply to: Hunkadinka

Whether a fact is convenient or not obviously depends upon the perspective of the individual. For a person psychologically invested, emotional invested, in a certain view of the world, a fact that troubles that view of the world is denied or swept under the rug. That is essentially what cognitive dissonance is.

For an open minded person, a disinterested individual, all facts are relevant and analyzed.

For him, a fact is a fact.

For the other, his mind won't allow some facts into the analysis. It is an inconvenient fact if he plans to engage in rational public dialogue or analysis.

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly

originally posted by: Hunkadinka

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: DJMSN

if you accept the "unidentified" designation, and take into account all that "weird" stuff they do (if you believe eye witnesses), it is far more rational to state "it's aliens"..then to say..."it's earthly secret black budget tech".
snip

Oh, please! It is irrational to state "it's aliens". It's rational to say, in all honesty, we don't know. Until you know, stay neutral.

If everybody always stayed neutral, we would have never achieved what we did. Dreamers and visionaries progress the human race.

And in any case...staying neutral is...easy. Taking a stand and expressing your bias takes way more courage.

You missed my point. All I'm saying is that to declare "it's aliens" when there is no evidence for such is irrational thinking.

When aliens or ETs are discussed logic should rule. Aliens are not supported by logic and/or common sense. We don't know is the correct assumption. And when you don't know, staying neutral is preferred, IMO.

originally posted by: Jay-morris
a reply to: Hunkadinka

ALL governments lie, they have to. They're not going to divulge details that may put them at risk. But they're not lying about UFOs because governments, like us, don't know anything special. They've learned what they know from us, from the possibly thousands of file cabinets stuffed with reports from the 1940s on. Throw in emulsion films: stills and movies, videos, and digital files. We are the governments' source. So how do you come up with a 100% admission? No one has exposed anything UFOlogy-wise that we can take to the bank. The worst scenario was the alleged claims that NASA doctored photos. Some of the claims are true but no one has explained the certainty.

If you actually bothered to do just a little research on the subject, you eould know governments lie about ufos! Be it coming out with stupid explanations for various cases, to missing or suppressed information on certain cases!

Seriously! Actually do some research!

I got a kick out of that one too. "Governments lie, just not about UFO's". Funniest thing I have read in decades.