Are skeptics disinformation agents?

If you can add something to that article, I think you'll find your input well received. But if you can't back it up with facts and sources, you will definitely get to meet some more skeptics here and I guess that will validate your original views and you'll move along to the next website.

I think I did a fair job in my own thread. I did not really meet as many skeptics as I would have expected. When my work here is done I won't hesitate to move along to another website.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

May I ask to what standard you hold UFO sightings? You say you don't believe every ufo sighting, so how do you apply your own critical eye without succumbing to your own label of skeptic? Is it because you don't discredit EVERY UFO sighting? Or is it because you don't discredit UFO sightings while others do? Why would you consider YOUR judgement more sound than others?

Don't confuse the issue. True skeptics claim that not enough evidence exists for ANY UFO claim to be proven. The very existence of ET is called into question. The 1952 Washington, D.C. flap is monumental IMO because of a number of factors. The events leading up to the flap, how it was reported, and the events after the flap are all very telling. ANYONE who doesn't smell a rat there needs to come to their senses. I don't consider my judgement to be better than any other. I just feel that some of us have abandoned our ability to think critically for one reason or another.

Yes, I have read your propaganda, I more interested in the answers to the questions I asked.

(And, if you believe your own words about 'true skeptics', you seem to be as closed minded as those you are demonizing.)

This standard you ask about does not exist. The UFO encounters that I consider phony involve ET doing bodily harm to humans. These types are most likely the work of disinformation artists.

Call me closed minded if you wish. I'm not here to impress you or anybody like you. I'm here to help spread a very important message. The message is that extraterrestrial life does in fact exist. UFO sightings are not all fake. Anyone who is in direct disagreement with this message is a bold-faced liar.

Originally posted by HaveSeen4Myself
This standard you ask about does not exist. The UFO encounters that I consider phony involve ET doing bodily harm to humans. These types are most likely the work of disinformation artists.

Call me closed minded if you wish. I'm not here to impress you or anybody like you. I'm here to help spread a very important message. The message is that extraterrestrial life does in fact exist. UFO sightings are not all fake. Anyone who is in direct disagreement with this message is a bold-faced liar.

You are contradicting yourself. If the standard I am asking for doesn't exist, then you would believe that EVERY UFO sighting is real. The idea you put forth that UFO sightings are not ALL fake implies that you yourself are in doubt of some sightings of UFOs, and if you believe SOME are fake, there IS a standard that you MUST use to seperate the real from the fake.

Are you saying that everyone that doesn't believe in aliens is a liar? What are they lying about? Who are they lying to?

Originally posted by HaveSeen4Myself
This standard you ask about does not exist. The UFO encounters that I consider phony involve ET doing bodily harm to humans. These types are most likely the work of disinformation artists.

Call me closed minded if you wish. I'm not here to impress you or anybody like you. I'm here to help spread a very important message. The message is that extraterrestrial life does in fact exist. UFO sightings are not all fake. Anyone who is in direct disagreement with this message is a bold-faced liar.

I don't think the one's who are in direct disagreement on extraterrestrials and UFO's are bold faced liar's.. at least not intentionally. I think that on a very deep level, they know that such things exist because the evidence is so pervasive and well documented only an idiot would say that it's all hogwash. But for those who are operating as skeptics, and I'm talking about the one's who are very strong and volatile in their negative comments where they are wearing their skepticism as a badge of honor -- where they even hound and target in on those of us who are presenting hard core material evidence as to the existence of such beings/ phenomena -- it's clear that they are really operating on the wave length of FEAR because such material is so outside of their frame of reference, they simply are not equipped to deal with such information on an emotional and spiritual level without reacting to such information in the extreme way that they do.

[edit on 29-12-2006 by Palasheea]

I thank the heavens that there is skeptics.

I believe in UFOs, but i also believe that 90% or higher of sightings and video/photo 'proof' are either hoaxes or something entirely logical.

As i've said in the past, there is extremists in both Skeptics and Believers, and they aren't what the community needs. It needs an open mind on both sides that is willing to debate and take information onboard.

To believe every account and photo or video that comes out is pure madness. Be interested and optimistic, sure, but don't be blind.

[edit on 29-12-2006 by fooffstarr]

Originally posted by fooffstarr
HaveSeen4Myself, you are one of the people that make me thank the heavens that there is skeptics.

I believe in UFOs, but i also believe that 90% or higher of sightings and video/photo 'proof' are either hoaxes or something entirely logical.

As i've said in the past, there is extremists in both Skeptics and Believers, and they aren't what the community needs. It needs an open mind on both sides that is willing to debate and take information onboard.

To believe every account and photo or video that comes out is pure madness. Be interested and optimistic, sure, but don't be blind.

fooffstarr, I noticed that you did not quote HaveSeen4Myself in your above most recent message to this thread but he/she said that " I'm here to help spread a very important message. The message is that extraterrestrial life does in fact exist. UFO sightings are not all fake. Anyone who is in direct disagreement with this message is a bold-faced liar."
Note the part where this person is saying "UFO sightings are NOT ALL FAKE" yet you in turn responded to this person's post as if he/she SAID THAT ALL UFO SIGHTINGS ARE REAL when in fact this person did not say any such thing at all!

You are intentionally distorting and putting words into this person's mouth that he/she said that this person never said in the first place! So I think you owe this person an apology for mis-quoting and intentionally trying to give the impression that this person said one thing when in fact this person said nothing of the sort...

[edit on 29-12-2006 by Palasheea]

This thread convinced me that there are tons of ATS users that need ticker skin...

I did not believe in any of that UFO crap, even when I saw strange things troughout my childhood.... I have seen 2 instances in which I cant explain what I saw, maybe these are highly advanced TERRESTRIAL airships but I highly doubt Mexico is a good place for them to conduct test OR to be developed !! LOL or such, so I think, those thing I saw (UFOS) must be from elsewhere, I have not met an allien not been abducted, but I cant prove to anyone else of what I saw...so I try not to convince anyone of what I saw, I KNOW what I KNOW and I dont care the debunkers...simply as that... but that doesnt make a a 100% believer in the abduction and weird theories about e.t. life on earth... simply I know there are UFOS and they are FOR REAL.

I agree that a vast majority of INTERNET skeptics are more than likely disinformation agents. As for those skeptics that are open about their denial within the public sector, are more than likely just being skeptical due to their nature, or forced nature (NSA mind control to promote disinformation in the public sector).

I think this thread would have been better if the OP would have defined exactly what they meant by the term skeptic. There are all levels of skepticism in the UFO community.

There are people who believe in UFO/Aliens but don't buy into a lot of this new age spin that can be put into the subject. There are others who believe that Alien reptiles from other worlds have invaded our planet and are currently masquerading as our leaders. There are people who believe that UFO’s do not come from other planets but are ancient civilizations that are currently living under the oceans, inside of mountains and under the Earths crust.

The choice to believe or not believe in aliens is based on a perception of the world. If there is a UFO (Unidentified Flying Object) spotted in the sky, a person who believes in Aliens and UFO is more likely to jump to the conclusion that the UFO is under alien control. A skeptic will perceive the UFO to be something natural or man-made. Both UFO believer and skeptic are wrong. Neither had any facts to back up their theory. Their perception of reality filled in the lack of evidence blank.

I personally believe that Aliens from other worlds have conquered space travel and are visiting the Earth. However, I do not believe many of the UFO and Alien videos that I see circulating on the Internet. My perception and belief is that most of them are hoaxes. I do not think that I have ever seen one alien on a video that I believed to be an actual real life otherworldly alien. Am I a skeptic?

Sure you are. We all are to a varying degree. I had an encounter which involved both close range visualization of a UFO and interaction with a physical EBE. The things that were imparted to me I can't explain. But I came away from that encounter with the knowledge that these beings are not here to harm humans. They intervened in my life at a time when I was in dire need of spiritual assistance. I would have to classify my experience as a type of divine intervention. I didn't realize until many years later how significant a part this played in my life. It is for these reasons that I feel compelled to have a voice on the subject of ET/UFOs.

Okay, let's first examine what a skeptic is.

skep·tic also scep·tic

NOUN:

1. One who instinctively or habitually doubts, questions, or disagrees with assertions or generally accepted conclusions.

2. One inclined to skepticism in religious matters.

3. Philosophy
a. often Skeptic An adherent of a school of skepticism.
b. Skeptic A member of an ancient Greek school of skepticism, especially that of Pyrrho of Elis (360?-272? b.c.).

Source: education.yahoo.com...

addl: www.thefreedictionary.com...


And what exactly is disinformation?

dis·in·for·ma·tion

noun:

1. Deliberately misleading information announced publicly or leaked by a government or especially by an intelligence agency in order to influence public opinion or the government in another nation...

2. Dissemination of such misleading information.

Source: www.thefreedictionary.com...

Underlining mine, for emphasis of the relevant text.


So, given the definitions above I would say that the majority of skeptics are not disinformation "agents", as the original poster had put it. Is there a possibility for disinformation to occur? Of course. But it does not necessarily mean that all skeptics are disinformation agents.

Originally posted by polomontana
Are skeptics disinformation agents?
[edit on 29-12-2006 by polomontana]

No. I'm a hardcore skeptic and I sure as hell know that nobody is paying me money to spread disinformation. Instead I take my own time to knock sense in to people.

The only reason why the government wouldn't tell you that there's a UFO over the white house or whatever is because of pure security. If it's a airplane or some other damn thing made by the United States government or some other party, just blatently saying exactly what it is is really silly. Especially if you purposely want to keep it a secret so that other countries don't know about it.

If you ever played a game like Alpha Centauri or some other 4X style game, you will know that one of the best ways to defeat other players is simply by constructing units using new technology and keeping them out of the sight of your opponents. I wouldn't be surprised if the same exists for real life.

Honestly though, no. Skeptics are just people who have some common sense really. It's really just following the whole belief of Occam's razor, a belief which states the most simpliest solution is obviously the correct one, should all possible scenerios be equal.

In otherwords, lets say I spill a cup of liquid. The liquid looks orange, smells like orange, and came from a bottle which looks like an orange juice carton. I tell you it's orange juice. Instead of admitting that it is orange juice, you go off on a tangent saying that it's actually cranberry juice, explaining in detail how this can be possible.

By doing that though, you are turning a simple situation into a complex mess. In which case your margin for error would be greater.

Simply said, skeptics base their comments off of that. Some might have egos, but I really do believe most think that way, or some fashion like it. Theres not enough solid concrete evidence to prove anything. You're trying to make people believe something that can't be backed up at all.

The only evidence truely available are testimonies from people and shoddy pictures/video. The fact that people are so willing to believe a bunch of people tell a crazy tale over a course of years, which do not actually match up to any other story most of the time, in comparison to an organization which has stated repeatedly over and over again the exact same thing.

It doesn't seem very logical at all.

And the only way to get a skeptic to believe is by finding actual scientific evidence. We have drawings and stories about dragons, but surprising enough we don't have any actual bones of a dragon. In which case, it's a very high probability that dragons never existed. And the same could be applied to aliens.

I do believe aliens are real. But I don't believe they are visiting us nor is there some grand government conspiracy. It doesn't make sense at all for it to be any other way really.

[edit on 30-12-2006 by CidCaldensfey]

Are skeptics disinformation agents?

No.

Why does UFOlogy have an air of ridicule about it?

Simple. Because deliberate frauds and innocent misidentifications make up the majority of the sightings. Now, that doesn't mean there aren't real events that are worthy of investigation. However, it does mean that given the statistics, a skeptical person is going to go into a case accepting that it could be either a misidentification, or deliberate hoax.

Personally, this separation is a good thing.

What do the skeptics have to say about the French government's recent statement on UFOs and its release of this information to the public?

That in itself is an undeniable and obvious disclosure. The French government is admitting there are unidentified flying objects in and around the atmosphere of Earth

[edit on 30-12-2006 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

Originally posted by HaveSeen4Myself

I submit that many people in the UFO field are disinfo specialists who create a constant string of hoaxes. If there ever was any truth, it is discounted by all the lies and fakes out there.

Absolute truth. Then, after they get through with the hoaxings, they get back to their real job as skeptics and debunkers of actual sightings.

Actually, no. Many (when caught) say they are believers who are trying to "force the government's hand." Many are folks who follow and believe the UFO information.

Many of the other hoaxers seem to be "me too!" bored teens who create these stories to see if someone really WILL believe fabricated tales.

Originally posted by HaveSeen4Myself

Guess what? Turns out Cooper was full of conjecture, misrepresented facts and what's worse, probably faked documents.

Guess what else? Cooper got f'ing MURDERED. So a little respect for the dead might be in order here.

According to all sources, he was in a shootout with police officers... so it's "suicide by cop" rather than murder. I think his paranoia was a contributing factor.

Don't confuse the issue. True skeptics claim that not enough evidence exists for ANY UFO claim to be proven.

Perhaps the problem is that the two sides are using different standards of proof.

Skeptics would like to see:
* consistant ship shapes and designs
* consistant reports of aliens and languages
* consistant reports of alien origins
* information that "jives" with physics and astronomy (no "space is warped in strange ways around this planet and the laws of physics don't apply there and that's why there's life on this planet that's parked between two stars" or claiming an ancient planet in an area where stars are no older than 3 million years (the Earth is 4-5 billion years old))
* information that predicts discoveries or proves (scientifically) to be true. A counterexample is the "aliens told me that element 114 has time travel properties" -- and the discovery of element 114 proved that statement to be both ridiculous and false.
* photos of aliens that show believable anatomy and physiology

...etc.

I'd say both yes and no.

Yes in regards to the information that they present that leads truth seekers in the direction that opposes truth.

No in regards that Skeptics do offer a viewpoint that can be beneficial in the search for the truth behind the phenomenon. Skeptics often prove to be resourceful, and do in fact conduct research, albeit in a seperate direction than that of believers.

I've often noted that skeptics do tend to ask some relevant questions that believers' logics do not always permit them to see as pertinent. In other words, i believe skeptics do offer tools necessary in the pursuit of truth.

Skeptics often ask the questions believers seldom do. In this regard i believe skeptics do serve a purpose for even the hard-line believers.

Believers do not always come up with the right questions to ask, as skeptics sometimes do.

I believe even the skeptic can assist the believers' stance on the subject, given that skeptics will often ask harder to answer questions concerning the ufo phenomenon.

Well, I guess I'll chime in.

Skeptics are not neccessarily unbelievers. I am in fact a devout believer in the existence of extra-terrestrials.

I am in fact 100% convinced that our galaxy and our universe is just teaming with all kinds of funky alien life.

I however do not believe in approaching aliens or the concept of any thing having to do with mortal species as a religion.

As you can tell from your thread that the opinion varies with each poster which of course sends us into that whole downward spiral of "the state of ufology".

So in my opinion at least, the die hard true believer is looking for a new philosophy, way of life, religion or even a message of salvation from the aliens.

The benevolent, astral plane traveling space brothers, the blonde (and oddly enough usually hot) goddesses, the spielbergian/streiberite demi-gods and all their various messages of a deeper, more interconnected universe going hand in hand with the salvation of the human race is oddly enough exactly what the believer was looking for, a confirmation of their beliefs. I am not alone, I don't need to be scared, I knew there had to be more to life than this humdrum day to day and here it is.

Whereas most skeptics are just looking for the aliens.

Not all skeptics are good people or even good skeptics just as not all true believers are good people...or right.

Spiderj

Many of these posts prove my point. A skeptic debunks a picture here and a video there and they act like they have debunked Ufology. I remember listening to Coast to Coast AM and the professional skeptic Michael Shermer was talking about psychics and he brought up Miss Cleo. This is very dishonest but it's a red herring that many skeptics use. They want to illuminate a mistake here or a flaw there and act as if it discredits the whole of Ufology. If you debunk a few theories in physics it doesn't discredit the whole of physics, just like if you debunk a video or picture in Ufology it doesn't debunk Ufology as a whole and that is my point. A skeptic can't debunk Ufology and that's why skeptics isolate specific cases. When you look at cave paintings, paintings, ancient manuscripts, pictures and videos and the add in eyewitness ccounts from Presidents, pilots, police, people in the military and highly respected individuals in the community, Ufology as a whole cannot be debunked. You then look at what's happening in science with things like parallel universes, the multiverse and extra dimensions. Theoretical physicist Dr. Michio Kaku talks about a type 1, type 2 and type 3 civilizations that could populate the cosmos. I believe alot of the things that we see and sense are beings who share the same Awareness but we are located at different points in spacetime. In order for Awareness to be conscious of itself it had to inhabit a decohered vessel like our human bodies. So uncertainty = consciousness. When you are uncertain of something you are conscious of it. There is no uncertainty in Awareness, so Awareness became conscious to experience itself. So when your unconscious your actually aware. This is why many near death experiences talk about becoming very aware as they become unconscious. There's a sea of possibilities in Awareness and there are an infinate amount of universes with beings in decohered states experiencing the fullness of Awareness. This is also why many ancients talked about letting go of the ego or the conscious self and allowing the spirit and soul to unite and you could experience Awareness in the body.

[edit on 31-12-2006 by polomontana]

[edit on 31-12-2006 by polomontana]