It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Can we rid the word "possible" from our vocabulary?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 09:50 PM
link   
How many times have we seen the word "possible" in a thread headline? IMO, the word has become a euphemism for "sensational story with little evidentiary support that I'm going to post to score fame and points". And yes, I'm talking about the Mars post, among others. While I do believe Mars harbors life, as evidenced by high levels of methane in its atmosphere, I believe that posting a story where we have very few details and trumpeting it as something great is stupid. Sensationalism is not a good way to deny ignorance.




posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 09:59 PM
link   
Isn't this a website that explores conspiracies and the unexplained?

I don't typically find the use of the word 'possible' as an attempt at 'sensationalism'.

If threads were relegated to certitudes, we'd have very little to talk about or explore.



[edit on 23-8-2007 by loam]



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:04 PM
link   
It's all good and well to post conspiracy theories, etc, but at least make sure they come SOMEWHERE close to passing Occam's Razor's test. Don't just post something that could be true, but has little evidence to support it.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:08 PM
link   
What you are now saying has little to do with the use of the word 'possible'.

In fact, wouldn't the absence of the word in certain thread titles do the very type of 'misleading' you are concerned about?


[edit on 23-8-2007 by loam]



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Are you kidding?

POSSIBLE is spot-on. It's the threads that have titles with "PROOF" that give me great pains.

Possible is an absolutely wonderful word. I don't know how you could POSSIBLY construe the use of that word as sensationalist. "Possible" does not equate to "trumpeting something as great". I'm questioning whether you even understand the meaning of the word.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:10 PM
link   
I'm just saying, don't post the junk threads in the first place. They make the forum look bad.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Well, now that you're being honest. No, that's not going to happen.

And to answer your original thread title question - which apparently has nothing to do with your intent -

NO! We will not eliminate the word "possible". It's one of the most powerful words in the english language and it leaves open the limitless expansion of the human mind.

While you are free to voice your opinion, your call to cease the posting of threads you don't agree with is way out of line.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


Ohoho!!! An assault on my intelligence. Give yourself a point, you are really on your way to becoming an Advanced Debater. But, let's get back to the point. If something is only merely "possible", why even post about it? It's possible that a pig could have a freak mutation instantly thru currently undiscovered biological processes and sprout wings. But I'm not going to post about that...



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:15 PM
link   
And it's possible you know what you're talking about.

Consider that statement. According to your rules just me pointing out that you might is a POSSIBILITY that would negate your ability to have this thread.

piffle. Go be positive.

[edit on 8-23-2007 by Valhall]



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


Hmph. I'm not going to make much headway with you if you think I was being literal with my thread title. Don't play dumb with me...let's discuss the issue at hand.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:21 PM
link   
The issue at hand, according to your own words, is that threads that you deem "sensationalist" or "junk" should not be posted.

My point would be who the hell are you? Why don't you avoid the threads you don't agree with and stop thinking you have some measuring stick the rest of this community hasn't yet attained to possess?

And the second point I'm making, and will continue to make, is that the word "possible" is an awesome word that should NEVER be stricken from any venue.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by uberarcanist
 



But by posting the story, other idea's and links and information can be exchanged, challenged and debated. I dont see anything wrong with it personally, and not just because i happen to agree with the OP in the Mars Life story you mentioned.

I think there are worse words used to sensationalise threads to be honest.
And you did use the word "possible" in your thread title, just a little ironic.





Edit for clarification, possibly.

[edit on 23/8/07 by mojo4sale]



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:33 PM
link   
I respect your opinion, Valhall, but I disagree because I think a loose-and-easy attitude towards sensationalism will only trend towards us becoming "Coast 2 Coast", which many will argue has lost all credibility. There are many alternative theories which have lots of evidentiary support...we should stick to those.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
...I think a loose-and-easy attitude towards sensationalism will only trend towards us becoming "Coast 2 Coast", which many will argue has lost all credibility.


In my view, credibility comes within the substance of a thread...not its title.



[edit on 23-8-2007 by loam]



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by mojo4sale
 


I just happen to think the Mars thread was posted with minimal or no research, which is dumb. Further research shows this claim to be by a sensationalist German researcher with low credibility based on old, generally unaccepted data.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by uberarcanist
 


Wouldn't it make sense then to discredit the information there, in that thread?



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


But threads which base as a cornerstone of their claims mere possibility have little substance by default.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


It already was...but the issue is bigger than that thread alone-we simply cannot continue to post threads that are little more than sandcastles of wishful thinking without suffering a serious hit to our credibility.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Furthermore, the mods have historically recognized that excessively speculative posts are a problem. That's why the Skunk Works subforum was established...to "quarantine" such posts.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Furthermore, the mods have historically recognized that excessively speculative posts are a problem. That's why the Skunk Works subforum was established...to "quarantine" such posts.


Wrong.

This site abhors intentional misrepresentations.

Skunk works was NOT created to 'quarantine' such threads for the purpose you indicate. Rather, it was created to encourage a less 'hostile' environment to explore more speculative topics.

Big difference.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join