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

reply to post by loam


Apparently you haven't heard the phrase "food for skunks" thrown around by old-timers here when they want the speculators to get the hell out of the more factual forums. I wish the "possible" posts would go to SW like the posts by other speculators typically do.

Heck, speculation is some people's cup of tea. I just wish it would always stay in SW and not masquerade as something of substance.

I am getting a chuckle out of all this when I think of how many times noted "scientists," and other figures of authority have scoffed at things with the words "impossible." Oh "heavier than air flight is impossible," they said.

The earth is not round, "what you say about it being round is impossible," any one knows that the oceans would spill out if it were round and we all know it is a flat "firmament." All of those events in the history of science were about what is possible, and beyond that it was the brave adventurers who declared things in fact and offered duplicative proofs.

Usually the authorities built their careers on certain things, and would be out of business if they were proved wrong.

Hey I am with Valhall, I like the word "possible," it's the word "impossible," that mostly shelters ignorance.

Maybe this angle of my thesis will be viewed as "kinder" and "gentler".

Ladies and gentlemen, we're selling ourselves short when we discuss things that are merely "possible" when we could be discussing things that are highly likely, such as Roswell, the Hill abductions, the Belgian black triangle flap, the Kennedy assassination coverup, etc. And although it is true that these things are discussed and will continued to be discussed, I hate to see them sidelined by sensationalist stories that more often than not wind up being totally debunked and forgotten.

We can do a lot better than "possible".

personally i agree with valhall, if we were to get rid of "possible" threads where would we be? nowhere that's where. looking into possibilities is what gets you closer to the truth, it's called the process of elimination. besides which, lets say we did as you suggest, who would decide which topics and threads fall under the "sensationalism through possibilities" category? you? someone else? a group? a committee? this leads to nothing but recriminations, fall off of membership contributions and a general lack of credibility to the site, which would be exactly what you would be trying to protect against. so you see it's a bad idea and really quite fascist.

so i'd vote no on this proposition

but can you see UA where it may not necessarily be fair to apply your standard to all posts and all members?

i for one loved discussing the life on mars thread because it was the IDEA that intrigued me, not necessarily the source.

so i and those of like mind would NOT be able to discuss things others may find "fanciful"?

yet there are those within your list of acceptable topics i find a waste of time personally. kennedy? oswald. thats my opinion and i dont feel the need to waste my time on something that holds no interest to me, thats the fabulous thing about ats...there are a LOT of other things for me to spend my time on and im not forced to discuss topics i feel dont have a conspiracy around them..

live and let live? (flashes peace sign)

If the word 'possible' is possible, we can expect many linguistics to reside upon that word.

reply to post by uberarcanist


I totally feel your frustration. In my quest for truth and/or answers I sometimes get side-tracked by really silly posts that seem to have no way to support their theories or no real avenue for debate. I mean, your right...anything is possible. However, let's at least concentrate on that which has actual evidence or is so unusual that we need to try to understand it better or that which is an informative and useful discussion or debate.

For instance, today there was a post about "The CIA bought my grandparents house", (sorry to noob to link a thread!) - the upshot is that the title of the thread was sensationalistic - even the thread's author played down any but the most mundune theory. It went nowhere.

I don't want to limit speech, controversial ideas or speculation on ATS so I try to be really picky with what threads I open in order not to waste my time.

Sorry, but I don't believe removing such a fantastic word would even be possible.

reply to post by uberarcanist


Sorry mate, but the two examples you quoted would only be "possible" if we suspend a large amount of what we all know to be "true".

Don't attack words; attacking words and language is "stupid".

So should we replace the word possible with "NO, sit down and shut up" ?

.....struggling getting over the question to be honsest..laughing and crying all at the same time. Mainly laughing.


[edit on 20-9-2007 by myowncrusade]

Basic psychology. He 'always', she 'never' anything is stinky thinkin'. Possiblilites are always.

I think, that within this forum of conspiracy theories, few things have been proven one way or another, and therefor most threads here, with or without accompanying sufficient evidence is all strictly in the realm of possible.
Even those things I think of as likely, are just just that, likely possible.
The word possible is one of the most beautiful words in the English language, along with hope.
I understand what you are saying, but you, IMO have done exactly what you are berating others for doing... creating a sensationalistic title which it turns out has little bearing on your true topic.

I see nothing wrong with this word.

Maybe it's you, ubera.

[edit on 22-9-2007 by TheoOne]

Originally posted by uberarcanist
I'm just saying, don't post the junk threads in the first place. They make the forum look bad.

The site has an entire group dedicated to a guy that posted 600 million people live on mars thread

There are phycics claiming to answering questions claiming to use witchcraft

And I have read some really cool post about our recent visators and their various liniages, greys, replilian, ect..

What are junk threads? I think exploring the imagined, or possibly real things we can't freely speak of elsewhere is what makes this ATS thing great

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Can we rid the word "possible" from our vocabulary?
How many times have we seen the word "possible" in a thread headline? ..... 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.

Am I misunderstanding something or are you actually advocating CENSORSHIP as a means to "a good way to deny ignorance"? If that is what you are saying, I disagree. I have been here for some time and although I don't post much, I am here almost daily.
There is an amazing exchange of ideas to be found in these forums. IDEAS, not always facts are part of what drives ATS/BTS/PTS..
It was a generally accepted FACT at one time that you could fall off the edge of the world. It was IDEAS and daring people who took a chance to POSSIBLY die, who proved that the world was sort of round.
In my lifetime, 50+ years, a computer went from something as big as a house to something I can carry effortlessly in one hand because people wondered what could be done and tried to do it.
Jules Verne wrote of the impossible in "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" , but now submarines allow man to live and travel under the sea for limited times.
H. G .Wells wrote of space travel. Now man does that, also.
What may be "Possible" is what attracts me to ATS. I speak for only myself, but want no censorship here, save for vulgarity, which was agreed to by all of us when we joined. It's in our Terms & Conditions.

[edit on 23-9-2007 by rawiea]