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.

 

debunking 101

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Hello all again, I was watching a video on HATI UFO CGI DEBUNKING I was impressed with the presentation and thought it would serve as a great benchmark or standard for all future debunkers...


Heres the video watch and learn how a proper debunking is done, details...its all in the details.

UFO DEBUNKING DONE RIGHT

I was impressed and thought that the educated astute readers and researchers here at ATS should be able to do the same.
I also realize that not everyone has the talent to make a "debunking" video or the time or software, so in that case since Extraodinary claims require extraordinary proof.... the same standards should be held to all whom "debunk"...if you cannot provide proof that its a HOAX mabey you shouldnt be adding to the clutter of nay saying.....


Debunkers should be held to a certain criteria in order to get to the truth, this video (IMHO) proves that debunking can and should be done with facts and not just "NAY" saying or indignant rebuttles.



Mod edit: cap title

[edit on 8/26/2007 by kinglizard]




posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Great video !! Nice find.

I always go with my "gut instinct".

If it looks too good to be true, it
probably is.

Regards,
Lex



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Actually demanding the debunkers provide evidence of hoaxing isn't proper scientific method. The person making the claim for the existence of something holds the burden of proof. Debunkers saying they don't believe something and saying why is just questioning the presenter's veracity. It's not up to the debunkers to come up with evidence to disprove it, it's up to the person making the claim to prove it.

Though I agree that saying things to the effect of, "That's bogus, man!" does not make for good debunking.

A person doing debunking should at least be able to explain why they are saying they don't believe the claim in the first place in a rational and well-thought-out manner.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lexion

I always go with my "gut instinct".

If it looks too good to be true, it
probably is.

Regards,
Lex


Talking about debunking 101! Lol

Although I agree that the burden of proof is in the person making the claim, statements like yours add nothing to a debate. Is people like you that need to understand the difference between debunking and giving your opinion, and I have see the latter being the norm rather that the other.

I have no problem with people giving their opinions here, but when most of them are based in no technical facts whatsoever then it does not bring anything relevant to the topic. Add to that that many of people here that give their opinion are loud and like to ridicule the others that don't see it their way has brought the recent episodes of child like behaviour that is plaguing this forum.

My advice, grow up, do the work like many others do, if you are giving your opinion realize that is going to be taken as such but nothing else, and like Springer said in his recent thread in regards of Members behaviour, if you have nothing worth posting, then just don't post.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction

Though I agree that saying things to the effect of, "That's bogus, man!" does not make for good debunking.

A person doing debunking should at least be able to explain why they are saying they don't believe the claim in the first place in a rational and well-thought-out manner.


My point exactly, while I do not have the ability of making a video as well as that, if I were to add to a discussion, I would present my opinion in a well thought out matter usually complete with photos or diagrams in order to illustrate my point as clearly as possible.

Hopefully we can establish a standard or set of criteria to be followed when debunking any given subject as to NOT perpetuate a hoax thread for pages and pages of people replying: "That's bogus, man!"


I think the video was an excellant example of how it should be done.

EDITED : To remove extemely lagre font tag on quote "That's bogus, man!"


[edit on 26-8-2007 by 1nL1ghtened]



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lexion
If it looks too good to be true, it
probably is.


No, this is the mindset that holds back ufology!!

What do you want more fuzzy, out of focus crap!!??

Granted with cgi and such one has to be skeptical, but this "to good to be true" statement doesnt hold water!

How ever will we get the proof then lex??

What exatcly are you looking for?? Fuzzy proof? I dont get your posts!!??

If I had a crashed ufo in my back yard would that be "to good to be true"?

Some people seem to only be here to boost their ego or come off as some all knowing erogant specialist.

I want the "to good to be true stuff" and less fuzzy crap!!

But thats just me.

REEEEEEGGGGGAAAARRRRDSSSSSSS

RED



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join