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.
Originally posted by Skyfloating
Originally posted by greshnik
I hope I will not be punished for being honest:
Why would you be punished? Nobody is punished for posting their opinion here. Only T&C Violations are punished.
[edit on 17-3-2009 by Skyfloating]
Originally posted by greshnik
...one more thing: it may be better not to let the "pseudo skeptics" know that we know who they are. If they get exposed, they will change tactics and evolve. They may be even harder to trace.
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
reply to post by greshnik
I'd be interested to read what you consider to be the difference between a debunker, a pseudo-skeptic and an ordinary skeptic?
Originally posted by greshnik
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
reply to post by greshnik
I'd be interested to read what you consider to be the difference between a debunker, a pseudo-skeptic and an ordinary skeptic?
Justice, sorry, but I don't want to elaborate on that - I have said what I had to say already.
We can discuss about the definitions...forever. I know what I know, and I use my knowledge the best way I can. I cannot teach anyone, nor do I think that anyone cares what my definition of "skeptic" is.
If you think that I am totally wrong, and all I said was a total rubbish, that is fine with me. Let's just move on...life is beautiful, spring is in the air
Originally posted by Cuhail
As a former Mod, I can attest that there is no conspiracy against the general membership, by the Mods, in the unseen areas of ATS.
The process of reviewing Anon Posts is done by review and committee. (my emphasis - rich23)
Originally posted by rich23
Debunker
Someone who is out to "debunk" a hypothesis or assertion at any cost: they may be being paid to do so or they may be driven by psychological necessity. An example of the former is J. Allen Hynek when he came up with the infamous "marsh gas" explanation for a UFO case - exactly which one I can't remember. From Jacques Vallee's views in Forbidden Science (well worth a read imho), Hynek, while working for Blue Book, knew full well that it was just a front and occasionally had to perform duties of debunking that actually sat rather badly with his own convictions.
There is also good reason to believe that Philip Klass was a paid debunker: NASA has one or two people they routinely wheel out who seem to fulfil this function.
At any rate, it's almost invariably someone with an agenda.
Pseudo-skeptic
Someone who considers himself to be a skeptic but actually invariably espouses the accepted/conventional view of things. This type is generally not given to questioning conventional wisdom and usually attacks those who do. I would say that these people have much in common with the right wing authoritarian personality type and is very much the "follower" type who cheerleads on forums like James Randi's.
Zetetic
A genuine skeptic who will question and/or reevaluate just about anything given reason to do so. I'd place myself in this camp. Usually criticised for being "gullible" by the pseudo-skeptics.
In posts earlier in this thread I have more to say about the early split in CSICOP and how the zetetics tend to leave because they're intellectually honest, whereas the pseudos aren't.
Skeptic
A title claimed equally by all three categories above.
Originally posted by mostlyspoons
Very good definitions rich23! Starred for that.
Its important that people remember that everyone else is a person too. Not all people who attempt to debunk you or be an avid skeptic are disinfo agents!
There are those who fear the very prospect of a website like this one, full of information that can not be controlled.
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
So anyone who doesn't go along with your beliefs or who questions them is either a sock puppet or an idiot?
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
So anyone who doesn't go along with your beliefs or who questions them is either a sock puppet or an idiot? So it's not up for debate? You, and those that agree with you are right, and all those who aren't convinced are fools?
Are you serious?
Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
So anyone who doesn't go along with your beliefs or who questions them is either a sock puppet or an idiot?
Unfortunately, it seems this immature, arrogant or deluded attitude is rampant on ATS as of late. Anyone who disagrees, no matter to what degree, is a stooge, disinformant or "attacking" those they are disagreeing with. Of course, I doubt these accusations are sincere; rather they are designed for much the same reason this thread was designed.