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.
"You are a liar"
"This thread is useless"
"No research into Ufos has been done"
The pseudoskeptics agenda is not driven by scientific inquiry but emotion-based.
To have the same nonsense employed again and again is tiring and distracting from deepening research on the real subjects.
Originally posted by tep200377
. I'd say that 98% of UFO posters are not researching more than 5 minutes.
Originally posted by tep200377
Heck, most of them aren't even posting their own stuff... just "what is your thougts of this 10 year old debunked 1000 times video.."
Originally posted by tep200377
Just because you have 1 person that has done a lot of reading and posting doesn't mean its all based on research.
Originally posted by Skyfloating
Look at some of the statements by so-called "skeptics" on this thread:
"You are a liar"
"This thread is useless"
"No research into Ufos has been done"
The pseudoskeptics agenda is not driven by scientific inquiry but emotion-based.
Originally posted by Skyfloating
You kept calling for an example so I made the mistake of giving in to your request. Simple as that.
As I dont use the 9/11 Forum I doubt that I have the agenda to silence that person.
One major point of this thread was to point out differences between skeptics and pseudoskeptics.
Originally posted by spacevisitor
reply to post by tep200377
Hi tep200377,
I suppose that just before you write this down you has put your big thumb in your mouth, make it wed and stick it in the air right?
Because what you say is nothing more then guessing?
So in fact, you do yourself of what you others accusing of, am I right?
Even the best scientists when doing research, study and use material / stuff of others don’t you think? So, there is nothing wrong with that.
Originally posted by tep200377
Just because you have 1 person that has done a lot of reading and posting doesn't mean its all based on research.
Again your big thumb in the air I suppose?
Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by tep200377
Alas...its frustrating to be aware of rock-solid evidence such as witness-testimony, pictures that havent been debunked, videos, artefacts, implants and personal experiences with UFOs, abductee accounts, statements made by respected and intelligent public figures...
...and then to have a so-called "skeptic" come by and say "There is no evidence whatsoever".
The next thing that skeptic will predictably say is "show me one piece of evidence". You show him one piece and he will try to rip that piece of evidence apart using the methods described in the opening post.
Originally posted by Xtrozero
I agree with this above, but do you really see this as much? Or do you see the opposite of people making extraordinary claims while using words like indisputable, undeniable, proof positive etc. in their post only to see a weak YouTube video, or opinions labeled as facts, or questionable citations that might fit the OP’s logic but goes completely against a mountain of other citations? I also see posts where the initial logic is ok but then the OP takes a leap in thought that is like leaping across the Grand Canyon, but is treated like the next logical small step.
My favorite example is the Criss Angel’s 1900+ post thread. I get slammed dunked by the believers that it is all real when I suggest a TV show cannot be considered empirical data proving it is real. I also get knocked around when I say that if a person under “controlled conditions” can levitated a foot off the ground that is all the proof I need. It can be done randomly for the show, but not for a group of unbiased observers.
For a person to use the word “Fact” it needs to follow certain rules to get that label, and when it cannot, then the OP needs to understand this and present their topic correctly even if THEY feel it is fact. This is only logical and shows empathy for those who do not have the knowledge, ability, or skill to also see it as fact.
Originally posted by SaviorComplex
So, you just carelessly and reckless just pulled out a name at random? And on the basis of what? CatHerder, whether you agree with the conclusions or not, crafted a well-researched post; you seemingly labelled it as an example of disinformation and "pseudoskepticism" on the basis it ran contrary to conspiracy theories.
You would not be warning everyone to be wary of those who demand evidence for extrodinary claims.
Originally posted by Skyfloating
Yes. One reason so many kids here open threads on "indisputable proof" blabla is in order to gain attention for their thread...similar to what the yellow press does to gain readers.
Interestingly, the people I am referring to in the OP dont even bother with threads like that though.
Originally posted by LoneWeasel
All I'd say in defence of the skeptic is this. I came to these boards because I believed in aliens and ufos, I believed in government conspiracies, and I believed in getting them out in the open. I started off as open minded as you could hope me to be. I was shocked at how quickly I became cynical, though. Actually what has happened is that I believe far less of what I see now, than I did before I got here. You could say I'm more skeptical - I prefer to think my nose for conspiracy has become more refined!
Originally posted by tep200377
But that was not my point. I tried to point out ie. those who post threads with videos and articles they stumble upon, just to be the first to post an outdated article.
Originally posted by tep200377
I'd say that 98% of UFO posters are not researching more than 5 minutes.
Originally posted by tep200377
Sorry, this post might start with short information in english to begin with. In norways biggest newspaper, the story goes that a norwegian professor of history has uncovered the secret society we've all heard about: Illuminati en.wikipedia.org...
He claims that they are behind events like the russian and the french revolution, the last two world wars, gloalisation and the Catholic Church .
Untill now, the story is in norwegian, and I'll try to translate some of it in my next posts.
www.dagbladet.no...
Originally posted by tep200377
Sorry, this post might start with short information in english to begin with. In norways biggest newspaper, the story goes that a norwegian professor of history has uncovered the secret society we've all heard about: Illuminati en.wikipedia.org...
He claims that they are behind events like the russian and the french revolution, the last two world wars, gloalisation and the Catholic Church .
Untill now, the story is in norwegian, and I'll try to translate some of it in my next posts.
www.dagbladet.no...
Originally posted by LoneWeasel
I reserve the right to cry foul over posts that I consider to be either coming from a position of supposed authority that can't be backed up, or that portray speculation as fact.
LW
Originally posted by Phil J. Fry
Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
You'll notice I've even greatly reduced my posts re: Greer, in fact I didn't even really want to post in this thread as I knew the exact same four vultures would be all over me and all clapping each other on the back giving each other stars the second I did....
Well, according to Mrd, i can choose between being a spook, paid debunker or disinfo agent