A plea to anyone with a little "conspiracy theorist" in them.

Please, PLEASE, stop acknowledging the "debunker's". For starters you are not going to change their mind. Next up while you are arguing with them in your own thread and now defending your own position, I am trying to look at your information and any additional information posted from others interested in your post. But guess what, it is often hard to find it all because it is lost in 12 pages of arguments with debunkers. Last but not least it just discourages other people from posting what they think or adding pics, vids or other pieces of info due to fear of ridicule and the knowledge that they will then have to defend THEIR information. It really shouldnt matter if people believe what you say or not, there are other people here interested in it and they have a hard time telling you "hey thats cool, something like that happened to me" because you are caught up in a pissing contest with a "debunker".

I have always giggled at people here (and elsewhere) that argue or even acknowledge "debunker's". For starters, if they were as smart as they think they are then why waste your precious knowledge here arguing with people who believe things you think are ridiculous. Then theres the obvious, which is if you dont believe in any of this "wild conspiracy stuff" what do you possibly get out of coming to places like this unless you have an agenda? Do you really think your going to change anyones mind? Are you just here to argue? Perhaps you enjoy confrontation and drama. Seems there are better ways to spend your time then hanging out arguing with people that you believe to be a little "off" for believing in this stuff. In conclusion, if you are truly tired of the drama that is drug into every thread started here, stop acknowledging the people bringing in the drama.

My point, I suppose I have one, is that if you are truly interested in this kind of stuff ignore those who obviously are not and are just here to get you fired up. I AM interested in this stuff (dont know if I believe it, but it interests me) and I can barely make it through one thread here without losing interest. Mainly due to the fact that after the first three posts there are another 16 pages of people arguing about the first three posts.

If someone is just here to try and prove everything wrong you must take into account why they are here. Then ask yourself do you want to help them accomplish their goal. If you do, argue away, defend your position to a stranger who came to a website, signed up, validated, searched out your post and hit reply just to tell you how wrong you are. I beg of you ATS.

If the members here REALLY want to "research" these alternate topics, you need to stop arguing and defending and research. When do you ever see paid researchers defending their research? Not often. Maybe one time, at the conclusion of their research but not during. Even then it is few and far between. For the most part there is research, it is released, people criticize it and life goes on. The researchers dont argue with every moron on the net that thinks they are a pro.

So you're saying you expect no opposition to your points? The reason ATS is even bearable is because of the debunkers who whistleblow people for cracks in their information.

Denying ignorance involves argument, you can't expect to learn more without contribution, even if it is against your own.

It'll be a sad day when I see the debunkers leave the forums. They keep us on our toes.

I have to agree with Santa. We do need debunkers. While it would be nice to always be right when we find a conspiracy... (sorta), it would be highly dangerous if there was noone around to prove the many disinfo officers wrong. I'm with Santa on this one... we need em'. Like em or hate em.. we still need em.

What is your definition of a debunker?

I ask because, as we all see on here, you'll get the occasional one-line drive-by post from usually a new account calling the rest of the people posting some childish name etc...and I usually ignore these people because they are probably kids anyway.

de·bunk Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[di-buhngk]
–verb (used with object)
to expose or excoriate (a claim, assertion, sentiment, etc.) as being pretentious, false, or exaggerated: to debunk advertising slogans.

I don't think the "debunkers" should be at all ignored. Now someone who just becomes a member here to make fun of someone's beliefs and to post rude comments is different, I agree they should be ignored.

I like to hear ALL sides and make up my own mind...that's why I LOVE ATS, because there are as many ways of viewing things as there are members on here.

If you believe in let's say... Big Foot... because you have seen one with your own eyes, and are convinced they are out there then no matter what a "debunker" says is not going to change your mind because you know what you saw, see what I am saying?

I think people on ATS get their feelings hurt or feel "attacked" by healthy skepticism when they shouldn't. If I was all excited because I looked up in the sky and saw a UFO, grabbed my camera and got footage of it, posted it on here for all to see...and people started analyzing the footage and it was found to be a helicopter or a plane or some other explainable object...

I wouldn't start calling them "debunkers" and getting angry, I would be disappointed that it wasn't a UFO, but I would hardly get angry at the people who were able to identify to my satisfaction that it was a helicopter or plane.

reply to post by shug7272


Sometimes it is hard from the title to know exactly what a thread is about. Sometimes there are threads that outright need to be debunked, and I think the people who start those sorts of threads expect that.

If I spend my time reading some threads, and after several pages of possibly wasted time on my behalf, yes, I am going to say something if it is worthy of debunking.

Wouldn't it be boring to have people just agree with you all the time?

I now believe in things I didn't used to, and I am now a skeptic of things I used to believe. All due to ATS. I appreciate being able to read a flip side to some stories!

So far I have read statements that equate to "it is good to hear all sides of the story" and "it would be boring to hear people agree with you all the time". And you guys are right. Problem is you make it sound like a Rosy pink world in which people say "excuse me I think this might be of interest, it seems to point out a problem with your theory."

Of course that is not how it happens. It turns into 4 or 5 people arguing over and over for PAGES about one little bit of information. If you want examples I can provide literally pages of links to show you what I am saying. I assume you all know what I am talking about though.

To reiterate. Disagreeing, GREAT. Arguing over and over with 20 replys in one thread, RIDICULOUS. How many people need to point out the same flaw in an argument? I think 12 is a little much. How many posts do we need going back and forth between three people of just personal attacks?

I would suggest that if for every thread that was started here there was a mirror thread started in a "debunkers" area for all info discrediting that thread.. well my guess is there would be a good lot of debunkers pack up and leave. They wouldn't be able to get people to argue with them at that point and the original thread could continue un-hijacked.

The intelligent debunkers are great. What i absolutely hate is when people just say something is a hoax or someone is a disinfo agent with no proof or no reasoning behind their claims.

reply to post by shug7272


Well I guess then I didn't understand what you were talking about....I apologize I thought you were just talking about people disagreeing or asking for more information or more proof etc

I mostly hang out in the UFO/Alien section and really the only time we have heated threads like you're describing is when someone starts a thread usually predicting some huge catastrophic event with no proof to back up the claims, etc.

I don't usually read all the conspiracy threads unless a topic catches my eye. So maybe it's a rougher more heated crowd that goes along with the more heated topics. So I can certainly understand your point now that I read your last post.

I agree that it shouldn't be 12 people attacking one or even arguing on and on through 20 pages of posts over one sentence.

Originally posted by icecap
The intelligent debunkers are great. What i absolutely hate is when people just say something is a hoax or someone is a disinfo agent with no proof or no reasoning behind their claims.

Yes sir, and I would agree. I tried to make it clear in my OP that differing opinions are great. The distraction, personal attacks and thread hijacking is bad here. It irritates me because ALL the bickering makes it hard to find the cool # people post. I would agree with your post 120 percent. The people who genuinely are interested in the info are just as guilty because they argue back and encourage the hijacking to continue. Heck, I am skeptical of most every conspiracy, nothing wrong with that. But it interests me and I do my best not to argue or attack other people.


I didnt respond to people who came in and tried to put words in my mouth. No I did NOT EVER EVEN COME CLOSE to saying I dont want to hear people who disagree with me. The people who came in here to put words in my mouth are the problem I am talking about. I specifically outline the people I am talking about, if the shoe fits wear it. I never said I dont want to hear differing opinions. I specifically said the people who come in to attack, be argumentative and disrespectful all the while hijacking the thread. I know most people on the net dont understand this, but you CAN disagree with someone in a respectful and well thought out manner. Usually once is good enough, 14 people yelling at someone for the same flaw in their argument is just not needed. Its ridiculous.



[edit on 13-4-2008 by shug7272]

reply to post by shug7272


Without debunkers in life you would have unfettered scam artists on every street corner selling you snake oil.


I find it equally disturbing that there are so many "me too's" and people who post really hard to believe information where they have zero proof to back it up.

You want to read someones experiences without anyone questioning them?
OK.. You can find fantasy in any good book store.


But when you post things as being the TRUTH and have nothing to back it up except "I saw it" then you're going to have some people with a different opinion. Bickering about a small detail over 12 pages may be a bit much but there are two opinions at work and neither give ground, you can't only fault the debunker on that.

So you just ignore them? That is worse because if you ARE telling the truth and are not just a joe trying to be important for a day, then you should be able to back up what you say and you should WANT to do so.


You seem to be implying a debunker has little worth, but in reality the only reason you weren't born into a world of moon worship and witchcraft was due to some debunkers.

Well, I think debunking is just fine. Problem here is, there's too many arrogant idiots, that think they know everything. So, at least sometimes, they must end up scaring some people away, who could possibly have great information, but maybe don't know all the facts.. So, their story may appear to have holes in it, and they get shot down before being given a chance.

Usually I don't reply to posts, 'cos it's usually just people arguing and ruining what the topic was meant to be.. but, I think this deserves a post! Even though I think people have misunderstood your post, you deserve a star for being one of the good guys/girls!

In my opinion, and it really is just my opinion, you have three different groups of "debunkers". First, is the paid shill: the disinfo agent, if you will. These get easier and easier to spot with practice if you know what to look for, ESPECIALLY in the 9/11 threads. These are the ones that (usually) get people arguing over select minutia that makes not one whit of difference were it to go either way. VERY effective usually.

Second, you have people that say "this is interesting, but you lack proof" These are the best kind of debunkers, imo., and most are truly intellectually honest.

Third, you have people that will fight something tooth and nail, not because it is not true, but because if it *IS* true, they will have their world view pulled right out from under them. They perceive it subconciously. These are the ones that get real nasty, real quick.

One of these days, if I weren't so lazy, I'd put together a list of disinfo tactics commonly seen. As it is, I'm getting tired of trying to educate people who have no desire to be educated.