Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Originally posted by polomontana
Vance, I'm actually glad you posted because your post shows a good example of pseudoskepticism.
It's basically using skepticism as a crutch to what you already believe instead of a tool to search for the truth.
Polomontana, NephraTari, and Teratoma are mischaracterizing what Vance said, ignoring the context in which it was said, and at the same time, proving
Yes, he did say you are using the unprovable to prove the unproven. He also says: "Let's prove one or the other or both or something lol!"
That is not pseudoskepticism, or whatever non-sense buzzword you want to employ. You are engaging in pseudoscience, "proving" the existence of
something unsubstantiated via the unsubstantiated*. You are not forwarding a theory, a hypothesis, or anything of the sort. You are using baseless
speculation and circular logic.
What Vance and I are both saying is that instead of using the unsubstantiated to prove Bigfoot's (or any other anomalous phenomena) existence, you
should use the observable and verifiable. That is a far-cry from your accusations of pseudoskepticism or from your employment of pseudoscience and
(*yes, I believe in the existence of Bigfoot. However, I concede the evidence suggests but does not prove, its existence)
Your posts doesn't make sense.
First, you talk about unproven.
Again, things like time travel, black holes, dark matter, dark energy, quantum loop gravity, quantum braids, holographic principle couldn't be
discussed according to your standards because their isn't ABSOLUTE PROOF.
You and Vance would wipe out entire fields of study in a SINGLE BOUND with that logic.
Secondly, things within ufology are not unsubstantiated claims.
In my mind these things are proven beyond any reasonable doubt based on my own sightings and the direct and circumstantial evidence that supports
things within ufology.
Did you or Vance read the title of the thread?
It seems pseudoskeptics feel the need to turn every thread into a debate on wether these things exist because they are theatened by the mere
discussion of these things in the context of logic and reason.
If you want to debate wether bigfoot is a myth, then go to the proper folder and start a thread about it.
Look at threads on this board. You will notice the pseudoskeptic trying to start a debate that has nothing to do with the thread.
They fear things that go beyond their 3 dimensional view of reality. They want the universe tied up in a box and everything has to be explained in a
context that fits their pre-existing belief system.
So please, if you want to debate wether bigfoot is a myth go to the proper folder and start a thread about it.
I thank the other posters for their intelligent responses and please excuse Vance and Complex need to try and turn threads into debates about their
That's truly a COMPLEX
[edit on 14-7-2008 by polomontana]