It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Truthers VS Debunkers, what gives??

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 12:54 AM
Some theories are touchy because they involve a great deal of human emotion and people naturally get up in arms when talking about it.
truther or debunker, whatever a person chooses to believe when it comes to 9/11 theory its not like truthers are trying to make images out of JPEG compression and pixilation.

There are those who throw out ithe dea that you can see the devils face in the smoke of the WTC attack, but what does this have to do with 9/11 truther?

It doesnt have anything to do with a conspiracy so I dont understand why sometimes debunkers will reach way down in their pockets and dredge out something like that to prove a truther wrong by merely being a theorist.

Thats like saying if I believe in aliens and UFOs then I must by catagory also believe in the anunaki and planet X topics which I dont.

Categorizing all theorists into one group is as bad a generalizing anyone else in my opinion.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 12:58 AM
for truthers, debunkers thoughts are unthinkable. they are either paid to deceive or brainwashed. (i personally believe this, although i try and pepper my intercourse(heh heh) with a grain of salt).

for debunkers, truthers are either delusional or misguided(or well informed, and so must be discredited, as i personally believe).

truthers act in anger against debunkers, because it is obvious to a truther that if you critically analyze the evidence, you will come to the conclusion that there is something rotten in denmark, franz. debunkers HAVE looked at the evidence, but they don't seem to be able to connect the dots. in fact, they like to disconnect the dots.

and debunkers, typically try and 'label' truthers as some sort of lunatic fringe that should be ignored/ridiculed.

it is obvious to truthers who is who, and not so obvious to debunkers. the reason for this is that all the dots are not visible. however, more and more become visible everyday, and so it becomes easier to see 'the big picture' to those who are actually trying to connect dots, as opposed to scattering them to the wind.

p.s. HINT: the big picture is unbelievable!

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 01:24 AM

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
Debunkers of any conspiracy theorists try to debunk conspiracy theories because they can't accept things that contradict their own already government-made opinion.
noone could have said it any better cheers buddy. Also a common debunker tactic is pointing out mispelt words and bad grammar i have fond

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 01:45 AM
Another famous line from both groupsis "DO YOUR HOMEWORK".

If everyone is misinformed then I guess it would be in everyones interest to just shut the hell up.

If one person researches and another disagrees and they come to a clashing point where both parties involved can no longer attain any more info then what is next?

I think debunkers dont believe truthers because it seems like truthers take every little detail and attach importance to it blowing it out of proportion.

There are times when even I am like " come on where did they get that BS how is that been declassified?".
I just dont like taking peoples words for it, if you say you have evidence let me see it and study it dont just tell me because word of mouth advertising doesnt help the cause. Simply telling me what so&so said about the president being shady proves nothing, how do I know?

That door swings both ways, I hate hearing debunkers quote "officials" and expect me to acccept it on that basis alone.

[edit on 16-7-2008 by snowen20]

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 08:20 AM

US plans to 'fight the net' revealed

By Adam Brookes
BBC Pentagon correspondent

A newly declassified document gives a fascinating glimpse into the US military's plans for "information operations" - from psychological operations, to attacks on hostile computer networks.

The document says information is "critical to military success"

Bloggers beware.

As the world turns networked, the Pentagon is calculating the military opportunities that computer networks, wireless technologies and the modern media offer.

From influencing public opinion through new media to designing "computer network attack" weapons, the US military is learning to fight an electronic war.

The declassified document is called "Information Operations Roadmap". It was obtained by the National Security Archive at George Washington University using the Freedom of Information Act.

Officials in the Pentagon wrote it in 2003. The Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, signed it.

Information Operations Roadmap

The "roadmap" calls for a far-reaching overhaul of the military's ability to conduct information operations and electronic warfare. And, in some detail, it makes recommendations for how the US armed forces should think about this new, virtual warfare.

The document says that information is "critical to military success". Computer and telecommunications networks are of vital operational importance.


The operations described in the document include a surprising range of military activities: public affairs officers who brief journalists, psychological operations troops who try to manipulate the thoughts and beliefs of an enemy, computer network attack specialists who seek to destroy enemy networks.

All these are engaged in information operations.

The wide-reaching document was signed off by Donald Rumsfeld. Perhaps the most startling aspect of the roadmap is its acknowledgement that information put out as part of the military's psychological operations, or Psyops, is finding its way onto the computer and television screens of ordinary Americans.

"Information intended for foreign audiences, including public diplomacy and Psyops, is increasingly consumed by our domestic audience," it reads.

"Psyops messages will often be replayed by the news media for much larger audiences, including the American public," it goes on...

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 10:16 AM
As far as I'm concerned, this is a useless thread. If you have been reading ATS for a significant length of time, you will know that there is a great deal of material and immaterial which has agonizingly been pored over by many posters. I appreciate such postings as they stimulate thought and imagination, possibly leading to benefit.

OP, you posed a question asking why there is so much disagreement and occasional rancor. Well, DUH! Expect this from any debate.

This thread is a waste of bandwidth; an opportunity for various posters to declare their identification status.

I question why you posed your question. CT'ers, please weigh in.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 10:43 AM

Originally posted by TheComte

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
Debunkers of any conspiracy theorists try to debunk conspiracy theories because they can't accept things that contradict their own already government-made opinion.

And conspiracy theorists try to prove conspiracy theories because they can't accept that they're dissatisfied with life and need something bigger than themselves to blame it on.

AND..........We're off!

Both sides already slamming back and forth on each other. Exactly opposite of what the OP intended.

I have stated this many times before. I was a believer of the 'Official Story'. However, through my own eyes and research I believe that there is WAY too many questions left about this event that have been refused to be answered by this administration. That is what has turned me into a skeptic of the 'Official Story'.

You see, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I'm a debunker! I am debunking the conspiracy theory that is the 'Offical *lie* Story' provided to the world by this administration and its hand picked commission.

When too much evidence is left out, the administration forces the EPA to change its wording in its health reports of ground zero, when this administration is caught in MANY lies, I tend to begin to wonder what they are trying to hide and why.

I was never a conspiracy type person before. The only 'conspiracy' that I really knew anything about was the JFK assassination. That was from the movie with the same name. Great movie with great questions that have still yet to be answered.

What disgusts me most is that, as with the JFK assassination, there is evidence that is being withheld from the public under the BS 'It's a matter of National Security' blanket.

I have yet to have any debunker of 911 answer me this. Why is any evidence of that days events a matter of national security? There shouldn't be a damn thing about it that is kept from the public. The only reason to do that is simply to protect people in high places that either KNEW about it or had a hand in planning the events.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 10:49 AM
reply to post by snowen20

I just want to point out that EVERYONE is both a "truther" and a "debunker" in some sense.

Not everyone can believe everything they read on this site.
Just the same, not everyone disbelieves everything on this site.

So it is impossible to pigenhole everyone into one group or another.

"Believers" are passionate about the subject they believe in, legitimate scientific proof or not, "Debunkers" generally (and I mean that loosely) have some science behind their claims and it isn't so much a passion for the subject as a passion for their own solid base of reality.

On both sides you will see disingenuous, ignorant clowns who put forth theories that have holes a blue whale could swim through. Or those who just call someone a government agent or a tin foil hat wearer. Those are the guys you put on ignore because they add nothing to the table..

You will also see on both sides people who put a lot of passion, belief, thought, logic and even science behind each side.

One thing to note.. scoring high on IQ or logic tests does not absolve someone of any claims to "nutball" status.. there are plenty of insane geniuses out there. By the same token, someone no so "educated" is not automatically disqualified from the debate.

Although I a HUGE skeptic, I myself have some beliefs that are not "provable" by scientific means so I can understand where some come from and I do not tend to debunk or "attack" unless I feel the believer is using psuedoscience, lies, or other falsehoods to promote their belief.

I get REALLY mad at liars.. REALLY mad (like "ghost whisperers"). But I digress...

If someone is using logic and any sense of reality to make their claim, I tend to leave it alone or at least to debate "nicely"

9/11 is a perfect example.. saying the Government is involved is OK with me, I don't believe it to the extent many do here but still, it's plausible.. however, when I see guys bringing in "phantom planes", "holographic images" and "projected sounds" I get a little batty.

So I think we all have our buttons and since there are so many of us, almost ANY post will push them. Asking for civility on ATS is like asking for syncronized swimming at a 5 year olds birthday party.. it just ain't gonna happen.

My two cents...

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 10:59 AM
I have to say i think i'm a bit of both or neither.
I generally use logic and reason to come to my conclusions, analyzing the evidence and looking at both sides of the argument.

People like to scream debunker or disinfo agent or whatever when you don't agree with their latest planet x, reptilian, EOTW scenario.

I am extremely open minded and am interested in many conspiracies but take most with a grain of salt.

it is people who blindly follow something with no proof or evidence and then argue to the death that it's real that get on my nerves.

we all need to be more objective and use our brains a little more before believing every random theory that comes out.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 01:00 PM
I suppose I am a CTer. I don't blindly believe every story out there. (reptilitan leaders) But I will listen to any idea and see if it might have some truth to it. Professional debunkers seem to automaticly shut down when any other idea than the mainstream idea is proposed. My best example of this is when the nukes were flown from Minot to Barksdale. The offical story is a complete lie. I would venture to guess that not even 10% is real. Do I have proof? NO. Would the government ever tell the public something that was not entirely true? I think they might. Therefore I must at least question the questionable stories. I try to be civil but sometimes the smartass in my gets the best of me. I do try to do it in a comical fashion. Now you have my 2 cents worth. keep it up and you might have enough for a cup of coffee.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 01:58 PM
reply to post by snowen20

An excellent thread! We need to ignore the extremes at both ends. At one end, the hoaxers, and the other, the skeptic who's only comment is
, with no constructive input.

In order to find truth, we need honest believers to present stories, and good skeptics to investigate them.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 03:37 PM

Originally posted by snowen20

I don't know where to post this and I really just want to get some opinions from both sides,... 9/11 Truthers and debunkers alike.

That's simply the generic name I have chosen to use for both sides so no offense to anyone.

It should be known that I myself am a truther for the 9/11 event and NOT an anything goes conspiracy theorist.

Please Comment:

Mod Edit: Changed title to reflect post

[edit on 7/15/08 by FredT]

Well you say its just a generic name for it but then you say you are a truther for the 9/11 event. what is your true complaint?

The fact is no matter what the subject is, You are always gonna have people that no matter what evidence you show them they will never agree with you. Stay true to the facts and never let them get to you in that way.

And from what i have seen, The majority of people that come on to debunk Conspiracys Dont have any facts or evidence, they just rammble on and on Relying on other posters to support there views.

But as others have said, Sometimes the facts we recieve are not the facts at all. And when dealing with 9/11 topics we may never know the truth for sure. There is simply not any evidence left to support any claim either way. Im not talking about video evidence, Im talking physical.

I to have got caught up in the sling fest back and forth on the 9/11 threads. But quickly realized it wasnt worth posting there anymore.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 04:02 PM
This all goes back to a point I've been trying to get across. We need both Truther and debunkers. However the tactics used by some on both sides aren't the ones that should be used.

Reguardless of the topic at hand, people need to keep the respect up, and respect the OPINIONS of others. No matter how true something may seem, its only an interpretation of the truth i.e. the sky is blue. One could argue at times the sky is grey, perhaps when its storming, or the sky is orange at sunset.

To oppose this, debunkers need to ease up when finding flaws in theories. Yes thats what ATS needs debunkers for, but the way some go about doing it is all wrong. I.e. someone claims the sky is blue, responding like such "the sky isnt blue you idiot" it totally uncalled for, and if you ask me those who belittle or degrade others for their ideas or thought should have concequences placed on them for their actions. Instead of being degrading about the whole deal, you should respond like such "I believe the sky isn't blue for these reasons" then provide your own evidence against the theory.

I keep repeating it over and over, respect is a key issue here and should be shown from all members to all members.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 06:05 PM

Originally posted by Xilvius
This all goes back to a point I've been trying to get across. We need both Truther and debunkers. However the tactics used by some on both sides aren't the ones that should be used.

I agree with this insofar as I'm understanding you correctly. I wonder how many 'truthers' and 'debunkers' alike haven't taken the time to really investigate the claims offered up by the opposition. It's easy to watch a 9/11 truth documentary, agree with it, and then only watch other documentaries that validate your made opinion. Since I would place myself squarely in the middle of the truther camp (w/ respect to 911 anyway), I'd like to encourage my fellow truthers to devote as much time as possible to becoming aware of and thinking critically about points raised by the opposition, if for no other reason than to become more capable of defending your own position.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:02 PM
I just ran across a very informative set of videos on youtube and google. A whistleblower by the name of Dr. Deagle. He seems to be a pretty legit dude when it comes to exposing the "agenda."

There will always be "debunkers" that buy into the official version of 911, Oklahoma City, the war on terror etc. Thats fine with me, after all it is your choice to drink flouride laced water, take dangerous vaccines, get cavities filled with mercury amalgums, treat depression with SSRI's, feed you kids speed for ADHD, happily microchip everything that lives, watch fox news, listen to hacks like Lush Rambo, and Death threat making Michael Reagan, and believe everything is just fine and dandy in the world.

Please do not force your flag waving, pseudo patriotism, support dubbya, and the war on terror propaganda on me. I think for myself and utilize critical thinking skills. Case in point would be the absurd notion of jet fuel bringing down the twin towers. It's news to me that jet fuel is able to reduce concrete to an 80 micron level, and sever steel beams at thirty foot intervals.

The term Conspiracy theorists should be changed to "Alert and conscious citizens capable of independent thought." Indeed a real threat to the powers that be.

As for these "debunkers" and otherwise ignorant Americans, return to your Nascar, beer swilling, Jesus loving, Muslim hating, wife beating, porn watching pathetic lives.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:15 PM
reply to post by bornagainagnostic

This is exactly the kind of thing I'm trying to put a halt to, and a fine example of an extreme that isnt nessicary. What point does it serve to point out negative things in someones life that they may disagree on. To start steriotyping(sp?) the opposing side with a negitive connotation. You make it seem like they are idiots because they believe something YOU don't. It is fine to give your evidence against a subject, but you must always accept that the opposing side has their own beliefs they are entitled to. Reguardless if they aren't YOUR beliefs.

Also, again, just because something is improbably doesn't mean it is impossible. As soon as you can think something up it becomes a possibility, doesn't mean its probable to happen, but it is possible. For referance, those who said the world was round at first were thought to be nut jobs.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 08:00 PM
It is said that Knowledge is a process of decent. We rise above a thing to really know it. To obtain real knowledge of a subject, one must have an intangible association with the subject known as "Affinity". This is an abstract, somewhat unscientific knowing or relating to the subject. But the mind, is a terrible liar in all of us and we can all be misled in our understandings. Often the music teacher may be technically skilled but never in their life time have the right affinity to produce a beautiful piece of music that another produces without formal training. It is difficult for the intuit to convey what they understand and difficult for the fact finder to comprehend how they could know. Still their is value in both and the wiser among them will not be intimidated by the nature of the other. I try to remember that probably 99% of what I think I know is, in at least in some aspects, flawed.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 09:16 PM
i think debunkers are stoopid

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 11:36 PM
I have simply come to the realization that alot of debunkers
simply dont care one why or another if 911 is all BS (even though there are more holes in the story than swiss cheese!) the reason is simple the system works for them they have worked hard to achieve satus in the system and the thing that scares them the most is losing that status quo & they are viewed by their peers & the "man" who cuts the paycheck.I make a good living and have a good reputation so I and actually do undersatnd that way of thinking to a degree. But live a lie to me is more insane to me then exporing a fanasy like reptilians! let me give you perfect example! My brother in Law very smart has a BA from a good school has a beautifull house in the hills family the whole 9! they are very cool people but very status quo, involed in the comminity blah blah...Here is the point I love my family but one day my brother in law was researhing pentagon footage for a week he realized in his own research that it was I M P O S S I B L E that a airliner hit that building! he aslo had freinds in DC that were in the pentagon area that were giving all kind of stories that did not add up! this made him very leery of the "official" story. I told him I knew this since day1 we started talking more...well as "family man" responibilty kicked in and his wife (my sister) had a talk with him about who knows what he totally flipped and became a debunker!!! he now wants no conversation at all about it ! The bottom line is poeple will choose to believe anything to uphold there own personal
life-style..If it's not broke to them:them why fix it. even if it means going against the own common sense! There is just no way. Debunker are sooooooo angry when pleading cases, emotion over takes them! its going to be a sad day when they realize they have been completly brainwashed.
I dont have an opinion on Twin Towers or Osama/911 and unless I see a reptile i coulnt care less if they exist ! But I do have common sense and not a debunker on the planet will ever convince me that a plane hit that pentagon, and any body that believes that has to have N O C O M M O N S E N S E O R I S C O M P L E A T L Y U N A B L E TO TH I N K FOR T H E M S E L V E S !!!!! O R D O E S N O T C A R E ....

posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 06:42 AM
reply to post by italkyoulisten

Yeah, i guess we should just believe everything we are told and not question it.
We went to war because Saddam had WMD's and so on.

No, the point is you need to ask questions and look at all the evidence, not just follow something.

Your comment seems more applicable to your own sentiments.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in