The paradoxial laws of a skeptic ?

So let me get this straight....

In the mind of a skeptic...

If someone posts a report of an alien aduction, sighting of a UFO, sighting of ghosts or any abnormal things it's fake if the poster doesn't happen to have pictures or videos showing evidence to back up the claims

Now if someone posts a report of an alien aduction, sighting of a UFO, sighting of ghosts or any abnormal things and does provide a video or pictures showing evidence to back up the claims it's also fake because it's too convenient the camera was there at the time right to record the picture/video of said instance

There seems to be a lack of logic here, shouldn't the skeptics be picking at what is in the report and the pictures/videos instead of trying to debunk why the camera was there in the first place ?

p.s sorry if it's in the wrong section couldn't see anywhere else that was general enough for this generalisation of skeptics

[edit on 23/7/08 by Discotech]

To be honest, not all sceptics are like that. While yes some of them are like what you talked about, but the majority of them are willing to debate and argue their points fairly. Regardless how much some individuals annoy or upset you due to their beliefs, one should not retaliate against others who may share similar beliefs but who haven't done anything to you.

Generalisations are always bad, even when they "Appear" positive on the surface.

Originally posted by Marshall Ormus
Generalisations are always bad,

I'm not picking on ya'.....I just love that kind of irony...intentional or not.

I think the thread author may be basing a broad statement on a small number of occurrences. The "for instance" is far too specific to support a conclusion about skeptics in general.