It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Threadfall
so god forbid a person asks for an iota of evidence,
The most immediate form of evidence available to an individual is the observations of that person's own senses.
For example an observer wishing for evidence that the sky is blue need only look at the sky. However this same example illustrates some of the difficulties of evidence as well: someone who was blue-yellow color-blind, but did not know it, would have a very different perception of what color the sky was than someone who was not. Even simple sensory perceptions (qualia) ultimately are subjective; guaranteeing that the same information can be considered somehow true in an objective sense is the main challenge of establishing standards of evidence. there is also the question of what is meant by 'blue', and how we measure it. (If determined by a particular wave-length of colour - then how do we actually measure this?) there is also the question of how evidence 'translates' e.g. is 'blau' in German universally translated as 'blue' in English: Germans may have different words for different parts of the spectrum; thus 'evidence' is a social construction.
Originally posted by Skyfloating
To a few others: The fact that you take this thread to be a thread against asking proof or a thread against skeptics again displays the amount of stupidity run rampant here.
This is NOT a skeptic-bashing thread. It is about the morons who interrupt when people are enjoying themselves speculating about various aspects of life.
Originally posted by antar
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
As previously mentioned, I do not see that you actually 'get' the meaning of the title.
As I sat reading the OP I knew that it was not headed in a one way direction. That the integrity of Skys reputation would not allow this thread to descend into a skeptic bashing...
Originally posted by whiskeyswiller
I agree with you, no one should ask for proof or be skeptical at all and we should all blindly accept things and not think critically.
The moon is made out of blue cheese and no one can disagree with me so i just think everything is so much better without thought or testing or truth.
No one should ever ask for proof or point out there is no proof.
That'd be silly.
Originally posted by agentofchaos
I think we need to set maybe like some ground rules on what is considered evidence, proof, and heresay. Like if I have a video of a reporter, telling that wtc 7 building has gone down 20 minutes before it actually goes down and you can see the building still up in the background, well then now we might have some evidence.