Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies, page 21

privacy

Pages: << 18 19 20 21 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 22 times

reply posted on 5-4-2009 @ 07:21 PM by cranberrydork

reply to post by Indigo_Child

it was kind of through perception

much better and more accurate perception

do you think it was possible to arrive at any other conclusion?

i dont

i guess even a 'pseudo' skeptic would find it hard to argue any other result

the earth rotates around the sun

i guess most humans agree that is the way it is

what is in the eth idea that has that clear of a realization?

anything?

ive seen nothing that leads to only one realization as far as eth goes

actually ive seen a lot of what ifs and maybes

i guess what im trying to say is there are no pseudo skeptics in regards to eth

at least as defined

cause it looks like if some one decides there may be a different explanation

out of a lot of explanations

they are just assigned that word

since there is nothing about eth that is like the earth around the moon thing

with great agreement

it looks like what you say is subject to the same flaws that 'pseudo' skeptics are accused of

i guess if someone were really a reasoner they would be skeptical of there own ideas

many faithful people dont seem to have that skill

reply posted on 5-4-2009 @ 08:44 PM by mmiichael

Some of us, at least me, are still following this out of morbid fascination.

It is about attention seeking not the merits of an ET thesis.

Confusing too because I don't even know who is capable of seeing the others' messages.

Anyway, I found out how much some people love the sound of their online voice and a new term to throw around - pseudo-skeptic. Wonder if it's contagious.

If any alien intelligence agents are reading this, you can tell your masters the earth people still arguing among themselves and haven't figured it out.

Mike

reply posted on 5-4-2009 @ 08:54 PM by symmetricAvenger

reply to post by mmiichael

haha!

more right that you know!! but poor me was infact put on ignore.. by BOTH of the main people FOR the for camp..that only leaves for the ones who are against??

so out of every post WE the majority aruge that based on er, oh wait no facts.. "opinion" that the underlying principles are YES debatable!

and the thread is kinda mmm blwing ur own trumpet and aguing for aguing sakes to prove a point that is infact "invalid"

or is that just me and the 10/2 against?

well you did ask for proof? lol backed by evidence.. i would say the ones who dont agree infact win the argument "when tbh there was no solid case for one"

its of to see the torllll the wonderfull wizord of trolllll

god i cant belive i was called a troll

am i realy that ugly? or is it just my grammer and spelling?

on the other hand it could be my logic you dont find attractive? hehe

btw all my humour and statemesnt were on topic was just pointing out the funny side of things

gotta have abit of humour considering the topic is a joke /me hides

"not the person" the "thread" or atleas the meaning of it in regards to the sub context of the ETH issue

thats the confusion many of us who dont agree was pointing out

reply posted on 7-4-2009 @ 04:52 PM by jkrog08

reply to post by Indigo_Child

SUPURB........EXCELLENT

I would give you a applause if I could(mods,FSME's?)!This is one of the(if not the best)put together post I have ever seen on ATS,you obviously have a great deal of knowledge in oral communication(knowing terms of fallacies).All of your rebuttals and explanations were airtight and unbiased.You should practice law IMO.I rarely compliment someone like this(infact never) so this should show how much I respect your thread.I will put this thread tag in my signature and profile for all to see as now we have a base to go by when debating this very hot and controversial topic.Star and flagged,many times.

reply posted on 21-5-2009 @ 04:39 PM by WWu777

reply to post by Indigo_Child

Indigo child, wow that was a great refutation of pseudo-skeptical arguments. You should join the new SCEPCOP committee! www.debunkingskeptics.com... You'd make a great addition there