Skeptics and Believers dont exist

reply to post by Gawdzilla


Fair enough. Cant disagree with any of that. Being a vietnam veteran I can see how that might have shaped your approach of being more careful with what you embrace.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Gawdzilla

 

Fair enough. Cant disagree with any of that. Being a vietnam veteran I can see how that might have shaped your approach of being more careful with what you embrace.

Very reasonable of you. Most people just assume I'm trying to start trouble. All I'm interested in is how people support their positions. I seem to push some button or other when I ask for support, however.

reply to post by Gawdzilla


In the interest offering constructive criticism Gawdzilla it often seems that you do not pay attention to what others are trying to say. Sometimes even attributing things to your opponent that they had jsut gotten through explaining the exact opposite. Perhaps you don't notice you do this but it is a common complaint against you cannot deny.
Amongst other things.

reply to post by Skyfloating

In other words: Is this a court of law or a discussion forum?

LOL,I wonder sometimes.....It seems like a court room in A LOT of threads I've been in recently.

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Gawdzilla

 

In the interest offering constructive criticism Gawdzilla it often seems that you do not pay attention to what others are trying to say. Sometimes even attributing things to your opponent that they had jsut gotten through explaining the exact opposite. Perhaps you don't notice you do this but it is a common complaint against you cannot deny.
Amongst other things.

Perhaps you could provide examples for my elucidation?

(Unless that would be deemed "evidence" or "proof", of course. )

reply to post by Gawdzilla

Well for one in this thread alone,

Strange, that's not the impression I have. Maybe my opinion is less valid than yours because I'm not a True Believer? That wouldn't be surprising.

Despite the fact he never even infered that.

But at anyrate, I was just offering some constructive criticism and have no wish to enter into an argument with you. So to that effect, good day.

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Gawdzilla

 

Well for one in this thread alone,

Strange, that's not the impression I have. Maybe my opinion is less valid than yours because I'm not a True Believer? That wouldn't be surprising.

Despite the fact he never even infered that.

But at anyrate, I was just offering some constructive criticism and have no wish to enter into an argument with you. So to that effect, good day.

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

I don't think that's putting words in people's mouths. It was simply a statement of the attitude I've detected here.

reply to post by Gawdzilla


Um, despite the fact they have often just gotten done typing the exact opposite? And like I said I am not interested in argument. You could choose to heed me or not.
But if you would like a conversation, minus hostility, feel free to u2u as I am pretty sure this is not the place for such a conversation and we are derailing.

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

Over the past year, I've grown from an individual who was politely hostile ( ) to claims of inexplicable or strange occurrences to someone who tries to genuinely consider the information presented to me, giving anyone a fair chance to explain their experiences. This seems to be a quality that is missing among self-proclaimed skeptics (those who would attach the badge to themselves tend to be just the demeaning sort I once was). It is a self-appointed position from which derision and mockery is a fluid response to any claim that seems preposterous from initial inspection. It was my default position, I'm sad to say, and I was certainly more mild-mannered than many of the pseudo-skeptics I spent time with and those who have chosen to be in the public spotlight. I was still a terrible conversationalist for anyone who had unusual ideas.

During the past year or so, I've allowed myself to entertain (yes, entertain) ideas that I would have previously pushed aside as nonsense. More importantly, I've developed a more respectful approach to individuals who have very odd, very personal experiences to relate. The benefit of this is a broadening of my thoughts and contemplations, to a realm of allowing myself to actually consider things freely without feeling the old self-imposed manacles. This does not result in a sudden or measured gullability, or a newly mystical outlook to life, but simply a greater respect for the simple fact that I cannot know all there is to know, and that many things are indeed beyond the presently known facts of science. That last phrase once sent shivers up my spine. "You mean to deride science? To claim that something might exist despite being unverifiable? For shame!" It was an immediate designation of mine, and wholly unreasonable (despite claims that it is in fact the only reasonable position), but I felt it was the correct--and that word is important--position to take. I highlight the importance of the word correct as a description of an individual's own ideas because it is such an inherent part of this particular culture, the culture of "We cannot verify it and have not seen it with our own eyes; it must be a hallucination, a mistake within your perception, or even a hoax of your own design." It is a mindset that we should trouble ourselves to avoid, as it truly stifles personal growth and interpersonal connectivity, upon which our entire society is based. This is not skeptical enquiry of the inquisitive sort, the esteemed skepticism of long ago, but a very different sort that has the audacity to seize the term for itself.

I try to first seek answers within science, but am no longer shaken by the prospect of discovering that no answers await.

I am sad to see the responses left by you, Gawdzilla. While other discussion participants take care to craft a sincere response to your concerns, you show them no amount of respect in return, posting one glib, insulting response after another. The non sequiturs abound--it is a logicians nightmare. I trust that you are knowledgeable enough to know this, and I can only surmise that you are merely being careless. It is honestly upsetting to see that energy is being spent toward discussing a subject with you, and you show no mite of respect for that. It may seem to you that individuals are attacking you or ignoring your assertions, but a thorough and unbiased reading of the whole of the posts should convince you otherwise. People really do care, and you're only cheating yourself by not engaging with them.

reply to post by paperplanes


Great post and very heartfelt.I remember debating with you on a few of my older threads.I am glad to see your evolution.Your response to Gawdzilla is admirable and you along with Armap and a few others are truly paranormal skeptics(how does that word work guys?).Good job and starred.

reply to post by paperplanes


"
I am sad to see the responses left by you, Gawdzilla. While other discussion participants take care to craft a sincere response to your concerns, you show them no amount of respect in return, posting one glib, insulting response after another. The non sequiturs abound--it is a logicians nightmare. I trust that you are knowledgeable enough to know this, and I can only surmise that you are merely being careless. It is honestly upsetting to see that energy is being spent toward discussing a subject with you, and you show no mite of respect for that. It may seem to you that individuals are attacking you or ignoring your assertions, but a thorough and unbiased reading of the whole of the posts should convince you otherwise. People really do care, and you're only cheating yourself by not engaging with them."

The way I see it is my major sin is not agreeing with everything. I'm not likely to start doing that any time soon. If you opinion on the matter varies, that's fine.

reply to post by Gawdzilla


And you do again. Just as way of an FYI. Ah well, enjoy your perpetual conflict and what you percieve to be a conspiracy of constant misunderstanding perpetrated against you. But it is worth noting the old adage, "You reap what you sow.".

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
It was simply a statement of the attitude I've detected here.

I'm guessing the "attitude" you're referring to; can be "detected" anywhere and everywhere?

There are no shortage of forums out there, which seem to be your forte.

Is this what ATS is / has become? .. A skeptic/debunker website?

reply to post by Majorion

Is this what ATS is / has become? .. A skeptic/debunker website?

I hope not....I am tired of the debates I have had in the last week.I mean it is good to an extent,but there are some on here who are just 'brick walls' and no matter what evidence is given will budge.

oh oh, listen to mr. sagan in this video.
he's explaining something incredible, even uses all kinds of interesting ancient symbols (the apple) to do so.

i wonder if his admirers understand what he's saying

Originally posted by Majorion

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
It was simply a statement of the attitude I've detected here.

I'm guessing the "attitude" you're referring to; can be "detected" anywhere and everywhere?

There are no shortage of forums out there, which seem to be your forte.

Is this what ATS is / has become? .. A skeptic/debunker website?

If you're confident in your beliefs you shouldn't be afraid of a debate about evidence. That's what annoys people, I ask them to back up their claims and they're not used to that. The fact that you're afraid ATS has allowed a skeptic into the fold in revealing.

reply to post by Gawdzilla


no, no, i think the posters here are supporting the op's comments about labelling. the op doesn't want to label you. that okay with you?

reply to post by undo


Some find comfort in said labels, the world is much easier to understand that way. They have their boxes and nothing is ever unexpected. Sure this takes a large amount of unrealism, but they don't see it that way.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Gawdzilla

 

no, no, i think the posters here are supporting the op's comments about labelling. the op doesn't want to label you. that okay with you?

It actually doesn't matter to me. I'm only interested in the evidence.

reply to post by Gawdzilla


Evidence you say? What sort of evidence? Evidence is at it's heart a subjective word, what one person accepts as evidence is viewed as trash by another. If you mean physical evidence such as what we can touch, see, taste and smell then your missing a great deal. Can we touch an atom, I mean just reach out and touch a single atom? Have we seen and atom, I mean really seen beyond jsut detecting it with this instrument or that instrument? Can we taste a single atom? Yet we agree they exist.
And that is not even without mentioning the fact that the senses can be tricked.

And incidently, the evidence points to what others *and myself* have said above about I hate to say.

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]