reply to post by pharaohmoan
Disclaimer the following is based on my experiences as a long term member of ATS .
Burden of proof always lays with the claimant this rational approach goes against the MO of those who believe in a conspiracy because its a conspiracy
or because an idea is perceived to be a part of the establishment . Now I am going to use the claimants rather then conspiracy theorist because while
I mostly follow current events I do subscribe to some conspiracy theories. The problem is that sometimes the claimants truly don't know what they are
talking about . Conspiracy theories that surround Obama birth certificate are a perfect example of what I am talking about and the problem extends to
both sides of the coin . The majority of claimants and those who have taken part in related discussions either don't know the difference between
eligibility and qualified or both .
Yet there is no telling the dingbat claimants or any of the other ignorant fools this . As for the claimants that don't fall into the majority
category above if Alex Jones told them Santa Claus was a part of the NWO they would believe it .
If a topic or particular doesnt have some basic logic or sound rational to begin with then it is a waste of time to make a contribution . That is not
to say that I have to agree with the op or a post but evidence or at a sound logical basis for a argument is a reasonable requirement for a productive
discussion. You could easily replace the word debunkers with claimants in your thread title and op . The term dis info agent is more often then not
used by claimants who either cant accept that people disagree with them or by those who cant handle rational thought process history destorying there
arguments .
Perhaps my favorite is those claimants who get there knickers in a twist when members don't them or the claims seriously because there so called
"evidence " is You Tube videos or some other crack pot source . I wouldn't be surprised that if there is a ten to two ratio people that will agree
with the op . Out of that ten will be admittedly a few people who have en counted a genuine road to rational thought process and discussion as I have
described above .
[edit on 21-5-2009 by xpert11]



I am not contradicting you that the definitions I have read for trolls are
pretty much the same. Your post is well written btw. 