It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UFO skeptics don't use reason

page: 13
13
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


It is more wise to believe in 'extra terrestrial' intelligence than not to, all science and statistics even prove so, as well as lots of other proof.

Humans believed the earth was flat not so long ago and would never have believed in planes or the internet.




posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Im glad there's alot of skepticism on here when it comes to UFO's. Mainly because when I first started lurking on here, Im ashamed to say I was one of those 'woweeeee that MUST be a UFO' type people as soon as I saw a picture with a funny light or one of the many youtube videos of alleged UFO's. I literally had no clue that CGI could be so convincing and that there were so many more logical reasons to explain them.
So yea, Im happy that theres plenty of people who will actually try ad bring a bit of common sense into the threads where someone's freaking out because they saw a speck of light in the sky... otherwise I might have jumped on the 'Im a special little indigo child'/'lets have an in depth discussion on the motives of the reptilians' bandwagon by now!

And at the end of the day.. none of these sightings/pictures/videos can be proved 100% either way, so it seems a little silly to get worked up if someone disagrees with your opinion.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bluebelle
Im glad there's alot of skepticism on here when it comes to UFO's. Mainly because when I first started lurking on here, Im ashamed to say I was one of those 'woweeeee that MUST be a UFO' type people as soon as I saw a picture with a funny light or one of the many youtube videos of alleged UFO's. I literally had no clue that CGI could be so convincing and that there were so many more logical reasons to explain them.
So yea, Im happy that theres plenty of people who will actually try ad bring a bit of common sense into the threads where someone's freaking out because they saw a speck of light in the sky... otherwise I might have jumped on the 'Im a special little indigo child'/'lets have an in depth discussion on the motives of the reptilians' bandwagon by now!

And at the end of the day.. none of these sightings/pictures/videos can be proved 100% either way, so it seems a little silly to get worked up if someone disagrees with your opinion.


Skepticism is good when the skeptic states what he's skeptic about. I'm not a UFO skeptic but I am an alien skeptic. Even I have evidence for the reality of UFOs and I don't argue that strongly with UFO believers except to state that believing doesn't make it so. But no one has ever presented anything but emotional effluvia when it comes to aliens and alien abductions. There is no way for me to accept even a single report of such as having any reality outside of the reporter's mind. I was there when the alien fad started and it had nothing to do with reality. It was media driven. Somehow, because of the seeming sincerity of those that make such reports, non-experiencers have jumped on the bandwagon and they've become even more difficult to deal with than the reporters of such experiences.

While I disagree with your statement: "...none of these sightings/pictures/videos can be proved 100% either way..." although you are somewhat correct, the fact is that discounting visual reports, a certain weight has to be given those photos/films/videos for they are not of human aircraft. What they're of is the topic of most UFO forums. And although they cannot be proven 100%, they are enough evidence of something that is not ours.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Also, I think something which sets skeptics off slightly (well I know it does me anyway), is that people generally assume a UFO is something that isnt from this planet. I think its highly likely that there are aliens out there somewhere, but saying that they are visiting us is a pretty big claim to make. Im more inclined to think that while the public may not know what they are, they're more likely to be advanced technology of our own.
The only thing I can really say against skepticism is that people can be quite blunt with their opinions sometimes, which if someones jumping about with excitement thinking they've found an annunaki mother ship or whatever else, can be quite put out when someone tears the thread apart within two seconds. But if that didnt happen then this forum would just become even more over run with non-sensical threads, making huge claims with no evidence whatsoever.

Oh, and #2 in the OP... Where have you read the 'hybrid origin' bit? All Ive ever read is that the hair was from a rare human bloodline.



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


there is no credible reason to not believe in ET life...if you think we are the only planet in the universe with life on it you are arrogant/ignorant and VERY closed minded



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
The whole premise of UFO skepticism is to abandon reason.


Sorry, but that's not fair, and quite frankly, it's just not very constructive.

We have to recognize that there are probably good and bad actors throughout the spectrum of this matter. There are probably those that posit disingenuous arguments on either side of the debate, and there are probably those that have an ulterior motive in supporting one particular side against the other. But throughout it all, we have to remember that we are all in this together!

We all have a stake in the answer to this (and other) important questions, and we must work together to reach a consensus. We may not always agree, but this is a strength, not a weakness. Our diversity of perspectives on this matter provides us with a greater (not lesser) depth of understanding that enables us to contextualize such phenomena within the framework of reality.

To that end, I challenge both sides of this debate to take action designed to drive us closer to consensus:

1) For those who reserve judgement on such phenomena, I challenge you to clearly define what you would accept as compelling evidence. Falling short of this, compelling evidence becomes a moving target that can never truly be hit.

2) For those who do not reserve judgement on such phenomena, I challenge you to exercise critical thinking. Specifically, acknowledge and explore the depth to which the conclusion you have reached may be incorrect or inaccurate.

Thank you.

[edit on 28-10-2009 by NewPrometheus]

[edit on 28-10-2009 by NewPrometheus]



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
This is a typical thread for Matrix Rising. His threads are based in an Argument From Ignorance fallacy. Instead of making an argument to support extraterrestrial life visiting the Earth, he attacks skeptics and mistakenly believes by proving skeptics wrong he will prove himself right by default. To this end he makes the usual list of straw man arguments and tries to substitute the standards of evidence for science with that of law knowing that the latter's standards are weaker.


Redefining what is a straw man argument and what constitutes under an Argument of Ignorance Fallacy is rather I guess you could say a standard for people who have no true meaning of countering someone's point of view.

And you are not saying this because you truly dislike the manner of which Matrix is talking and addressing his concerns. Rather I believe this is a substance issue of which you are a skeptic and you dislike the fact that Matrix dislike Skeptics.

I mean I've seen this tactic used all the time by Republicans and Conservatives in the United States when they confront Liberals and Democrats that are tired of the rhetoric and lies Republicans and Conservatives make.

Can't we just say Matrix has a general dislike concerning Skeptics and that maybe his own bias is driving his sanity a little too far towards outlandish ridicule and paranoia?

Maybe instead of engaging Matrix in this sort of fashion, perhaps you should consider proving the premise of his argument wrong by fairly articulating skepticy with him. Not to prove that extraterrestrials don't exist, but to prove the alien contacts or some of the alien contacts he alledgedly believes are true that are in fact not true to some extent at the very least if not at all.

But I don't see you doing that and I doubt I will ever see you do something like that.

[EDITED]

NewPrometheus, there is a valid argument to place on skepticy. I myself believe aliens exist and are visiting Earth, but I am completely skeptical on the existence of malevolent extraterrestrials working alongside the government, because there is so much contrary evidence behind it.

The most fundament contrary evidence is if the government and mainstream society which are both tied together in almost everyway were working with extraterrestrials that were malevolent then surely we wouldn't have movies like "The Fourth Kind" being released in theaters, because such impressions made by such a media outlook generates so much fear and paranoia in it self that it can risk whatever agenda malevolent aliens may have over us.

Since I am making it quite clear that no malevolent extraterrestrials are visiting this planet, then surely we must argue that if there is a correlation between the government and extraterrestrials it would be against each other and not in a good way.

I sincerely believe people are not being abducted by aliens. I believe it is done by the government. It is easier for government operatives to sneak into your house without your knowledge, torment and torture you to the point that you will believe anything they tell you as we do this to our own prisoners through such acts water boarding that we can falsify such an existence as alien abductions. This intention as I see it isn't to create something in our minds that surely doesn't exist. The universe is too big and full of too much water as we've seen with the Lunar Surface to be as barren as we had originally thought. This intention as i see it is to distance our people from the real aliens that are visiting our planet. Those aliens you don't get to see, because encounters with them are ultimately so rare they are almost non-existent (aka like they never happen).

[edit on 28-10-2009 by DrainMaster]



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Wow, another bashing thread, who cares, do what you do people, just quit the bashing. These threads are annoying and pointless. I'm not saying i agree or disagree with the argument either way. Besides, everybody believes in something , and everybody is skeptical about something.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrainMaster

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
This is a typical thread for Matrix Rising. His threads are based in an Argument From Ignorance fallacy. Instead of making an argument to support extraterrestrial life visiting the Earth, he attacks skeptics and mistakenly believes by proving skeptics wrong he will prove himself right by default. To this end he makes the usual list of straw man arguments and tries to substitute the standards of evidence for science with that of law knowing that the latter's standards are weaker.


Redefining what is a straw man argument and what constitutes under an Argument of Ignorance Fallacy is rather I guess you could say a standard for people who have no true meaning of countering someone's point of view.

And you are not saying this because you truly dislike the manner of which Matrix is talking and addressing his concerns. Rather I believe this is a substance issue of which you are a skeptic and you dislike the fact that Matrix dislike Skeptics.

I mean I've seen this tactic used all the time by Republicans and Conservatives in the United States when they confront Liberals and Democrats that are tired of the rhetoric and lies Republicans and Conservatives make.

Can't we just say Matrix has a general dislike concerning Skeptics and that maybe his own bias is driving his sanity a little too far towards outlandish ridicule and paranoia?

Maybe instead of engaging Matrix in this sort of fashion, perhaps you should consider proving the premise of his argument wrong by fairly articulating skepticy with him. Not to prove that extraterrestrials don't exist, but to prove the alien contacts or some of the alien contacts he alledgedly believes are true that are in fact not true to some extent at the very least if not at all.

But I don't see you doing that and I doubt I will ever see you do something like that.

[EDITED]

[edit on 28-10-2009 by DrainMaster]


snipped NewPrometheus dumb reply.

While you make sense in a logical way, of course, the problem is that a believer whether it's Matrix or anyone else, will always have a bias against skeptics because all a skeptic wants is evidence. A claim that is supported by irrefutable evidence stands on solid ground and can be taken to the bank. A claim without evidence does not satisfy anything Look at what is happening with the President of the United States, Barack Obama. He came into power bypassing requirements demanded of all presidential candidates: evidence of an American birth. Obama not only has not provided this but his whole background is questionable. So what is the result? Court cases challenging his right to be in the White House's Oval Office. No evidence, problems.

The UFO field is not much different since now with everyone walking around with a camcorder or digicam seeing a UFO can be immediately recorded which will satisfy most everyone as far as evidence. Maybe not irrefutable evidence but circumstancial evidence which now numbers in the millions. So if a skeptic denies the UFO reality, he's operating normally but something is keeping him/her from at least admitting that due to the numbers something has to be going on. In reality, there are very few such skeptics. And those few should be ignored because they are aware of the circumstancial evidence since such evidence is not a secret, it is public. So one doesn't have to be "nice" to such skeptics since it's not gain any ground. Those skeptics will have to deal with an accept whatever criticism is leveled at them. Close-mindedness has a price.

However, where even open-minded skeptics such as I have a problem is dealing with aliens. For some reason, most people want to believe that there is other life in the universe besides us and that we are being visited by them. The problem is common sense and logic dictate that no matter who says that the mathematical odds dictate that we are not alone, the mathematical odds are not based on any evidence, just wishful thinking by whoever is claiming it such as Drake.

The alien presence is claimed by those who link aliens to UFOs even though, again, there are no credible reports of this link. It is only through speculation and conjecture. One doesn't have to be a close-minded skeptic to deny the reality of aliens because even an open-minded skeptic has nothing to work with, just hearsay. Once a skeptic denies the reality of aliens he's in deeper # than merely denying UFOs for people are more connected emotionally to aliens than they are to UFOs.

You cannot take anything associated with aliens to a court of law for you will be told you have no standing since nothing in the form of evidence can be presented and no judge is going to put up with nothing but tales and wishful thinking. You will not be heard.

Are people interacting with aliens as claimed by many? Those who are asked this question have to be true to themselves. If they're believers, they will accept without question. If they're not believers, they may sympathize with the claimant but will nod their head and walk away. If they're skeptics, the claimants are in for a questioning period in which they'll have to qualify their claim. With no evidence, the skeptic cannot but deny the experience was real but the skeptic has to be savvy about the field. He has to be well read. He has to be knowledgeable about the history of alleged alien abductions. The history of alien abductions does not support the experience as really happening.

The best example of denial was made by Dr Simon who did not consider Betty and Barney Hill as going through the experience but because of certain factors manufactured the experience. Yet, the Hills are looked upon as the best "documented" alien abduction. Having read about the Hills from day one I have to agree with the good Doctor.



[edit on 28-10-2009 by Skeptical Ed]

[edit on 28-10-2009 by Skeptical Ed]



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 07:23 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 07:27 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   
Is it possible any of you people can discuss your differences without resorting to childish sniping and bickering? You disagree, big deal, doesn't make your opponent stupid or you smarter. Act like adults.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Is it possible any of you people can discuss your differences without resorting to childish sniping and bickering? You disagree, big deal, doesn't make your opponent stupid or you smarter. Act like adults.


Most intelligent thing I have heard on here. Thank you sincerely.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 08:21 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 08:25 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 05:58 AM
link   
Can we get back On Topic now please?

Maybe stop the bickering?

Semper



posted on Oct, 30 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


This is off topic but i think everyone needs to know what i am about to say. In four days i am most likely going to be visited by the "MEN IN BLACK" and before i start........SCREW THE MEN IN BLACK.
I know exactly what is in that hangar at dugway proving grounds. i cant believe dugway thinks they are keeping things secret from us. i wonder if the government has heard of hi res high def cameras that can zoom in from over a mile. now what i am about to tell you is what i witnessed with my camera on september 21st 2008. a round object with a dome on the top. oh and by the way, there is reverse engeneering going on inside dugway. as i continued looking at this object i could hear 2 helicopters. well i can assure u that they may have seen a glare from my camera but they damn well never found me. so now you know whats in that hangar thanks to a man who has the balls to investigate something. men in black i look forward to seeing you



posted on Oct, 30 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   
I call shenanigans on the above post.

If you have these pictures, why don't you post them for us all to see?



posted on Oct, 30 2009 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by johnnie_walker
 


Yeah, sure.

But, imagine my delight when I saw that we have an "area 52" on UFO hunters last night. I must not be paying attention, I didn't know that people were assigning all sorts of delusions and fantasies to a new base. now days. I had to chuckle out loud, as I have been there on two occasions. Place sucks.

At least above ground
No, just kidding, the place sucks.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join