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.

 

The U.F.O. Party Gatecrashers

page: 4
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by converge
More, this notion that only "open-minded" people should be allowed to post is also a dishonest one, because it's painfully clear that in this context "open-minded" means believer.


No, that's a false claim. I've never said that and made it quite clear what I meant.

It's about at least being open to the possibility, not about believing that it's a fact.


What people should do, rather than believing or denying is acknowledge that while some possibilities are more likely than others, the jury is still out on what is actually happening.


I don't even really think it's about what's more likely, because I don't think we should be detrmining things based on what we think the odds are. I'd just like to see people discuss the evidence open mindedly and to be allowed to do that without heckling and rudeness from those who have already firmly closed their minds.


[edit on 24-10-2009 by Malcram]




posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malcram
Is ATS really aimed at the people who think "I absolutely don't believe in Aliens or UFO's, I really must find an Aliens and UFO forum to express my absolute disbelief".


I already told you what demographic ATS is aimed at, and that is inquisitive people, and certainly not that caricature you present of a denialist. And I was pretty explicit on that before.

But if you guys think ATS is specifically aimed at believers let's ask Springer to comment on that. I'm sure it will be enlightening.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by converge

Originally posted by Malcram
Is ATS really aimed at the people who think "I absolutely don't believe in Aliens or UFO's, I really must find an Aliens and UFO forum to express my absolute disbelief".


I already told you what demographic ATS is aimed at, and that is inquisitive people, and certainly not that caricature you present of a denialist. And I was pretty explicit on that before.


I already addressed this point, the very quotes you posted make it clear that this forum was supposedly created in order to support the investigation of the "ET phenomenon". This hardly includes those who insist there is no ET phenomena to investigate, that the investigation is stupid and futile, and that an ET phenomena itself is impossible.


But if you guys think ATS is specifically aimed at believers let's ask Springer to comment on that. I'm sure it will be enlightening.


Why are you misrepresenting what we are saying?

I have never claimed ATS was for 'believers' alone and have been very, very explicit about that. You're raising a straw man here.

[edit on 24-10-2009 by Malcram]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
I am one of the non believers, but I am willing to give evidence a chance if it turns out to be good. So far though, no good evidence points to aliens just unknown craft or lights. There are to many good photos/videos to deny this....but there are also too many fakes out there. Not one photo/video or trace of an alien, just people stories...but there are also stories of people seeing vampires, werewolves and other such nonsense. Since there are more logical explainations...and since mental illness or looking for attention cannot be entirely ruled out, then the ET hypothethis is strictly hypothethis and not fact.

I chime in when people claim the alien phenomenon is fact..because there are people out there who read that and will believe it and will avoid the medical attention they may need. People may bring up lie detector results to help thier stories, but think about this....you give a mental patient who claims to be Abe Lincoln a lie detector test...I bet you anything the results would tell you he is telling the truth. We know this doesn't mean it's true...it just means he believes it to be true. SO lie detector tests don't tell us anything.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Edward 1st
So separating people according to beliefs, but also giving them a common ground is punishment in your eyes? Your logic is flawed. This is not punishment.
As you said "maybe a debate forum where the two can meet" I didn't consider it with the same weight as "a separate forum for sceptics and one for believers", but then we would have the same situation we have now (a common forum) and two separate, specific forums for sceptics and believers, and I don't see how that could be better than just having a common forum.


You have either very little knowledge on how to get the best out of people and/or you’re heavily influenced by the politically correct jargon, or you know exactly what you’re doing and wish for slow and little progress.
I think it's mostly the first option.

I don't understand what you mean by the third.


Will you please explain to me why you choose the disruptive classroom? Or do you want to revert back to saying segregation with common ground is punishment and prove to me your not worth talking to?
I don't choose the disruptive classroom, I choose a common classroom where the disruptive elements must learn how to behave or they will be put out of the classroom.

And as many times the disruptive elements are not noticed by the teacher, the responsibility of keeping them under control falls also on the other students; if they want to learn they will tell the teacher that this or that student is preventing him/her from getting the most of the class.


Did I not mention a common ground debate forum?
You did, but I forgot about it when I reached this part. Sorry.



This doesn’t solve anything. We’re in that position now and it doesn’t work. From your comments, this broken system is the way you want.
No, what I want is that people use the current system the way it was intended to.

If anyone appears on a thread and starts disrupting the discussion, hit the "alert" button to be sure that the staff knows about what is happening in that thread or send a U2U to one of the forum Mods (their names appear at the bottom of all thread pages), nobody wants to turn this from a "discussion forum" into a "fighting forum" (except those that do the disrupting).

PS: as more ideas have been presented, I think those should be posted on the ATS, BTS, What would you like to see in the future? thread, that's the best place for posting new ideas for alternative systems for ATS.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by kerazeesicko
I am one of the non believers, but I am willing to give evidence a chance if it turns out to be good....the ET hypothethis is strictly hypothethis and not fact.


Hi kerazeesicko. So, you are a skeptic, which is to say that while you don't feel the ET hypothesis is a proven fact, you agree that it is possible and are willing to open mindedly examine further evidence.

The position I am addressing in this thread is different to yours and involves those who deny even the possibility that the ET hypothesis may be true. They are not interested in the evidence because they have already made up their mind that the subject is nonsense and they are only here to heckle.



[edit on 24-10-2009 by Malcram]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malcram
I have never claimed ATS was for 'believers' alone and have been very, very explicit about that. You're raising a straw man here.


No, I made the point that ATS wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, except people willing to question things. You were the one that contested my statements.

If you have no problem with that, why do you continue to raise this or better yet, why do you even make a thread suggesting requirements for certain types of people being able to post in this forum?



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Hi Malcram, I hear what you're saying but I'm of the same opinion as ArMap.

As previously mentioned the forum description already lets people know they should respect the tradition you're talking about, which means it's perfectly ok for people to report those who repeatedly stand against this tradition.

I think the mechanisms for dealing with this issue are already in place. If the problem is still occurring I would posit that it is because people are not availing themselves of these mechanisms.

At the very least you have alerted ArMap (who I see is now a Mod) to the problem so he may be sympathetic in future when you alert him to behaviour of this sort


Reporting someone who just disagrees with your stance would not be acceptable (of course you know that) but if you report one line posts that add nothing to the topic, personal attacks or repeated undermining of the forum tradition in the manner you state then you should have a reasonable expectation that the Mods will act on it.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by convergeNo, I made the point that ATS wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, except people willing to question things. You were the one that contested my statements.


ATS is aimed at those wiling to investigate the "ET phenomen" - as you say, "inquisitive people". This does not include people who have already made up their mind that the inquiry itself is futile because the ET phenomenon is impossible, and who are consequently only here to heckle those who believe it or who are open minded to it.


If you have no problem with that, why do you continue to raise this or better yet, why do you even make a thread suggesting requirements for certain types of people being able to post in this forum?


I can only suggest you reread as I have been very clear and repeated my point many many times.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by MarrsAttax
 


Hi Marrs. Perhaps you're right.

However, I was under impression that the ATS Admin only wanted the alert button used for overt abuse and weren't really interested in upholding the original claimed raison d'etre of the forum.

I get the feeling ATS has rather "fallen to the dark side" and that there was little inclination to rectify that.


Perhaps members just need to start alerting posts more frequently.



[edit on 24-10-2009 by Malcram]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malcram
ATS is aimed at those wiling to investigate the "ET phenomen" - as you say, "inquisitive people". This does not include people who have already made up their mind (...)


That description would deny participation to the true believers as well.

Having their mind made up goes both ways.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malcram
However, I was under impression that the ATS Admin only wanted the alert button used for overt abuse and weren't really interested in upholding the original claimed raison d'etre of the forum.
You can see below what it says on the page where you can write your complaint, the text includes troublemakers as a target of the "Alert" function.



We encourage members to alert us to posts that might be a potential problem.
However, please be aware that this feature is intended for flagrant violations of our Terms & Conditions such as trouble makers, insults, inappropriate content, and potential copyright violations. This feature is not intended to alert staff to minor issues like 1-liner or off-topic posts.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by converge

Originally posted by Malcram
ATS is aimed at those wiling to investigate the "ET phenomen" - as you say, "inquisitive people". This does not include people who have already made up their mind (...)


That description would deny participation to the true believers as well.

Having their mind made up goes both ways.


(You cut of my quote mid sentence)

Not really, because this forum is for the investigation of the "ET phenomenon" and so belief in the ET phenomenon does not hinder the purpose of this forum. Active disbelief and closed minded opposition to the very possibility of an "ET Phenomenon" and the value of it's investigation directly opposes the raison d'etre of this forum.

It doesn't work both ways.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malcram
Not really, because this forum is for the investigation of the "ET phenomenon" and so belief in the ET phenomenon does not hinder the purpose of this forum.


And neither does the disbelief. The purpose is discussion not agreement.



It doesn't work both ways.


Yes, it does. To be taken seriously, believers have to substantiate their claims, just as any disbeliever has to.

It seems that you don't have an opposition so much against unfounded claims in general, as an open-minded skeptic would, but only against people expressing beliefs contrary to yours.


[edit on 24-10-2009 by converge]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Seems if one absolutly believes in the existence of, and another believes the opposite, surely one is wrong. If they connot communicate, neither can benefit from each other's rational or creative minds. Thank you for something to read.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by converge

Originally posted by Malcram
Not really, because this forum is for the investigation of the "ET phenomenon" and so belief in the ET phenomenon does not hinder the purpose of this forum.


And neither does the disbelief. The purpose is discussion not agreement.


Closed minded disbelief/denial itself may not hinder the discussion but it contributes nothing to it. And if the disbelief is proclaimed repeatedly as fact - "There are no ET's. It's ridiculous to believe that" - then that is not a "discussion" but a pointless proclamation, a useless sermon. It's only an annoyance. It's not as if this position is being proved or argued with reason or evidence, because it can't be, it's just being repeatedly stated. And if it is accompanied with snarky jibes, as is usually the case, it becomes both useless and insulting.


It seems that you don't have an opposition so much against unfounded claims in general, as an open-minded skeptic would, but only against people expressing beliefs contrary to yours.


I'm not "a skeptic", although I'm open-minded. I find unfounded claims of the ETH to be vaguely interesting but ultimately useless, but as I have repeatedly said, they don't oppose the purpose of this forum or seriously hinder it. True open minded skeptics are enough to deal with these types.

However, the closed minded insistence that the ETH is impossible because no ET life exists anywhere and thus UFOs categorically have nothing to do with ETs and consequently investigation of the ET hypothesis is worthless and only for the gullible directly stalls discussion and runs directly counter to the purpose of this forum.

We've been over this several times. I don't think we are going to get any further.


[edit on 24-10-2009 by Malcram]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   


Not really, because this forum is for the investigation of the "ET phenomenon" and so belief in the ET phenomenon does not hinder the purpose of this forum. Active disbelief and closed minded opposition to the very possibility of an "ET Phenomenon" and the value of it's investigation directly opposes the raison d'etre of this forum.

It doesn't work both ways.


And since when did you have to believe in something to investigate it?

At the end of the day the tools to solve the problem are in front of you, it's called the ignore button. Every user has one (except mods), just click it and you wont have to read their crap again



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wh00pS
And since when did you have to believe in something to investigate it?


You don't have to. I have never claimed that you do.

What I have said is that you have to believe that it's possible. You have to be open minded. You have to believe that an investigation is necessary and worthwhile - which would require not having already reached the firm conclusion that ETs absolutely do not exist and so have never visited earth and that the whole idea is absurd and it's investigation futile and only for the simple-minded.


[edit on 24-10-2009 by Malcram]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malcram

Originally posted by Wh00pS
And since when did you have to believe in something to investigate it?


You don't have to. I have never claimed that you do.

What I have said is that you have to believe that it's possible. You have to be open minded. You have to believe that an investigation is necessary and worthwhile - which would require not having already reached the firm conclusion that ETs absolutely do not exist and so have never visited earth and that the whole idea is absurd and it's investigation futile and only for the simple-minded.


[edit on 24-10-2009 by Malcram]


Ok then this means that if i start a thread in the UFO section stating that " I 100% do not believe that ET life exists" then this means that you would not be able to join in said discussion because you find what i have just said to be absurd.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wh00pS
Ok then this means that if i start a thread in the UFO section stating that " I 100% do not believe that ET life exists" then this means that you would not be able to join in said discussion because you find what i have just said to be absurd.


LOL. Depends what you mean by "don't believe" . If you mean "I'm open to the possibility, it could be true, but I'm not convinced so far, it's not been proven, IMO" then that just makes you a skeptic, and I have no problem with that.

But if you mean "There are no ETs. All UFOs have noting to do with ETs. The ETH is ridiculous." then that's quite different.

I'd be interested to see if you were going to argue the case or were just stating disbelief. If it was just disbelief/denial, I'd wonder why you were at ATS at all, as obviously your mind would be made up and therefore you have nothing to contribute to the investigation except your denial of it's value. I might also post that in your thread.




[edit on 24-10-2009 by Malcram]




top topics



 
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join