Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

ATS has been infiltrated with agents of ignorance!

page: 1
36
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+26 more 
posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 08:56 PM
link   
It is very frustrating to try and intelligently discuss a matter when a thread is hijacked and derailed by people who have no desire for truth. It is really unbelievable how people behave here at times, when I'm sure they would never get away with such tactics in their jobs... or maybe they do


I am referring to the various tactics that I have seen employed here on ATS that are clearly either intentional disinfo and deflection, or extreme cases of impaired mental processes.

Here are some of the tactics I am referring to:

1) If a topic dealing with Zero-Point Energy is introduced, there emerges a raft of people who spring forth claiming "impossible", or "hoax", when they have not introduced one shred of proof that it is a hoax. And no matter what points you bring up to try and convince them, they do not come back with counter-ARGUMENTS, they come back with more epithets of derision. This is highly suspicious of a prejudiced agenda of disinformation, and here is why:

A) If the subject was really a hoax, why are they so enthusiastic about saying so? Why are they so passionate about resisting it with chanted mantras of "hoax", and not with one shred of evidence? Why are they so driven to keep man bound in the current shackles of current understanding? They are clearly afraid of something, but what? What is motivating them, if not some agenda to dissuade others from pursuing the truth in the matter?

B) If they really had any solid arguments against the supposed hoax, why do they not present them? Why do they not make a solid case to support their accusations? Why do they commit such slander against others, not providing one shred of evidence to their claims? They say things like "if that were me, I would do it this way, and because they are not doing it that way, it must be a hoax!" and other types of nonsensical circular-reasoning and flawed logic.

C) If they are truly just trying to defend a position that they believe to be true, why are they not willing to have their claims cross-examined? Are they really that unskilled in debate? Everyone knows that in a courtroom the prosecutor starts off with the premise that the defendant is guilty, while the defender starts off with a presumed innocence. Then each argues from their prejudiced point-of-view. The lawyers are not seeking truth... they are trying to convince an impartial jury of their position, and it it the jury's job to find the truth. Are we not supposed to be like the JURY? Anyone who behaves like a lawyer must have some agenda other than truth, in which case we must then ask, who is paying the retainer fee?

2) Another tactic often seen is to misdirect the arguments so they focus on things that really don't matter, and are not germane to the point at hand. For example, if a particular scientist has some trumped up accusations against him, this is brought forward as proof that the original point is wrong. It is used in court also... destroy the credibility of the witness. The problem with this technique is that it is no guarantee that the witness is lying or wrong. And if you bring up that the scientist was framed or unjustly maligned, that is laughed at as ridiculous! Here, on a conspiracy site, the idea of unjust slander is laughed at!

3) Another tactic is to do smorgasbord responses, which is especially frustrating. Basically, they are doing what the MSM does... misquote or selectively quote in order to give a different perspective than what was meant. If you say "the scientist was wrong about that particular item, but then in subsequent tests, he found his error and corrected it...", the disinfo responder will just quote the first part "the scientist was wrong... he found his error...", and then they will say "See, you even admitted he was wrong!" This is just such blatant manipulation and deception!

These are just a few tactics that come to mind immediately, but there are many more that I have witnessed first hand.

My question is, WHY ARE THEY DOING IT? In one case that happened recently, there was a real attempt at trying to discuss the science behind ZPE energy systems, and there were some that just refused to discuss with intelligence. No matter what was said or presented, they kept repeating their mantras of disinfo and deflection. I had a hard time believing they were actually that stupid or thick, so my only conclusion was that they must be doing this intentionally with some malicious agenda in mind.

I fully agree that people should be able to voice their intelligent rebuttals and that intelligent skepticism is healthy and necessary to finding truth. What is NOT HELPFUL, however, and actually COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE is blind and ignorant rejection, masquerading as skepticism.

If you say "aliens exist" and I say "no they don't", it then becomes necessary for each of us to present objective evidence either for or against, if indeed any kind of progress is to be achieved. Even opinions should be informed and based on something other than pure biased conjecture, for what value does that really hold? If we are not here to learn and progress, that what is ATS really all about?

After all, what is the process for denying ignorance? Perhaps there should be some "rules of engagement" that help to foster meaningful debate and help to neutralize the disinfo "agents" and daft-brained thread derailleurs.




posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:03 PM
link   
I agree but have no answers except that I believe most of those you describe only read the title thread make up their mind immediately and begin posting.Last week I started a thread from an article in the World Weekly News as a joke(and to prove a point ) and it took 18 post before someone mentioned it was a poor source and the S.O. deleted it.Goes with the territory.
I have been called everything here from racist to troll to genius by people who don't know me or my motivations pretty presumptuous on their part.But like I tell any newbie I respond to in an introduction "around here you better have a thick skin".

[edit on 18-12-2009 by genius/idoit]



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:10 PM
link   
Oh, and in case anybody thinks I am dissing ATS, think again. I love ATS and the mental stimulation in can provide at times. That is really why I wrote this thread. I am hoping that some people will take a look at this issue and take it to heart because I'd love to see the quality of thread discussions be raised. There are SO MANY important issues facing us all these days that it would be a shame that they not get dealt with because some people with negative agendas derailed the attempts.

Please, can we discuss this matter, and especially possible ways to remedy it.

In my frustration over this problem I've even had the thought of launching a new website that enforced solid debating behaviors for the betterment and quality of discussions. I can think of many ways for a website to make the quality of discussion better, but in the end it would take a lot of work and it would likely never match ATS is number of people. But perhaps it is not the number of people that come to website that really matters, but instead, it is the number of quality people who provide meaningful and helpful contribution that really matters. Besides, it's usually a lot easier to fix the existing wheel than it is to reinvent a new one.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by genius/idoit
 


Yes, I have noticed the same thing... that people don't read the whole thread before making a post. I wonder if that is how they would handle themselves at a party? Would they enter a party, pick a group of people who have obviously been talking for a while, and just walk up and start spouting about, responding to the very first sentence they heard someone say? That would be seen as so very rude and foolish, and yet that is what happens here almost all the time.

That leads me to think that there is some inherent flaw in the whole "forum" mechanism to begin with. The notion that somebody makes an OP and then people read that (or maybe just the title), and then they add their 2 cents in... well their 2 cents is not even worth a hundredth of a cent in that case. They need to see how many comments have been made thus far and judge their response accordingly. Is there anything at all on ATS rules or suggested behaviors that address this?

Maybe it should work like email and show you the most recent post first, so to see the conversation you need to read it backwards. At least then people would be responding to what was most recently said, which may be completely changed from the OP.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by downisreallyup
 


The easiest solution is when someone contributes nothing to the debate point it out! Usually when people are confronted with the fact others are aware what there doing they tend to change and try to explain there actions.


+4 more 
posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Oh, here's THIS thread again.


seriously, i think everyone gets the point by now. this is the, what, 1,000,000,000,000th thread on this?


[edit on 18-12-2009 by LocoHombre]



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Lol I just came from the thread he's talking about. He's right a lot of guys sound like they know as much about physics as I do. Reading their responses reinforces the belief that I should continue to not post there.
I'm not declaring my belief/disbelief in the device, I just know a crappy, sarcastic argument when I see one.
You should go in there and read it it's actually kind of funny, yet it's also sad.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by LocoHombre
 


Well, until it gets fixed perhaps it should be brought up daily or even hourly. These are not unfounded rants, but genuine issues that affect the very nature of forums themselves, of which ATS is a prime example.

This section of ATS is called "disinformation and deflection", so it is quite appropriate to be discussed here.

Perhaps your attempt to minimize this, and deflect it only casts doubt on your own motives for not supporting this... hmmmm


At any rate, this site is all about conspiracy, and part of discussing conspiracy is to discuss the tactics used by conspiracy participants. What is your problem with that? If you don't want to discuss conspiracy, even those parts of it that touch ATS directly, then why are you on ATS? That is what we do here... discuss conspiracy, and this particular board topic it is specifically addressing the very thing I brought up in the post.

The reason I brought it up is because I have noticed a high level of the problem occurring in certain forum topics, and until it is addressed, it should be talked about... how else will it ever change?

Anyone who thinks this should just be ignored and swept under the carpet only serves to cast doubt on their own motives for saying that.

I'm sure that most of the "old timer" ATS members don't like seeing the raft of new members who spend their time jumping into every important thread to spew their disinfo venom all around, while never making any meaningful OPs themselves. They are actually breaking the rules by not "making every post count" and yet the mods are not doing anything to flag those posts. I think the mods must be overwhelmed or something like that.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   
I've noticed alot more "WTF" coming up in those same kinds of posts you mention.

It may not actually be SAYING "WTF" outright,but that's what registers in our minds.

Never a good sign of intelligence if people resort to foul language,in my opinion.

(I'm guilty of swearing myself,don't get me wrong! It's just that I don't see what it contributes to intelligent discourse in a forum like this.)

Also,I see there are many clever spellings for the "F" word that are used quite liberally!

When I see threads disintegrate into the kind described,I tend to bow out,because I find the company offensive.

I don't expect it to change either. The "IGNORE" button is a handy option for what I deem "repeat offenders"! The board must have figured it would come in handy sometimes,or it wouldn't be there! (Thank you,ATS!)



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by LocoHombre
 


Read your own signature line:



Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.- Martin Luther King Jr.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by downisreallyup
 


I just read the last 3 pages of that thread and would like to offer my take-

* Once a thread goes past say, 4-5 pages, the likelihood of derailment goes WAY up.

* You were feeding the trolls, please do not do this.

* Use the ignore button and walk away. I have been caught up with this myself, just walk away.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by downisreallyup
 




You are like, oh, how do I say it. New here. And I'm supposed to believe that new people are here to save me from ignorance and disinformation. Infiltrated? Heh. WTF?




posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by downisreallyup
 

Simple answer really…
A lot of times, its due to the fact that its something that many of us have already seen, either on ATS or elsewhere, and know has been debunked. There are possibly more bad bits of information out there floating around the web, then true ones, and when they are proven false there is no internet police that take that bad information off the web. So what happens is that we get new members that post things that may be new to them, but we have already seen multiple times before and know for a fact are false.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Kudos. You said it much better than I managed.

Second, third line.

Whatever.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 

I'm flattered to be your very favorite!
I dont see you on my friends list however.
Care to elaborate on your reasoning at all?

Did you get your name from a Rush album?
I see you like guitars. I play some Rush myself.
Surely that must be the reason......


On topic:
Op, I know what you mean.
If it wasnt so disgusting, it would be pathetic.
Especially the namecalling!
Star and flag!



[edit on 18-12-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by downisreallyup
 


What you are seeing are passionate members with strong opinions and sometimes it can get messy to the point where people become personal. I dont think there are necessarily agents as such differences are common on such a large forum on the web. Im not saying there is no possibility of disinformation agents but then again there are many members who have personal agendas but are just members nevertheless.

I think also, there is this big thing on here to dismiss anybody who is critical of a conspiracy. I know this is a conspiracy theory website but being a debunker is not synonymous with being a disinformation agent. Disinformation agents (if they existed) can come in many forms and mislead in many ways. A conspiracy with a secret agenda to confuse and mislead can be just as bad as an disinformation agent trying to derail a thread. Nobody and define exactly what a disinformation agent must be.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


If the Steorns issue was not brought up because of fresh news then this topic of free energy would not have been brought up. This is a new and relevant topic because of the new progress with this particular company.

This is appropriate because there are answers as to why Steorn had problems in 2006 with their public test, and also why the so-called panel of "scientists" quit before the job was complete. Where is their report? Where can I read of the tests they did, how they did it, and what their conclusions were? Show me the data that disproves the Steorn generator and I will be disclaim it immediately. You can't show me though because the panel produced nothing, so that tells me they quit because of other reasons, not because of true scientific studies. Who knows, perhaps they were bought off by big energy.

You claim that I am so ready to believe this is possible, and I see that you who doubt are so ready to disbelieve it... it's as if you hope it is a fraud.

Back to topic, my problem is with people who think that just because something was determined a while ago here on ATS, that DOES NOT MEAN the issue was CORRECTLY settled, or that new information can't come out that changes the former determination.

I'm just about truth, nothing more. I don't care about financial agendas, political agendas, or any other agendas that may try to suppress the truth or keep people from looking into new information and possibilities.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by downisreallyup

If you say "aliens exist" and I say "no they don't", it then becomes necessary for each of us to present objective evidence either for or against, if indeed any kind of progress is to be achieved.

Incorrect, it is impossible to prove something doesn't exist. If someone claims that a thing does exist, he must then offer proof supporting that contention. Those arguing that something doesn't exist, or is unlikely to exist, are only responsible for evaluating and responding to the evidence provided by those arguing that a thing does exist.

It seems to me that much of your "issue" has to do with a basic misunderstanding, or possibly even ignorance, of the structure of logic and reason.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by downisreallyup
 


What you are seeing are passionate members with strong opinions and sometimes it can get messy to the point where people become personal. I dont think there are necessarily agents as such differences are common on such a large forum on the web. Im not saying there is no possibility of disinformation agents but then again there are many members who have personal agendas but are just members nevertheless.

I think also, there is this big thing on here to dismiss anybody who is critical of a conspiracy. I know this is a conspiracy theory website but being a debunker is not synonymous with being a disinformation agent. Disinformation agents (if they existed) can come in many forms and mislead in many ways. A conspiracy with a secret agenda to confuse and mislead can be just as bad as an disinformation agent trying to derail a thread. Nobody and define exactly what a disinformation agent must be.


While I respect your views on this, my main thesis in this thread is that even passionate people need to argue with facts not baseless assumptions... otherwise this site will go the way of yahoo chat rooms... have you ever tried going to one of those? OMG


Also, the tactics I described are not about a passionate person, they are about people who would be kicked out of any physical discussion group. Imagine if you make a statement in a conversation like this:

"I heard the economy was getting worse."

And then some other guy chimed in and said:

"Who said the economy is going to get better?"

And you said "Wait, I didn't say that!"

And he says "See, you know nothing about politics!"


This is the kind of nonsense and ridiculous shenanigans that I witnessed in the on Steorn. Then some other guys pipes up and comments on the incoherent guys ravings "Well, so-and-so is the only one who is making sense here."

Am I in the twilight zone or what?



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 11:45 PM
link   
S + F
I agree. I have recently been checking out the debate threads. Cool stuff.
You should attempt a debate thread with those who are putting out these
tactics.

More info here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

It would be cool to show in the user signature, info or profile that reflect:
*Challenges made
*To whom
*Inclined
*Declined
*Link to debate (if it happens)

I think it could give more insight to a members integrity for the truth.

If a poster keeps posting "hoax" or "not possible".. blah blah blah
Then let it show that they are not capable even of defending or debating
their stance. And if they accept your challenge, then let the debate begin.

In the future, people can choose to just ignore posters like this, since they
may not have anything to logical to offer. Deny their ignorance and don't
even take their remarks into consideration.

I am not saying that this should reflect ones intelligence, but it could reflect
their willingness to participation in an intelligent discussion.









 
36
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join