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.

 

To Debunkers and Skeptics, is every single theory on ATS bunk?

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Point of No Return

If not, what are you doing here?




Playing the role of a debunker is a great way to get one's trolling jollies.

And it is easy too. There is very little effort required to be a debunkertroll on a conspiracy site and generally you'll get away with whatever antics you get up to - so long as it is in the name of debunking/educating the masses/denying ignorance.
I guess this makes you a debunker of debunkers, and a skeptic of skeptics.
Stop trolling Please.



Try it.
I have been skeptical.
See if I haven't put a lot of effort into it. And guess who the trolls ended up being. The believers.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
In fact Conspiracy Theories rely on skepticism and debunking.
That is why we have them, because we generally do not believe many things that we are told, especially from authorities or "experts".
Why this skepticism or debunkers attitude would not apply here is rather an absurd notion and reeks of an insecurity surrounding a form of "group thinking" or "sheeple mentality" regarding specific ATS topics.

Some theories that debunk "conspiracies" actually involve conspiracy themselves.
I make a case for such a conspiracy around one ATS topics.
So debunking and skepticism may be totally conspiracy related.
They are by no means mutually exclusive.

Just as 9/11 is about debunking the "official conspiracy", which was the original conspiracy involving terrorists.


When you are playing the role of a debunker, you can get away with alot more trolling.

B.S.
Go look at the hundreds of "I'm an alien, here is my message threads". GFL threads, STS-mission "omg its not dust its a spaceship", Planet X is coming threads, False Flag Predictions, Disclosure is imminent threads, that all SPAM material that has been posted time and time and time again.
I think this makes it seem like there are many skeptics, because the same crap gets posted over and over again. And the same arguments pop up time and time again.
Like threads that complain about skeptics!
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I think we need a ATS WHINERS and DA BAD MAN SKEPTIC IS NOT AGREEING WHIFF ME! MUST BE A TROLL DISINFO AGENT SCARED OF ALIENS LITTLE BAD MAN DEBUNKERERS forum?


Please do not try and debunk or raise skepticism regarding the above, as that is what a troll would do!


[edit on 29/12/09 by atlasastro]




posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return
There is nothing wrong with healthy skepticism, we need it, but in the end, ATS is a CONSPIRACY site, and if you don't believe in any of the theories presented on this site, what are you doing here?


If everyone here was a believer then the ignorance would be multiplied 10 fold.

Without skeptics every conspiracy theory could seem true and facts would get forgotten about and replaced with possibilities.

Possibilities are only that...chances of truth. Omitting other perspectives denies the chance of revealing further truths.

For every truth there could be a lie....who's going to find those lies and point them out if there were no skeptics here.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by nerbot
If everyone here was a believer then the ignorance would be multiplied 10 fold.


And if everyone here was a cynic then the same thing would happen.

I'm all for true open minded scepticism but the trouble is this discipline is rarely practised by certain 'debunkers' who just rely on wilfull ignorance, lazy prejudice and fuzzy logic to prop up their own preconceived beliefs.

In many ways this approach is far more dogmatic than pragmatic and perhaps these people are just as bad (and a mirror image of) those who think everything is a conspiracy.

Here are some apt quotes about the dangers of harbouring cynical preconceptions -which ones don't you disagree with?




"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance-- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
Herbert Spencer, British philosopher







"It is really quite amazing by what margins competent but conservative
scientists and engineers can miss the mark, when they start with the
preconceived idea that what they are investigating is impossible. When
this happens, the most well-informed men become blinded by their
prejudices and are unable to see what lies directly ahead of them."
Arthur C. Clarke, 1963







"I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the
greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most
obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of
conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which
they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives."
Tolstoy







"If you are only skeptical, then no new ideas make it through to you.
You become a crotchety old person convinced that nonsense is ruling the
world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.) But every now
and then, a new idea turns out to be on the mark, valid and wonderful.
If you are too much in the habit of being skeptical about everything,
you are going to miss or resent it, and either way you will be standing
in the way of understanding and progress. "
Carl Sagan







"Sit down before facts like a child, and be prepared to give up every
preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever and to whatever abysses
Nature leads, or you shall learn nothing."
T.H. Huxley

www.amasci.com...


[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Just read the responses, and it seems like most didn't even read my OP.

I'm not questioning the need for skepticism, I'm not debating why we need skeptics, I'm not suggesting we should believe every single theory posted here on ATS.

From the OP:




There is nothing wrong with healthy skepticism, we need it, but in the end, ATS is a CONSPIRACY site, and if you don't believe in any of the theories presented on this site, what are you doing here?


and:



Like I said healthy skepticism is vital, and I'm skeptical about things myself more often than not, but I see so much closed-mindedness in these skeptics, and all of that in the name of science off course.


It is beyond me why I get a dozen responses explaining that we need skeptics.

The premise was that there are uberskeptics here, that debunk every single theory presented on ATS off the bat, there's always a rational explanation, never a conspiracy, and they won't even consider alternative options.

I'm talking about skeptics that seemingly believe in none of the theories here.

Most people are drawn to this site because they feel the mundane, official explanations don't always make sense.

What draws in those that already have all the answers and explanations, to a conspiracy site?

If you don't believe in anything, what other reasons are there to be here, besides ego-stroking, trolling, and supression of info.

Or are they here looking out for the impressionable "stupid" people.

If you are only here to debunk, I don't trust you.

[edit on 29-12-2009 by Point of No Return]



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by karl 12
And if everyone here was a cynic then the same thing would happen.


No, if everyone here was a cynic there would probably be no ATS, but don't forget this site is full of "theory" and not "fact" and to expect a certain amount of cynisism is normal.

I may be skeptical but I would like nothing more than disclosure on aliens, it would be fantastic, but I also realise that there is not one piece of proof to show us they exist with any certainty. There is however a lot of proof that people hoax, lie, mistake evidence and can be plain old deluded.


-which ones do you disagree with?


None, they all ring true in some way or another.

Maybe you should consider "Occam's Razor" alongside your list of quotes:

"All things being equal, the most obvious answer is usually the truth."

And consider how basic and out of date something like the "Drake's Equation" is. The possible needs for life on another planet must surely have to consider more than the short and brief list used. Each addition could add many, many noughts to the end result.

I suppose the bottom line is that I want to believe they do, will or have existed somewhere out there, just as we exist here, but I also believe we will never have contact because the actual possibility is so microscopic due to space, time and human (and alien) limitations within our finite existance.

And I've SEEN something I cannot explain myself! To PRESUME it was alien because I couldn't explain it would be ignorant! It would take a little more than "could have been" to make me change my whole way of thinking. "Couldh've been" is not enough to prove it wasn't earthly in origin so I'll carry on using my down-to-earth brain for now.

We can't know everything.

The ultimate irony would be if THEY landed and said "are you god?"



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   
Anyways, everybody thanks for the responses, and thanks to those who presented some of the theories they actually consider to be possible.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 11:11 AM
link   
I think a good amount of what gets posted doesn't rise to the level of theory. It's at best, conjecture. And I personally see nothing wrong with that. It's all a basis for discussion, if you find it interesting.

Some people haven't learned the difference between promoting a discussion and attempting to shut it down. Not all threads are going to be deemed worthy of discussion by every member. It isn't a competition. No one wins anything by flaming a discussion into submission, but a whole lot of people can lose.

There's also a need for the person posting the thread to not take it personally when someone disagrees. Disagreement isn't devaluing, or at least, doesn't need to be.

The trick is to find the threads you do think are a worthwhile avenue of discussion, whether or not you agree with the premise, and ignore the rest. Remain civil in participation even if you don't agree. Counter the points and not the person. If that can be done, we wouldn't need moderators.

I'm feeling fairly secure.




posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return
It is beyond me why I get a dozen responses explaining that we need skeptics.


And it's still beyond you? How many responses would it take?


I'm talking about skeptics that seemingly believe in none of the theories here.


If you don't want varied opinions and only seek information that supports a theory then how do you know that what you think you know is close to true?

Should they leave because they don't believe and support a theory?


Most people are drawn to this site because they feel the mundane, official explanations don't always make sense.


Do we not deserve the largest pool of opinions and discussion from both ends of the spectrum or should ATS only promote the theories here towards true and ignore all else. Stupid imo. MORE is learned from debunking something here than you obviosly realise.


If you don't believe in anything, what other reasons are there to be here, besides ego-stroking, trolling, and supression of info.


If skeptics and cynics are unwelcome in your world, it is you who are suppressing your information, and because someone doesn't believe what YOU think doesn't mean they don't believe in ANYTHING, but that they believe something DIFFERENT.


Or are they here looking out for the impressionable "stupid" people.


...who are entitled to information from ALL sides upon which to base any beliefs on the theories here.


If you are only here to debunk, I don't trust you.


That's the spirit.

Good luck.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by nerbot
I may be skeptical but I would like nothing more than disclosure on aliens, it would be fantastic, but I also realise that there is not one piece of proof to show us they exist with any certainty. There is however a lot of proof that people hoax, lie, mistake evidence and can be plain old deluded.


I certainly don't think you're sceptical - I think you've made your mind up about a great many things before even attempting any kind of objective approach - and that is not scepticism.


Originally posted by nerbot

"Personally I don't believe in ET or Alien UFO craft so from my point of view, all the reports you have read are false or a hoax".



When it comes to UFO evidence there are quite a few cases that are truly perplexing and it may be the case that these objects aren't ours - to just blindly refuse to even entertain the notion (or purposefully confuse evidence with proof) is just as bad as beleiving everything is a UFO.

As for Occam's razor - that too can be abused by cynics masquerading as sceptics, heres a relevant quote by Brian Zeller:


"UFO debunkers do not understand Occam's Razor, and they abuse it regularly. They think they understand it, but they don't.
What it means is that when several hypotheses of varying complexity can explain a set of observations with equal ability, the first one to be tested should be the one that invokes the fewest number of uncorroborated assumptions. If this simplest hypothesis is proven incorrect, the next simplest is chosen, and so forth.

But the skeptics forget two parts: the part regarding the test of the simpler hypotheses, and the part regarding explaining all of the observations.
What a debunker will do is mutilate and butcher the observations until it can be "explained" by one of the simpler hypotheses, which is the inverse
of the proper approach".

Brian Zeiler






Originally posted by nerbot
I also believe we will never have contact because the actual possibility is so microscopic due to space, time and human (and alien) limitations within our finite existance.



So you've based your prejudices on the speculative assumption that sufficiently advanced technologies would remain on planet.. or would not utilize exotic technologies... or would not be from a different dimension altogether... or a myriad of other unknowable factors.

Is this guesswork your justification for stating that all CE3 reports are hoaxes or delusions?

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return
If you don't believe in anything, what other reasons are there to be here, besides ego-stroking, trolling, and supression of info.


Thats a pretty good question -good luck with getting an answer to that one.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by nerbot
 




And it's still beyond you? How many responses would it take?


Sigh, it is beyond me that people respond with saying that skepticism is needed, because I wasn't debating that. I clearly pointed out that skepticism is vital, and that I'm often skeptical myself.

So yes, it is beyond me why people posted that in response to my OP.

The rest of your post also clearly shows you don't understand my point.

Again, I'm not talking about skepticism in general. I'm talking about the skeptics that want to debunk everything.

I'm not saying they aren't allowed to be here, I'm not saying they don't have the right to speak.

I just don't get why they are here, if they already have all the answers.

If you say there are no conspiracies at all, and everything has a mundane explanation, I don't trust you.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by karl 12

Originally posted by nerbot

I certainly don't think you're sceptical - I think you've made your mind up about a great many things before even attempting any kind of objective approach - and that is not scepticism.



[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]


Meanwhile we have alot of truthers that glom onto one idea and have made up their mind before being objective as well...same thing-different angle

Both sides are horribly guilt of it

Truthers who refuse to believe they could ever be wrong

Debunkers who refuse to believe anything extraordinary is remotely possible

Search the site(as you probably already have many time over)...you'll find tons of examples of both

-Kyo



[edit on 29-12-2009 by KyoZero]



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Point of No Return
Playing the role of a debunker is a great way to get one's trolling jollies.
[edit on 29-12-2009 by Exuberant1]


EXCELLENT! You've made a very fascinating point. This is called generalization...

I can form it into an SAT question

All skeptics are debunkers and all debunkers are trolls, there for

a. some skeptics are trolls
b. no skeptics are trolls
c. all skeptics are tolls

Clear you seem to be leaning towards answer c

Yes there are indeed trolls...ON BOTH SIDES

Yes us skeptics have a troll problem...just like your side

Way to paint with the broad brush

-Kyo

[edit on 29-12-2009 by KyoZero]



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by KyoZero
 


Yes - truthers, beleivers, debunkers, cynics, sceptics, pseudosceptics, denialists, mugwumps, fencesitters ...whatever label you want to give them, I think its best to attempt to remain impartial when looking into certain subjects.

Of course there are extremist, agenda based, ego obsessed individuals on either side of any debate who have utter contempt for objectivity but I think that has always been (and always will be) the case.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Just out of curiousity, what is it you just did with that post? Hmmm?

There is room, and to spare, here on ATS for everyone, or haven't y'all figured that out yet?

Skeptics need believers...and believe it or not, believers need skeptics. Other wise there's gonna be a lot of sitting around going "Dude, you're so right" with the answer coming back "Cool, dude..."

How boring is that? Very.

Skepticism in the search for the reality of a given topic is no sin. How else do you get at the truth of the matter?



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by KyoZero
 





Meanwhile we have alot of truthers that glom onto one idea and have made up their mind before being objective as well...same thing-different angle Both sides are horribly guilt of it Truthers who refuse to believe they could ever be wrong Debunkers who refuse to believe anything extraordinary is remotely possible Search the site(as you probably already have many time over)...you'll find tons of examples of both


That is true, but with those "believers" I can see why they are here, I mean ATS is formed from the belief in the possibility of conspiracies or paranormal stuff.

They may not be right, or overly paranoid, or whatever, but I still understand why they are here.

Debunkers who refuse to believe that anything extraordinairy is remotely possible, shouldn't even be interested in such a site, what is there to gain for them personally?



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return

Just read the responses, and it seems like most didn't even read my OP.

I'm not questioning the need for skepticism, I'm not debating why we need skeptics, I'm not suggesting we should believe every single theory posted here on ATS.

From the OP:


There is nothing wrong with healthy skepticism, we need it, but in the end, ATS is a CONSPIRACY site, and if you don't believe in any of the theories presented on this site, what are you doing here?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~





So my question is, are there any theories on ATS you believe or consider to be possible. If so, wich one(s)?

If not, what are you doing here?




i seldom deliberately put in zingers to replies, i try in my own way to help & Expand the discussion in any topic/thread that interests me.

i guess that act is seen by a few as being closed-minded, skeptical when i voice my mind that the path of discussion has nose-dived into fluff & the theater-of-the-absurd.

in some threads, even if i don't share the authors viewpoint on the conspiracy topic, i have posted in an attempt to get the exchange back-on-track instead of those left-field sidebars & such.

Now, its my opinion that everybody signed as members is in agreement to at least one-single conspiracy theory that the outside world considers off-the-wall.
Maybe you should construct a list of CT items and poll the members to which ones they see there's something real-true about there being a effort to hide or conceal from the public the reality of the situation...

i say Jesus the Christ is a myth
i say that Reptilians disguised as humans is a misinterpeted ruse
i say the an Ascension of many or few humans in 2012 is a pipe dream
i do acknowledge an illuminati, NWO, elite oligarch take over of the USA
i do accept that there will soon be a cosmic 'super-wave' force to hit Earth
i do see the fascist/elites money-changers as the bane of humanity (devil)
i understand that food poisions, like sugar, are a key element in control of the masses

Etc Etc

~well, am i OK to be a member here at ATS? ~



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   
This video is an excellent example of what to expect from the Moon Hoax Debunker Troll (this is a good choice for a debunkertroll as you can call people 'stupid' and get away with it):





*Note the heavy emphasis on insults and derogatory remarks.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Can we come up with a new term for 'Conspiracy Theory'? I mean, my friends see me on this site, and go, "what is that, one of those Conspiracy Theory websites?"

Well, of course it is, but # there are SO many intelligent posters here, that this is just a great places to come and discuss NEWS.

Obama recently amended Executive Order 12425, conferring diplomatic immunity upon INTERPOL. This is serious #. But because I read it here, it's clearly the subject of CT!

And, even some of the stuff that CT, but clearly, TRUE, can't it just be 'alternative knowledge' or 'just 'cause you don't know about it...'.

Ugh, what do you tell idiots that won't shut up about it.

[Hell, a mere half a century ago, the Sun being the center of the solar system was a 'conspiracy theory'. We need a new way to describe important, 'unpopular' news]

[edit on 12/30/2009 by SquirrelNutz]



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join