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.

 

Skeptics! What's the Matter?

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by masonicon
What's the matter! no gods? no aliens? no angels? no demons? no cryptids? no intelligent designers? no ethereal beings? no free energy devices? no strong artificial intelligence? no starships? no UFOs? no paranormal stuffs? and no conspiracies?


I take everything with a grain of salt unless i find evidence of the otherwise. I'm open to the ideas but i don't want to succumb to blind devotion.




posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by masonicon
What's the matter! no gods? no aliens? no angels? no demons? no cryptids? no intelligent designers? no ethereal beings? no free energy devices? no strong artificial intelligence? no starships? no UFOs? no paranormal stuffs? and no conspiracies?


Well, I'm a sceptic. Mostly because 99% of what I see here is a rehash of stuff I saw 40 years ago that never pans out. I think you might see this too as you gain experience. Most of what is posted here as BIG news, is just old tired crap.
I don't post in most forums because there is no point in it. I do enjoy the aircraft a politics forums, as well as several others. I have no interest in arguing about UFO's, the NWO etc, but occasionaly I see something so silly I just have to post.

[edit on 2-4-2010 by OldDragger]



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 11:02 AM
link   
the hard core skeptical position is faulty, from what i can tell.
it asserts that you must believe a certain set of "facts" as viewed through whatever mainstream paradigm they adhere to. even this set of "facts" varies, although somethings are believed almost exclusively across the entirety of the hard core skeptic network. where it falls short of the mark, appears to be:

1. by insisting that the status quo on a subject represents reality, they ignore the lessons of the past in which the status quo on any subject has been found to be wrong from time to time, and in varying degrees of error.

2. they approach a subject with a set of investigative tools, called empirical process, that hasn't been upgraded to reflect new knowledge (example, quantum physics), since its inception. as a result, new fields of study not afforded the literal world approach of older empirical process, manage to stay afloat by sheer force of personality (the reputation of who discovered it).

3. by insisting that all data should undergo peer review in which the reviewers are only allowed their seat, provided they are willing to follow the status quo and only the status quo. should they veer from this, they had better have the reputation to support it and it better not be too big of a change, particularly if it undermines long cherished theories about physics and evolution. this also balances precariously on who the originator of the cherished theory was and how a change, may or may not impact society at large.



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Mr Mask has a profound point to make. Many of the religous zealouts, ghost hunters, ufologists, cryptozoologists, psychics and general believers operate under the premise that everything they see here is true. Because the man is trying to supress the truth. They use pseudoscience to attempt to validate their claims. They speak in abstracts so you can't pin them down. And when you address their claim with logic and REAL SCIENCE they call you a goverment agent. The 9/11 truthers are one of the worst groups for this type of thing. Most have no concept of the real science involved in determining if these events were really possible, they'd rather stake their claim on disinformation, out of context quotes and flat out lies. And then when their pseudoscientiffic explanation is exposed they attack you and try to discredit you.

It's funny but I have no interest in what's true and what isn't. So proving something one way or the other is irrelevant to me. What is important is that I determine the truth of what I'm examining. Facts are always superior to assumptions. But some here would rather try to validate a clearly false claim with pseudoscience, manipulation and emotional outrage just to further whatever irrelevant agenda they have.

People need to seek the truth. And the truth is everything isn't a conspiracy. And those who buy into every conspiracy they see on here are just as bad as the folks who believe everything they see on CNN. The truth is out there, but you actually have to want to find the truth rather than just wanting to prove a point.



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   
I am a grudging skeptic. I fall into the category of "I want to believe but...just ...can't ...YET". You'd never know it by my posts, however, because I keep a wide open mind when it comes to perceptions and experiences of others.

I want to have experiences that are out of the ordinary, explainable realm - but I don't. I sure do love reading about the experiences of others, and it's pretty easy to discern who is "lying" versus who experienced "something".

For this reason I don't debunk. I simply take it all in. Who am I to tell someone what they saw? Who am I to speculate about why they saw what someone experienced? I love to ask questions of the experiencers and to relate what I might have read or heard others say about the topic. What keeps me from throwing in with the experiencers is that regarding something so subjective as "unexplainable phenomena", I need to experience that for myself. Otherwise, I would be lying to myself in a way.

Also, it is healthy that we are able to discuss existential issues. I really like the theories that can't be disproved and strive to answer age old questions - what happens when we die? and why is there injustice in the world?

I wish the world was like some of the more colorful conspiracy folks insist that it is. There'd be more leverage for regular folks to affect change. Maybe some of the theories come from wishful thinking like this?

So please, if there is anything out there listening/reading/spying that might have the power to do so ... make me less of a skeptic.

-jennybeth



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by DrJay1975
 


you realize, of course, that college professors, engineers, architects and other educated and well trained indivduals also have an issue with 9-11? i don't personally have a position on that subject, but i've heard professionals from both sides, talk about it. so to characterize as being the ramblings of uneducated or gullible people is stretching the envelope.



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by masonicon
What's the matter! no gods? no aliens? no angels? no demons? no cryptids? no intelligent designers? no ethereal beings? no free energy devices? no strong artificial intelligence? no starships? no UFOs? no paranormal stuffs? and no conspiracies?

I haven't seen any of these, have you? Can I come over and take a peek? Show me any of these and then I won't be a skeptic any longer. For example, I'm agnostic for a reason, I'm playing it safe, I don't want to screw up and later learn I had been worshiping the wrong god or a false idol. My mind is too logical to allow myself to play make-believe and pretend.



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Corporate media globalization has homogenized reality perceptions of the world's populations

[edit on 2-4-2010 by masonicon]



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
Skeptics! What's the truth?



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   
Skepticism is healthy for the human mind. If we don't judge every extreme claim with some kind of skepticism at first, then we're destined to become prey to the old adage "those who believe in everything will fall for anything".

I occasionally use the Flat Earth Society, and the once-held belief that the Earth is flat as an example. If someone came up to you today and told you that the Earth was flat, had four corners, and was held up by angels - would you believe it or be skeptical of it?

Of course you'd be skeptical of it. We know that the Earth is an oblong egg-like sphere. We have evidence and photographic proof of this.

The same goes for every single conspiracy, religion, pseudo-science and paranormal events. You have to be skeptical of them until undeniable, hard, scientific evidence is presented. If you aren't then you have no right to say that the Earth is not flat. Or that the sun is not pulled by a chariot and horses.

Skepticism keeps us honest, with ourselves and each other.



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wandering Scribe
Skepticism is healthy for the human mind. If we don't judge every extreme claim with some kind of skepticism at first, then we're destined to become prey to the old adage "those who believe in everything will fall for anything".

I occasionally use the Flat Earth Society, and the once-held belief that the Earth is flat as an example. If someone came up to you today and told you that the Earth was flat, had four corners, and was held up by angels - would you believe it or be skeptical of it?

Of course you'd be skeptical of it. We know that the Earth is an oblong egg-like sphere. We have evidence and photographic proof of this.

The same goes for every single conspiracy, religion, pseudo-science and paranormal events. You have to be skeptical of them until undeniable, hard, scientific evidence is presented. If you aren't then you have no right to say that the Earth is not flat. Or that the sun is not pulled by a chariot and horses.

Skepticism keeps us honest, with ourselves and each other.

There's something wrong: just every undeniable, hard, scientific evidence of every single conspiracy, religion, pseudo-science and paranormal events are suppressed by Big Fat Liars.

[edit on 2-4-2010 by masonicon]

[edit on 3-4-2010 by masonicon]



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by masonicon
 


I beg to disagree.

RELIGION

Religion is not outlawed. In fact, the free practice of religion is protected by the "powers that be". It's in the Constitution of the United States of America. Religion is only under attack by other religions. If religious-minded folks would just accept that there are different religious ideologies then no one would feel like their religion is being threatened.

As a personal anecdote, I happen to be a Buddhist, and a spiritualist, and a theosophical magician. I've also done time as a Shaman, a Wicca witch, and I've been part of some Voudun rites. Religion is not being threatened one bit, except by biased and uneducated other religious zealots.

CONSPIRACIES

This one is a bit more difficult. Yes, there are some conspiracies that the media and mainstream news outlets try to squelch. Most of those are done with good reason. For instance:

• Barack Obama is not a Muslim socialist who wants to bring Communism to America. So news agencies say this is inaccurate.

• The Jews are not part of a New World Order in cahoots with the Masons and the Illuminati.

For one thing, the Masons are a public fraternity that welcomes members. Go join if you're curious about what happens in their Lodges.

Secondly, the Illuminati were a group of 1700s scientists, philosophers and free-thinkers who felt it was time to move away from the superstitious Christian Dark Ages and into the enlightenment. The group disbanded at the end of the century.

Third, the Jews are a religious peoples with structured dietary plans, money regulations and the like. They only seem "evil" and "powerful" because they're more careful and conservative with their possessions and their lives. No New World Order necessary.

All one needs to do is search the actual, legitimate histories of conspiracies they are curious about to uncover the real truth of the matter. Is Barack Obama a Muslim? No. Is Alqueda a radical Islamic terrorist organization that is conspiring to damage non-radical-Islamic nations? Yes. Is there a New World Order composed of Jews/Masons/Illuminati? No. Is there a striving by zealous religious fundamentalists to change the Constitution and what it means to be a citizen of certain countries? Yes.

Research goes a long way towards enlightening oneself.

PSEUDO-SCIENCE

This is another one of those difficult ones. Certain things fail miserably. Horoscope Astrology does not work. Feng Shui does not work. Dowsing does not work.

On the flip-side though, there are legitimate spiritual pseudo-sciences which can help. Meditation works. Tarot can work if done correctly. Acupuncture works.

Again, it's all about researching and learning the methods. Visit astrologers and count the mistakes they make compared to the correct answers they give. One correct answer does not make up for 7 wrong ones. Or find a dowsing rod and try to "follow" it to water. Realize you'll find water better by using your ear, not a "wishbone" stick.

Learn some legitimate Buddhist, Hindu, or Chakra meditation. Practice them and see how your body improves, your focus strengthens, and other things. Have 3 separate Feng Shui "experts" visit your home and take note of the contradictory movements they make with your furniture.

Pseudo-science needs skepticism because some of it is legitimately a scam, while other things are legitimately functional processes.

PARANORMAL EVENTS

Alright, you cannot honestly sit there at your keyboard and tell me that the government and "Powers that Be" are covering up paranormal events.

ATS exists. This is a forum for open discussion of these kinds of events. ATS is proof that the "Powers that Be" are NOT conspiring to cover up paranormal experiences.

I am proof of this. Why? Because I am on here, and I have openly discussed my own paranormal, spiritual, religious, and pseudo-scientific encounters on this board, with my friends, in my schools, at my place of work, in the local library, among my family, and with complete strangers who were interested enough to ask.

There is no movement to "cover up" the existence of paranormal things. There are only claimants who cannot show any evidence of their encounters. You cannot blame a man for not believing you when you have no way of demonstrating that what you say is true.

The legitimacy of all of these things require the same amount of evidence and trial-and-error as regular scientific studies from all walks of life.

And skepticism, is what will keep the true pioneers into the supernatural field honest both with themselves, and the people they are trying to convince.

* EDIT *

Formatting errors and some spelling mistakes...

* EDIT *

~ Wandering Scribe

[edit on 3/4/10 by Wandering Scribe]



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by masonicon
 


I do think we need a mixture of both skepticism and open mindedness. The problem here is many confuse skeptics and debunkers while there is a huge difference between the two.

There are thousands of claims made of paranormal, supernatural and extraterrestrial activities every year. There are also many charlatans and hoaxers out there who either want to make money off of the gullible or show that many people are fools. There needs to be a way to skim off the fat and get to the good reports out there.

There are many hundreds of great cases that have physical evidence to support them that get ignored or brushed off by the debunkers. There are also many hoaxes and solved cases that are posted by believers as the real deal.

I have an open mind, but also some skepticism in me to question what I have read or seen. I am not perfect and have been fooled a few times. But I try to learn from those hoaxes or cases that fooled me, and do not let it jade me into thinking they are all bad.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by masonicon
 


Masonicon.....

For purposes of your convenience, I will ask my question again (I assume you missed it when I asked it the first time):

What do you mean when you say "skeptic"?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Kind regards
Maybe.....maybe not



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join