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.

 

Be skeptical of debunkers, Debunk Skeptics & Believe in someone.

page: 2
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


Debunking comes with being wrong. If your conspiracy or ideas are wrong, they must be debunked.

Deny Ignorance.




posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
I thought the moderators had decided no more us versus them, skeptics are evil threads...


i have decided no such thing, although i do not carry the burden of "moderator", some skeptical believers may debunk this, though.

DoomsdayRex,
You may bring up a good point, and this thread is certainly not about "us verses them". we get enough crap like that from the MSM, TPTB, and even the trolls here on ATS, at times .... unless my senses are mistaken.

having said that, i would like to take the opportunity to point out that from some of the posts already posted in this thread there seems to be some level of skepticism on the part of believers, skeptics, and debunkers as to what believers, skeptics, and debunkers are, and what they do.

interesting conversation.

maybe they mean different things to eachother???

don't worry. this is less a "us verses them" thread & more a "who are us and what do them know" sorta thread, i think.

there is a place and time for debunkers.
there is a place and time for skeptics.
there is a place and time for believers.
there is a place and ATS for someones.

there is a time for debunkers to believe skeptically about someones who are believers in ATS, at some place and time, et thinks.


and if anyone is looking for an arguement, please be informed:

i may be smarter than you are in my sleep. (while i dream)
so don't wake me up without giving me at least one star.

thanks,
et



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
this is less a "us verses them" thread & more a "who are us and what do them know" sorta thread, i think.


That is an interesting spin, though not one in keeping with reality. Instead of attempting to prove your beliefs through evidence or cogent, logical argument, you seem to want to bash skeptics for being skeptical, attempting to validate your beliefs by proxy.


Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
and if anyone is looking for an arguement, please be informed:

i may be smarter than you are in my sleep. (while i dream)
so don't wake me up without giving me at least one star.


Will laughing at you get this post removed?



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


I'm sorry but all I get from your post and stupid thread is that you appear to be nowhere near as clever as you think you are. There's a certain type of person that indulges in things of this nature and the ridiculous length of your Avatar only goes to back that fact up. Massive vanity, massive ego, inflated sense of worth and importance, being patronisng and condesending....umm Narcissistic personality disorder anyone.

But hey don't take it to heart, we're all stupid and I'd hate to see what state you ended up in if anyone shattered your own individual little paradigm.

and another for good measure



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


In your mindless rambling you've essentially labeled yourself ignorant. There is a place for skeptics. And it is at every single new post on this website. All of them. Especially yours.

[edit on 21-7-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by spookfish
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


I'm sorry but all I get from your post and stupid thread is that you appear to be nowhere near as clever as you think you are. There's a certain type of person that indulges in things of this nature and the ridiculous length of your Avatar only goes to back that fact up. Massive vanity, massive ego, inflated sense of worth and importance, being patronisng and condesending....umm Narcissistic personality disorder anyone.

But hey don't take it to heart, we're all stupid and I'd hate to see what state you ended up in if anyone shattered your own individual little paradigm.

and another for good measure


spookfish,
I agree wholeheartedly with your response.

I would like to know how this thread made it to the front page with only 20 flags??? And spouting such nonSENSE!

Mods, I know it is an automated procedure of which the algorithm should be looked at and tuned up a bit.

All I see is someone begging for "Stars", as per his/her avatar.

I would never stoop the star / flag baiting.
I'm out of here.

Disgusting and

73's, spookfish,
Tom



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Sorry,
I meant TEN (10) Flags!

Disgusting begging for star recognition.
Tom



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
...senses...senses...senses...sensory input...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses...senses. ..senses...senses...senses...
etc.

Your sense of taste would tell you that antifreeze is a sweet, refreshing beverage.

Your sense of sight would tell you that someone wearing vertical stripes is thinner than their identical twin wearing horizontal stripes.

Eyewitness testimony in court is notoriously unreliable, as people unconsciously change what they remember to fit what they believe is actually true.

And skeptics aren't using "senses." Intuition is also not good - logic and rational analysis are not "senses."


? Be skeptical of debunkers. Debunk Skeptics. Believe in someone. ?


Believe: to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so

So, you should be skeptical of debunkers - no problem there. But you should "believe" others without actual proof.


A little consistency, please. Be skeptical of EVERY claim, pro or con.

And what do you get when you accept someone's eyewitness testimony in a kneejerk fashion?

50% of Mistaken Eyewitnesses Certain After Positive Feedback


Participants were asked to watch 8 seconds of grainy security camera footage showing a man walking into a store. The footage was slowed down so that participants could get as much information as possible. The quality of the video, however, was not that good.

After watching the video, participants were told that the man is a murderer. Just after the footage cuts away, the man shot and killed the store's security guard. This information is not misleading - the CCTV footage is real - as is the subsequent murder of the security guard.

Participants were then told that their job is to identify the killer from a five-person photospread. This photospread was identical to the one used in the real case except - and here's the twist - the real gunman has been removed. Having been told, though, that the gunman is in the photospread, all the participants identify one of the men.

This is where the experimenters got clever. They then introduced three different experimental manipulations:

* One group of participants were given no feedback on their choice of suspect.
* The second were told they had made the wrong choice from the photospread and that the answer was one of the other men.
* The third group, though, were congratulated: "Good, you identified the actual suspect." Although, of course, they hadn't - no one had.

After this participants were asked about many aspects of their identification including how certain they were, how good their view of the gunman was and their ability to make out the details of his face.

The results showed that simply congratulating participants on choosing the right suspect had a huge effect on their reports when compared to those told nothing and those told they were wrong. Those given positive feedback were suddenly much more sure they were right, thought the identification was easier, had a better view, thought their judgement was more trustworthy and would be more willing to testify.

Those given positive feedback even placed more confidence in their own ability to identify the gunman.


Remember that everyone is providing these reports based on exactly the same piece of store camera footage. Also, remember that everyone is wrong because the real gunman has been removed from the photospread!

The surprising thing about this experiment is what a massive effect a simple statement had on such a wide variety of factors. Giving positive (although incorrect) feedback to participants catapulted their confidence in their identifications much higher than they would have been otherwise.


THIS is why skepticism is a good thing. Tell someone what a good job he did seeing whatever he thought he saw, and the person will be more certain that he is correct. And he'll subconsciously alter his recollection to fit whomever or whatever is identified as what he witnessed with his "senses."



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
there is a place and time for debunkers.
there is a place and time for skeptics.
there is a place and time for believers.
there is a place and ATS for someones.

there is a time for debunkers to believe skeptically about someones who are believers in ATS, at some place and time, et thinks.


No. The time and place for all four of those things coincide with one another. If you want to put forth theories without having to defend them, then find another forum. This one is devoted to Denying Ignorance, not perpetuating and encouraging it.



and if anyone is looking for an arguement, please be informed:

i may be smarter than you are in my sleep.


Please, PLEASE bring it on.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


A great reply. This whole topic is Rubbish and a failure of intelligence. You might as well call the person a government shill, but that would be wrong. Continue my friend. Let us show the young lad why he is so wrong.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by tomdham
Sorry,
I meant TEN (10) Flags!

Disgusting begging for star recognition.
Tom


Can we assign negative stars and flags?



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 09:44 AM
link   
When you are facing those hardcore debunkers and skeptics

Simply keep in mind that if they were always right, the Earth would be flat with the universe evolving around it.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by mothershipzeta

Originally posted by tomdham
Sorry,
I meant TEN (10) Flags!

Disgusting begging for star recognition.
Tom


Can we assign negative stars and flags?


I wish!!!
mothershipzeta, that function has been addressed to the admin and mods but I have heard no feedback.

I wish the kids would hurry and go back to school so this "summer break" rush of nonsense threads will stop.

73's,
Tom (KC5ILU)



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Skeptics hold the ground at ground level.

Skeptics keep the urge to run around screaming that the end is here "at bay".

Skeptics weed out the liars, the predators, the ones who scare you into buying their books, dvds, and ridiculous charms.

Skeptics try to show that life is worth living without worrying about every little story becoming the END OF LIFE AS WE KNOW IT.

On the flip side, we also need the paranoid, the off the wall theories to help open doors to the truth of matters. But there needs to be a balance and control over the destination of such doors. Some just empty into a void of chaos. Skeptics try to help keep those doors shut, so that others don't needlessly fall through.

And sometimes it is just this.

Ultimately, the choice is yours, mine, theirs to decide which doors to step through.

It's all about the balance.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
someone senses that skeptics are skeptical of someones' senses because skeptics are skeptical of relying on someones' senses more than the senses of someones because the debunker's senses told them not to trust someones' senses.


Oh wow! Why not just post in English??
This is all Greek to me! Reminds me of what Rummy Rumsfeld once said:

"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."

WTF?



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Personally I believe in rational logical thought, if that leads me to come across as a skeptic or a debunker then so be it.

I want to believe in the people who who say disclosure was going to happen at the last world cup because it was in Africa, I want to believe in the people who fake photo shopped UFO's, I want to believe in 'star children' but sadly, they never hold any water.

There's always a book to buy to give you an answer, always a website that needs more hits for advertising revenue, always something else to sell but with little or no grounding in hard fact.

Silly threads and infighting like this get us no closer to finding an answer and should be closed down by the ATS mods.

Threads like these that are most likely to be posted by governments wanting to throw people off the scent or prevent them from looking into what little truth is out there.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   
who do you propose to believe in and why ?



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by OrionHunterX
 


He was just trying to say that they do not trust other people's judgement when it doesn't fit their perception.
So, to them, those who witnessed and believe in UFOs are either delusional, hoaxers or stupid.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 





THIS is why skepticism is a good thing. Tell someone what a good job he did seeing whatever he thought he saw, and the person will be more certain that he is correct. And he'll subconsciously alter his recollection to fit whomever or whatever is identified as what he witnessed with his "senses."


Excellent post Mothershipzeta, skepticism is important.

[edit on 21-7-2010 by Welsh_Mulder]



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 


I agree, in essence, that the OP was trying to point out that we should be skeptical of skeptics and debunkers, however one wishes to define those terms. The problem has been pointed out by folks in this thread already: The OP is making an attempt at being clever, and has displayed his/her own ignorance in the process.
Skepticism is healthy, however, the zealotry of denial is not. Many people will cite statistics about the reliability of eye-witnesses, they are not reliable at all. However, many of these same people are fanatical zealots who will deny the existence of anything not in the Canon of Modern Science. It is true, if we all accepted the stance of skeptics and debunkers, we would still believe that the Earth is flat and at the center of the universe.
Both extremes are counter-productive.
Many scientists believe in Higg's Boson, with no experiential or physical evidence thereof, does that make them crazy tin-foil-hat-wearing kooks? Maybe, maybe not, more research is needed before we can answer either question.

1: Does the God Particle exist?
2: Is belief in Higg's Boson or String Theory a misguided confabulation akin to believing in the Loch Ness Monster?

I don't like the OP or the post for this simple reason: "esoteric teacher." This self-important screen-name implies that this person is here to teach, not learn. Superiority is implied, and that makes me sick. There are so many educated, insightful people here who do little to toot their own horn, that when someone has to do so with the very name they choose for themselves, it makes me ill. It's a pathetic, ego-based position to take, whether intentional or not.

(With my screen-name, I'm not claiming to know anything more or less than anyone else, but I am claiming if you piss me off I might just throw you out a window.)

Self-important screen-names disgust me, and though I see the value of what was originally posted, despite the unnecessarily 'esoteric' style of prose in which it was written. I think the OP is part of the problem, not the solution. Sorry, e.t. but that's my honest opinion.

With all of that said, I have to admit that I saw a group of UFO's that did not behave within the standard laws of Newtonian Physics, and I'm a believer. What I saw is very unlikely to have been of human origin. Very unlikely indeed. The skeptics and debunkers attack me about it every time I mention it, but I will stand my ground, because it changed my perception of life forever.
The universe is far stranger, even here on puny little Earth, than most people are ready to accept. I hope more skeptics like my buddy Aaron, who just witnessed something that transformed his world-view utterly, will have these experiences and get a fresh perspective. I also hope they are left with reasoning-skills intact.

Death to fanatics!

(^_^ That's called irony, look it up!)



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join