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: 5
41
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Believe what your heart and mind tell you even if you know it may be hard for many to except and to prove. And when challenged by many dont change your personal perspective view of the situation you believe so deeply in. Because you may be correct and many know you are and dont want you to share it with the others. Keeping your mind which may be powerfull enough to awaken others to serious topics in constant battle with itself, questioning if what you first felt and believed so deep in is really TRUTH....


STARZ ET




posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 04:57 PM
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.


how clever do you think i think i am? and have you read my stupid thread? the link is in my signature.


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.


my avatar is too long? according to who's rules? ATS's rules, or your rules? and if you are correct about my avatar being too long, which vertical pixel is considered over the line for length? 406 pixels? 1127 pixels? any specific number of pixels that is too long?

please share with us all how long an avatar background image is suppose to be and then inform ATS via suggestions and complaints concerning your findings. thanks.



Massive vanity, massive ego, inflated sense of worth and importance, being patronisng and condesending....umm Narcissistic personality disorder anyone.


what is "ego"?



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.


what "state" i find myself in after you, and you alone have shattered my own individual little paradigm? maybe the massive ego you gave me didn't fit in the little paradigm you have provided for me???



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.


what "state" i find myself in?

I'm in the "state" of Illinois, of course, genius.

can't you tell from my long avatar?
i put my longitute and latitude coordinates under "location" in my avatar.


but, maybe my avatar shares too much information for you to notice some answers to your questions already existed in my avatar, thus should have negated the necessity for some responses to some questions that didn't really even need to be asked, had one been paying attention to my long long long long avatar.

thanks, & star for the doc!

-et


[edit on 21-7-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Skeptics and critical thinking is one thing, it is necessary to weed out the fake from the real data. I consider myself a skeptical believer. Im skeptical of most of the crap i read and hear in the UFO community, i am skeptical or reports and treat them with a grain of salt and debunk what i can. Whatever is left standing then I am inclined to believe. I believe ET is here and has been here and i believe several classic cases to be genuine.


I think you have skeptics confused with psuedo skeptics. A skeptic is open to the logical information that has relevance and is more on the fence so to speak imo.

A Psuedo Skeptic will pretend to be a skeptic and open to the prospect of alien visitation when asked with a slight smirk. But they are not, they will refuse any and all data presented even if have ET shake his hand his only interest is to derail the subject,cause confusion,distract the reader or listener and change the subject when you get too close to truth. It is the agenda of the psuedo skeptic to persuade the reader or listener to cast doubt and uphold the status quo of TPTB. If he is hired to do so or is trolling or has a denial complex take your pick. They will usually resort to personal attacks and insults and name calling. The modus operandi of the psuedo skeptic is irrational. Many are obnoxious and arrogant. It is usually more of a Mr Know It all kind of thing. Psuedo Skeptics give Skeptics a bad name.

A Skeptic is a bit more disciplined and professional most the time at least here. Agree or disagree you would never have as much truth today without skeptics. And most the people here want answers. Skeptic or not and yes there are a few pseudo skeptics you should be able to spot them easily.

Then you have "true believers" or I WANT TO BELIEVE, they refuse logic and reason and will assume any UFO picture or video is genuine smoking gun proof. They seem to be the epicenter of hoaxes and many of them think hoaxing is for the greater good when it is disinformation in itself and they are enabling TPTB who they preach out against so vigilantly. Many are mentally unstable people or suffer OCD's and other disorders and are attracted to the fantasy of being special or chosen. They are just as counter productive as psuedo skeptics.



[edit on 21-7-2010 by Unknown Soldier]



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
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.


i am only saying this in big letters so it can be easily seen:


This thread is not intended as an anti-skeptic thread.
This thread is not intended as an anti-debunker thread.
This thread is not intended as an anti-believer thread.

This thread is not an attempt to attack or discredit the contributions skeptics, debunkers, or believers share on our ATS.



this thread is intended as an attempt to promote consideration of similiar values and idealistic objectives and share the fact that maybe some of our fellow ATSers and new members are not falling into the catagorical labels of "believer, skeptic, or debunker".

this thread is for new someones who come to ATS and old members of ATS who are not just skeptical, not just debunker, and not just believer.

this thread is designed to address the opportunities and obligations we have each and every post & thread we ATSers author to share more than just skeptical perspectives, more than just debunkers' perspectives, and more than just believers' perspectives.

i'm not bashing any of them. (in this thread)

i'm suggesting other avenues other than labelling ATSers such things exist, especially if we engage in dialogue and learn more about eachother.

in my opinion, some of these labels in and of themselves seem to assign something akin to the concept of "mental racial divides" in our shared super-cyber-ego that is our ATS community.

be my intellectual advisary if you feel the need or inclination to do so. ok by me, it is why i come to ATS.

but, please ATSers, do not critique vaguely, then offer no specific talking points to back up the opinion we share, and offer no "fix" or solution to the problem you don't specifically identify. this is not productive behavior for skeptics, believers, or debunkers, in my micro-ego opinion. star?

happy happy joy joy,
et

[edit on 21-7-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 05:50 PM
link   
honestly, i'm still reading through page two's posts, and absorbing what is being shared by fellow ATSers.


my senses are telling me that some of us have different opinions on what skeptics, believers, and debunkers are and what they do.

i'm wondering how a skeptic sees a skeptic, and what similarities exist between how a debunker may view a skeptic.

i'm wondering how a debunker sees a debunker, and what similarities exist between how a skeptic may view a debunker.

i'm wondering about the variations of the above two statements when we use the labels "believer, skeptic, debunker, someone, other" and plug them into their appropriate places, and their relationships with eachother.

i would think mods have more experience with this, and may offer some insights into the phenomenon and relationships between them.

my point in this post is:

believers, debunkers, skeptics seem to view eachother different ways sometimes, which i think hinders some levels of effective communication.

i am interested in hearing/reading what the take on some of these viewpoints mean to my fellow ATSers, and what label they may think they are, and why. and what it means to them.

i suggest some role play on your behalf to better understand other viewpoints a little better. and if skeptics, debunkers, and believers do not have the proof or the evidence or the answers they seek after nearly a decade of ATS, then...

maybe there are other viewpoints, other perspectives other than the sides we can readily acknowledge and/or recognize.

thanks 4 the stars guys,
ET



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Skepticism is not equivalent or even synonymous with debunking. To be rigorously skeptical simply means to refrain from embracing something with no empirical proof as being empirically factual. That also means that a rigorous skeptic cannot attempt to debunk something or someone without proof, either. They cannot assert that someone is delusional, lying, hoaxing, simply wrong, etc. without proof. They can suggest alternative possibilities, but without proof of those possibilities, they cannot assert them as being factual explanations either.

Skepticism is in actual point of fact an extremely open-minded philosophy, because it cannot accept that something is untrue without proof either, and it is nearly impossible - if not entirely impossible - to prove a negative. Those who attempt to debunk without proof are pseudo-skeptics, the same way people label those twisting scientific data to suit their agenda as pseudo-scientists. A real skeptic does not have as their agenda to disprove anything. A real skeptic's only goal is to ascertain the truth, whatever that might be, and to refrain from accepting as factual or axiomatic that which lacks proof.

[edit on 7/21/2010 by AceWombat04]



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


What is with your sudden obsession (and nearly begging) for stars? I just don't get it. If you want stars that bad just make a thread asking for them outright.
That would obviously be so much more straight-forward and honest than this "topic" and a request every few replies for more stars.


[edit on 21/7/2010 by Chamberf=6]



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by IamBoon
Debunkers wish to be debunked in my opinion! I mean , I consider myself a skeptic because I have the common sense to ask questions and try to understand how or why something has happened rather than believe it blindly because it fits with how I would want my wild beliefs to be seen.

So please debunk me, I want you too . If even 1 % of you with wild assumptions (most cannot even be called theories) could stand up to a well-educated skeptic then there would be less problems.

If someone has perceived an event that is unexplainable , then proclaim it so and ask input. Most of the time someone perceives such an event and think they "know" what it is , what it ties in with , where it comes from , how it happened, etc. If that were the case then it wouldn't fit into your "unexplainable" category you proudly put for yourself and other crybaby companions.



WEll more than 1% of those "assumed" to be espousing wild assumptions, as you put it, are more than capable of standing up to a well educated skeptic, the problem is that the skeptic while thinking they are knowledgeable are in fact deluded with their own sense of accomplishment from being well edumacated and therefore just deny any logical argument that is contrary to their so called learnedness. I run into this all the time, where so called well-educated people think that they have all the answers so they can't even acknowledge when there is a logical argument that is contrary to their learnedness.

Jaden



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


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

Deny Ignorance.


i thank you for sharing. i liked your post.

but, two words that may not belong together are: your conspiracy

the conspiracy cannot be owned or "mine", nor mine alone since the very definition of concpiracy requires more than just what is "mine".
conspiracy = greater than one ..... ie, not "yours" or "mine".

if one owns the conspiracy, then no more conspiracy exists.


and this is not in the best interest of ATSers, because then what would ATSers talk about on the number 1 conspiracy website?



huh, i think i learned something while in the midst of a thought amongst my own senses and in the company of skeptics, debunkers, and believers alike, all akin to a thing known to us as: Homonid ATSers' Super-Cyber-Ego

thanks for teaching a teacher!
where is my dunce cap?


the conspiracy cannot be owned or "mine", nor mine alone since the very definition of concpiracy requires more than just what is "mine".
conspiracy = greater than one ..... ie, not "yours" or "mine".

if one owns the conspiracy, then no more conspiracy exists.


and this is not in the best interest of ATSers, because then what would ATSers talk about on the number 1 conspiracy website?





wouldn't a great User Name or Screen Name be:

The illegitimate Son of SimonGray






really wierd random et thought:
i'm a third generation abortion four times removed. how are we related? star? senseless?


ats is fun.

[edit on 21-7-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by Come Clean
The guilty dog always barks first.


Clichés do not make for cogent arguments. We can see you rehearsing your prejudices in your signature.


So look before you leap does not make for cogent argument.

PS...who is we? You got a mouse in your pocket? Did you know conspiracies consist of two or more people? So let's hope I'm not being conspired on. So in this respect I guess a skeptic can also be paranoid. So I will give you that one.

Look, I'm just trying to make the point some people come here to simply debunk but you said "so what". I think "agenda debunking" has no place here. Skeptical "debate" gets more respect.

Not sure if you're aware of this but debunking and conspiracies are like oil and water. They don't mix. You can not mix debunking and conspiracies to ever find the truth. You can with skeptics and conspiracies.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masterjaden
So please debunk me, I want you too . If even 1 % of you with wild assumptions (most cannot even be called theories) could stand up to a well-educated skeptic then there would be less problems.


Esoteric Teacher role playing (channelling) a temporary mod wanna be perspective:

How educated can a skeptic be? aren't they skeptical of that education?
How educated can a debunker be? aren't they debunking that education?
How educated can a believer be? aren't they believing that education?

someone?



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


Great post! My official position is that some people come here just to debunk. It doesn't even matter what it is. If it has anything to do with God, Aliens or Conspiracies they debunk it.

But I think the air has been cleaned on this topic. We all know where we stand most times.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


What is with your sudden obsession (and nearly begging) for stars? I just don't get it. If you want stars that bad just make a thread asking for them outright.


i did. the mods trash binned it for some odd unforeseen reason? (joke)


That would obviously be so much more straight-forward and honest than this "topic" and a request every few replies for more stars.



if you give me a star for this post i will tone down my begging for stars


it just seems to me i get far less stars on an average daily basis than i give out, especially for great posts such as yourself contribute to ATS.


star,
et



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Let's use chemtrails to to bring this home.

Believers: They absolutely believe chemtrails are real and the government is spraying it's own citizens. Even if planes were never invented they would think clouds are chemblobs. They believe it's true and nothing will change their mind.

Debunker's: They don't believe in chemtrails. No matter how many videos, pictures and eye witness reports they see they will never believe the government would spray its own people with chemicals. They believe it's false and nothing will change their mind.

Skeptics: Take each instance one at a time. They start out open minded, then the evidence doesn't support the theory. Maybe the next time there is a little bit more evidence but nothing conclusive. Point being, they don't automatically debunk every time someone makes the claim. They just believe anything can happen on any given day of the week and evidence will change their mind.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by brokedown
You have hit the nail on the head with this one.
The skeptic is very welcome to me, he challenges your thoughts and research. Helps keeping you honest. The skeptic states their case and submits proof to support their claim.

The debunker attacks you personally with no offer of supporting proof.

Take the resent threads dealing with chemtrails. A couple of the debunkers were on the thread 12- 15 hours straight, just repeating the same post they had made hours earlier. Attacking people personally just as you said in this thread.

My question is WHY? Why would a normal person put out such an effort.
Why would they care.

The only answer that is plausible is they are paid to do it. How could someone stay on the internet hour upon hour and still pay the rent.


Yep! That is a valid assumption if we want to be logical about why they insist on doing what they do, hours and days at a time. Certainly, the most logical of them knows full well that they can never win the war--you can't prove a negative--but only cause chaos on the battlefield.

Actually, we can go a step further. We may wonder if some of the debunking persons behind a couple of major avatars may pass on the name and avatar to the next employee once they get a real job and need to leave. ATS is in the entertainment business, you know, not for the simple task of searching for the TRUTH of any matter.

Making others' blood boil by presenting decent and good info on wild cases is not necessarily a bad thing overall...slightly dispicable, maybe, but not bad, bad.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 07:17 PM
link   

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

Disgusting begging for star recognition.
Tom


i would like to point out the fact that the members in the know and the "conspiracy" headquarters for some of the deepest black ops, the most secretive psy-ops, may only get a star on a wall as recognition for their efforts, also. granted maybe they were not begging for that star, they gave alot for just one star on the wall, in the general publics perspective.

thanks for sharing your thoughts with us fellow ATSers, and however you may have meant your post to be taken, i'm adding you to my friends list, sending you a private u2u, and i'm giving your posts on page 2? stars.

thanks,
et



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 07:29 PM
link   
as you guys can probably see, i'm just now reading page number three.

i'm catching up and it hits me. can we make a new catagory or possibly subcategories for skeptics & debunkers?

i'm reading these responses and it seems to me some members do not address the elements of the Opening Topic or any of the words in it.

after i catch up on reading, before i post again, i'm going to count how many posts in this thread only address me, my percieved intentions, or simply my avatar, or anything else except the information in the Opening Post, and original topic.

although, i have responded to some of these, there seems to be a percentage's worth of material about the author of the post thus far, or ATSers playing doctor and providing me with free medical advice. ah, we get what we pay for.


thanks for participation guys & gals.

but i would still like to discuss what these things are and what they do, so i can make an informed decision as to which one i may be, so i know who is friend, and who is respected foe:

believer
skeptic
debunker
someone

who does what, plays which roles, why for, to what ends?

that is what i would like to learn from this thread.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


What is with your sudden obsession (and nearly begging) for stars? I just don't get it. If you want stars that bad just make a thread asking for them outright.


i did, but SemperFortis moved it to BTS.





posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


the motto of this site is "Deny Ignorance".

Just accepting a theory posted by someone without hard evidence backing up their claim is ignorant.

its fine to post sightings or experinces but people are here to help find out the possibilities of what could of caused that thing to happen.

I love reading peoples wierd experiences as there is some pretty wierd shi* happening in thos world. yet you have to have people debunk what is claimed or this site will be worthless.



posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


Believer: Chemtrails are real and nothing will change their mind people.
Debunker: Chemtrails are not real and nothing will change their mind people.
Skeptic: Chemtrails might exist you never know people.

I'd like to add one more if I might.

Devil's Advocate: Chemtrails exist, chemtrails don't exist, maybe they do exist people. They just want to argue.



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join