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: 8
41
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 01:46 AM
link   
I would like to put out a very Strong statement to all those who have nothing better to do other than going around forums and trying to instigate,to plant the seeds of trouble,confusion,to get those of their own kind to derail a topic,discussions. You may think your barbaric half human intelligence can see everything in this lower plane of existence. You should seek help! The time has come for those who cannot live and let live to be dealt with. You hold the future of your existence in your very own hands and if you do not try to correct what is wrong with you,then you shall have to pay dearly. The great Universal cleaning is reaching its peak and the universe is being threaten by those who are unworthy of existing humbly in peace.




posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 03:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chamberf=6


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.

And surely in that above quoted post you weren't comparing yourself to soldiers and others that have earned their stars on the wall with Their LIVES??


i think they are heroes.
yes, i do compare myself to those i think of as heroes.

without comparing myself to those i idolize as heros, then why put forth any effort to idolize them as heroes in the first place if you are not going to follow through?

the way you said it, you made it sound like a dirty taboo thing that i haven't earned the right to do, or have no knowledge about, or even the right to speak of those stars. as if i didn't know any of them at all.

that is an unfair, unjust, unjustified, unfounded, unsupported assumption.

this assumption may or may not be correct. but based upon what my senses tell me i'm leaning towards may not be.

thanks,
et

edit to add:
p.s.
the belief that ones' heroes turn into stars is a traditional belief dating back to pre-pharonic ancient egyptian times. so, if evolution holds to be some vice of our interpretation of our own senses, then how many generations does it take before the custom or myth/legend becomes engrained upon our genetic structures?

it might be a natural thing to associate stars with symbols representing something important to us. maybe not.

thanks.

[edit on 22-7-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 04:33 AM
link   
reply to post by free_spirit
 


i really like your entire post at the top of page 4, i think.

i can see how i can agree with much of it, compared to a few years ago, the mood on ATS seems, .. less enthusiastic than one ET thought would exist. communication seems to be a joke to some who act like clowns.

reminds me of a quote from the comedian "edward blake" from the watchmen:


Once you realize what a joke everything is, being the Comedian is the only thing that makes sense.


maybe it is just easier for some people to
or joke around about it at times, while not really knowing their own motivation for doing so.

maybe it is a natural response some people employ in order to deal with what subject matter they face on ATS and how they react to it because of where their understanding is on the subject.

maybe other factors exist.

i am guilty of employing humor in my posts now and again, just to try to make them more interesting.

but using humor to derail someone's thread altogether is not a good practive, i think. as long as the topic is being discussed i don't mind.

thanks,
et



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 06:22 AM
link   

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





(it's about Esoteric Teacher's star collection) esoteric teacher thanks you 4 your participation. star for you! & star for et? -et


Well all I can say is at least you are very up-front and open that you only did this to collect stars.
What the point of having stars is kind of escapes me, but to each his own.


i just like stars. not sure why.

curious side note. maybe there is something about the flag system i do not get, but when i view my profile, apparently i am not capable of collecting any flags. but, i can collect stars. not sure why. maybe something i don't "get".

thanks.
et



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 07:11 AM
link   
I have watched this thread and another similar one since they started and all I am seeing is that they get nothing accomplished other than the bickering back and forth.

Perhaps if as much energy was put forth in a collaborative effort, we might be able to uncover what the true unidentified craft are.

They could end up being alien craft, military secret projects, some kind of atmosphere related phenomena, and the list goes on for the possibilities, but we will never know unless this bickering that has been going on comes to an end and all skeptics debunkers, believers, or whatever it is you wish to call yourselves, come to gather in a collaborative effort instead of wasting time bickering. I am not just talking about the bickering in just this thread or just the bickering that goes on in ATS alone, I am talking about the bickering that has been going on in the field of UFO research for decades now. It seems as soon as someone challenges a believers or the skeptics view, the line get’s drawn in the sand and they stand on the line and the battle is on to see who can win the argument.

Believers and skeptics are both needed to find the truth, the believer brings evidence to light for the skeptic, the skeptic looks to determine if there is any possible terrestrial reason for the object, if not then it can be set to unidentified. The next step would be to work together on possibly identifying what the evidence actually is, without making speculations. In the end it still might be unidentified, but there is a possibility that by working together, at least one might be able to be identified, and thus making a big first step.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Come Clean
Behold....

Classic debunker/believer logic. It's either all or nothing right? There is no middle ground.


Not "classic debunker/believer" logic at all. It is a philosophy of open-mindedness. Basing judgement on the best available evidence then adapting that judgement as better evidence is found is not extremism, as you try to cast it. You have no idea what skeptical thinking is; your idea of skepticism is based not on any reality but your prejudices about skepticism. Some believers want to usurp and twist the meaning of skepticism, knowing the power of the philosophy, so they may dismiss those opinions they do not like.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher

Originally posted by Magnus47
People shouldn't come to ATS with some preconceived "goal" to debunk people or to target certain people with skepticism, much less to somehow do both at once.


i agree. wait, did i do that?


Not at all. But you did suggest the idea of being a skeptic and a debunker at the same time, or at least that's what I thought you were suggesting.


so, according to the terms and conditions from the start, ego is demoted upon entry into the ATS community, isn't it?


Interesting points you make. Perhaps I am not thinking of the "ego" but simply of pride. While we are in an anonymous environment, we still take pride in the things we say, because these things can have meaning even if nobody knows who we are. That's why it feels good to see a bunch of people give you stars for something.
You feel like you have contributed something useful to the discussion, which sparks your pride, I would say. And pride is not always a bad thing.

But some people, then, will take pride in the idea of taking a strong stance as a "skeptic" or "debunker," simply for the emotional value of confidence. But in reality these people would be much more useful in their discussions if they didn't focus on labels like "skeptic" or "debunker" and simply tried to offer their honest analysis on a case-by-case basis. I guess that's what I meant to say.

Thanks for the friend!



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by DoomsdayRex
 


interesting interpretation in this post DoomsdayRex.

i'm not going to disect your entire post here or try to inject or infect personal beliefs into your contribution.

i like what you say:

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
you are rehearsing prejudices.


rehearsing prejudices. prejudices are in fact the pre-determined judgements we have become accustomed to and readily accept.

prejudice = pre-judging. pre-judging based upon a mix of our instincts (senses provided) and the sum of or rounding off/up/down/on of our experiences. prejudices do not make room for adaptation to the "breaking news" of the moment. and when we judge the "breaking news" of the moment we do utilize our experiences as decyphered by our senses and our instincts.

someone might believe (based upon their senses, instincts, and experiences) that skeptics and debunkers are the ones who are practicing rehearsing prejudices more so than someone.

but more times than not, it is skeptics and debunkers who invoke the accusation of prejudice upon those who cannot honestly be classified as skeptics or debunkers, due to their percieved interpretation of an experience or experiences that their senses and or environment has introduced to them via their senses.

so, who is relying on prejudices more?
debunker, skeptic, believer, observer, someone

or maybe they all have their own equal amount of prejudices?

i don't know the answer, and if i did i might be skeptical that others may be willing to accept the answer (to any subject) due to the prejudices i percieve based upon the data i have collected.

ATSers don't know the answer, and if an ATSer did, an ATSer might be skeptical that other ATSers may be willing to accept the answer (to any subject) due to the prejudices an ATSer percieved based upon the data an ATSer has collected up to that point in time.

these are some of the thoughts i had when i read DoomsDayRex's shared words:

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
you are rehearsing prejudices.



thanks for making the teacher think DoomsdayRex




posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Interesting thread.


thank you for taking the time to read and contribute to this thread.

i know you keep a busy schedule and do alot. i really enjoy and appreciate your work with the ATS LIVE Radio project. i'm admittingly ignorant on many aspects of what it may take to "mediate" or host a format where people of differing backgrounds, experience, and technical specialities come together to discuss speculative and conspiritorial subjects. sure you guys may have a few "car crashes", but the effort for such an endeavor shall not be construde as futile by the adamant ATSers who enjoy the program. kudos to you and those who call in and share.

i think the ATS LIVE Radio project offers us a template example of how believers, skeptics, debunkers, someones, and others can effectively collaborate together to unearth true gems and nuggets of valuable truisms in the process of participating in such dialogue.



Is a television a magic picture box, or is there science behind how it works?

If you simply don't care about the science, or are ignorant of it, then its a magic picture box.

If you are interested in the science, then you understand how it works, and its not magic picture box anymore.

Calling a television a magic picture box is ignorance.

Skepticism isn't something that is wrong.


i agree that skepticism is not something that is wrong, however i would interject that skepticism may not be the most accurate tool for each and every scenario that confronts us. skepticism has in my opinion slowed progress in some instances.

take the hadron collider for instance and the search fro the ellusive particle science looks to prove exists.

the first person to submit a paper suggesting such a phenomenon as possible was denied publication of that paper by the institution that has now invested more than $10 BILLION dollars in a project that was seeded by an american science institute paper that was publicized by the same person who was met with skeptical debunkers at that same institution that denied publication of the individuals findings decades earlier.

guy says here is proof this particle exists to europe.
skeptical debunkers effectively do their job in europe.
guy says here is proof this particle exists to america.
america follows up on guys proof that this particle exists.
decades later the same european institute has a budget of $10 Billion pouring into the guys work they initially kicked out of a continent.



Denying ignorance by explaining the science behind a subject isn't debunking - Its education.


science is still educating itself in an effort to understand the little pieces that are not there and have no mass. at least this is what my understanding is thus far. but i am ignorant of some things, and this is undeniable.

i'm ignorant of some things, and this is undeniable.

sincere thanks for sharing neformore,
et

[edit on 22-7-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


The believer in me says: ...*snip*...


The skeptic in me asks: ...*snip*...


The debunker in me concludes: ..*snip*...


Not going to waste my time. My time is too precious to waste on the game which I suspect you are playing. FAIL.


so who do you permit to have the last word? you give me the grade of "F" not because you believe in me. you give me the grade of "F" not because you are skeptical of me.

you give me the grade of "F" because the Debunker is the Concluder.




Originally posted by wcitizen
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


The believer in me says: ...*snip*...


The skeptic in me asks: ...*snip*...


The debunker in me concludes: ..*snip*...


so, according to your game plan the believer says something, the skeptic asks a question, and the Debunker makes a conclusion, and i get an "F"?


hey pal,
if i get an "F" because i'm an "F", then an "F" i am.

but, if i get an "F" from an "F", then that is sorta a passing grade, and a compiment, isn't it?

thanks for the compliment & i'm adding you to my friends list.

thanks,
et

[edit on 22-7-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 07:55 PM
link   
I love a skeptic, they use reseach.

A debunker states his law and backs it up with nothing but rudeness and their ego of knowing it all.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimstradamus
Some people require very little evidence to believe in certain ideas...which is fine.

However,

When they try to convince others, they need to realize the burden of proof increases exponentially.


maybe society (the super-egos) has measures in place to ensure the one who is an individual observer who bases their opinions on their senses are to be outnumbered by the those who are skeptical and are debunking the individual observer, ie self, ie ego.

each individual is outnumbered when the big picture is revealed.

people who do not believe in the big bang, are passively and aggressively participating in a multi-billion dollar project designed to create a big bang scenario.

interesting that science and religion have the same goals these days.

at the pinacle of science they are trying to prove a particle that has no mass or structure actually exists.

religion has been doing the same for generations.

need proof of a big bang?
need evidence of a big bang?
how close do you want to be to view it?

fun things to watch, one can imagine.
-et

[edit on 22-7-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

If you want me to take the trouble to try to understand you, say what you have to say in a language which is accessible to everyone.


given enough time, personal observation, experience, and listening ..

maybe the someones, the skeptics, the believers, and the debunkers may all agree that they are not accessing the same languages, same communication skills, even though the same languages are accessible to everyone??

not everyone seems to be accessing the same language.

and not everyone is moving at the same speed on the same subjects, and some are not even moving in the same direction, it would appear sometimes.

but, my senses findings to date may be unacceptable to some, for various reasons. accessibility to language may be part of the puzzle.

thanks for sharing,
et

[edit on 22-7-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by debris765nju
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


You have to factor in those with multiple personalities, fence sitters and those who keep changing their mind.


we agree & we thank you for sharing theses thoughts with us,
et



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Sam Vimes
 


i like what you say in your post. can you be all those things at once and still be credible to others who are in one of those modes of engagement?

and other catagories may exist we don't always account for, i think.

hence the "someone's" aka "someones'" role in the opening post, original topic.

thanks for sharing,
et



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:02 PM
link   
moving onto page # 5. (after a small break).

thanks everyone who has taken the time to read through alot of the information shared in this thread and sharing your thoughts about it.

pleasentries,
et



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


What did I just read?

My eyes are bleeding.

And 36 flags, no less.

What a wonderful time to be on ATS.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
Skeptics and critical thinking is one thing, it is necessary to weed out the fake from the real data.


but, according to my senses, unless they are not to be believed, i have zero chances of living long enough to compile enough data to prove all the existing data on the subject fake, debunkable, or believable.

it seems to me (someone) that while we are analyzing, scrutinizing, and debunking the components of the magic television box (reference nefermore's post page 4) then by the time we convince ourselves a television can really exist then we discover that this internet computer web thingy has been here all the time, while we were busy debunking and scrutinizing the "plastic" and "electrical cord" of the magic television set.

we get stuck on a snapshot of a ball and keep argueing over what the ball was a picture of, but in reality the ball keeps moving, and those who are skeptical, debunkers, believers, etc... may have taken their eye off the ball to look at every aspect of a piture of the ball that was either taken by someone or made by someone 100 years ago.

by the time we get done analyzing the data from one picture, in that time 72 more pictures have been made, and the population of skeptics and debunkers has doubled in size.

so what good did the effort of being skeptical and debunking do?
we are now 72 pictures further behind schedule, and the ball is moving faster it seems.

treat your home town like it is earth's capitol.
stop pointing the finger at some city far away.
that city far away, isn't sharing the answers they have, or don't have the right answers to share. or other possibilities exist known only to the ball.

my suggestion?

have balls, or act like you do.
anyone argues with you about not having balls?
show them your balls.

but how many people want to see my balls?

things can be taken different ways dependent upon the intentions, state of mode, state of mind, and state of mood of the one recieving the message.

just some thoughts,
et



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by SaosinEngaged
 


thanks for the insight.

as a national registered EMT, please take my advice & keep your head elevated and seek immediate medical attention.

this is my professional advice, not my opinion.

STAR 4 U & a new friend,
et



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   
I have been one of those individuals who had always thought it this way:
"Knowing is a virtue and belief or to believe is a forced phenomenon"

I dont say everyone speaks the truth nor everyone lies



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join