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.

 

Are Skeptics/Debunkers A Conspiracy Against Conspiracy Theory?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Would you like it all skeptics/debunkers either magically disappeared from ATS or, once professing skepticism in a post, were banned? Of course, we know this will never happen.

Obviously, the PC thing to say is "no, of course not, we need skeptics. But do you really feel that way?

Is it possible ATS would be a better site if people were allowed to really let their freak flag fly? Or is that ridiculous, considering nobody flies freak flags better than ATS? Could more theories and discussions flourish without (what some might consider the) "intrusion" of naysayers?

Conceptually, do skeptics conspire against conspiracy theory by acting out their skepticism? Or, do conspiracy theorists hold their own just fine?




posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   
There are ten billion sites for people that love dogma, want their beliefs unchallenged and tolerate no "debunking" or skeptics.
They are boring as hell, and serve only as sad circle jerk cheer-leading
wastes of time. Instead of destroying ATS by insisting on conformity, people would be better served by going elsewhere if they are disturbed by challenges.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:01 PM
link   
I like the old saying" I think he/she does protest to much" as to pointing to them that are skeptic's/debunkers, the more they say "no" "can not be" the more it seems that it is real, and for the conspiracy theorists, they hold there own, for in today's world the info is easily got, and can easily be verified, yes there is a lot of dis info out there, the more one digs, the more that comes to light. there is an saying "who watches the watchers" we do.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:02 PM
link   
What makes ATS so great is the fact that people of different backgrounds can come together and get to the bottom of all of these theories. Places like GLP and Icke's forum are filled with believers and they try to weed out skeptics, which in the end detracts from what little credibility these sites have. Even with skeptics we have people posting links to Weekly World News and videos of Mars claiming they are Nibiru. Do you think ATS would actually change for the better if these topics were allowed to flourish instead of being stamped out at the first sign of a hoax?



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
debunkers with an agenda? Ha ha! Of course not!

seriously; if you are afraid of someone questioning your beliefs, how sincere can you be? anything REAL should be able to stand scrutiny.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Hadrian
 




Conceptually, do skeptics conspire against conspiracy theory by acting out their skepticism? Or, do conspiracy theorists hold their own just fine?


A conspiracy theorist that lack skepticism is like a car that lacks an engine. The whole of idea skepticism is to not take anything at face value. This includes the official story of the powers that be as well as the online rantings of a paranoid person with delusions of grandeur.

As a skeptic, I don't believe anything just because someone says it.

You take the skepticism out of conspiracy theory, you essentially remove the very thing that makes conspiracy theory great.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Removing the debunk from the conspiracy trunk would serve no purpose but to utterly confuse the hell out of people trying to find real truth on "serious" matters.

Like said already, there are countless sites for people sharing wacky ideas with no proof to back them up. Those are play grounds.

ATS is a warzone where "lies" are the enemy and denying what is false is the core of its establishment.

Yes there is room to roam into fringe theories and what not, but the second "hard proof" presents itself to destroy those "unprovable" ideas, that proof will be dropped on the head of the falsehood at hand.

I mean...really now...ATS is an enemy of Ignorance and built on skeptics, debunkers and good people who rather know truth even if it contradicts what they assumed before.

I would leave ATS the second it became a huddle hole for nothing but "goofy ideas with no merit or proof".

I assume I wouldn't be alone.

Just my harsh opinion, no offense to anyone.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
If you believe everything you read, better not read.
*Japanese Proverb



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by DINSTAAR
A conspiracy theorist that lack skepticism is like a car that lacks an engine. The whole of idea skepticism is to not take anything at face value.


Do you find this the de facto attitude of ATS membership? We are all skeptics?



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Hadrian
 




Conceptually, do skeptics conspire against conspiracy theory by acting out their skepticism? Or, do conspiracy theorists hold their own just fine?


9 times out of ten it has nothing to do with skepticisim, it has to do with facts. Yes ATS does need skeptics to stop this place from becomming like the GFL forum. What i mean by it is about facts is that when someone comes on here and posts a video about some fishermen in spain seeing a UFO and some jets the skeptics get the facts well all the believers say "wow a real UFO" or simply make things about the intention and the nature of the occupants.
UFO Spain
Haiti
So what did the "skeptics" do besides show the truth? Would it have been better if all the little open skulled believers still thought that these were real?



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Hadrian
 
If you got rid of the ATS skeptics and debunkers, you'd be left with GLP or Rense.

If you got rid of believers and CTers, you'd be left with Bad Astronomy or Csicop.




posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Hadrian
 


Interesting thread, I would like to see some more responses from non sceptic debunkers. From personal experience on this site I know there is a substantial group in ATS who think a “debunker” is a person who is out spread disinfo, I think of a debunker as being somebody who proves a conspiracy to be wrong, not having a agenda, but I was once accused of being comparable to a paedophile because i admitted to this. I am very sceptical of most conspiracies, I would believe the MSM over ATS on most things.

Also you used the BAN word, always dangerous territory.

S&F for a interesting question now you just need more responses.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I think the balance of "believer vs skeptic", and everything in between makes ATS work.

Both sides make each other work for it, and in that process we all learn.

Yes, we need skeptics.

However, I do have a bit of a problem with the hardcore skeptics that want to debunk every single thread and don't seem to bleieve in anything that's considered out of the box.

You know, "If there's no proof it doesn't exist."

I still don't get what reason there is for people to be here on this conspiracy/alternative topics site, other than to muddy the waters, or accomodate their ego's.

PS, I also have a problem with the people that blindly believe any far out theory put out there, but at least I can understand why they are here.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by Point of No Return]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


I want more responses from the die-hards/anti-skeptics, although it's probably juvenile and gratutitous of me. I guess there are indeed people who think aforementioned sites like GLP, et al, are actual sources of reliable information.

I can't imagine any skeptic is going to indicate ATS would better serve its purpose by excluding "naysayers."

I used "ban" just to make the point. I don't want or think anyone should be banned for any reason, really ... and obviously not skeptics. Were there none, I would have nothing to do with ATS - just my view.

[edit on Jul 29, 2010 by Hadrian]

[edit on Jul 29, 2010 by Hadrian]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Hadrian
 


I doubt there is just one reason for such a large group as you mention. The reasons most likely run the gambit as with anything.

And, I consider my self a skeptic in the classical sense. Not topical as some choose to apply it *IE anything that goes against popular science is wrong*.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Hadrian
 




Do you find this the de facto attitude of ATS membership? We are all skeptics?


You should be. Otherwise the only reason to question anything is to fit into a preconceived dogmatic belief system.



die-hards/anti-skeptics


I think this is more of a thread about people who are skeptical about things you want to be true. A skeptic questions everything, even ones own assumptions.

All over ATS there are people that look at clouds and see shapes. "There are giant elephants in the sky!" is what they claim, and they get really defensive when someone has the audacity to try and explain that it is just water vapor. The problem is that you want to believe whereas we skeptics want to know.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by DINSTAAR
 


a thought: perhaps one should be skeptical about one's assumptions of other people's mindset.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join