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.

 

UFO's and the right to be skeptical

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lowneck

To cover this logical point, why not remove 'Aliens' from the title of this forum?


GASP!


BLASPHEMY!!!!





posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blue Shift

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
if they were here and are here among us or in our skies, then why haven't they either saved us by now, or put us out of our/their misery yet?


The very seed of that argument is, "Who or what are we even talking about here?" There's a kind of "given" notion around these parts (possibly to do with the forum being called Aliens and UFOs) that we're talking about Star Trek or Star Wars type aliens as being responsible for all the weird stuff happening. And there is weird stuff. We're all sure of that.


Firstly Blue Shift, a star for that post. some ideas you put into those sentences was very well stated. And whatever our personal opinion is at the this particular point in time, we do agree that there is wierd stuff going on.



It's just unfortunate that so often the sighting or experience itself is so quickly shuffled off to the side so people can reach a "conclusion." Oh, well, it's an alien spacecraft because nothing on Earth could do what it did. Really? There are other potential explanations, you know.


yes, there are other potential explanations, i agree.
however, like i stated in a previous post, i do not have the luxury of being skeptical on certain issues.

but, the facts are my ears only here a small fraction of the sound.
my eyes only see a small fraction of the spectrum.
my planet has only existed 1/9000th the alleged age of the universe.
my species has only existed a small fraction of the age of my planet.
i have only existed a small fraction of the time my species has existed.

so, my ignorance (not knowing) is probably the biggest piece of this puzzle, considering my senses alone are not going to provide me with the absolute proof i require, if i require absolute undeniable proof to begin with.



It's important to look at the cold, hard facts first, then see what we can draw from them.


the cold hard facts draw us, don't they?

ignorance is a byproduct of when truth is percieved as a choice, ... or is truth a choice?



We have to look at the source of those facts, too, because you can't just believe everybody.


we also should not assume everyone is a liar until proven otherwise.
and if we assume everyone is a liar from the get go, how far down that road are we going to travel before we are forced to admit to ourselves that our assumption of them being a liar was our mistake?

we can, we have the choice, to disagree on issues politely. i can have a heated debate with a friend in one thread concerning one subject or topic, and still find myself on the same side of the fence with that member in another thread. they are still my friend, or at least/most my respected intellectual foe.



If looking at the facts without trying to jump to a conclusion qualifies me as a close-minded skeptic, then that's fine. If other people are willing to accept lousy evidence and less proof so it maintains their fantasy, I suppose that's fine, too. But there will be a little friction when those two viewpoints meet.


just because someone is deemed a "skeptic" does not make them synonymous with being closed minded in my opinion. But i also believe skepticism is good in moderation, in stead of being skeptical of everything.

even myths, legends, lore, science fiction, and "fantasy" have some measure of truth in them. most science facts i know of started out as science fiction. until someone decided to ask a new question that had never been asked before, or said to themselves "what if".



Most skeptics I know are aching for somebody to show them proof that holds up to scrutiny, and actually provides some clues to a potential explanation. Alien, time traveler, time slip, tulpa, whatever. Unfortunately, that just doesn't happen.


show proof? what percentage of the light that exists in our universe do we actually process visually at the conscious level? what is our visual range of the spectrum of light?

although dwelling on your earlier statement of: "There are other potential explanations, you know."

yes, i think there are clues to other potential explanations.

but, you may already be programmed (genetically) to think i am bat
crazy if i were to share with you some examples of possible clues to potential explanations.

i entertain ideas that i am prepared to accept as possible, but others may not be. i shouldn't be offended by your right to form your own opinion based upon your experiences and what you have been exposed to in your life.

i think there is evidence in science fiction and fantasy that provides us clues, and i believe truisms are encoded and encrypted into our languages by us at a subconscious level.

in other words, i think literacy is more than just left to right, and we put more information into our words than we consciously know.

but, like i said, you may think i am crazy, but you mentioned time travel.....

Directive: Act Mental
same letters as:
Time Travel Accident

I'm Star Trek Capt.
if we turn the "m" upsidown = same letters (symbols) as:
Patrick Stewart

so, yes, i think there is truth in fantasy. Who knows, Glenn Beck might even be right about at least one thing.

again, thanks Blue Shift for sharing your thoughts with us.

happy Wed & keep ATS fun,
ET



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
just because someone is deemed a "skeptic" does not make them synonymous with being closed minded in my opinion. But i also believe skepticism is good in moderation, in stead of being skeptical of everything.

Well, only by being sceptical of everything can I be sceptical about my own thoughts and think "why do I think this?" when thinking about newly presented information.

But obviously I am more sceptical about some things than others.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
Well, only by being sceptical of everything can I be sceptical about my own thoughts and think "why do I think this?" when thinking about newly presented information.

But obviously I am more sceptical about some things than others.


very well put. i like what you say about "newly presented information".

i try to keep this in mind myself.

i often think to myself that i am better able to adapt to changes in my environment if i promise myself it is ok to admit to myself:

i reserve the right to claim i am totally wrong about what i just said pending future information my experiences, environment, & senses may provide me with.

and in retrospect, i may even be wrong about that previous statement.

ArMaP,
i strongly agree with you.
skepticism is an important tool we have in our arsenal when reflecting upon who it is we are and why it is we do the things we do, and why we make the choices we make.

well said.

keep on ATSing,
et



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Iam a believer. UFOs and Aliens. No doubt for me. Yet...

I understand why older members lose patience over certain pics, videos or "out of the ordinary" events. I'm sure they've seen their share of "crappy" evidence. As I mentioned in your other thread, respect is always nice and should be applied.

Strong debunkers are a must, imo. In my case, it keeps me grounded, and seriously, I did AND do learn from them. Not the bashing ones, no, the ones that bring serious content to disclaim.

Yesterday, I was going over a thread where we saw a video of "something" that went behind and under a bridge. Phage came out with a very good explanation.

I had other times where Chadwickus came up with good explanations. Very direct but true nonetheless.

I highly respect that. Some other debunkers are getting heat from believers, I've seen it happen, more than once. Maybe, Maybe Not comes to mind. This guy is a gentleman, he's helped me here when I joined, but some see him otherwise. I have learned from his links and referrals. And still do.

Isn't it was ATS is all about? We share, agree, disagree, and learn in the process...

S*** disturbers are on both sides. Some will like to ridicule an OP to get stars. I've seen that happen. Some will like to bash a debunker for the same reasons, I've also seen that happen. A soured reward...

As I said, and I'll mention it again, I'm just a newbie, but once again, I do thank you, neformore, for bringing this up on both sides of the medal.

It really is a two way street.

Just an anecdote...I chewed on my nails on a thread yesterday as I REALLY felt that I should reply strongly and agressively enough even to get banned in the process, yet your civil and decorum thread kept coming up in my mind.

If it was only for that, it was WORTH posting it !!


I did go out for a walk of fresh air afterwards though....


[edit on 18-8-2010 by SonoftheSun]



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
Because they consider debunking as an attack on their religion. Yes a religion.. no longer UFOligy, the believers are not interested in solving a UFO claim only to use it as gospel and propaganda


These same do not recognize their own religiosity and refuse to even acknowledge the similarities between UFO sightings, spiritual phenomenon (unless they are force fitting interpretations of said phenomenon as alien encounters) and religion in general. They become offended and enraged when such comparisons are made.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lowneck
Even if some Ufos are of ET origin IMHO they are far more likely to be intelligent probes without old-fashioned humanoid alien pilots. See the SETV project, for example.


Von Neumann machines and Bracewell probes. Though it does stand to reason that an intelligent race could fashion such probes to be humanoid-shaped; though I think we'd find the ship they come to be the actual alien and the beings on board constructs or simply parts of the whole.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Thanks for making this topic.


Everyone has a right to their opinion, this is unquestionable.

What I, however, cannot stand, are the believers that have transformed UFOlogy into a religion, and those that do not blindly "believe" with them are looked at as heretics were to the Catholic church in centuries past.

I have no problem with people that believe in aliens and people that do not. I have a problem with the "radical believers" that ironically denounce the very tagline of this site in favor of beheading the heret....skeptics.

I have a problem with those that do not wish to see, but merely sit comfortably with a blindfold. When things can be explained, people can be exposed as frauds, and beliefs can be challenged, I cannot stand those that cannot acknowledge this and simply dismiss you as if you uttered horrible blasphemy.

Why? Because many members of ATS allow their desire for aliens to be hiding in their closet outweigh their rational mind and ability to think objectively.

That I cannot tolerate.

Hey, I am totally open minded. But I'm not foolish.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by SaosinEngaged
 


Well stated! Thanks for highlighting an issue that is unfortunately endemic in UFOlogy... and reflected on these boards.

IRM



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by SaosinEngaged
 


there are some well thought out statements made in this thread, and thanks SaosinEngaged for saying some of those things diplomatically, and well worded.

in fact there are some real nice contributions in this thread.

_____________________
off topic, but...

DoomsdayRex,
i like the new avatar

Keep ATS fun,
et

[edit on 19-8-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 07:19 PM
link   
ATS Team:

To my mind.....

This thread demonstrates how a positive, informative discussion can be achieved about a significant UFO case, despite some pretty strong differences of opinion.

Rising Against's Fantastic Rendlesham Thread

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
ATS Team:

To my mind.....

This thread demonstrates how a positive, informative discussion can be achieved about a significant UFO case, despite some pretty strong differences of opinion.

Rising Against's Fantastic Rendlesham Thread

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not


Couldn't agree more. For the UFO concerned and considering people (that's everyone in this discussion), the problem is always found in the dichotomy of "Believer" & "Skeptic".

You simply can't have an "open" mind without some real degree of both. No matter what anyone states to the contrary. Someone mentioned the intolerable "religion" of believers. The exact same degree of irrational fanaticism exists at the far end of the skeptic polarization as well. Both of these issues merely represent the commonly distorted dysfunctional projection of an identity crisis.

IMO, this whole discussion boils down to one word: Balance. There exists an undeniable NEED for that quality within any field of esoteric interest and research. To loose sight of it, or worse, to never recognize that quality within ourselves, guarantees that same person residence in an unhealthy locale akin to polarized extremes.



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 06:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Solomons
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
 


Skeptics would like you, or anyone else for that matter to provide solid proof that ET's exist first of all, then we can start trying to know more about them.[edit on 17-8-2010 by Solomons]


I also agree witht he premise of the thread. However There are a group of sceptics that I have no time for as their scepticism is just a stance. I have a parrot than can now say "it is untrue". That to me is the level of some sceptics on ATS.

I do like the more impartial sceptics like the debunkers as some do support the UFO as a possibility. In fact I would love to believe in the ET hypothesis but am highly sceptical.

The bottom line is that people should try to uphold ATS's rules.

[edit on 21-8-2010 by Tiger5]



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 06:51 AM
link   
reply to post by MasterOfSparkz
 


Very well said.

There are sceptics which troll to the degree of only looking to state that something cannot exist as fact and they need to accept that even spending time considering the matter makes them at some small level a believer of sorts.

That being said though the balance is out of kilter when it comes to how many people will blindly star and flag a topic which has no evidence to support it and how many genuine sceptical exploration threads die due to not being zesty enough in their promotion.

-m0r



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkz
You simply can't have an "open" mind without some real degree of both.

That's true, if we think about it there are very few things that we really know, but many in which we just believe.

So, when I say that I think that one explanation is better than other it means that I believe that my reasons are correct, so that makes me also a believer.

The difference is that I know that I am basing my opinion in my beliefs and that I know that I am sceptical of my own beliefs.



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 07:49 AM
link   
First of all, I don't like the terms 'skeptic' and 'believer' used when referencing ATS as a whole, they are terms that should be used specifically, not broadly.

Anyone who defines themselves as an 'ATS skeptic' is not seeing the bigger picture, and vice versa.

Concerning UFO's - I think the problem is people wanting UFO's/Aliens to be real. Skeptics, on the other hand, are willing to believe in the phenomena but will not jump in both feet first.

I rarely find myself scratching my head when a supposed 'skeptic' posts something, I wish I could say the same for the supposed 'believers'.

Personally, I don't wish to label myself either or, I take each case on it's merits and remain analytical when coming to a conclusion.

I must say though - when I first came to ATS I was more of a Mulder. However, now I tend to see through the eyes of Scully



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by LiveForever8
when I first came to ATS I was more of a Mulder. However, now I tend to see through the eyes of Scully


That'd make a superb signature!

I think it beats 'Deny Ignorance' as a motto too!

I wish i could applaud you because that's the best thing I've read on here in a long while.

-m0r



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


Sorry , point of order. First alot depends on how the picture, story, document or other evidence is presented.
For instance , if a poster provides a picture with an unknown object on it, and asks , "What the crap is it?" then a skeptic has no reason to reply!!! Its not as if a theory has been put forward at this stage, so theres nothing, just nothing for a skeptic to say , because nothing has been said or done to be skeptical about at this point. Skeptics need to learn to wait for a target before spamming threads with debunkings and accusations of idiocy or hoax.
Further more, when someone tells you "This is what happened" and it takes what seems to be the whole ten thousand character limit in order to say it, then you can bet your butt that any request for more information will be met with confusion... something along the lines of "What the hell did I just write all that out for, if ignorant mooks arent even going to look at it !?".

In short , theres nothing wrong with skepticism as long as it waits its turn and pays attention... in all other cases it will be shot on sight. Thank you for your time.



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

Originally posted by LiveForever8
Anyone who defines themselves as an 'ATS skeptic' is not seeing the bigger picture, and vice versa.

I'm not an ATS sceptic, I am just a sceptic that is a member of ATS.



Skeptics, on the other hand, are willing to believe in the phenomena but will not jump in both feet first.

And that should apply to all fields for someone that considers him/herself a sceptic. A real sceptic, to me, has to be a sceptic in everything, not on "special" topics.


I must say though - when I first came to ATS I was more of a Mulder. However, now I tend to see through the eyes of Scully

For those that do not even know who Mulder and Scully are (I only know the names, I do not even know which is Mulder and which is Scully
), could you please explain it?

Thanks in advance.



posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Fox Mulder, male character from the Xfiles show of the ninties.
FBI agent with responsibility over the Xfiles, and investigation of paranormal , and otherworldly happenings.
Dana Scully , female character from same show.
Also FBI agent, but significantly more skeptical of most everything , than her male partner. Also looked a hell of a lot better in the company colours, but then I have a thing for red heads.




top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join