The nature of the epic conflict between skeptics and believers, or - at the heart of it all

As a consequence of Springers recent demand to the posters not just in the Alien/UFO forum to show a bit more respect to each other, I started thinking about the reason for the rude character of many discussions in the Alien/UFO-Forum.

Being neither a die-hard believer nor a die-hard sceptic, more than once I tried to communicate between the different factions, and with time passing by, I grew tired, because the sheer amount of hate not rarely shown here often buries even the most optimistic efforts to create a place, where understanding for different views (and possibilities) and respect is general and the focus is on serious discussion (and not just on the total rhetoric distruction of the counterparts), which results may enlighten all involved in the discussion.

The reason that I didn't get totally frustrated by this and why I'm still here, is because I realized something that is really important to understand if you want to know the reason for the dissension that is so common here:

We're not discussing cooking recipes, on which people may agree or not. Nobody gets seriously hurt there.

We're talking about things that are EARTHSHATTERING in the truest meaning of the word.

It's not that it doesn't matter, if aliens exist or not, if they're already here or not.

It DOES matter, how those questions are answered. And in the case the answers to both of these questions are positive, the implications of that would be so far-ranging, I think only few of us really can imagine.

Here, not just strong beliefs, but world views collide.

And we must not forget, that behind the words of either a "sceptic" or a "believer" might be more, than one might expect.

It's not so different from the time, when people were discussing, if earth was flat or not. If earth was circled by the sun, or contrary.

At first, for us today, it may seem, it doesn't matter, if the earth was flat or not. And today, it seems really strange and unbelievable, that people got burned because they were claiming, that earth wasn't flat and not circled by the sun.

Who does it view that way, does not realize the implications of those claims. And the implications were fundamental, not just for the ruling elite of that time (if the church was wrong with it's claim, the sun was circling the earth, than maybe they were also wrong in other things, for example that they were the legimitate ambassadors of god...). The implications were also fundamental for the beliefs of the people: When the church was wrong on THAT, then maybe everything else was also wrong - no Jesus, no salvation, no paradise in heaven full with the love of god, just a cold big black NOTHING!

The times have changed, the faithsystems have changed, but we people, we didn't really change. We're still full of hopes, and still full of fears. And still, there are many unanswered questions that planted a doubt deep inside of us that we try to bury with all kind of things - faith, drugs, or consume of any kind. Some were really succesful in constructing a faith that was heavy enough to bury those terrible doubts. And it's good, until you question this faith (may it be the faith in science, in god or in aliens). When you start to erode the fundament of this faith, the things buried beneath it will come up, as if they never got buried. And what you get is: Hate, fear, and pain.

Look at it, it's a difference, if you say: "I don't think aliens exist, because science tells the creation of life aside of the earth is highly unlikely in this barren universe!" respectively "Oh, I think they do exist, because I saw something really strange up in the sky that must be of extraterrestrial origin, because we Terrans are just not capable of building such cool things!"

compared to: "I don't think aliens exist (and, unspoken: because their existence would question all the things I believe in an that give me security in this ocean of chaos we call life!!!)" respectively "I believe they exist (and, unspoken: because the proof of their non-existance would destroy my last hopes, that (after god got killed by Nietzsche) there's someone that finally will get us out of this whole terrible mess we're trapped in!!!)".

Got it?

I think it will help, when we keep this in mind: That it's not just about logic and proofs. That it's possibly more about faiths and fears. And the next time we start to deconstruct the arguments of our counterparts, we should think about, that possibly we're not just challinging the rhetoric and logic skills of our counterparts, but also their worldviews and faiths, short: The things that keep them sane and somehow happy in a crazy and often cruel world. And if we should really win, we should leave something to the inferior, so that he just can live on, sane and somehow happy.


We are our brothers keepers...



For all of us I hope, there will be answers to those questions that keep us all awake, more sooner than later.

I hope there will be someone that will bring this whole mess we're in to an end. May it be god, aliens, or finally us who'll realize, that if we want to reach up to the stars, we have to grow another bit.

Peace to all of you!

Of COURSE they are out there! The only thing stopping people realising this is the inability to comprehend the numbers that lead to this conclusion. Once you can get your head around the idea that there are more stars in a galaxy than grains of sand on a beach, and even more galaxies in the universe than that it becomes so unfathomably unlikely that we are the only example of life in the universe that the idea that we are alone seems absurd.

I have noticed the post flooding by people on either side of this issue. Saying the same thing over and over never convinces anyone of anything. It all boils down to our hard wired instincts. Cognitive dissonance does not explain the denigration of the debates into name calling and sneers though.

The following is some information about a book on the subject of "Cognitive Dissonance: The Engine of Self-justification." Interesting study.

Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) by Elliot Aronson

We all have a hard time admitting that we're wrong, but according to a new book about human psychology, it's not entirely our fault. Social psychologist Elliot Aronson says our brains work hard to make us think we are doing the right thing, even in the face of sometimes overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Source

When people aren't able to communicate or debate their position effectively, they often get angry and their argument tends to break down into childish insults. When people aren't able or aren't capable of effectively attacking the message (for whatever reason), they often relegate themselves to attacking the messanger, as that's really all they know how to do. It boils down to "I'm right and you're wrong", only they aren't capable of getting that across in an intelligent or viable way, so it breaks down to insults and becomes solely focused on making the other person wrong in the only other way they know how. It's a bad habit that we learn from childhood and while many people are able to break away from that habit through intelligent discourse, many people aren't.

That's my take on it anyway.


--airspoon

reply to post by digdeep


Of course you're right! But I'm not talking about possibilities or probabilities, I'm talking about implications and their affect on every single one of us! ;-)

Originally posted by airspoon
It boils down to "I'm right and you're wrong"...

You are absolutely correct. I learned that lesson this morning. I got so wrapped up in being right, instead of being accurate, that I made an absolute ass of myself.

To the OP, I don't think there is necessarily a believer versus skeptic divide. Skeptics and critical-thinking believers have more in common than they do with cynics or fundamentalists who superficially share their viewpoints.

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

To the OP, I don't think there is necessarily a believer versus skeptic divide. Skeptics and critical-thinking believers have more in common than they do with cynics or fundamentalists who superficially share their viewpoints.

Maybe you're right. It's just that, that the discussions often are displayed, as if there's just black and white (skeptics vs. believers), as if there were not many shades of gray. I for myself, for example, are (as I explained in the OP) neiter a pure skeptic nor a pure believer. The reason why I'm here is, because once I saw something really strange (a orange-violet glowing object floating very low above a local river), and until this day I find no satisfying answer, what it really was. I don't know what I've seen, and I don't want to believe, I want to know...

And I think, the thing that the skeptics and the critical-thinking believers may have in common is their thirst for truth, whereas the fundamentalists (of both sides; meaning die-hard believers and skeptics, which just perceive themselves as skeptics, but in fact are skeptics not because of their rationalism, but because of their blind faith in a science, that is afraid of auditing its findings) share their desire for security. And the cynics - I'm not so sure what to say about them. Cynics are strange people. Possibly masked aliens ;-)

@ all: thanks for your replies!

I could post this in probably every forum here. Its labels. Get rid of them. I don't like you because you are a " "
or a " ". Its really that simple. Live by labels, and you get stuff like this.

reply to post by Peloquin

It's not that it doesn't matter, if aliens exist or not, if they're already here or not.

To any experiencers, this is so NOT true. There is a huge issue at stake, the very heart of black operations and lack of information or technology to the people, by the very same ones who have been preparing for some sort of events that we won't like.

In addition, there are ETs, many kinds, and polarities involved.

Whats at the heart of this conflict to me, is suppression of information and taking that power back into the people's hands, versus the secrecy, profit and genocidal/slavery plans of this very negative oriented group.

Versus disclosure.

So, its time to wake up.

reply to post by Unity_99


I'm sorry, english isn't my first language, and possibly you got me wrong. I wanted to say, that in fact IT DOES matter if they're here or not.

My intention to open this thread was to shed a light on the motives of the skeptics respectively the believers to hold their positions.

I didn't want to open another battlefield, I just wanted to ask...

why we are fighting in sometimes such a rude manner?

This time, it's not really about THE TRUTH (whatever this might be), it's more about faith and the possible fears that make it sometimes impossible for believers and skeptics (as I've shown, also skeptics can have their fundamental faith...) to let their faith be questioned.

I really don't understand what all the fuzz is about.

Believers often do so because of a personal experience. Any Skeptic that criticizes them basically say they are lying.

It seems people do not appreciate being called a lier. They get mad, but how can you blame them.

Any non- believer because a lack of evidence doesn't seem to understand the size of our surrounding universe.
I admit. It's mind boggling huge...

No evidence doesn't mean anything and any other reason to think we are alone is only arrogant at best.

On top of that people in general are just stupid... Which is the actual problem. In my humble opinion of course...

Isn't the real issue not if we are visited or not anyway ?

reply to post by Sinter Klaas


Hi!

I was not so much referring to the people that saw something that was (in fact) not from this world, I was referring to those who need to believe that whatever they saw, MUST be of extraterrestrial origin, versus those who are never able to consider, that it MIGHT BE possible that there's alien life above this world and even maybe on this world.

I wanted to find an explanation, why those battles between those hardcore-factions, that dominate and bury so many discussions here, are so furious. Of course there may be several explanations, some posters in this thread already delivered several plausible explanations.

Finally, this thread is my small effort to establish another culture of discussion than the one that it shown here so often.

But I understand, that that's possibly a futile mission, because - as I already wrote - we're not discussing cooking recipes.

Too many fears involved. And, of course, egocentric agendas.

This is not about disclosure, and not about TPTB.

It's about us, and how we're dealing with the hopes and fears an alien existence (or even presence) might generate.

reply to post by Peloquin


I don't think it is never about fear though... It's about Ego

reply to post by Sinter Klaas


Of course, several discussions here might be dominated by clashing egos, whose only interests might be to show the inferiors their overwhelming intellect or rhetorical skills (what in fact sometimes just shows their ability to write in caps and to use bad language)

But to say it's never about fear?

Of course it is...

The same fears that arose, when we learned, earth was flat, that we were descendants of the apes, and stuff like that.

The biggest fear of the believers might be, that we're possibly alone.

The biggest fear of (some of) the skeptics might be, that we're possibly NOT alone. (The fact, that man is a social animal might make it questionable, why we shouldn't be glad to hear, that we're not alone. But if this disclosure may lead to the finding, that we're not longer at the top of the foodchain might make it reasonable, why the finding that we're not alone wouldn't be applauded by the die-hard-skeptics (beside the even worse fact, that they were just wrong). But my guts tell me, that also the believers would develop a bit of skepticism, if they realized that their brothers in space have a faible for human meat. Hm... did I already turn into a desillusioned, frustrated cynic...??? So fast??? No...! :-) Peace!)

reply to post by Peloquin


No you didn't lol

That's just normal. Only man cares about his food before they eat it.

Fear I don't get. Rather pointless emotion isn't it.

Nothing will change and no thread is bigger then man himself... Fear ....???

reply to post by Peloquin


First law of life: it is natural to be a skeptic and an atheist. It is unnatural to be a believer. When we are born, we are natural skeptics and atheists because our minds have not been conditioned. Once you start to age conditioning comes into effect. Especially if you are born into a religious family. Conditioning goes on daily privately and publicly. The publicly mostly through television. As an ex-hypnotist and student of the mind I see this daily.

So let's jump to the present. Conditioned adults who do not require evidence and believe whatever comes down the pike. Skeptics who question everything and require evidence and do not rely on hearsay. Atheists who have not been conditioned to accept the myths of religion or who may have educated themselves about the myths of religion.

Enter forums. You will not find forums aimed at skeptics or atheists (I could be wrong here) because skeptics and atheists are happy within themselves, with their lives. Believers, on the other hand, need to band together to exchange their beliefs.

Above Top Secret is not the only family of forums, there are others just as well known with plenty of members. For example, UNEXPLAINED MYSTERIES. There is no difference between the two and many other, less populated forums. They all draw the believers and a few skeptics/atheists will also join in, as here.

If these forum as populated by believers, why do skeptics/atheists join? The simple answer is that among the chaff there is some wheat (to separate what is useful or valuable from what is worthless). Once in a while, a thread has something of interest regardless of members' replies. Videos for example.

Some skeptics/atheists lose it when dealing with the believers. I've lost it many times when I should know better. It can be aggravating dealing with tyros (believers) and all you want to do is insult them no end. But that is prohibited and with good reason. A skeptic/atheist should just look and not get involved because doing so is really a waste of time. By that I mean that you cannot deal logically with a conditioned believer. Since believers do not require evidence, any comments dealing with common sense, logic, and reason are useless.

Oh, what the heck...

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by airspoon
It boils down to "I'm right and you're wrong"...

You are absolutely correct. I learned that lesson this morning. I got so wrapped up in being right, instead of being accurate, that I made an absolute ass of myself.

To the OP, I don't think there is necessarily a believer versus skeptic divide. Skeptics and critical-thinking believers have more in common than they do with cynics or fundamentalists who superficially share their viewpoints.

"...critical-thinking believers..." - an oxymoron

reply to post by The Shrike


Thanks for your response, I think you hit another interesting aspect of the strange relationship or better relationships between (because, as I explained before, there are different kinds of) skeptics and believers.

But although your conclusion sounds very plausible, I have to add something. Because following your conclusion, believers must be really dumb (because they're acting like fools just because of their conditioning).

I don't really know, what life is like in the US, where's the so called bible belt etc., but where I'm living (in Germany), religion doesn't play any longer the role it played once. We germans got very secular, at least since Napoleon, who was a great opponnent of the church, and who separated state from religion in his jurisdiction.

Now, it seems as if science replaced religion, and we started to believe everything they teach us (why not to trust the scientists? They DO know, just because of their profession and the white coats they're wearing!). In fact, because we were conditioned to do so. To believe everything, scientists postulate. And most of us do it without any doubt.

Just those of us who experience things, that are so different from anything, organized science tells us to be the gospel of THE TRUTH, start to disbelieve, to develop a kind of skepticism regarding science and their teachings, and start to believe in something different.

And sometimes, the more enmity they experience for their beliefs, the more they see that not rationalism and the spirit of the Enlightment are behind the words and deeds of the so called keepers of reason, but - beside other, more material agendas - pure, archaic fear. Fear for having to audit what they thought to know (and what they were conditioned for - I think, also at colleges and university, to develop an individual opinion is not what you learn first, if at all. Much more you learn what (the scientific) truth is all about, and of course, to obey...). Fear, that man isn't any longer the supreme species (the scientists killed god, but his order, to subordinate earth, they kept well in mind).

There is much faith in science, and I'm not sure if it's really better than the faith we thought we've left behind.

My conclusion: Believers may be blind, but skeptics (as you described them) are also never safe to fail.

If we are tired from all those pointless discussion having here all over the place, we should start think about the motives behind the arguments (and I'm not talking by monetary motives of payed dis-info agents).

It's truly about faith. In fact, several types of faith.

I just found a brilliant thread, where the OP seems to validate my conclusions.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Didn't we roundly mock the Global-Warmists for their calling any non-believer a "Skeptic"?

Since when is skepticism a bad thing?

If a scientist believed anything anyone told him, no science would ever be done.
Its exactly because they refuse to take anyone's word for it and do their research over and over again until they arrive at verifiable conclusions that we regard them as a scientist at all.
Anything else isn't science.

I am a 100% confirmed skeptic and proud.
I refuse to believe what you, the government or anyone else tells me unless I can verify the data and confirm the findings and reproduce them.
That is science.

Belief is not science.

As a skeptic do I "believe" in Aliens and UFO's?
No.
But that does not mean I do not believe.
It means I am waiting for verifiable evidence so that I can KNOW and not BELIEVE.

Beliefs are pretty flexible. As children we all believed in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy. That strength of belief did not and does not make them exist.

Look at the video of the couple in London filming what they believed were UFO's.
They were so convinced of what they were seeing that they called the police to report the sighting as well as their friends.
They jumped to a conclusion based upon their belief.
Turns out they later did their research and found out it was nothing other than Chinese Lanterns.
They added new data to their experience and found themselves wrong.
Much to their credit they still left the video up to show how easily people can be fooled into believing.
See the video and their comments here:www.youtube.com...


Being a skeptic does not mean we refuse to believe in Aliens or UFOs.
It means we do not jump to conclusions, we demand evidence and proof.
Of course there are those that refuse pointblank to believe and never will, but they are not skeptics, they are just as fundamentalist as those who believe every video of a blurry object in the sky is an Alien craft.
Fundamentalism on either side will get us nowhere. A healthy scientific skepticism however will add knowledge that all of us can benefit from.