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.

 

Please attempt to verify , not debunk

page: 1
10

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 03:57 AM
link   
this is not an attack or dig at any one in particular , but it irks me to see thread after thread with titles such as [ paraphrased examples ]

' can any one debunk this '

' has this pic been debunked '

etc etc

many such threads are thinly veiled attacks at skepticism , and almost all blindly miss the critical maxim that :

the burden of proof lies with the positive claimant

with notable exceptions - few people invest much time or effort into positive research - most believers simply believe and when challenged , simply demand proof or evidence from skeptics , often demanding that they jump throgh hoo after hoop

if i had a pound for every time i see the claim :

' it hasnt been debunked , so it is believable '

my financial woes would be over

such uncritical believe simply fuels trolls and hoaxers who know thsat however assanine thier claims , and shoddy thier " evidence " someone will believe it

whats the solution? - simple -

positive investigation , not lazy belief

investigate , do not sit back to be spoon fed

and promote research and discourse , not polarised ' us and them sniping '

rather than the examples above , an idealised title would be :

' please help me establish the provenence and veracity of this pic '

not only does it avoid any pre-loaded inference , but its free of negativity

is it that difficult ?????

PS - while this thread directly addresses erveived flaws with conduct on the aliens / fufo sub forum - it could be rewritten to address most ATS fora sections




posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:38 AM
link   
Excellent.

Star/flag

More 'common' sense (which is obviously not so) would be appreciated at ATS.


For the record... "Debunk" Most of us know the word, use the word, yet likely all have a slightly different interpretation of it (or completely). Let me resolve this:

Bunk = Bull#

De- = Remove

I am 100% for the "de-bunking" of any and everything.

What I am NOT for, is the countless herds of sheeple - arms crossed - nose up - calling 'bull#' before they've seen a shred of evidence.

OR ... the opposite



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:47 AM
link   
Joining in a random discussions with no Value Add (just like OP) and no reason to star or flag, I heard a great saying the other day.

Taking out the trash = Reverse Logistics!!

How good is that.

S/F/A from me!



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:53 AM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 




positive investigation


What? You mean posting up a youtube video with "BEST EVAR!!1!!" and "debunk this!!!" isn't enough?

NO WAI!!!



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 07:17 AM
link   
You are putting limits on how to examine unusual events so that a proper answer can be forthcoming? Can't you see how that is self-defeating? It reminds me of the beginning of aviation. Many of the "experts" of the day, nicely secure in their ivory towers said that it could not be done physically and that, anyway, God wouldn't have it. Thing of it was, nobody told those facts heatedly enough to Orville and Wilbur and other early pioneers.

The problem, as your suggest applies to UFOs, is that there is little science involved in proving or disproving any particular case. The debunkers will always make their pronouncments regardless of how extreme, and the pro side will do their bit but never with enough proof. Each side has a vested interest in the outcome, as with the coming of aviation, their minds are already made up and bulwarked with supporting data.

Basically, you are requesting an unbiased approach. It cannot happen. It is too late, and besides, we all know the answer, but some work real hard at denying it. That is OK. The real meat of the matter is the installation of the UFO myth into culture and society in a subtle, slow slide toward acceptance without undo damage.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Well here is the problem.

You cannot get 100% proof in science.

You can however prove a hypothesis to be incorrect.

I must say though, some of the 'debunking' is thin at best.

The best you're ever going to get (in anything), is something that cannot be proven as false. Unfortunately its just how it works.

I'm not going to go into too much detail on this one, but its basic science.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aliensun
You are putting limits on how to examine unusual events so that a proper answer can be forthcoming? Can't you see how that is self-defeating? It reminds me of the beginning of aviation. Many of the "experts" of the day, nicely secure in their ivory towers said that it could not be done physically and that, anyway, God wouldn't have it. Thing of it was, nobody told those facts heatedly enough to Orville and Wilbur and other early pioneers.

The problem, as your suggest applies to UFOs, is that there is little science involved in proving or disproving any particular case. The debunkers will always make their pronouncments regardless of how extreme, and the pro side will do their bit but never with enough proof. Each side has a vested interest in the outcome, as with the coming of aviation, their minds are already made up and bulwarked with supporting data.

Basically, you are requesting an unbiased approach. It cannot happen. It is too late, and besides, we all know the answer, but some work real hard at denying it. That is OK. The real meat of the matter is the installation of the UFO myth into culture and society in a subtle, slow slide toward acceptance without undo damage.



Quoting this post because of how true it rings.

It seems rare for a truly open mind to enter a thread without preconceived notions. Most seem to go into a thread either fully believing and ready to say "wow, that's amazing, real proof" or of a more sceptical mind to call fake.

What we're missing are the posters, old and new alike, who are capable of not forming an opinion until all the evidence is weighed up and picked apart to give the claim of "valid" or "invalid"



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Why does it matter what someone or a group of people think or how they arrive at their conclusions? Do you really need a "believer" or a "debunker" to do your thinking for you? Seek your own truth and screw everyone else.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
People want to know and thats an approach.
Why should they say I am truly ignorant and need help.

Perhaps they should just bust in and fend off all the ignorant answers
that are just wise evaluations that they have no understanding to comprehend.

That would be interesting.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by seenitall
Well here is the problem.

You cannot get 100% proof in science.

You can however prove a hypothesis to be incorrect.

I must say though, some of the 'debunking' is thin at best.

The best you're ever going to get (in anything), is something that cannot be proven as false. Unfortunately its just how it works.

I'm not going to go into too much detail on this one, but its basic science.


There is no problem lol, your just throwing out meaningless scientific definitions to look smart. There is not a problem with the laws of gravity, even if you cant by definition, prove it 100%. You cant get 100% proof in science, but you can make a claim that is "strongly supported by scientific means". And that is what we want to see, and that is what people are refering to when they say "proof".



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 01:10 AM
link   
And 'strongly supported by scientific means' (as you put it) is essentially what is left when you eliminate all other possiblities. A hypothesis is tested by trying to prove it to be incorrect. This is often referred to as H0, or a null hypothesis.

Such terms are not meaningless and I have no need to feel smart, however I would like to think I know enough about my own profession.

If you actually took the time to think about this entire thread you may see that I was pointing to the fact that 'debunking' is an essential part of the process. It cannot and should not be stopped or ignored.

You cannot verify without 'debunking'.
edit on 19-3-2011 by seenitall because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   
It makes me sad on here sometimes, I've for as long as I've been on here made it clear that I'm a believer BUT I'm not a blind believer, I look at every video, picture and story and aim to work out what it could be rather than trying to make it what I'd like it to be.

I'm sick to death of people blindly believing or the folks that blindly follow one persons lead and reply to threads attacking anyone who dares to pour scorn on their belief. The term debunker gets thrown about so easily as does dis info merchant. The fact I want to verify that what I'm looking at isn't something being taken out of context or hoaxed so I can then really look at what the item is should be the way it's done.

I'd never deliberately denounce a genuinely interesting item just as I'd never jump on the bandwagon without looking at the facts and working stuff through.

Sadly you have to wade through the legions of smart arses, ego merchants, self proclaimed experts, deliberate BS people, hoaxers and people who just like to annoy before you get to the good stuff. The problem is that its getting harder to actually enjoy reading the forums because of the abuse and the nit picking, I'm not an expert in UFO, I'm simply a guy with a deep interest in the subject who looks at things logically firstly with an open mind, I've got some knowledge of 3D modelling, some photographic knowledge and a keen mind to look for answers, that surely is enough to do the job but having to wade through the posters that just add the same daft posts like 'if there aint proof it never happened'....Please, hopefully we are better than that...




top topics



 
10

log in

join