Imagine A UFO Skeptic

Originally posted by grizzle2
The content of the video can be extrapolated from the static image that shows up before you watch it. Skeptic: "I don't believe in ghosts." Non-skeptic: "You hate God." I see.

Proving you have not watched the video.

The content of the video can be extrapolated from this conversation; you are behaving just like the closed-minded person in the video. You are not actually having a conversation or listening. In fact, you are not even thinking. You instead are exercising rote answers based on your prejudices.

Originally posted by WingedBullIt has everything to do with him being dead; it is easier to attack a straw-man than to have a conversation.

Really not. He's just an example of what I've seen out of skeptics throughout my life. That's quite a leap, by the way, to deduce that I'm using him as an example because he's dead. It never crossed my mind. I've never heard a skeptic criticize Klass, though. I've seen a lot of them imitate him. Ad hominem attacks, appeals to authority, dismissing things out of hand, etc. And "proving negatives". But, like I said, this thread isn't just about UFOs. It's about the enforcement of the paradigm laid down by authorities, in any area. It often leads to real consequences in non-skeptic's lives. The characterization of people who disagree with reality, as defined by authorities, as having a mental illness is gaining steam in the US just as it did in Soviet Russia.
Also interesting (but not surprising) is the putting of words in people's mouths, as if everyone who thinks UFOs exist also subscribe to an entire belief system, including claiming to know where they come from, what their intentions are, etc.
It is very late where I'm at, and I am tired. I'll continue this tomorrow.

reply to post by 35Foxtrot


I never said prove a negative, I said prove that it is what they claim. I hear all the time "Chinese lanterns." And they will have ZERO proof to back it up besides "Well it acts like one so it must be."

I think a lot of you are misunderstanding. It is good to be a skeptic. It is good to question. That is how humans have advanced to the point we have. Believing everything you are told or see is a recipe for disaster, which is why we must always question.

However, when it comes to UFO skeptics (which is what this thread states), too many are blinded by their own personal beliefs. I did not say everyone, but the same skeptics on this site always say the same thing about videos. And most of them don't question. They just write it off.

Originally posted by WingedBullProving you have not watched the video.

The content of the video can be extrapolated from this conversation; you are behaving just like the closed-minded person in the video. You are not actually having a conversation or listening. In fact, you are not even thinking. You instead are exercising rote answers based on your prejudices.

OK, fine. I got to about 3:00, and I maintain that yes, the content of the video can be extrapolated from the static image that shows up before you hit "play". The non-skeptic is portrayed as someone who hysterically believes and claims that a moving lampshade is caused by a ghost. The non-skeptic is also portrayed as resistant to accepting the obvious cause of the movement, a fan at the base of the lamp. This is of course the behavior one would expect from a mentally ill person, and is not characteristic of someone who thinks they have seen UFOs, ghosts, etc. It is also pretty clear this example was constructed by the video author to make non-skeptics appear irrational.
In addition, of course, the "anecdotal experience" concept is played. Of course, most experiences which involve things outside the realm of mainstream scientific understanding are going to occur as anecdotal experiences, as an overwhelming majority of experiences are in fact anecdotal and do not occur in the setting of a scientific experiment. Doubly so in cases that may involve intelligences.
I'm glad you have psychic powers to be able to discern remotely that I am not having a conversation, listening or thinking, and that I am closed-minded, and that I am exercising rote answers based on prejudices. All that, huh? And no "maybe" about it. Psychic powers such as these often help skeptics make short work of debates.
Now I really am going to get some sleep. See you tomorrow.

reply to post by ch1n1t0


As I try to be the best member I can be on these amazing forums, I answered the thread and gave my thoughts on skeptics. That would be the reason I didn't include my dissatisfaction with most believers, as many do blindly attach themselves to some rather ridiculous theories.

And about opening a dictionary...one of the definitions of a skeptic is "a person who maintains a doubting attitude, as toward values, plans, statements, or the character of others." Many times from what I have seen on this site the doubts are not founded on personal experience or thorough research, but rather just assuming what they see in a video is computer generated or a misidentification. They maintain their doubts even whenever they do have no explanation for what it really could be, rather than continuing to question it before making assumptions.

Notice I am now using the word many. There are some skeptics on this site who actually do their research before making a decision, and I applaud those few (we know who they are) who actually make attempts to really get to the bottom of videos, pictures, and firsthand accounts before writing things off. It is you few who make these UFO and Alien forums a better place.

Also I would like to apologize for the generalization of "I have not been convinced by a single skeptic here once." That really was a false statement that was formed before I knew what I really meant to say. Guess you could say I was being a little hypocritical

I think the air traffic controller, radiographer etc would turn around and thank the sceptic myself.

They'd say "Thank you for making all this possible and giving our children the chance at a better life"

They'd then press a button and the whole world would be waiting at a party, just for that one sceptic, and everyone would get laid.

-m0r

Originally posted by grizzle2
Over the shoulder of:

* An air traffic controller

* A radiologist

* A baseball umpire

* A witness to a hit and run accident

Et cetera

Applying their usual tactics.

Think it could cause some major problems?

can't get rid of the idea that the OP might have been constructed intentionally to start flames?
have been reading the first few replies: luckily some still seem to be able to use rational thinking.

too bad there's no "negative stars&flags" system on ATS

I'm a believer but this thread is as silly as the swamp gas explanation.

I have seen hundereds of "UFO" videos and i don't need to be a debunker or a disinfo agent to understand that the videos have nothing unidentified on them.The field of UFOlogy needs the skeptics now more than ever and honestly i'm turning into one myself with all the hoaxes and the blurry-shaky-out of focus lights in the night sky.

Instead of believers attacking skeptics and vice versa we should work together and see if we can have results.I'm sure that there are a lot of skeptics in here that are waiting for the real thing to show up.

Originally posted by grizzle2
OK, fine. I got to about 3:00, and I maintain that yes, the content of the video can be extrapolated from the static image that shows up before you hit "play". The non-skeptic is portrayed as someone who hysterically believes and claims that a moving lampshade is caused by a ghost. The non-skeptic is also portrayed as resistant to accepting the obvious cause of the movement, a fan at the base of the lamp. This is of course the behavior one would expect from a mentally ill person, and is not characteristic of someone who thinks they have seen UFOs, ghosts, etc.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it a mental illness, but merely being illogical and jumping to conclusions by saying "I don't know what it is, therefore I know what it is", as in the statement "I saw a UFO, it must be aliens". No, if it's unidentified, it's unidentified.

It is also pretty clear this example was constructed by the video author to make non-skeptics appear irrational.

Indeed you got the point, except it's not just appearance, it's reality. Lots of people see lights in the sky that they can't identify and jump to conclusions that some of them must be alien spacecraft. If they see a UFO and admit they don't know what it is, they they are no longer a "non skeptic", that makes them skeptical to admit it's an unknown.

reply to post by grizzle2


Imagine a UFO believer that is so blind in their faith of UFOs that they reject any sort of skepticism whatsoever

Over the shoulder of:

* An air traffic controller

* A radiologist

* A baseball umpire

* A witness to a hit and run accident

Et cetera

Applying their usual tactics.

Think it could cause some major problems?

Originally posted by m0r1artyI think the air traffic controller, radiographer etc would turn around and thank the sceptic myself.

Sigh. OK, since many here seem to have some kind of Aspergers and can't understand the OP, the idea is that the skeptic would be taking the same attitude towards the people listed as they do towards UFO witnesses, and they would be using the same argument tactics they're famous for.

Originally posted by grizzle2
Sigh. OK, since many here seem to have some kind of Aspergers and can't understand the OP, the idea is that the skeptic would be taking the same attitude towards the people listed as they do towards UFO witnesses, and they would be using the same argument tactics they're famous for.

You'll need to extrapolate further then as I still cannot understand what you present here.

Could you provide an example of what you'd imagine what would happen in any of those situations please?

-m0r

Originally posted by bhornbuckle75Imagine a UFO believer that is so blind in their faith of UFOs that they reject any sort of skepticism whatsoever

Over the shoulder of:

* An air traffic controller

* A radiologist

* A baseball umpire

* A witness to a hit and run accident

Et cetera

Applying their usual tactics.

Think it could cause some major problems?

I doubt it, since they seem to be "looks like, quacks like, walks like, is" type of people. While skeptics, by and large, are "looks like, quacks like, walks like, is swamp gas, lens flare, lenticular cloud, chinese lantern, sun dogs, military flares, hoax, secret military aircraft, venus" types.

Originally posted by m0r1artyCould you provide an example of what you'd imagine what would happen in any of those situations please?

I already did.

Originally posted by grizzle2
I already did.

Then, in at least presenting ideas and opinions to me, it seems you fail at constructing legitimate debate.

All of the professions or individuals you put forward in the OP would be required to either use critical thinking to save lives or use an accurate memory which stands up to scrutiny both of which are called upon by sceptical minds as standard, and not special or stand-alone, skills.

These machines, mechanisms, processes, rules, laws and measures were all put in place by people of sceptical minds.

Be thankful you are not still standing around naked hiding under a tree and preying to a rock.

Sceptics made the world what it is today and we're the ones who will be here when belief has gone for good.

-m0r

reply to post by grizzle2


Basically, your OP is redundant.
You have placed yourself in a skeptical position in relation to the behaviour of skeptics.

You have essentially muted your own argument because it is itself skeptical in nature.

Epic Fail.
Epic.

Originally posted by ArbitrageurIndeed you got the point, except it's not just appearance, it's reality.

So I did discern the content of the video from the static image, as you im plied could not be done. So you characterize "believers" as a group of irrational people, as I said. We're not talking about moving lampshades. I assume you don't mean "belief" in the sense that I believe I'm typing on my laptop.
Let me ask you something. If I said I saw a flying metallic disc, or some large airborne object at night in the sky which hovered and made no noise, and had flashing lights all around it, either of which making maneuvers which flying animals, flares, venus or known aircraft were incapable of, what would your answer be to that? I haven't, but people I know have.If you wish to argue that you would require a specific case to come up with an answer, here's one:
My aunt told me that when she was 10 years old (I don't know her age, but I'm 43 1/2), she was in the garden with my grandmother weeding rows of crops. Three objects appeared. They resembled the shape of tadpoles, but had a highly reflective (mirror) finish, and were about four feet in diameter. They flew around in the area for a while, then took off at high speed and disappeared. Then it started snowing, in August. While they were present, my grandmother told her "Don't pay any attention to that.", which indicates to me that this wasn't the first time she had seen them. My grandmother was and my aunt is a devout baptist. They would no more make up this story than I would join the communist party. Also, this was in deep Appalachia. And it was a sunny, clear day, until it started snowing. Were they mistaken, crazy, or the victims or perpetrators of a hoax? Or is it enough to say it's "unknown" and not speculate at all, would you do that, and is it what you and other skeptics do?
In addition, all the military men, NASA employees, etc who say they have been privy to government knowledge that there are extraterrestrials visiting earth, what do you say to that?

reply to post by atlasastro


That's just silly. I'm merely theorizing (correctly, I think) what would happen if the known criteria and methods of skeptics of the UFO phenomenon were applied to more everyday things.

Originally posted by grizzle2
My aunt told me that when she was 10 years old ...

Same author as the critical thinking video too Grizzle.

-m0r