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.

 

Give The Skeptics Some?

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 08:12 AM
link   
Perhaps the idea arose from my own bias and maybe it's been suggested before but why not have some feature for the skeptics? I mean those following the established standards of skepticism (not pseudoskepticism) - to critically examine even our own ideas that we present and discuss here. I understand much of the content here arises from our natural skepticism, but in the true spirit of denying ignorance we should scrutinize our own beliefs. there are already notable skeptics present here and they consistently represent the best examples of destroying whatever ignorance happens to pop up on this site. Why not have their own forum, or corner, or blog, ... or whatever?




posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


Or perhaps just a title. Maybe the staff could choose who they think are the best skeptics on the board or have a Skeptic of the Month or something?
With all the crazy theories that abound on this site, it would be nice to see the skeptics and more 'critical thinkers' among us recognized in some way.

It's a good idea, I just don't know the best implementation.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
... but why not have some feature for the skeptics? I mean those following the established standards of skepticism


I actively reject the idea to separate people into "believers" and "skeptics".

Those two words are BAD, they imply bias and IGNORANCE, it doesnt matter what "side" someone is on.

A "believer" is someone who buys the dumbest and silliest things and then takes them as facts, and a "skeptic" is one who denies ANYTHING out of the ordinary and doesnt even bother investigating or looking beyond his own, limited horizon.

IF YOU USE YOUR BRAIN - then, on one hand you can look beyond all the lies and frauds, spot the fake prophets, UFO fakers and disinformants - on the other hand ALSO can see that established science is NOT all there is. If you use your brain you dont "need" to be either "skeptic" or "believer". Easy.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Real skepticism is synonymous with thinking.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


No more titles!

The contribution levels are bad enough, since their introduction, they've become a big gold or silver target for the haters.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by flexy123

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
... but why not have some feature for the skeptics? I mean those following the established standards of skepticism


I actively reject the idea to separate people into "believers" and "skeptics".


I do too and if you gathered that from my suggestion perhaps I wasn't clear. Skepticism is simply an application of criticism; a way of thinking and investigating the merit of various claims. The idea is not to separate people, but to separate truth from falsehoods and good ideas from bad ones.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Perhaps the idea arose from my own bias and maybe it's been suggested before but why not have some feature for the skeptics?


I do like the idea, however you need measures in place to ensure it doesn't fall victim to the same believer/skeptic bickering found in the other forums. I guess a good way to minimise the afore mentioned is to set it up like RATS where members must forfeit points to maintain membership to said forum.

IRM



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 09:38 AM
link   



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 

There not really skeptics,they just get high and drunk before they come on,nothing speciel about them or what they say.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   
Conspiracy theorists ARE skeptics in the most literal sense of the definition of skeptic... or, at least they should be.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Conspiracy theorists ARE skeptics in the most literal sense of the definition of skeptic... or, at least they should be.


Conspiracy theories arise from our natural skepticism. But true skepticism determines whether they stand or fall.

I guess the idea didn't go over well... but I do thank everyone for entertaining the idea.

Thanks



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 





or, at least they should be.


In a perfect world. Yes. On ATS. Not so much.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


I just joined. 100% skeptic here, and don't mind saying so.

Would I mind being labeled as so, 100% not.

I think if people had a mindset of the person posting a reply to begin with, it might avoid people arguing, and or bad feelings about being questioned, etc....

While I am a skeptic, I am also here to learn. Already people seem to be taking offense to my questions.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   
I think there is no need for a skeptic forum(or title for that matter). I really dont see what it would bring to the table. Besides, most people on this site claim to be skeptics(but obviously they are not). It would be best if the skeptics just be skeptical and call out ridiculousness when they see it.

Just use this to distinguish yourself as a skeptic.



Easy as pie.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 10:31 PM
link   
my view on the skeptic / believers issue :

a great many conspiracy theorists do not believe " the govt " , " the church " , NASA , " the police " " pharmecutical compaines ", etc etc etc

but the same conspiracy theorists get prissy when people dont believe thier claims

go figure that one



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join