reply to post by Xcalibur254
I don't presume to speak for all the others who regularly get labeled shills and disinfo agents. What I do hope to achieve though is to illustrate why
someone might come to this site and not support the alternative explanations on a regular basis.
You speak for me sir, in much better words than I could have attempted to provide. I come here to know, not to believe. For me to know, I need
evidence. I can't just take people at their word, people are full of crap. I can't take every video of such and such as evidence when there are
other, easier to swallow, explanations.
When it comes to UFOs specifically, I'd rather throw out a questionable, but real, video than promote a hoax. People jumping on every single pixel
and artifact as "PROOF" all caps required, just makes all of us look silly. In fact, the influx of that type of attitude has kind of made me ignore
the paranormal section here in it's entirety. It's just not worth trying to discuss any of it when all I get is "you're a shill". At this point,
I've been called it so many times, I kinda wish I knew where to apply, so at least I could get paid.
It's a shame really, people let their passion get in the way of reason. It's great to be passionate about the subject, without that, we'd never push
ourselves outside the current boundaries. But once that passion blinds you, it's a hindrance to us all.
I think it's a fantastic idea to try to bring some type of litmus test to the stuff we'll spend our time on, certain criteria must be met before it's
worth MY time, but I'm sure my criteria are much more strict than most. Stuff that could be easily explained, shouldn't be a discussion for very
long. Everything should be looked at of course, but when things start to pop out, and the "shills" start pointing out that there was editing done, or
the source is unverifiable, or what people perceive to be paranormal, is standard artifacts, those things shouldn't be discounted just because it
disagrees with your paranormal theory.
But we can't go overboard. At this point, movie quality cg work is at anyone's fingertips if they are willing to take the time. And you can easily
get *free* copies of all of the major 3d software suites, so it's not totally about money. This brings in the argument that any and all videos are
questionable. That is a true statement, but doesn't mean we should throw them all out off hand. There are very knowledgeable people here, there are
signs to look for in a video to hint at editing or cg work, if a given video presents any of these it should be scrutinized, if it presents more than
one, should be dismissed.
edit on 26-4-2012 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)