UFOs, ATS's "deny ignorance" motto and admitting ignorance

page: 3
93
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


If you keep looking at the trees then you will never see the forest. I strongly suggest you stop putting everything through the microscope and accept things at face value. I am not talking about amateur youtube videos, I am talking about any serious work accomplished in the field.

The hardcore skeptics will have you believe everything is fake to justify their ill conceived bias. The disinformation agents have poisoned the well first.




posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   
It's disappointing and frustrating to me (not an attack, just how I feel personally) that both believers and skeptics have interpreted this topic as an attack on either camp. Perhaps I misinterpreted Koi's post, but I believe the intent was to encourage humility in the face of our own ignorance, rather than overconfidence on the shoulders of what we know. That can apply equally to both the skeptical mind and the faith driven or concluded mind.

As pertains specifically to UFOs, we do have quite a large body of evidence proving (to my satisfaction at least) that "something" is happening, that reliable witnesses perceive it to be an intelligently controlled phenomenon, and that various world governments have responded to it in some interesting ways, to say the least. Where agreement breaks down is when skeptics or believers dig in and say "well, there's no proof that whatever they are is ET in origin, so it's ridiculous to entertain that notion," or, "they can only be ET in origin, and it's as obvious as the nose on our faces." I don't believe we know enough to make either of those statements.

Case in point, the Condon committee. Despite declaring some sightings unknowns, Condon's whole attitude when entering the fray (much like the Robertson Panel before it,) was to debunk the "damn UFO." They started with the premise and assumption that there was nothing to it - arguably under some influence by the CIA I might add, who had a robust interest in the phenomenon albeit not publicly at the time - and confirmation bias did the rest. That's not a skeptical or honest approach. But neither is therefore concluding, "Ah, well they're covering it up, therefore it must be ET." There's not enough evidence to support that conclusion either in my opinion.

In short, there is a lot in both directions of inquiry that we "don't know," and we would be better served by being humble before our lack of knowledge and, at least this would be my preference - to not create dichotomies between skeptical inquiry and belief in the first place, since we share a common goal, and are both lacking in definitive, complete data. But, this is just my opinion. I'm just saying, I believe this was Koi's intent, not to attack either skeptics or believers as close minded or zealous. I'll let him speak for himself, though, of course.

Just a note to add, I believe the spirit of this topic was intended to be something along the lines of this topic I wrote a while back: Three words people don't seem to like very much:

Peace.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Whatever about other issues discussed here,
most enlightened people here accept and know we are not alone in the universe/galaxy,
no proof needed, the sheer numbers dictate so.
That being the case,
the only entitlements we have as humans will be to all the worlds and planetary bodies,
and anything else really,
that orbits our own Sun.
That is our playground.
If a time comes in the future that we have the ability to venture beyond this,
then we will be in someone else's backyard, and most likely brought to task accordingly.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 07:41 PM
link   
There's true skeptics with an open mind on this forum who actually are interested in the "alien UFO" phenomenon, they are a very small percentage, but they do exist, like myself. These folks are a healthy ingredient to the community and you will sometimes see them, when they are around, also discussing with other members in some of the "saner" subject matter threads, documented events that still go unexplained but NEVER EVER attract the typical pseudo-skeptics that are constantly poking holes through obvious hoaxes like silly YouTube video's. When these "saner" or "cold cases" can't be explained via scientific method, and all other investigative avenues have been exhausted, if it walks and talks like a duck, in the end, it might just be a damn duck.

Pseudo-skeptics use the ever so tiresome demeaning sarcasm and childish wit, always skirting along the edges of the T&C's of this website. They tend to lie about their background to try and somehow elevate themselves above the rest of the crowd and will often deflect away from actual UFO evidence at every opportunity. These types have ZERO interest in the UFO/Alien phenomenon and are merely here to draw attention to themselves as if thinking they are doing a heroic service while patting themselves on the back for us all to see, you know who these people are, we all do. These people are not skeptics, they are not interested in the UFO field AT ALL and they DO NOT deserve your response. Just ignore them, by replying to them your are giving them a platform and an audience. Don't engage them and make them feel as if they are taking part in the ongoing conversation in discussion threads.
edit on 2-1-2013 by Jocko Flocko because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by funbox
i reckon in should be scraped for

"todays truth..tomorrows horsehash"

or maybe

"truth today.. ignorance tommorow"

or even

" a cheese is just a cheese. untill its a mouse*"


*or even a moon in some cases

carl sagan... such an interesting fellow..


How about... "Yesterday's conspiracy theories are today's headlines"



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 04:10 AM
link   
“... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” -Neil DeGrasse Tyson

I know the ATS moto is meant to encourage actually learning the facts, and not remaining willfully ignorant as many are prone to doing ... but many of the things Neil DeGrasse Tyson says in his speaking engagements particularly resonate with me.

As been stated already ... admitting ignorance is tough!



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donegal_TDI
Whatever about other issues discussed here,
most enlightened people here accept and know we are not alone in the universe/galaxy,
no proof needed, the sheer numbers dictate so.


Unfortunately another example of what the OP laments.

Enlightened people do not KNOW we are not alone and the numbers alone only indicate a possibility, they do not DICTATE it to be so.

You have stated an opinion as fact. Both are welcomed when clearly distinguished.



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Let me try to break this down into a more coherent sentence that better describes the phrase, Deny Ignorance.


Definition Source: www.dictionary.com

de·ny [dih-nahy]
verb (used with object), de·nied, de·ny·ing.
1.to state that (something declared or believed to be true) is not true: to deny an accusation.
2.to refuse to agree or accede to: to deny a petition.
3.to withhold the possession, use, or enjoyment of: to deny access to secret information.
4.to withhold something from, or refuse to grant a request of: to deny a beggar.
5.to refuse to recognize or acknowledge; disown; disavow; repudiate: to deny one's gods.

ig·no·rance [ig-ner-uh ns]
noun
the state or fact of being ignorant; lack of knowledge, learning, information, etc.


So, to "deny ignorance", we need to refuse to recognize or acknowledge the lack of knowledge, learning, information, etc. In other words, don't ignore knowledge or facts when presented, in order to educate or learn.

However, there is still ambiguity in this sentence here at ATS. It seems to be the definition of "facts".

fact [fakt]
noun
1.something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact.
2.something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact.
3.a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.
4.something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable.
5.Law. . Often, facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence. Compare question of fact, question of law.


With this definition, to "deny ignorance" should be interpreted properly as,

To refuse to recognize or acknowledge the lack of knowledge, learning, information, etc. In other words, don't ignore knowledge or something known to exist or to have happened when presented, in order to educate or learn.



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceWombat04

Case in point, the Condon committee. Despite declaring some sightings unknowns, Condon's whole attitude when entering the fray (much like the Robertson Panel before it,) was to debunk the "damn UFO." They started with the premise and assumption that there was nothing to it - arguably under some influence by the CIA I might add, who had a robust interest in the phenomenon albeit not publicly at the time - and confirmation bias did the rest. That's not a skeptical or honest approach. But neither is therefore concluding, "Ah, well they're covering it up, therefore it must be ET." There's not enough evidence to support that conclusion either in my opinion.



This.

The problem is that both sides are almost zealotous in their assertion to have the "true" story.

In the case of the Condon Report, it was damned before it started. While I wouldn't doubt alphabet agency pressure on the committee, I also wouldn't put it past them to place their professional reputations over objectivity. Their investigation into the phenomenon was anything BUT scientific.

I commend "Dr. Swampgas" for approaching the subject from a truly scientific standpoint, as well as having the nerve to state publicly that he felt the Robertson Panel and Condon Report were both a whitewash.

Now, as for the die-hard "believers"...

After all the years I've been at this, I've yet to see anything that tells me, with 100% certainty that the phenomenon has an extraterrestrial origin. We simply don't have enough data to support this.

That being said, I've personally had two sightings that were nothing short of awe-inspiring, and despite having over a decade to contemplate both sightings, I still can't state with any certainty what, exactly, it was that I saw.

I know that one was definitely a physical, metallic object, flying with neither wings or chemical thrust.

The other was more amorphous, and appeared to be a highly accelerating light, flying into an orange blob, after which, said orange blob contracted upon itself and disappeared.

I'd love to say that I saw alien spacecraft, but that would be disingenuous at best, and I'd be lying to myself.

All I know is that ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the public consciousness can sufficiently account for what it was that I bore witness to. I have no more proof that the objects I witnessed were extraterrestrial in origin, than I do to say they were teenage mutant flying super squirrels.

Now, deductively, I can state with some certainty what they were NOT, and that is any conventional aircraft that we "lowly commoners" are privy to.

I guess, what chaps my hind-quarters, is that for every voracious skeptic, there is an equally assertive "die hard", who equates every bad CGI video on YouTube with "proof" of "aliens".

Don't even get me started on the abduction phenomenon. While I feel there is some validity to some of the claims, I won't accept that the phenomenon is extraterrestrial in nature, and even beyond that, I have a deep-seated belief that the abduction phenomenon is absolutely and totally rife with dis/misinformation; its waters are, I feel, the muddiest of all, in regards to this topic.

I guess the gist of what I'm saying is that if anyone, ANYONE, comes forth claiming to have all the answers, run, don't walk away from them. If I've learned anything from decades of studying this subject, it's that when someone comes along with a whole host of answers, my BS meter gets its needle buried.

The only people I trust on the subject are the ones who end up with more questions than answers. Mostly because it's mirrored my own experiences in delving into this. I can state, firmly, that I was a die-hard believer in the ETH when I started out, but it seems questions only lead to further unknowns.

The only thing I can state, with any honesty, is that I feel something absolutely extraordinary is occurring; however no hard and fast proof has ever been publicly disseminated.
edit on 3-1-2013 by AllenBishop because: iPhone Typos



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 10:24 AM
link   
ATS is just another front for the government.
As long as you're talking bullcrap it's fine by them.



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by pinobot
ATS is just another front for the government.
As long as you're talking bullcrap it's fine by them.


Do you have any proof of that?



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by pinobot
ATS is just another front for the government.
As long as you're talking bullcrap it's fine by them.


Straw Man argument. A feeble attempt at deflecting the conversation away from the truth.

Please present your facts to backup this statement. Otherwise, it's merely your opinion, and can be treated as such by everyone reading your posts.



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Krakatoa

Originally posted by pinobot
ATS is just another front for the government.
As long as you're talking bullcrap it's fine by them.


Straw Man argument. A feeble attempt at deflecting the conversation away from the truth.

Please present your facts to backup this statement. Otherwise, it's merely your opinion, and can be treated as such by everyone reading your posts.


Agreed. A pointless, irrelevant statement to the topic at hand. Seems like the only intention is to derail the thread.



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Krakatoa
 

What truth are you speaking of?
If the 'truth' is not to the moderators liking it is removed without a reason given.

edit on 3/1/2013 by pinobot because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   
Thank you to the OP for bringing up a topic that has made me very frustrated w/ATS. Just opinion/attack/BS, etc. EVERY SINGTLE THREAD follows a certain, highly predictable pattern. I would like to know what a sociology professor would have to say about this forum-the patterns on the left & the right, the very very few who take the middle way, the ones who say they take the middle way, but are actually highly conservative, & highly protective of their belief systems that keep them safe & confident that they know the "world" & what it entails.

One thing that I've realized is that, among the 99% BS in this forum on the subject of UFOs, I guarantee you that many people glossed over or regected that 1% which is truth, because they cannot accept it, or refuse to accept it- because it may be socially unacceptable, politically incorrect, or downright "weird" (a variety of "socially unacceptable").

I have proof about this subject- that something is happenning, but it is personal proof- it doesn't hold water in any finite way. I can, however tell you that the truth about this subject IS weird, somewhat worrisome, & extraordinarily complex (which is why a forum thread will NEVER solve anything about this subject). It is so complex in fact, that we lack even the basic pre-requisites for beginning to understand the basics behind beginning to understand exactly what is happenning. In other words- right now we are so SURE that the earth is flat that we would kill eachother to defend this truth. I have had my share of experiences of contact, & yet I hold no claim upon understanding what is happening. What makes you think that a divided people, mostly w/ZERO true experience, could even begin to know anything about this subject- it's just pathetic.

I just wish that people would realize that social manipulation runs deep- far deeper than needed to just divide the people into "believers" & "skeptics", yet the ability to experience is the birthright of everyone, you just need the right mindset for it, but as long as you are content to apply labels to yourself as "believer" or "skeptic" that's all you will ever be.

It IS partially up to you- please don't underestimate your true potential!



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by pinobot
 

So you admit you have no proof, typical,lame and boring. tell you this, get your own website, moderate it as you like and I bet that you will have some drive-by say your site is government controlled and removes real input. I have checked out several sites in the past few years, only today I became a member of ATS due to the fact that they are fair and reasonable,(only my second reply ever) I want to know more and more, not only "deny" ignorance but remove some of that void that completely covers our lives. I love a good real debate, and strive to learn more of what interest me and that I have found here, last question... if you really believe what you say, why waste you short life reading inconcieved government inspired intentional propaganda???



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by teslahowitzer
reply to post by pinobot
 

if you really believe what you say, why waste you short life reading inconcieved government inspired intentional propaganda???


Because his only goal was to send the thread off-topic.

Topic Dillution:

"Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator."

I mean, just sayin'.



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by teslahowitzer
 

What i don't understand is why you seem to take this as an attack to your person. So you tried different forum and found what you're looking for in ATS, good for you.
I've looked at many different forums and this is what i found out a long time ago:
On every forum there are groups of people that think that because they are there 'the longest' or have the most stars or the most post or even know someone that knows someone who knows the owner's mother that gives them certain rights. One of those rights is to attack anyone they don't agree with, once that happends his friends join in and agree with the attacker (surprise) You will never ever see these teams disageeing in these threads, they always speak with one voice, but in multiple posts ofcource. A moderator comes along that 'knows' these people, he doesn't know you and because everyone is saying it's a worthless threath you thread is closed or removed. Mission accomplished.
It's bad enough if this happeds because these people are genuine a-holes but as with so many things these thing can be used for (more) evil. Don't think this doesn't happen.
Some years ago i got into some legal trouble trying to figure stuff out and someone who apparently knew what he was talking about told me that i would never find what i was looking for in places like this. Boy, was he right. Don't trust anybody.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by pinobot
 


What is even worse than a worthless thread is a worthwhile thread with a bunch of worthless posts.



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


Fair points there Isaac and I'm sure humility (along with objectivity) is extremely important in UFO research -let's hope 2013 brings more balanced threads that everybody can get involved with.




Originally posted by Pinke

... but many of the things Neil DeGrasse Tyson says in his speaking engagements particularly resonate with me.


As with me Pinke but when it comes to UFOs he's a complete ignoramus.





new topics
top topics
 
93
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join