Are Alien Debunkers trying to Deny Ignorance or Are they trying to Block the Truth?

draknoir2
reply to post by pilotx

 

You will never prove the existence of a paranormal phenomenon through metaphysics and pseudoscience.

You might reinforce your personal convictions or affect the BELIEFS of others, but you will have proved nothing.

I will grant you that that is a valid position to take. But again consider what I said:

AlienView
How can the alien presence be seen if those who would deny even its possibility blind you with rhetoric to the truth of what is occurring and what you are seeing?

You see this is my main criticism of the same debunkers spouting what is often the same type of skepticism when it is not necessry. We all know that without hard physical evidence nothing is proven. On the other hand there is a plethora of anecdotal evidence and much filmed and recorded on radar evidence of UFO craft that appears to be moving in ways indicating intelligent control. Could this be the result, like in the case of some of the better and not hoaxed crop circles of an unknown and yet to be explained natural force and not an ET? Sure it could be BUT until it is explained by hard science it is an unknown and alien force. When talking about aliens we are of course talking about something that is not fully understood and remains to be proven so why do we need debunkers to persiteintly attempt to nit-pick posts on the interesting phenomena of the alien/UFO paradigm?

AlienView
anecdotal evidence and much filmed and recorded on radar evidence of UFO craft that appears to be moving in ways indicating intelligent control.

But there is nothing to indicate that aliens are involved.

like in the case of some of the better and not hoaxed crop circles

What is a "hoaxed" crop circle? All crop circles are man made, so what is a "hoaxed" one?

reply to post by AlienView


The debunkers are either-----Afraid----Stupid-----or being Paid.

The difference between a normal, rational person and a 'believer' is that when something 'out of the ordinary' is presented, a normal person will look for all possible logical and natural explanations for themselves then wait until an 'official' explanation is presented. A believer, on the other hand, will automatically assume this event is of an alien interaction and not for it to be scientifically explained, and then STILL believe it was alien.

This is a no-win situation for both sides.

For example, a UFO=alien to believers, but means 'unexplained' or 'yet to be explained' to the rational. Crop circles=alien to believers (God knows why!) but hoax to the rational. Abduction stories=evidence to believers but something entirely different to the rational. Lights in the sky=alien craft to believers but aircraft, satellites, hoaxes, etc to the rational.

Regarding the post by Chardonnay, that debunkers are either afraid, stupid or paid, I don't think of myself as a debunker but I have researched this subject extensively and I'm certainly not afraid. I couldn't think of a more exciting thing than to find out we are not alone and we could interact with another species and learn from them. I'm not stupid, and would quite happily reflect that insulting accusation. Paid? Well, if I were it would be the easiest money I could ever make – all I'd have to do is be rational, informed, ordinary human being. What's the salary?

hellobruce

All crop circles are man made, so what is a "hoaxed" one?

I don't even believe that.

Fungal colonies, vortices, animals, or other natural explanations for some are perfectly reasonable.


I will agree that there are no "hoaxed" crop circles, as they are all real.

AlienViewI will grant you that that is a valid position to take. But again consider what I said:

AlienView
How can the alien presence be seen if those who would deny even its possibility blind you with rhetoric to the truth of what is occurring and what you are seeing?

You see this is my main criticism of the same debunkers spouting what is often the same type of skepticism when it is not necessry. We all know that without hard physical evidence nothing is proven.

It is pretty clear to me, that many people do NOT know this, otherwise we would not get spuriously titled stories like "PROOF!!11 Aliens amongst us!" without there being actual proof within the article or the threads originating post. It is very important, if UFOlogy is to get the respect that such an important field of study deserves, that accuracy and rigid adherence to a high minimum standard of conduct and discipline are undertaken, to ensure that spurious clap trap does not cloud the issue and prevent UFOlogy from attaining its rightful place amongst other important subjects.

On the other hand there is a plethora of anecdotal evidence and much filmed and recorded on radar evidence of UFO craft that appears to be moving in ways indicating intelligent control. Could this be the result, like in the case of some of the better and not hoaxed crop circles of an unknown and yet to be explained natural force and not an ET? Sure it could be BUT until it is explained by hard science it is an unknown and alien force. When talking about aliens we are of course talking about something that is not fully understood and remains to be proven so why do we need debunkers to persiteintly attempt to nit-pick posts on the interesting phenomena of the alien/UFO paradigm?

Heres the problem. First of all, approaching something from the position of saying that it falls into an alien/UFO paradigm, suggests that those two are intrinsically linked. They are not. Something can be a UFO, and have NO POSSIBLE LINK to alien life, on this, or any other world. Until the object is identified, one cannot make any judgements about it, its contents, its control method, whether it is a probe, or being controlled from within by creatures from outer space, or any other such thing. When a UFO comes along, all you can do is describe its size, shape, colour, apparent material construction, any lights, and so on, and then keep the record in case it is ever seen again.

You cannot make assumptions about how it works, which of a range of probably fictional species (like reptilians, greys, nordics, and all the ones that have legends sprung up from them) might be in control of it or built it, or any other such absolute bloody claptrap.

You call attention to the real problem you have, by calling those who aspire to a proper level of rigor in research on this subject, nit pickers. Are those who operate the LHC nit pickers? Are those who sequence genes nit pickers? No. These are people who come up with ways to bring to light the unknown, and in order to appropriately make use of the resource they represent, the field of UFOlogy and research into alien life, needs to be cleansed of the inconsistencies that have plagued it, and the people who promote their continued insertion into the subject.

AlienView
Could this be the result, like in the case of some of the better and not hoaxed crop circles of an unknown and yet to be explained natural force and not an ET? Sure it could be BUT until it is explained by hard science it is an unknown and alien force.

In science the first place we go when faced with an unknown is not "aliens" it's nature.

That is why it is up to you, not us to prove it's "aliens". Because nature has presented us with some pretty "alien looking" things throughout the history of science all of which turned out to have very natural causes/origins.

JadeStar

AlienView
Could this be the result, like in the case of some of the better and not hoaxed crop circles of an unknown and yet to be explained natural force and not an ET? Sure it could be BUT until it is explained by hard science it is an unknown and alien force.

In science the first place we go when faced with an unknown is not "aliens" it's nature.

That is why it is up to you, not us to prove it's "aliens". Because nature has presented us with some pretty "alien looking" things throughout the history of science all of which turned out to have very natural causes/origins.

edit on 5-12-2013 by AlienView because: (no reason given)

So you say. But this is part of my whole point of starting this post - there is nothing to prove or that can yet be proven if it can be considered alien - Alien by my definition refers to any phenomena which is yet to be proven as natural. If we knew what is was it would not be considered alien - that is until alien life can be proven to exist. So I can see no need to debunk something which is by its very nature speculative and can be called alien and can then be speculated upon until proven natural. By my way of seeing things there may be many phenomena even of terrestrial origin which can still be classified as 'alien' until it can be defined and categorized as natural - and even so called natural phenomena may not always be as natural as it appears. To the science of Galileo's world it was considered quite natural to believe the Sun revolved around the Earth and to the science of the physics before Einstein the atom was indestructible and matter and energy were separate things but Einstein later said it is all energy and mater is only energy at a slower rate of vibration. And until proven otherwise I can speculate that aliens my be entities who are energy based [higher frequency than dense corporeal life forms] and therefor difficult to observe and communicate with.

AlienView

Could this be the result, like in the case of some of the better and not hoaxed crop circles of an unknown and yet to be explained natural force and not an ET? Sure it could be BUT until it is explained by hard science it is an unknown and alien force.

In science the first place we go when faced with an unknown is not "aliens" it's nature.

That is why it is up to you, not us to prove it's "aliens". Because nature has presented us with some pretty "alien looking" things throughout the history of science all of which turned out to have very natural causes/origins.

So you say. But this is part of my whole point of starting this post - there is nothing to prove or that can yet be proven if it can be considered alien - Alien by my definition refers to any phenomena which is yet to be proven as natural.

This is called "Argument from Ignorance, "God of the Gaps" (or in this case "Aliens of the Gaps) fallacy. It is flawed logic.

Why God of the Gaps/Alien of the Gaps fallacy is not the answer to the unknown.

Again, the answer to the unknown does not equal Aliens. That's very ignorant, lazy thinking.

Imagine if Issac Newton, when hit on the head with an apple falling out a tree said, "aha! Aliens!".

None of us would know his name.

Science tends to favor investigation over speculation. The former is encouraged and most of us hate the latter.

reply to post by JadeStar

This is the typical myopic thinking of most debukers. It is truly argument from an ignorant prejudice that has an agenda to exclude other than human intelligence which in itself, can often be questioned. Science itself would never progress if thinkers were to except paradigms of automatic exclusion of possibilities. Many scientists of today have personally expressed the belief that alien life in this universe is probable - and no philosophical rhetoric as to the nature of argument can discount what science sees as more than possible but as probable. It is not for me to prove the existence of alien life - it is for you to disprove it.

AlienView
reply to post by JadeStar

 

This is the typical myopic thinking of most debukers. It is truly argument from an ignorant prejudice that has an agenda to exclude other than human intelligence which in itself, can often be questioned. Science itself would never progress if thinkers were to except paradigms of automatic exclusion of possibilities.

Do you not understand there is a huge difference between saying, 'based on everything we know about the universe alien life should exist" and "there are aliens under every mystery and everything we don't understand is due to aliens.

The difference between you and I is that I say the former, you essentially keep claiming the latter.

Many scientists of today have personally expressed the belief that alien life in this universe is probable -

Number one, it's not a 'belief' its a deduction based upon the available data we have about the universe.

Number two, that gives no weight to your position of aliens behind every dark corner.

and no philosophical rhetoric as to the nature of argument can discount what science sees as more than possible but as probable.

It's a probability, not a certainty.

You do know the difference between the two right? And if (or in my opinion, when) we do find alien life that still will not make your argument from ignorance/aliens of the gap fallacy any truer.

It is not for me to prove the existence of alien life - it is for you to disprove it.

Check my major below. I hope it will be my job to help find it.

And you're wrong. You're the one claiming aliens under every mystery. You make the claim, you put up the evidence. That's how it works in science.

AlienView
But this is part of my whole point of starting this post - there is nothing to prove or that can yet be proven if it can be considered alien - Alien by my definition refers to any phenomena which is yet to be proven as natural. If we knew what is was it would not be considered alien - that is until alien life can be proven to exist. So I can see no need to debunk something which is by its very nature speculative and can be called alien and can then be speculated upon until proven natural. By my way of seeing things there may be many phenomena even of terrestrial origin which can still be classified as 'alien' until it can be defined and categorized as natural - and even so called natural phenomena may not always be as natural as it appears. To the science of Galileo's world it was considered quite natural to believe the Sun revolved around the Earth and to the science of the physics before Einstein the atom was indestructible and matter and energy were separate things but Einstein later said it is all energy and mater is only energy at a slower rate of vibration. And until proven otherwise I can speculate that aliens my be entities who are energy based [higher frequency than dense corporeal life forms] and therefor difficult to observe and communicate with.

Let me stop you here.


Are you saying that whenever you refer to "Alien" you mean it as an adjective and not a noun?

You agree that there is no proof of alien [extraterrestrial] life, but rather suggest that certain phenomena are alien [strange] in nature?

If this is the case then you have no beef with skeptics, as this position is basically true and devoid of belief.

So is it?



By the way, "argumentum ad ignorantiam" or "appeal to ignorance" describes a general logical fallacy. It is not a term devised by skeptics to debunk claims of alien [extraterrestrial] contact, as it dates back to the 17th century.

Now fellow alien/UFO fans please read the last couple of posts as they prove my point:

Are Alien Debunkers trying to Deny Ignorance or Are they trying to Block the Truth?

Rhetoric, and out and out lies is their modus operandi - Notice this ridiculuoos and falicious statement:

Saying I said :"there are aliens under every mystery and everything we don't understand is due to aliens."
this is not misleading - this is a lie!!!

Apparently the 'debunkers' are getting more rabid - And so I ask you again:

Are Alien Debunkers trying to Deny Ignorance or Are they trying to Block the Truth?

There is another post on ATS right now where someone else noticed these trolls and wonders about them,
I too wonder what is their agenda? Are they working for someone with an agenda? Are they paid to kill threads?

Are they trying to hid a real alien presence among us?
And finally are they not in fact aliens themselves? [hyperbole]

"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

-A. Lincoln

reply to post by AlienView

"Hidden agenda"... "paid to kill threads"

Can you just not see how ridiculous and paranoid you sound? You only further hurt your position.

Why don't you use this energy to prove us wrong?

reply to post by AlienView

Apparently the 'debunkers' are getting more rabid - And so I ask you again: Are Alien Debunkers trying to Deny Ignorance or Are they trying to Block the Truth?

Yes absolutely they're trying to block your truth it's a conspiracy I tell ya a conspiracy !

Can you just not see how ridiculous and paranoid you sound?

Finally PROOF! No, not of aliens but of hostile alien debunkers spouting the same old bunk. Yes they have proven the existence of the cult of debunkerism - but we already knew that didn't we?

How about something interesting like aliens, UFOs, reverse engineered technology or crop circles, far more interesting than the debunkers mantras of 'if you can't touch it it don't exist.

"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."
-A. Lincoln
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

“The problem with ID, of course, is that it leaves open the possibility that the intelligence behind nature may have a moral interest in us, having communicated already with humanity in the past, and might try to boss you around in your private affairs.

With hypothetical advanced aliens residing at a safely distant address in the hypothetical multiverse, that is - to the relief of folks like Gribbin, Dawkins and the New Scientist - manifestly not the case.”
― David Klinghoffer

AlienView
How about something interesting like aliens, UFOs, reverse engineered technology or crop circles,

How about much more interesting things like science, astronomy, biology, much more interesting than silly made up stories about aliens, manmade crop circles and lights in the sky.

hellobruce

AlienView
How about something interesting like aliens, UFOs, reverse engineered technology or crop circles,

How about much more interesting things like science, astronomy, biology, much more interesting than silly made up stories about aliens, manmade crop circles and lights in the sky.

Do you know how to read? There are sections on this forum covering all of the subjects you just mentioned - Why don't you go there and add your two cents worth - Or better still why don't you try to contact the moderators of this forum who have sworn to protect the Alien and UFOs section from beings like you and tell them to eliminate the Alien and UFOs section becuase you don't believe in it.

reply to post by AlienView


March out an ET in front of me or have one of their ships land on my front lawn.

Until then aliens are debunked by default.

Considering how much circumstantial evidence there is and we have yet to have solid proof, increases the likelihood that they do not exist or at least not visiting us.

Saying that every government in the world has been so efficient that they can cover up every single piece of solid proof is a bit ridiculous. Something would have come out by now.

Look at the video evidence and pictures we have. Almost all of the are nothing but a bright light or a disk out in the distance.

Out of tens of thousands of photos not one person has been able to capture one of these things in clear view or with an alien wandering around it?

What are the odds on that?

“Yes, there have been ET visitations. There have been crashed craft. There have been material and bodies recovered. There has been a certain amount of reverse engineering that has allowed some of these craft, or some components, to be duplicated. And there is some group of people that may or may not be associated with government at this point that have this knowledge. They have been attempting to conceal this knowledge. People in high level government have very little, if any, valid information about this. It has been the subject of disinformation in order to deflect attention and create confusion so the truth doesn’t come out. ”

― Edgar D. Mitchell, The Way of the Explorer: An Apollo Astronaut's Journey Through the Material and Mystical Worlds