The Hobbyist Debunker Mick West

Mick West is the owner of the website Metabunk.org, which is often cited on this forum.

The pejorative term "shill" has been used to describe him, and I have been doing some reading to try to discern whether or not there is any truth to that.

I don't think he's a paid disinformation agent. I believe him when he says he's retired and has no need to earn a living.

If one clicks on the "About" tab at Metabunk.org, at the bottom of the page linked to there is a link under "More about me," to a thread on his forum entitled "My Personal History of Debunking." I like the candor with which he expressed himself:

. . . Debunking has been a hobby of mine ever since I was young, when I grew up reading a magazine called "The Unexplained - Mysteries of Mind Space and Time", a magazine published in 1980 that told tales of UFOs, ghosts, magic, and strange beasts. For many years these things were causes of great fear to me. . . .

In particular one small book, written for children, really scared me. It contained an account of the Kelly-Hopkinsville Encounter, a tall tale of a farmhouse under attack by little green men. At one point they describe turning around to see a clawed hand reaching down towards them.

But as I grew up and learned more of science, and the way the world actually worked, then these fears dropped away. I did not lose my fascination with these fringe topics, but instead became even more interested in them, particularly in seeking out the most reasonable explanations of strange phenomena. I never fully rid myself of the fear - I'm still not entirely comfortable in the dark, nor in a shower in a empty house (perhaps thanks to watching Psycho at too young an age). I can rationalize it away, I know the fear is an illusion, but it's still there.

www.metabunk.org...

Fear.

Without exception, we can all relate to fear.

I would like to suggest that the role of fear in the modus operandi of Mick West should be a consideration in arguments here on the Geo-Engineering and Chemtrails forum.

I take issue with the fact that he describes debunking as a hobby. That implies that his sole aim is to "debunk" and that facts and objectivity have nothing to do with it.

originally posted by: Flatcoat
I take issue with the fact that he describes debunking as a hobby. That implies that his sole aim is to "debunk" and that facts and objectivity have nothing to do with it.

Actually, he goes to great lengths to use verifiable "facts" when debunking.

And just to put "debunking" into perspective, when something comes along that cannot be "debunked", then it's time to sit up and take notice. I believe in any subject you are interested in, you should try to debunk it, in order to ensure you are dealing with facts you can support and defend.

a reply to: network dude

Well, if you can use verifiable facts to debunk something, then that's fine, That's the way it should be. But that's not what I see when I hear the term "debunker". Personally, I think being a "skeptic" is a good thing, but judging by my time on ATS, a "debunker" is not a skeptic. A debunker will use any method at all to "debunk" a subject including insults, condescension, scorn and outright lies. Sorry, but they're not my favourite internet people....

a reply to: ConnectDots

Mick West is the owner of the website Metabunk.org, which is often cited on this forum.

He is also a member.

Have you been to his site to discuss the problems you have with him, because that would be better than discussing other members here.

a reply to: Flatcoat

I take issue with the fact that he describes debunking as a hobby.

Well if he was getting paid then you would have a problem with that now wouldn't you?

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

You are informing me that he is a member of ATS?

a reply to: ConnectDots

I would like to suggest that the role of fear in the modus operandi of Mick West should be a consideration in arguments here on the Geo-Engineering and Chemtrails forum.

And yours modus operandi should be question when you quote the Mr. Wigington and push his fear mongering as truth.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Flatcoat

I take issue with the fact that he describes debunking as a hobby.

Well if he was getting paid then you would have a problem with that now wouldn't you?

What, you mean like James Randi ?

a reply to: ConnectDots

He reminds me of me. I read the same books by flashlight, trembling under the covers. I don't know where I got them, my parents would never allow them in the house.

I ate those books up, most of which were written Enquirer style, relegated by the public to sic fi, horror genre.

Because I wanted to know the truth. Thats all debunking is, trying to find the truth about things and events. Finding the truth is about dispelling the here-say, myths, mis / disinformation.

If something is true it will stand up to scrutiny. A process of elimination, ruling out what it can't be until you find out what it is.

originally posted by: network dude

Actually, he goes to great lengths to use verifiable "facts" when debunking.

What meaning are you conveying with your quotation marks?

a reply to: Flatcoat

What, you mean like James Randi ?

What does he have to do with the question asked?

And nobody ever received his million dollars did they, so he was never proven wrong now was he?

originally posted by: intrptr
Thats all debunking is, trying to find the truth about things and events.

Investigating is trying to find the truth.

Debunking is trying to make something not true in order to dispel fear.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

My hobby is restoring antique furniture....but I still get paid for it.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

being a member here doesn't stop people from talking about lear, marrs ventra plus a few others now does it.
having a website that deals with the topics discussed here leaves ones credibility open for discussion, and being a member here shouldn't change that.

originally posted by: ConnectDots

originally posted by: intrptr
Thats all debunking is, trying to find the truth about things and events.

Investigating is trying to find the truth.

Debunking is trying to make something not true in order to dispel fear.

Google is your friend when you don't know what words mean.


Just open up google and put the word debunk in and you have your definition.

Its absolutely not trying to make something not true.

a reply to: InhaleExhale

One always has to read between the lines when researching any topic.

There is always a scientific argument that can be made for anything under the sun.

Everything hinges on what is left out of the argument. Or misinterpreted. For a reason.

originally posted by: ConnectDots

originally posted by: intrptr
Thats all debunking is, trying to find the truth about things and events.

Investigating is trying to find the truth.

Debunking is trying to make something not true in order to dispel fear.

Debunking is also investigating and uncovering falsified images or stories… investigation finds the chink in the armor of lies.

a reply to: intrptr

In my opinion, the connotation of the word "debunk" screams agenda, emotional issue, a lack of objectivity.

a reply to: ConnectDots

How is his wanting to dispel fear any more a handicap or any more suspect than the conspiracy hobbyists that want proof of their beliefs?