The NYC Oct. 13th balloon sighting and the Oct. 15th skydiver sighting have had HUGE responses and energy put into them. This is showing me that
ATSers are excitable at the moment and eager to further their individual views, be they debunkers or believers, but have perhaps lost sight of what it
means to be an investigator and seeker of truth.
Skepticism is essential for living one's life without being mentally enslaved, but I feel as though many on ATS, especially recently, are preaching
skepticism but practicing a subjective perspective. I also think that some people misconstrue what skepticism actually is for scientific
Skepticism means thinking objectively and questioning established/mainstream/somebody else's ideas. If you believe UFOs are real, you can still be a
skeptic just as if you believe they are not real. Skepticism is just considering whatever the situation may be with logical thought processes, and
questioning any beliefs or views one might have.
When you approach the UFO phenomenon with *healthy* skepticism, that means you do not look at any UFO sighting/video/photo/report with ANY intent of
showing that it was a "real" or fake UFO. You would approach the incident without any attachment to the result of your investigation, that is to say
you would deny yourself any and all biases, hopes, and fears. If you approach the UFO phenomenon with a bias towards UFOs being legitimate ET craft,
then you will be searching for that explanation in every video or photo. If you approach UFOs with a debunking attitude, then you will be searching
for a non-ET explanation for every sighting. Neither of these perspectives are worth anything when it comes to *proof*! Doubting the validity of a UFO
report is very different from doubting the existence of ET/UFOs.
It's just as bad to shout "ET!" for every video of a light in the sky as it is to shout "SWAMP GAS!" for every video. Debunkers and Believers both
have agendas (disproving or proving that the UFO phenomenon is real and/or ET in nature) and both groups are often unfortunately fanatical,
disregarding the real evidence in favor of exploiting others' ignorance to push their agenda. Since Oct 13th, one partition of ATS is going crazy with
claims of ET or RC kites while the other claims the NORAD guy's predictions were accurate. Both seem to choose to support their agenda (proving or
disproving ET/UFOs) regardless of the evidence.
I'd like to post the definitions of a few words and ideas here so we all might be able to better understand what it is to be rational and a true
- informal ( tr ) to expose the pretensions or falseness of, esp by ridicule
- to expose or excoriate (a claim, assertion, sentiment, etc.) as being pretentious, false, or exaggerated
- Synonyms of debunk: disparage, ridicule, lampoon
To debunk is to show something to be false REGARDLESS OF ITS ACTUAL TRUTHFULNESS.
- to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so
To believe in something is to hold the view that something is true/reliable/existing without proof and REGARDLESS OF ITS ACTUAL TRUTHFULNESS.
- (in classical oratory) the art of influencing the thought and conduct of an audience
- (in writing or speech) the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast
Rhetoric is the art of persuading somebody that a certain position/viewpoint/mindset is better or worse than other positions regardless of the
truthfulness of said positions.
- not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion
- belonging to, proceeding from, or relating to the mind of the thinking subject and not the nature of the object being considered
- of, relating to, or emanating from a person's emotions, prejudices, etc
- a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual
- a person who mistrusts people, ideas, etc, in general
Notice that skepticism can be objective, or subjective. A skeptic might mistrust every single bit of information which he/she encounters, regardless
of the apparent support for that information. This is subjective thinking. It is not rational or logically sound to be a skeptic in this sense. An
objectively oriented skeptic would question anything which is supposed to be factual in nature, they would seek valid support/evidence for any claim
regarding matters of fact. Matters of fact/factual data are things which can be definitively said to be true or false according to epistemological
methods. So a healthy skepticism is basically objective thinking. Not baseless doubt.
Many people here are in the Debunker or Believer category. Neither of these types of views are good for the logical investigator as they involve faith
in something without necessarily having any evidence for it. Hope we can get this forum back on track soon.
DENY IGNORANCE does NOT mean one should deny that you are ignorant, that doesn't get anybody anywhere, especially themselves! DENY IGNORANCE means to
fight the lack of knowledge in this world using objective thinking, logic, and our collective resources to improve our reality.
and some comments for a couple notable individuals:
Maybe...Maybe Not, and Phage seem to do their best to maintain sanity around here, often without avail. Regardless, I am very appreciative for the
large amount of time they dedicate to keeping ATS's collective head level.
Phage - Despite having a skilled and perceptive eye for UFO video analysis, you're a huge ass most of the time and that makes it really hard for your
average ATSer to understand skepticism. They see you as a condescending douchebag debunking everything left and right and think you're not actually
being objective, they see you as thinking you're better than everybody else and your word is final and nothing else matters. The information and
logical progression in your posts is certainly very sound, but nobody wants to listen to a douchebag, and people have a hard time filtering the
personal attacks in your posts from the actual info. I have a hard time myself reading your posts and getting anything useful out of them because you
are very demeaning. I know that many question your motives here because of the attitude you have in your posts. I hope you can make progress in this
area and become more personable, it would really help the insanity level here. Trying to offer you some constructive criticism from a non-fanatical
perspective so that your knowledge might be better spread.
edit on 17-10-2010 by tetsuo because: corrected date of skydiver sighting to oct