Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,622 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 773,258
Pageviews Today: 964,774Threads Today: 143Posts Today: 2,904
07:03 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

"Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning

 
Kai (VALIS)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 21572327
United States
08/23/2013 12:56 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
"Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The term "skeptic" refers to someone who continuously questions the nature of reality and the validity of suppositions put forth by, not just authorities, but anyone making claims as to the "inherent" nature of things. Somewhere along the way, the word's definition seems to have changed to mean: referring to a person or party who accepts "established" facts in the face of questions. This is literally the opposite of being skeptical. It is not skepticism that leads one to doubt the reality of a UFO sighting based on the fact that the United States Air Force explains it away by claiming the witnesses viewed LUU2 illumination flares. It is skepticism that leads one to question why said flares did not descend as flares should. It is skepticism that leads one to ask the question, "Why did the Air Force state that they had no idea what was going on and then retract their statement the following day?" It is skepticism that brings one's attention to the multiple radar confirmations of what appears to be an enormous craft in the air where the "flares" were spotted. It is the true skeptic who wonders why no one has paid attention to the blatant lapses in logic on the part of the explainer. We (the so-called "conspiracy theorists) are the true skeptics.

Last Edited by Kai (VALIS) on 08/23/2013 01:11 PM
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Dionysian Fractaliscious

User ID: 44798935
08/23/2013 01:04 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The term "skeptic" refers to someone who continuously questions the nature of reality and the validity of suppositions put forth by, not just authorities, but anyone making claims as to the "inherent" nature of things. Somewhere along the way, the word's definition seems to have changed to mean: referring to a person or party who accepts "established" facts in the face of questions. This is literally the opposite of being skeptical. It is not skepticism that leads one to doubt the reality of a UFO sighting based on the fact that the United States Air Force explains it away by claiming the witnesses viewed LUU2 illumination flares. It is skepticism that leads one to question why said flares did not descend as flares should. It is skepticism that leads one to ask the question, "Why did the Air Force state that they had no idea what was going on and then retracted their statement the following day?" It is skepticism that brings one's attention to the multiple radar confirmations of what appears to be an enormous craft in the air where the "flares" were spotted. It is the true skeptic who wonders why no one has paid attention to the blatant lapses in logic on the part of the explainer. We (the so-called "conspiracy theorists) are the true skeptics.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


As the nature of reality is transition through supposedly novel states; Would this not presuppose the need for skepticism to be an eternal state erasing the biases of positionality and constancy?
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 21572327
United States
08/23/2013 01:06 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The term "skeptic" refers to someone who continuously questions the nature of reality and the validity of suppositions put forth by, not just authorities, but anyone making claims as to the "inherent" nature of things. Somewhere along the way, the word's definition seems to have changed to mean: referring to a person or party who accepts "established" facts in the face of questions. This is literally the opposite of being skeptical. It is not skepticism that leads one to doubt the reality of a UFO sighting based on the fact that the United States Air Force explains it away by claiming the witnesses viewed LUU2 illumination flares. It is skepticism that leads one to question why said flares did not descend as flares should. It is skepticism that leads one to ask the question, "Why did the Air Force state that they had no idea what was going on and then retracted their statement the following day?" It is skepticism that brings one's attention to the multiple radar confirmations of what appears to be an enormous craft in the air where the "flares" were spotted. It is the true skeptic who wonders why no one has paid attention to the blatant lapses in logic on the part of the explainer. We (the so-called "conspiracy theorists) are the true skeptics.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


As the nature of reality is transition through supposedly novel states; Would this not presuppose the need for skepticism to be an eternal state erasing the biases of positionality and constancy?
 Quoting: Dionysian Fractaliscious


Absolutely. Stay skeptical.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Dionysian Fractaliscious

User ID: 44798935
08/23/2013 01:14 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The term "skeptic" refers to someone who continuously questions the nature of reality and the validity of suppositions put forth by, not just authorities, but anyone making claims as to the "inherent" nature of things. Somewhere along the way, the word's definition seems to have changed to mean: referring to a person or party who accepts "established" facts in the face of questions. This is literally the opposite of being skeptical. It is not skepticism that leads one to doubt the reality of a UFO sighting based on the fact that the United States Air Force explains it away by claiming the witnesses viewed LUU2 illumination flares. It is skepticism that leads one to question why said flares did not descend as flares should. It is skepticism that leads one to ask the question, "Why did the Air Force state that they had no idea what was going on and then retracted their statement the following day?" It is skepticism that brings one's attention to the multiple radar confirmations of what appears to be an enormous craft in the air where the "flares" were spotted. It is the true skeptic who wonders why no one has paid attention to the blatant lapses in logic on the part of the explainer. We (the so-called "conspiracy theorists) are the true skeptics.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


As the nature of reality is transition through supposedly novel states; Would this not presuppose the need for skepticism to be an eternal state erasing the biases of positionality and constancy?
 Quoting: Dionysian Fractaliscious


Absolutely. Stay skeptical.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Surf to live. ;)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14676125
United States
08/23/2013 01:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
history is all lies, anything they say is a lie, every word...

no skepticism needed, when you are looking at lies and alibis
Dionysian Fractaliscious

User ID: 44798935
08/23/2013 01:18 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
history is all lies, anything they say is a lie, every word...

no skepticism needed, when you are looking at lies and alibis
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14676125


History is propaganda to bolster cycles and the systems which require cyclical redundancy over thought or connection.

Most people need this redundancy as not to be frozen in fear.

Most should not bite the warm teat that feeds them.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 16453458
United States
08/23/2013 01:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
FUCKING EXCELLENT THREAD.

I used to be skeptic as fuck, until I had my ass literally handed to me in certain ways. But you cannot "prove" any of that shit, even to your own family. Especially when they only care about money or what is on TV.

Sad.


Proof is in the pudding. And I'm eatin' it. Tasty!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 01:20 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The term "skeptic" refers to someone who continuously questions the nature of reality and the validity of suppositions put forth by, not just authorities, but anyone making claims as to the "inherent" nature of things. Somewhere along the way, the word's definition seems to have changed to mean: referring to a person or party who accepts "established" facts in the face of questions. This is literally the opposite of being skeptical. It is not skepticism that leads one to doubt the reality of a UFO sighting based on the fact that the United States Air Force explains it away by claiming the witnesses viewed LUU2 illumination flares. It is skepticism that leads one to question why said flares did not descend as flares should. It is skepticism that leads one to ask the question, "Why did the Air Force state that they had no idea what was going on and then retract their statement the following day?" It is skepticism that brings one's attention to the multiple radar confirmations of what appears to be an enormous craft in the air where the "flares" were spotted. It is the true skeptic who wonders why no one has paid attention to the blatant lapses in logic on the part of the explainer. We (the so-called "conspiracy theorists) are the true skeptics.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Problem is there is no record of claimed radar sighting
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 21572327
United States
08/23/2013 01:25 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The term "skeptic" refers to someone who continuously questions the nature of reality and the validity of suppositions put forth by, not just authorities, but anyone making claims as to the "inherent" nature of things. Somewhere along the way, the word's definition seems to have changed to mean: referring to a person or party who accepts "established" facts in the face of questions. This is literally the opposite of being skeptical. It is not skepticism that leads one to doubt the reality of a UFO sighting based on the fact that the United States Air Force explains it away by claiming the witnesses viewed LUU2 illumination flares. It is skepticism that leads one to question why said flares did not descend as flares should. It is skepticism that leads one to ask the question, "Why did the Air Force state that they had no idea what was going on and then retract their statement the following day?" It is skepticism that brings one's attention to the multiple radar confirmations of what appears to be an enormous craft in the air where the "flares" were spotted. It is the true skeptic who wonders why no one has paid attention to the blatant lapses in logic on the part of the explainer. We (the so-called "conspiracy theorists) are the true skeptics.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Problem is there is no record of claimed radar sighting
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Oh, yeah?

[link to www.nicap.org]

This is just one example out of many. Look into the RB-47 UFO sighting of 1957 for more multiple radar confirmation evidence.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 34998081
Australia
08/23/2013 01:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The term "skeptic" refers to someone who continuously questions the nature of reality and the validity of suppositions put forth by, not just authorities, but anyone making claims as to the "inherent" nature of things. Somewhere along the way, the word's definition seems to have changed to mean: referring to a person or party who accepts "established" facts in the face of questions. This is literally the opposite of being skeptical. It is not skepticism that leads one to doubt the reality of a UFO sighting based on the fact that the United States Air Force explains it away by claiming the witnesses viewed LUU2 illumination flares. It is skepticism that leads one to question why said flares did not descend as flares should. It is skepticism that leads one to ask the question, "Why did the Air Force state that they had no idea what was going on and then retract their statement the following day?" It is skepticism that brings one's attention to the multiple radar confirmations of what appears to be an enormous craft in the air where the "flares" were spotted. It is the true skeptic who wonders why no one has paid attention to the blatant lapses in logic on the part of the explainer. We (the so-called "conspiracy theorists) are the true skeptics.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)



clappa
5 stars OP
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 21572327
United States
08/23/2013 01:30 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
...or the '94 Holland, Michigan radar confirmation case...


- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45093183
United States
08/23/2013 01:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
Great read, OP! However, I kind of think skepticism just defines your position relative to the topic at hand.

In a two way conversation, can't I be skeptical of the official line I'm being told, while the other person is skeptical of my belief that I am being lied to?

Provocative thread!
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 21572327
United States
08/23/2013 01:40 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
Great read, OP! However, I kind of think skepticism just defines your position relative to the topic at hand.

In a two way conversation, can't I be skeptical of the official line I'm being told, while the other person is skeptical of my belief that I am being lied to?

Provocative thread!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45093183


Thanks. But skepticism is merely a noun defining a person's propensity to question something beyond its face value. Someone cannot really be skeptical of your "belief." They could be skeptical of an opposing theory, however. But this would entail doing some thinking and research to uncover why said theory may not be valid.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 02:20 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
[link to www.ufoevidence.org]

This has become the UFO radar evidence thread. Sorry. A certain non-skeptical inividual (above) set me off.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 02:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The term "skeptic" refers to someone who continuously questions the nature of reality and the validity of suppositions put forth by, not just authorities, but anyone making claims as to the "inherent" nature of things. Somewhere along the way, the word's definition seems to have changed to mean: referring to a person or party who accepts "established" facts in the face of questions. This is literally the opposite of being skeptical. It is not skepticism that leads one to doubt the reality of a UFO sighting based on the fact that the United States Air Force explains it away by claiming the witnesses viewed LUU2 illumination flares. It is skepticism that leads one to question why said flares did not descend as flares should. It is skepticism that leads one to ask the question, "Why did the Air Force state that they had no idea what was going on and then retract their statement the following day?" It is skepticism that brings one's attention to the multiple radar confirmations of what appears to be an enormous craft in the air where the "flares" were spotted. It is the true skeptic who wonders why no one has paid attention to the blatant lapses in logic on the part of the explainer. We (the so-called "conspiracy theorists) are the true skeptics.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Problem is there is no record of claimed radar sighting
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Oh, yeah?

[link to www.nicap.org]

This is just one example out of many. Look into the RB-47 UFO sighting of 1957 for more multiple radar confirmation evidence.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


You are mixing individual accounts of sightings

Your flare comment was obviously about the so called Arizona lights.

There was much talk about radar sightings of a "huge craft"

There appears to be no such radar evidence.

There was also much talk when it became obvious that it was flares that there was a different earlier sighting documented with many pictures and videos but none of those have been located either.

Are you suggesting that there were LUU2 flares in 1960s?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 02:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
[link to www.ufoevidence.org]

This has become the UFO radar evidence thread. Sorry. A certain non-skeptical inividual (above) set me off.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


I am always a skeptic and I don't take sides in what I am and am not skeptical about
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 02:33 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The term "skeptic" refers to someone who continuously questions the nature of reality and the validity of suppositions put forth by, not just authorities, but anyone making claims as to the "inherent" nature of things. Somewhere along the way, the word's definition seems to have changed to mean: referring to a person or party who accepts "established" facts in the face of questions. This is literally the opposite of being skeptical. It is not skepticism that leads one to doubt the reality of a UFO sighting based on the fact that the United States Air Force explains it away by claiming the witnesses viewed LUU2 illumination flares. It is skepticism that leads one to question why said flares did not descend as flares should. It is skepticism that leads one to ask the question, "Why did the Air Force state that they had no idea what was going on and then retract their statement the following day?" It is skepticism that brings one's attention to the multiple radar confirmations of what appears to be an enormous craft in the air where the "flares" were spotted. It is the true skeptic who wonders why no one has paid attention to the blatant lapses in logic on the part of the explainer. We (the so-called "conspiracy theorists) are the true skeptics.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Problem is there is no record of claimed radar sighting
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Oh, yeah?

[link to www.nicap.org]

This is just one example out of many. Look into the RB-47 UFO sighting of 1957 for more multiple radar confirmation evidence.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


You are mixing individual accounts of sightings

Your flare comment was obviously about the so called Arizona lights.

There was much talk about radar sightings of a "huge craft"

There appears to be no such radar evidence.

There was also much talk when it became obvious that it was flares that there was a different earlier sighting documented with many pictures and videos but none of those have been located either.

Are you suggesting that there were LUU2 flares in 1960s?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


What I was "obviously" doing was creating a gestalt of typical UFO sighting/Air Force response situations. The Arizona Lights incident was arguably the most well known incident involving illumination flares as a cover story. However, the Kokomo lights could just as well fit into this category.

[link to www.journalgazette.net]

[link to www.ufoinfo.com]
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 02:34 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The Air Force (again) changed their story in the days following the above event.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 02:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
...


Problem is there is no record of claimed radar sighting
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Oh, yeah?

[link to www.nicap.org]

This is just one example out of many. Look into the RB-47 UFO sighting of 1957 for more multiple radar confirmation evidence.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


You are mixing individual accounts of sightings

Your flare comment was obviously about the so called Arizona lights.

There was much talk about radar sightings of a "huge craft"

There appears to be no such radar evidence.

There was also much talk when it became obvious that it was flares that there was a different earlier sighting documented with many pictures and videos but none of those have been located either.

Are you suggesting that there were LUU2 flares in 1960s?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


What I was "obviously" doing was creating a gestalt of typical UFO sighting/Air Force response situations. The Arizona Lights incident was arguably the most well known incident involving illumination flares as a cover story. However, the Kokomo lights could just as well fit into this category.

[link to www.journalgazette.net]

[link to www.ufoinfo.com]
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


What exactly was changed about kokomo?

"I got to the VP at the point, just west of Kokomo and looked north one last time. Above the field in between a couple of houses, two UFO's appeared together, much lower than before and much closer. I would say they were less than 100 yards away. This time, however, they had "tails." They had 4 to 5 yellow-orange colored 4-pointed star-shaped lights trailing behind each of them and they appeared to be dancing towards the highway."

Ever see an afterburner open after dark?

Why is the army story so incredible to you?

And why do you have a religious belief in UFOs?

Not arguing if there are or aren't but I am arguing that there is to date no credible tangible evidence of them being aliens
Fret Wiz
Give Away the Stone

User ID: 45093183
United States
08/23/2013 02:41 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
Great read, OP! However, I kind of think skepticism just defines your position relative to the topic at hand.

In a two way conversation, can't I be skeptical of the official line I'm being told, while the other person is skeptical of my belief that I am being lied to?

Provocative thread!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45093183


Thanks. But skepticism is merely a noun defining a person's propensity to question something beyond its face value. Someone cannot really be skeptical of your "belief." They could be skeptical of an opposing theory, however. But this would entail doing some thinking and research to uncover why said theory may not be valid.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Hey, OP. That was me posting from my mobile. I certainly didn't mean to come across as a non-skeptic, I mean I am on GLP, after all.

Your OP just got me to thinking about the differences in Skepticism, Skeptical and "being a skeptic", which I think you effectively nailed as euqating to a "debunker" (or maybe I did that after reading).

The word has been hijacked by all these History Channel, etc shows that introduce "bigfoot/ufo/haarp skeptics" who are always there to debunk, and the word itself is changing in the public's perception.

I 5*'d you initially, was just hoping for some discourse on the terms themselves and various connotations.

Okay, back to your UFO evidence :)

hf
Fret Wiz

fw_calvin_sig

"Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it."
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 02:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
...


Oh, yeah?

[link to www.nicap.org]

This is just one example out of many. Look into the RB-47 UFO sighting of 1957 for more multiple radar confirmation evidence.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


You are mixing individual accounts of sightings

Your flare comment was obviously about the so called Arizona lights.

There was much talk about radar sightings of a "huge craft"

There appears to be no such radar evidence.

There was also much talk when it became obvious that it was flares that there was a different earlier sighting documented with many pictures and videos but none of those have been located either.

Are you suggesting that there were LUU2 flares in 1960s?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


What I was "obviously" doing was creating a gestalt of typical UFO sighting/Air Force response situations. The Arizona Lights incident was arguably the most well known incident involving illumination flares as a cover story. However, the Kokomo lights could just as well fit into this category.

[link to www.journalgazette.net]

[link to www.ufoinfo.com]
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


What exactly was changed about kokomo?

"I got to the VP at the point, just west of Kokomo and looked north one last time. Above the field in between a couple of houses, two UFO's appeared together, much lower than before and much closer. I would say they were less than 100 yards away. This time, however, they had "tails." They had 4 to 5 yellow-orange colored 4-pointed star-shaped lights trailing behind each of them and they appeared to be dancing towards the highway."

Ever see an afterburner open after dark?

Why is the army story so incredible to you?

And why do you have a religious belief in UFOs?

Not arguing if there are or aren't but I am arguing that there is to date no credible tangible evidence of them being aliens
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I should ask why is it so improtant to you that there be aliens from other worlds?

It is impossible to view any evidence in an unbiased fashion if you really really want the outcome to fall one way or another.

It doesn't matter to me and hasn't for a very long time since when I was much younger I realized that I too wanted it to be that way.

When I evened the playing field all the events that I considered the very best events faded to the point of maybe but not very likely.
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 21572327
United States
08/23/2013 02:50 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
...


Oh, yeah?

[link to www.nicap.org]

This is just one example out of many. Look into the RB-47 UFO sighting of 1957 for more multiple radar confirmation evidence.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


You are mixing individual accounts of sightings

Your flare comment was obviously about the so called Arizona lights.

There was much talk about radar sightings of a "huge craft"

There appears to be no such radar evidence.

There was also much talk when it became obvious that it was flares that there was a different earlier sighting documented with many pictures and videos but none of those have been located either.

Are you suggesting that there were LUU2 flares in 1960s?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


What I was "obviously" doing was creating a gestalt of typical UFO sighting/Air Force response situations. The Arizona Lights incident was arguably the most well known incident involving illumination flares as a cover story. However, the Kokomo lights could just as well fit into this category.

[link to www.journalgazette.net]

[link to www.ufoinfo.com]
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


What exactly was changed about kokomo?

"I got to the VP at the point, just west of Kokomo and looked north one last time. Above the field in between a couple of houses, two UFO's appeared together, much lower than before and much closer. I would say they were less than 100 yards away. This time, however, they had "tails." They had 4 to 5 yellow-orange colored 4-pointed star-shaped lights trailing behind each of them and they appeared to be dancing towards the highway."

Ever see an afterburner open after dark?

Why is the army story so incredible to you?

And why do you have a religious belief in UFOs?

Not arguing if there are or aren't but I am arguing that there is to date no credible tangible evidence of them being aliens
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


One cannot believe or disbelieve in UFO's. There are unidentifies objects that have been sighted and documented on radar for over 70 years (more before there were instruments to observe them). They exist. The Air Force has admitted this much. ATIC did a running study (officially) up to 1973 and has been proven to STILL investigate these phenomena. They are real. The question we should be asking is, "what are they?" I don't have an answer but I can say that the extraterrestrial or extra dimensional hypotheses are the most likely.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 21572327
United States
08/23/2013 02:51 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
Great read, OP! However, I kind of think skepticism just defines your position relative to the topic at hand.

In a two way conversation, can't I be skeptical of the official line I'm being told, while the other person is skeptical of my belief that I am being lied to?

Provocative thread!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45093183


Thanks. But skepticism is merely a noun defining a person's propensity to question something beyond its face value. Someone cannot really be skeptical of your "belief." They could be skeptical of an opposing theory, however. But this would entail doing some thinking and research to uncover why said theory may not be valid.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Hey, OP. That was me posting from my mobile. I certainly didn't mean to come across as a non-skeptic, I mean I am on GLP, after all.

Your OP just got me to thinking about the differences in Skepticism, Skeptical and "being a skeptic", which I think you effectively nailed as euqating to a "debunker" (or maybe I did that after reading).

The word has been hijacked by all these History Channel, etc shows that introduce "bigfoot/ufo/haarp skeptics" who are always there to debunk, and the word itself is changing in the public's perception.

I 5*'d you initially, was just hoping for some discourse on the terms themselves and various connotations.

Okay, back to your UFO evidence :)

hf
 Quoting: Fret Wiz


Yes! Debunkers have most certainly hijacked the term "skeptic." Good call.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 21572327
United States
08/23/2013 02:55 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
Read Blue Book and then tell me someone wasn't deliberately drawing attention away from these phenomena.

Last Edited by Kai (VALIS) on 08/23/2013 02:55 PM
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 02:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
...


You are mixing individual accounts of sightings

Your flare comment was obviously about the so called Arizona lights.

There was much talk about radar sightings of a "huge craft"

There appears to be no such radar evidence.

There was also much talk when it became obvious that it was flares that there was a different earlier sighting documented with many pictures and videos but none of those have been located either.

Are you suggesting that there were LUU2 flares in 1960s?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


What I was "obviously" doing was creating a gestalt of typical UFO sighting/Air Force response situations. The Arizona Lights incident was arguably the most well known incident involving illumination flares as a cover story. However, the Kokomo lights could just as well fit into this category.

[link to www.journalgazette.net]

[link to www.ufoinfo.com]
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


What exactly was changed about kokomo?

"I got to the VP at the point, just west of Kokomo and looked north one last time. Above the field in between a couple of houses, two UFO's appeared together, much lower than before and much closer. I would say they were less than 100 yards away. This time, however, they had "tails." They had 4 to 5 yellow-orange colored 4-pointed star-shaped lights trailing behind each of them and they appeared to be dancing towards the highway."

Ever see an afterburner open after dark?

Why is the army story so incredible to you?

And why do you have a religious belief in UFOs?

Not arguing if there are or aren't but I am arguing that there is to date no credible tangible evidence of them being aliens
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


One cannot believe or disbelieve in UFO's. There are unidentifies objects that have been sighted and documented on radar for over 70 years (more before there were instruments to observe them). They exist. The Air Force has admitted this much. ATIC did a running study (officially) up to 1973 and has been proven to STILL investigate these phenomena. They are real. The question we should be asking is, "what are they?" I don't have an answer but I can say that the extraterrestrial or extra dimensional hypotheses are the most likely.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Why are they "the most likely"?

And do you know just how few pieces of radar evidence there actually are?

The UFO business has been promoting and exaggerating such things since the first sightings

The fact is that what people constantly report as UFOs are pretty much invariably exactly like what has appeared earlier in movies.

Do the research......I have.

And what you are describing appears to be more akin to UAPs which are very different.

Look up the difference as they can both apply to some events but they are mostly one or the other
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 02:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
You are carrying on a conversation with someone who was a researcher for years until the fruitcakes started showing up and making UFOs a religion and circus.
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 03:10 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
You are carrying on a conversation with someone who was a researcher for years until the fruitcakes started showing up and making UFOs a religion and circus.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I am aware of the differences between objects and so-called aerial phenomena. And you are mistaken. There is loads of valid research. Look into James McDonald, Donald Keyhoe, Edward Ruppelt, etc....look into the history of national security and how it evolved almost solely because of the need for restriction of information regarding UFO's. Enough military and intelligence employees with enough credentials (along with scientists like McDonald) have offered mountains of evidence. I will agree with you on one point: we currently are faced with an almost total lack of legitimate research. But this seems to be the direct result of the military/industrial complex along with debunking programs like the Condon Report.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 03:15 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
...by the way...what did you research? Specifically? I am interested. I have published a few UFO articles myself...but mainly dealing with the Air Force's lies.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 03:23 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning

- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 03:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
You are carrying on a conversation with someone who was a researcher for years until the fruitcakes started showing up and making UFOs a religion and circus.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I am aware of the differences between objects and so-called aerial phenomena. And you are mistaken. There is loads of valid research. Look into James McDonald, Donald Keyhoe, Edward Ruppelt, etc....look into the history of national security and how it evolved almost solely because of the need for restriction of information regarding UFO's. Enough military and intelligence employees with enough credentials (along with scientists like McDonald) have offered mountains of evidence. I will agree with you on one point: we currently are faced with an almost total lack of legitimate research. But this seems to be the direct result of the military/industrial complex along with debunking programs like the Condon Report.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


[link to en.wikipedia.org]

"This article contains weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed."

""Weasel words" are statements which appear to assert something but subtly imply something different, opposite, or stronger in the way they are made. A common form of weasel wording is through vague attribution, where a statement is dressed with authority with no substantial basis. Phrases such as those above present the appearance of support for statements but can deny the reader the opportunity to assess the source of the viewpoint. They may disguise a biased view. Claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe, and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proved should be clearly attributed.[6] However, views which are properly attributed to a reliable source may use similar expressions if they accurately represent the opinions of the source. Reliable sources may analyze and interpret, but we, as editors, cannot do so ourselves, since that would be original research or would violate the neutral point of view. Equally, editorial irony and damning with faint praise have no place in Wikipedia articles."
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 03:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning

 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


All I see are claims with zero sources for any of them.

News