Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Beleive It Or Not, A Sceptic Is Someone Who:


  • Please log in to reply
111 replies to this topic

#76    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 28 November 2012 - 02:45 PM

View PostJGirl, on 27 November 2012 - 10:12 PM, said:

i think it goes like this
the gullible
the heartfelt believers
the fence sitters
the skeptical
the debunkers

at UM we have an abundance of all of these types, but the debunkers are often mistaken for skeptics and the heartfelt believers are often accused of being gullible (usually by the debunkers)
i sit between fence sitter and skeptic usually.
ok if none of that made sense, sorry. it did when i typed it lol

You forgot one important category--the free thinkers.  Yes, if strict definitions were used they might be included with skeptics, but the way the language has been butchered in today's political environment, some describe themselves as skeptics even though they believe every press release issued by the government.


#77    JGirl

JGirl

    Pajama Goddess

  • Member
  • 9,016 posts
  • Joined:23 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:British Columbia Canada

Posted 28 November 2012 - 03:35 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 28 November 2012 - 02:45 PM, said:

You forgot one important category--the free thinkers.  Yes, if strict definitions were used they might be included with skeptics, but the way the language has been butchered in today's political environment, some describe themselves as skeptics even though they believe every press release issued by the government.
i'm not familiar with what a 'freethinker' is.


#78    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:46 PM

View PostJGirl, on 28 November 2012 - 03:35 PM, said:

i'm not familiar with what a 'freethinker' is.

At the beginning of the last century, a free thinker was a person who did not practice organized religion.  He or she did not buy into all the superstition and dogma of organized religion.  Susan Jacoby wrote a book about it, subtitled A History Of American Secularism, in 2004, and it was quite good.

A freethinker is a person who thinks for herself or himself.  He does not have others do his thinking for him, whether "others" be the church and its priests, or the government and its priests.


#79    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,312 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 28 November 2012 - 08:04 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 28 November 2012 - 07:46 PM, said:

A freethinker is a person who thinks for herself or himself.  He does not have others do his thinking for him, whether "others" be the church and its priests, or the government and its priests.

You are excluded as a "freethinker" because you allowed yourself to be duped by conspiracy websites whose main purpose is to spew lies, misinformation, and disinformation. :yes:

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#80    Insaniac

Insaniac

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,060 posts
  • Joined:11 Dec 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 28 November 2012 - 08:59 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 28 November 2012 - 08:04 PM, said:

You are excluded as a "freethinker" because you allowed yourself to be duped by conspiracy websites whose main purpose is to spew lies, misinformation, and disinformation. :yes:

Exact same thing goes for you. Just replace "conspiracy websites" with " world government" and there you have it.

Anyway, what has Babe lied about?

"He is wise in heart and mighty in strength. Who has hardened their heart against Him, and succeeded"? ~ Job 9:4

#81    Hasina

Hasina

    Maximillion Hotpocket Puckershuttle

  • Member
  • 3,049 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female

  • JINKIES

Posted 28 November 2012 - 09:00 PM

I'm skeptical of all the points raised and made in this thread...

Posted Image

~MEH~


#82    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,312 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 28 November 2012 - 09:07 PM

View PostInsaniac, on 28 November 2012 - 08:59 PM, said:

Exact same thing goes for you. Just replace "conspiracy websites" with " world government" and there you have it.

Anyway, what has Babe lied about?

That doesn't work with me because I have used references with no connections with the government in order to support my case.

Edited by skyeagle409, 28 November 2012 - 09:31 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#83    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,312 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 28 November 2012 - 09:26 PM

View PostInsaniac, on 28 November 2012 - 08:59 PM, said:

Exact same thing goes for you. Just replace "conspiracy websites" with " world government" and there you have it.

Anyway, what has Babe lied about?

We can start with his claim as a pilot. He has shown a lack of knowledge on aerodynamics and aeronautics and has posted errors regarding the "Hani maneuver." He is not familiar with pilot associations, which was evident when he posted a message regarding the AOPA and overlooking the ALPA and the APA.

We can now move on where he claimed that "no Boeings" crashed into the Pentagon or near Shanksville despite the overwhelming evidence presented to him.

I  should add his blunder regarding an P700 anti-ship missile striking the Pentagon. How about his comments regarding nukes and 9/11? How about explosives as responsible for the downing of light poles, which clearly depicted impact damage and nothing to do with explosives?

The list goes on and on!

Edited by skyeagle409, 28 November 2012 - 09:28 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#84    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 28 November 2012 - 10:01 PM

You light up my life Sky, you really do. :tsu:


#85    JGirl

JGirl

    Pajama Goddess

  • Member
  • 9,016 posts
  • Joined:23 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:British Columbia Canada

Posted 28 November 2012 - 10:11 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 28 November 2012 - 07:46 PM, said:

A freethinker is a person who thinks for herself or himself.  He does not have others do his thinking for him, whether "others" be the church and its priests, or the government and its priests.
so according to this definition a free thinker could be either a believer or a skeptic as well.
(edit to add they could even be fence sitters)
not necessarily a category on its own

Edited by JGirl, 28 November 2012 - 10:12 PM.


#86    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,312 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:24 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 28 November 2012 - 10:01 PM, said:

You light up my life Sky, you really do. :tsu:

I've noticed your comments were gathered from Internet references rather than from a platform of flying experience. In other words, you were placing pieces of the puzzle in the wrong order because you didn't possess the knowledge to know the difference.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#87    Obviousman

Obviousman

    Spaced out and plane crazy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,715 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Coast, NSW, Australia

  • "Truth needs no defence. Nobody - NOBODY - can ever take the footsteps I made on the surface of the Moon away from me."
    Gene Cernan, Apollo 17

Posted 29 November 2012 - 06:39 AM

A "free thinker" can tend to be a person who applies neither logic nor critical thinking nor evidence to what they choose to believe.

Sky - can you direct me to where claims have been made of being a pilot? I want to explore that but this is not the place.

Edited by Obviousman, 29 November 2012 - 06:56 AM.


#88    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:40 PM

View PostJGirl, on 28 November 2012 - 10:11 PM, said:

so according to this definition a free thinker could be either a believer or a skeptic as well.
(edit to add they could even be fence sitters)
not necessarily a category on its own

Yes, "fence sitter" might work very well.

I use "freethinker" because the term was commonly used in the United States about a century ago.


#89    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,312 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 29 November 2012 - 09:28 PM

View PostObviousman, on 29 November 2012 - 06:39 AM, said:

Sky - can you direct me to where claims have been made of being a pilot? I want to explore that but this is not the place.

Here are just a few.


9/11: The Flight 77 Eyewitnesses


View PostBabe Ruth, on 28 February 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

No sir, crop dusting DOES NOT qualify one to fly jets, but for the record I'm typed in the Learjet, and am currently flying right seat on a Falcon 10.

View PostBabe Ruth, on 26 February 2012 - 03:38 PM, said:

Whether you understand, believe, or care about what flying experience I have influences me not at all.

View PostBabe Ruth, on 24 February 2012 - 03:36 PM, said:

With 10 years of fixed-wing crop dusting sir, it is most likely that I have spent more time in ground effect than you have. And I assure you that coming out of a 4000FPM descent and attempting to transition to terrain following flight is a sure recipe for disaster.


Edited by skyeagle409, 29 November 2012 - 09:30 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#90    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,344 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 01 December 2012 - 08:43 AM

View Postflyingswan, on 28 November 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

I am not back-pedalling from a statement, or defending anything. I asked a question of Turbs.  I have not had an answer from either him or you.

This is my last try at getting you to understand my point:  Given that the steel from ground zero contained incriminating evidence, why should it be shipped to a foreign country rather than melted down in the US?

Why not just melt all the steel in the US? Why would - and did - they ship it away overseas?

What is the best option for disposing of the evidence?

Which is the faster option? Overseas is much faster, obviously. It's all gone in a few days. At most.

Melting the steel is done afterwards - in China. There's no hurry to melt it in China.

But if the steel remained in the US, it can't be metled fast enough. Because it's within our reach, you have a cousin who works there and tells you about it. Many people are soon protesting the facility to return all evidence they've illegally obtained from a crime scene.

Not if it's all in China.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users