117 replies to this topic

[orangepeaceful79]

the L, on 09 February 2013 - 10:44 PM, said:

You contradict yourself.
You say you are fool -meaning you dont believe in UFOs. Then that there are UFOs.

UFO doesnt mean ET.

When I first read your original post, it seemed that you were implying that UFOs are ET.  I responded to that, perhaps incorrect assumption on my part, and then halfway through posting decided I should clarify.  I apologize for the contradiction.

My official position is that :
1) there are unidentified flying objects, which are to date either hoaxes, or otherwise explainable phenomenon.
2) the universe is too big to not have other life forms
3)I don't believe that we have been visited by any of them, ever - yet.

I do apologize for the confusing nature of my post.  I should have edited more correctly. Thanks!

Edited by orangepeaceful79, 10 February 2013 - 05:08 PM.

[G Donnelly]

the L, on 09 February 2013 - 08:55 PM, said:

Only fool doesnt believe in UFOs.

I'm in a state of complete shock here because you couldn't be more cryptic even if you tried.
It's not the type of thing I was expecting when logging in after a hard day of errands and keeping a beady eye on the dogs.

Is this your way of questioning my belef system or lack off.
You can still believe in UFO's and not fully take it all in.

Please put my mind at rest and answer this properly.
Because it feels like you are calling me a fool.
I didn't expect that statement you quoted to be nitpicked in this way.
It depends on you whether or not I keep my cool.

Edited by Medium Brown, 10 February 2013 - 05:41 PM.

[freetoroam]

Medium Brown, on 10 February 2013 - 05:40 PM, said:

I'm in a state of complete shock here because you couldn't be more cryptic even if you tried.
It's not the type of thing I was expecting when logging in after a hard day of errands and keeping a beady eye on the dogs.

Is this your way of questioning my belef system or lack off.
You can still believe in UFO's and not fully take it all in.

Please put my mind at rest and answer this properly.
Because it feels like you are calling me a fool.
I didn't expect that statement you quoted to be nitpicked in this way.
It depends on you whether or not I keep my cool.

I completely agree. but chose not to answer such a foolish reply. But glad you did cos it really is a ridiculous thing to say.

[G Donnelly]

freetoroam, on 10 February 2013 - 05:50 PM, said:

I completely agree. but chose not to answer such a foolish reply. But glad you did cos it really is a ridiculous thing to say.

It did come out of the blue.

[Professor T]

Archimedes, on 10 February 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

A non-believer in what?

'Believer' and 'non-believer' don't mean anything in themselves out of context.  Is a devout Catholic who denies the existence of ET visiting Earth and believes ghosts don't exist a 'believer' or a 'non-believer'?  In the context of the ghosts and hauntings forum here he would be called a 'non-believer' or a 'skeptic' whereas on a Christian forum he would be a 'believer' (or a depraved immoral Satanist on some fundy forums).

Yes, I do call myself a skeptic, but the word as thrown around on this forum regularly means something else that what I mean by it which is why I generally avoid using it on UM, where it is commonly used to mean 'close-minded cynic'.

A-typical skeptic/realist response..
You may be right that Skeptics to not always feel that they are being personally attacked when someone elses thought's or posts are out there.. I know I've been wrong about scpetics before.. But when one identifies one's self as "Skeptic" it becomes their mission to attack any beliefs that do not fit into their world view.. Hense "Why Sceptics post here"

Oh, and like it or not, the phrase "Close-minded" Applies whole heartedly to anyone who identifies ones-self as being a Skeptic, A true believer, or born again fanatic because once someone indentifies themselves with/as something their perspective becomes attached to & seen from that one-eyed lense..

I'm sure there is a point where healthy sceptisism becomes unhealthy.. It occurs to me, there is an equal measure of both on this site.

Note: There's a lot of healthy skeptics on this site that I respect... And some that I dont..

Edited by Professor T, 10 February 2013 - 06:45 PM.

[Archimedes]

Professor T, on 10 February 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

A-typical skeptic/realist response..

Boy, this post has started well.  I thought I was being reasonable about this and your opening line is "A typical skeptic/realist response"?  I can't see this discussion going much further.

Quote

You may be right that Skeptics to not always feel that they are being personally attacked when someone elses thought's or posts are out there.. I know I've been wrong about scpetics before.. But when one identifies one's self as "Skeptic" it becomes their mission to attack any beliefs that do not fit into their world view.. Hense "Why Sceptics post here"

Exactly the reason I am loath to use the word 'skeptic' on these forums.  It's a word used by some people to bash others over the head with. A label with negative connotations just like the word 'believer' is used by some as a by-word for empty-headed belief in all sorts of woo.

They are not particularly helpful terms to use as a general description especially on a forum with very divided opinions like this one, even though they have their uses.

Quote

Oh, and like it or not, the phrase "Close-minded" Applies whole heartedly to anyone who identifies ones-self as being a Skeptic

No, it simply doesn't.  As used by those who self-identify as a skeptic, it is a description of how they approach claims.  It is a word I use to describe how I think when someone presents me with a supposed picture of a UFO, an alien pyramid, ghost, etc.  Considering the amount of nonsense that gets touted as these things, combined with sheer number of proven fakes and hoaxes, how can you not look at them with a skeptical approach?  Even the ghost believers on these forums regularly maintain a skeptical attitude to such things when they are presented with them, even if they don't use the word "skeptic".

The fact that many "skeptics" on the Internet are close-minded nay-sayers says no more about them as a group than the fact that many "believers" on the Internet are credulous and empty-headed says anything about UFO believers or ghost believers as a whole.  I know people on another forum who call themselves "skeptics" but believe they've discovered an alien base on Google Mars, been visited by the ghost of their grandmother, etc. and there are "believers" here who can see through a lot of the BS that gets thrown around on many forums here. Let's try not to generalise.

And you're not helping in any way by asking me to provide you with a label to describe myself so you can take that label and use it, instead of what I actually say and do, to form a judgment.  That's close minded.  "Oh, you call yourself an X, that means I can form a judgment of you based upon that one-word description".

Quote

A true believer, or born again fanatic because once someone indentifies themselves with/as something their perspective becomes attached to & seen from that one-eyed lense.

Do you refuse to use any labels whatsoever to describe your worldview?  Does the same thing apply to people who identify themselves as Christian or Buddhist or conservative or American or socialist, etc.  I find it hard to accept that anyone who identifies with something is automatically a "true believer" or "born again fanatic".

Quote

I'm sure there is a point where healthy sceptisism becomes unhealthy.. It occurs to me, there is an equal measure of both on this site.

But 'healthy skepticism' becomes a type of 'true believer' or 'born again fanatic' if they identify themselves as being a 'healthy skeptic', only others can use the term skeptic to describe them?  They can't describe themselves as such?  Odd idea that.

Quote

Note: There's a lot of healthy skeptics on this site that I respect... And some that I dont..

If they describe themselves as healthy "skeptics", would that make them close-minded and true believers?

Edited by Archimedes, 10 February 2013 - 07:54 PM.

[Professor T]

I see..

[Sakari]

Simbi Laveau, on 09 February 2013 - 06:27 AM, said:

I was just reading this thread , http://www.unexplain...howtopic=242661 ,and it makes one ponder ,WHY .

The title of this forum ,is UNEXPLAINED MYSTERIES ,and each sub forum has a very definative title as well.
Why,if you do not believe in anything unexplained ,occult ,mysterious or conspiracy ,why do any of the non believers post and come to this forum then .

Why don't you all post in a forum for people who think people who are believers , are just all delusional .

And I'm not trying to start flame wars ,but it begs the question ,are people who post in forum for things they do NOT believe in ,only posting to creat trouble ,belittle others ,or be a troll ....


If you're a non believer ,what do you get out of a forum for unexplained mysteries ?

Your question can be answered with a simple description of a " Open Forum ".......That is what UM is, and if it is not to your liking, then you are free to find other options that may make you happy.




A Open Forum ( this one ) :


The term “open forum” can refer to several things, depending on who is speaking and what the context is. All of these meanings, however, imply the open exchange of ideas and information, usually to better the common good. The word “forum” comes directly from the Latin. In Roman times, the forum was an open marketplace where people could make purchases, have discussions with other citizens, and try to reach agreement on matters of public interest. Some of these meanings have carried through to the modern day.

In a loose sense, an open forum is any space in which people may exchange information and ideas. In the United States, for example, most government owned public property is an open forum. In that forum, citizens can protest, hold meetings, and exercise other first amendment rights. Some typical examples of open forums include sidewalks, parks, streets, publicly held buildings, and spaces set aside specifically for the purpose.

The term is also used to refer to a specific meeting or event. In this instance, an open forum is intended to be a venue in which people can gather to find out about a specific issue, reach a resolution on a controversial subject, or interact with members of their communities. Often, officials and representatives are present at an open forum to answer questions from the public, facilitate the discussion, and provide information which people may find valuable or useful.

The idea of the open forum is very important to many democratic nations, since it allows citizens an opportunity to speak out about things which concern them. An open forum also allows residents to have influence in their communities, by giving them a vote in major community decisions. Depending on the nation, an open forum may offer citizens an opportunity to vote on proposed development, allocate community funds, or participate in their communities in other ways.

Although an open forum is intended to be a space in which free speech is exercised, there are restraints. People are expected to behave politely, although they are welcome to disagree with each other. Violent words or actions are not condoned in an open forum, and a forum must also be held at a reasonable hour. If citizens intend to exercise public rights by marching or holding a demonstration, they must apply for permits, just as a group of individuals holding an open forum in a municipal building must do. As a general rule, the open forum must be open to everyone, regardless as to race, gender, creed, or economic status.





If you want a forum that is one sided ( closed forum ), and does not allow discussion from opposing views, then maybe you would enjoy forums like this :


The goal of 'Believers Only' is to have a wonderful learning experience together, undisturbed by the so called 'debunkers', non-believers or undercover disinformation agents.
  http://humansarefree.forumcreativ.com/


( You will see forums such as above have little activity )




I would like to follow up this question with one of my own :


Why do people that do not want opposing views on a forum / topic participate in a open forum?


To me, this is like going to a Steak House, and demanding a vegetarian menu.


You seem to be active here quite a bit, so something about a open forum keeps you coming back, versus a forum such as the one I linked.




.

Edited by Sakari, 10 February 2013 - 08:22 PM.

[Purifier]

the L, on 09 February 2013 - 11:15 PM, said:

Problems I have with so called sceptics on UM is this.

When we debate and you give arguments. Lets say 5 of them. They shake your one argument of five, and rest of four are intact. Yet so called sceptic start to cheers like he debunks your whole theory. And others joined him. Others so called sceptics. Then they start to teasing you because they debunk you one of five arguments.
Whats even worst in that debunkery post it is often (about 85% cases) hidden insult. As they want to make you insulted. They posts are full of agression.
As I said in one of my previous post radicalism at it best



Now all that above is wrong on so many levels. First of all its wrong because kills conversation. Personally only way to deal with it its ignoring insults, teasing and agression. Ignoring surpression of idea. Its wrong in the first place because so called sceptics ignore rest of 4 arguments. Because they debunk you one argument they in almost every situation will try to dicredit you as person and in that way discredit yours rest of 4 arguments. Its wrong because its against forum rules. Its wrong because of their lack of knowledge they will often try to make personal attack. And whats again wrong others will press like button. Its like in school. When bully teasing nerds and others with no opinon will smile or keep quite. And we all know that being silent is sign of aprovement. I see those so called sceptics as insecure persons. Because if they were not insecure they would feel comfortable discussing your dilema, questions amd ideas. Yet those so called sceptics wait to cut down conversation to discredit you and say: Next!

Ofcourse I could say many names of persons who doesnt act like that. And they are real sceptic. I remember when I admit my ignorance about astronomy how MID ( RIP ) felt comfortable in conversation. When you discuss about ancient Egypt with member Kmt_Sesh you will find he is comfortable in talking about your idea. No matter that he doesnt agree with you. He show no fear. He show patience. He teach you. He gave counter arguments. And most importantly he isnt malicious so you dont feel bad to ask him another thing.

There are sceptics and sceptics on UM.

Simbi Laveau, on 10 February 2013 - 05:30 AM, said:

Hey,if people don't adhere to my belief system ,thats fine ,but say a few people who believe in demons,are discussing demons,or UFOs...or the megalodon .
And if people don't believe it post ,it doesnt exist ,and theres no proof.


Ok ,thats their opinion ,if the three people who do believe it want to discuss it ,why must they take it private , to discuss it without a barrage of naysayers,when it has been pointed out ,this is a forum.
Why dont the people who dont believe ,just let it go .
It's why I stop posting on some threads . I can only explain my viewpoint so many times ,before its just redundant to just keep repeating myself to someone who doesnt understand what Im trying to convey .ok,they say im wrong,ive explained it three times.
No point in reiterating again.
Right ?

Simbi and L, if you get posters with heavy bias tones towards your posts or throw rimshot insults at you through your posts, just use the ignore function. It's the best thing you can do for yourself. There's no need to quit posting in certain sections or stress over it, just use the ignore function and continue posting to those who respond to you with courtesy. Believe it or not, I've been told by those of the opposing side of whatever the subject is about, does this as well. Once you put them on your ignore list and they see that your not responding to their posts, they'll quit quoting your posts and eventually leave you alone. I mean, if your not gonna respond to them and they see that, what the hell is the point in them continuing on with you. They might as well put you on their ignore list and save themselves from wasting their time.

There are always a few Thought Nazis on every forum, that doesn't mean of course that some of those who disagree with you are that way. Usually the ones, who or not heavily bias towards you opinions, debate with you for a while and finally just agree to disagree. The ones who don't, keep hammering on you with occasional rimshot insults and won't let up. You just got to figure out who they are and use the ignore function. Best thing I've seen on any forum was the ignore function. It really does help.

[Sean93]

So you'd rather that believers would just all hug and agree with each other? Where's the fun in that? Do you realize how childish that sounds?

I discuss unexplained things for three reasons.
1: I'm interested and want the truth.
2: I get a nice laugh at some o the more hilarious and crazy posts. (Gotta put a smile on my face, right?)
3: Because I can.

Also, even the stanchest of believers are skeptics or down right non-believers of something, you don't get off that easily.

Edited by Sean93, 11 February 2013 - 05:36 AM.

[Simbi Laveau]

Purifier, on 11 February 2013 - 05:06 AM, said:

Simbi and L, if you get posters with heavy bias tones towards your posts or throw rimshot insults at you through your posts, just use the ignore function. It's the best thing you can do for yourself. There's no need to quit posting in certain sections or stress over it, just use the ignore function and continue posting to those who respond to you with courtesy. Believe it or not, I've been told by those of the opposing side of whatever the subject is about, does this as well. Once you put them on your ignore list and they see that your not responding to their posts, they'll quit quoting your posts and eventually leave you alone. I mean, if your not gonna respond to them and they see that, what the hell is the point in them continuing on with you. They might as well put you on their ignore list and save themselves from wasting their time.

There are always a few Thought Nazis on every forum, that doesn't mean of course that some of those who disagree with you are that way. Usually the ones, who or not heavily bias towards you opinions, debate with you for a while and finally just agree to disagree. The ones who don't, keep hammering on you with occasional rimshot insults and won't let up. You just got to figure out who they are and use the ignore function. Best thing I've seen on any forum was the ignore function. It really does help.

*blows kisses*

I have no problem with people disagreeing.
The conspiracy threads ,I do not expect anyone to share my views .
But if I'm posting on a medical thread,given ive been a medical professional for 30 years,I find it RUDE for anyone to claim I know nothing about medicine ,because their experiences are not the same as my own.
I also find it beyond pompous ,to say,well you can't say that ,you don't have the proper college education to say it,when I do.
Especially when they have no idea what my degees are,and they do go after my every post .

As for spiritual issues,its called faith for a reason.
Sadly,we have a lot of trolls who post nonsense,to the point I don't always take them seriously.

And I do use the ignore function . People say its because I cannot complete the argument . More like I get tired of arguing with a prat who gets off on subtle trolling .

[DKO]

The reason I steered clear for so long was because unfortunately I assumed these forums would be similar to ATS forums. When I realised it was a healthy mix of multiple beliefs I joined up.

Also I see 'non-believers' attacked all the time, "Another sceptic", "You're too blind to realise", "You have no idea" etc. If anything, some believers go straight on the offensive if someone else doesn't believe their story or agree with them.

There's nothing wrong with trying to explain these mysteries, that's the challenge, and if some can't be explained, then it's even more interesting.

[Purifier]

Simbi Laveau, on 11 February 2013 - 05:55 AM, said:

*blows kisses*

I have no problem with people disagreeing.

Yeah I figured that you are a reasonable person and can understand when someone just simply doesn't agree with you, as long as they are courteous about it. Most people are.

Simbi Laveau, on 11 February 2013 - 05:55 AM, said:

The conspiracy threads ,I do not expect anyone to share my views .
But if I'm posting on a medical thread,given ive been a medical professional for 30 years,I find it RUDE for anyone to claim I know nothing about medicine ,because their experiences are not the same as my own.
I also find it beyond pompous ,to say,well you can't say that ,you don't have the proper college education to say it,when I do.
Especially when they have no idea what my degees are,and they do go after my every post .

It's good you don't expect everyone to share your views in the conspiracy threads. That means your realistic and you know that if everyone agreed with what you posted, then something is seriously wrong or at least suspicious. You'd probably have a "WTF!" moment. (Hell, I would of thought I've entered the twilight zone or something, if that happened to me.)

As far as those making accusations of your medical education, telling you that you know nothing or just being down right asinine about it...all the more reason to put them on your ignore list, instantly; which I'm sure you do at some point, but instantly is always the best. Also, that may be the time when you may want to use the report function, because then they're attacking you personally and there is no need for that. And you don't have to deal with it, it's not really worth your time and why give yourself the headache trying to deal with it.

Simbi Laveau, on 11 February 2013 - 05:55 AM, said:

As for spiritual issues,its called faith for a reason.
Sadly,we have a lot of trolls who post nonsense,to the point I don't always take them seriously.

Good for you, I mean that. Taking them seriously draws you in for for personal attacks. Some people get bored and try to suck you in, just to argue with you for the hell of it.

Simbi Laveau, on 11 February 2013 - 05:55 AM, said:

And I do use the ignore function . People say its because I cannot complete the argument . More like I get tired of arguing with a prat who gets off on subtle trolling .

Yeah that's a rimshot insult to draw you back into the argument with them, don't fall for it. They just want to keep hammering on your ass until they get somekind of self feel good dominace over you. Makes them feel special if they think they're keeping your butt in line with their accusations, arguments and whatever else they throw at you.




Overall with debates, there is just simple disagreeing and than there is just being downright asinine about it. That's when you know the debate has lost it's appeal and is not worth your time.


Edit: Typos

Edited by Purifier, 11 February 2013 - 08:00 AM.

[Render]

Simbi Laveau, on 09 February 2013 - 02:28 PM, said:

I understand that this forum is older than most ,and there's a wide diversity of people. I'm friends here with many skeptics ,but they do not go out of their way,to immediately jump on others because of their beliefs.

If you can speak and debate ,you have one thing .If you just keep repeating SHOW PROOF,or SEE A DOCTOR  ,to people who believe what they believe because of things other people cannot comprehend ,or its based in faith , it doesn't seem like these people post to debate anything. They post because just because they like to act superior to people they deem beneath, them mentally .

This has caused many constituents of this forum ,to go to other forums ,and there are many people here who do not post,for fear of ridicule. which I think is a shame . .

And there are forums ,that have a title,and that is what they discuss there.
Its to exchange ideas with people who are in your clique .Not argue as to why you believe what you do.  
Im not saying a good debate isnt a healthy thing , but my observation is ,its not always a debate ,as so much a bashing party .

My observation would have to be ,some people get off on the bashing part .
I mean there's a reason I posted this in psychology

But you do understand it's absolutely acceptable for ppl to ask for your arguments and proof to back up your claims?
You yourself simply blurt out stuff without backing it up quite frequently. And then you run away when ppl ask for a decent argument, claiming they are turning against you. It's called a discussion. Or you simply state that you're a paramedic, thinking that proves everything you claim.

I mean ... you do realise ppl do not have to believe you on your word ?
And that's not an insult, that's simply ppl wanting to find out things.

There are certain ppl here that make unexplained things or other topics about themselves instead of about the topic at hand.
When they claim something and somebody asks for proof or some logical argument of how they came to such a conclusion then that is not an insult, that's simply pointing out that what you or they say does not come across as reasonable.

Running away and saying non-believers don't belong here is a cop-out.

[green_dude777]

Personally, I think uninformed people can be very dangerous to others, hence why you see me pop up from time to time.


I also don't think it's doing any good, but you know what they say about playing 'Devil's Advocate'.