Are debunkers wasting their lives?

[SkepticalScarecrow]

Which makes me think the OP was confused about exactly what being skeptical meant. Not all skeptics believe or disbelieve in the same things, just like not all believers believe in everything having to do with the paranormal or supernatural.

[Hazzard]

Part of my post from your other thread.

Not sure if you realize this or not but YOU ARE A SKEPTIC of Atlantis, Atmospheric beasts, most Ghosts, Demonic Possession. Welcome, we have cookies.

If you carefully read many of the crypto threads you will see that very often a skeptic will post a logical explanation or post a simple observation that doesn't support the "OMG 11!!!1 DO U C WHAT I SEE?!?1"

Those of us who have been involved in this for a while (not just this board but interested in the area) see a pattern form.

1. Film/see amazing picture or statement on the internet regarding a cryptid/ghost/psychic/religion.

2. Post picture or link in forum with "what do you guys think?"

3. Skeptic posts "looks like a bear with mange", "dust", "reflection", etc. along with the "OMG!!11" posts or with a simple and plausible explanation. (USING SCIENCE TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION)

4. Believers freak (not all) and for some reason take it personally that not everyone is convinced by the same information. It's like when the example is critically examined and explained the believer behaves like some one just told them that they have a small penis, they are ugly and their girlfriend is cheating on them.

I also don't understand your gripe with science. Without science you would still be dying at a very early age or being sacrificed to the moon for the harvest.

Science is the method used not an all powerful thing out there judging what is right and wrong.

Science is what told the world that a coelacanth was found otherwise we would have "Hubert, the Really Cool Fish".

I want people to find solutions to todays issues rather than just looking forlorn and saying "Gee, if Atlantis hadn't sunk itself with the giant magic crystal, things would be soooo much better." I would rather people use science to follow the evidence to explore more of the amazing history of humanity. I don't want my money and time wasted on an argument based on maybe, could have meant, really might say, etc. that has produce NO evidence.

I certainly don't want the pilot of the next plane I am in to believe in atmospheric beasts. I want him to utilize science so that if he sees a strange looking cloud or there is a smear on the outside of the window he doesn't think that we are being attacked by giant rods so he must ditch us into the ocean to save us all.

Ghosts, gods, demons, etc all fall into my same thought process.

I want the world to use critical thinking. To not just believe what they read, are told or see. Poke at it, prod at it, use skeptisism to find out what it is.

Otherwise we will be flung back into the dark ages where anyone who questions the current superstition is burned at the stake.

Skeptics using science gave us what you have today. "Beliefs" with no questions and debunking would have kept us ignorant and in the dark.

Nibs

I could not agree more... Well said, Nibs.

[+HerNibs]

I could not agree more... Well said, Nibs.

Aw... thanks.

Nibs

[aquatus1]

Why you ask,Well I'll give you my opinion.It must be their fear that if what they are trying to disprove turns out to be real their lives could take a dramatic turn and all their beliefs could very well be WRONG.and noone wants to be wrong.and most dont have anything else to do anyway or they are just a bunch of trouble makers and cant help themselves to be buttheads,Just My Opinion.

I understand that it's your opinion, however I can't really imagine what it is that you believe that we skeptics are fearing. After all, what sort of dramatic turn are you talking about? If these things exist, then they exist, and are currently in existence right now. The we acknowledge them or not isn't going to change that. Thus even if these things are shown to be true, nothing much would really change.

As for fearing being wrong...sorry, but when you are a skeptic, you get accustomed to being wrong pretty quickly. After all, to a skeptic it's only through a process of finding out how wrong you are about something that you ever get to see what is right about it.

[drakonwick]

I understand that it's your opinion, however I can't really imagine what it is that you believe that we skeptics are fearing. After all, what sort of dramatic turn are you talking about? If these things exist, then they exist, and are currently in existence right now. The we acknowledge them or not isn't going to change that. Thus even if these things are shown to be true, nothing much would really change.

As for fearing being wrong...sorry, but when you are a skeptic, you get accustomed to being wrong pretty quickly. After all, to a skeptic it's only through a process of finding out how wrong you are about something that you ever get to see what is right about it.

HaHA... Very well said.

Personally, I think Vukx is a bit confused on how skepticism/debunking works. Sure, occasionally there will be a hardcore debunker that has nothing better

to do than go trolling through a forum just for the sake of an argument, but then again hardcore believers are no better. Critical thinking is always the best

way to go about forming an opinion about paranormal phenomena. You can't expect everyone to believe a speck of dust in a video could have a probablity

of being a ghost, it just doesn't work that way.

[Wallydraigle]

Although I am a skeptic, I don't really consider myself a debunker, but if I see idiocy I'll point it out.

[Lolipopkid]

I'm bashing because only skeptics and debunkers are giving their opinion, and not believers.

You see, you are not correct in your assumption. I have given my opinion and I would consider myself a believer in much of the paranormal. Just because I believe does not mean that I'm so secure in my beliefs that I can not reason with facts that are presented to me. Knowledge is key, I used to believe in Orbs years and years ago, but now after seeing all the real causes for that particular phenomena I now understand that they are not paranormal yet entirely normal in photo's. They can be caused by a number of very normal things, moisture, bugs, light, you name it. It is learning that will make or break this subject and the more we learn the better the chance to find real answers.

[Blueguardian]

To me debunkers are an important thing to have, even a believer who witnesses something can debunk it themselves to just being a trick of the light. It's important to try to debunk things otherwise we will have tricks of light or optical illusions classed as paranormal or supernatural and that doesn't go down well with skeptics.

[Eternal Light]

I've been away and have only just seen this thread, but the title is rather misleading; I think that the poster may have meant 'skeptic' rather than 'debunker.' Yet even debunkers can hardly, technically, be seen to be 'wasting their lives.'

But, in any event...

A debunker is not a skeptic. See link:

A debunker is an individual who discredits and exposes claims as being false, exaggerated or pretentious. ...

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&d...on&ct=title

A debunker, generally, doesn't want to 'investigate' a phenomenon, he/she just wants to 'discredit' a claim; They have no interest whatsoever in the pro's and con's of a phenomenon.

whereas a skeptic is genuinely concerned with what evidence there is, if any, to back up a claim. They doubt a claim but are genuinely open to perusing any claims for the truth of something, that they may otherwise find implausible or 'iffy.' See link:

1. One who instinctively or habitually doubts, questions, or disagrees with assertions or generally accepted conclusions.

2. One inclined to skepticism in religious matters.

3. Philosophy

a. often Skeptic An adherent of a school of skepticism.

b. Skeptic A member of an ancient Greek school of skepticism, especially that of Pyrrho of Elis (360?-272? b.c.).

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/skeptic

Just some thoughts...

[MDeacon]

Considering this topic is now 4 pages, forgive me if someone has already answered the original question (not enough time to read all pages ).

A general skeptic has no room in his/ her heart and imagination for the truth where as a debunker fights for an answer to what he/ she is searching for. There are levels of skepticism though...

I am a skeptic but also a "Mystery Hunter". I have experienced some things in my life that I feel I need an answer for, so if I can not "debunk" the unimaginable, then I believe that makes me one step closer to solving life's mystery. Let's face it, the day someone catches evidence of a ghost walking up to a camera and stating that they are deceased and yes there IS an afterlife, I just need your help into heaven. will you help me?. That will most likely never happen, unless your name is Whoopi and you know a man named Patrick, contact like that will never happen. So "debunking" a possible photograph or audio voice will help with the credibility of the find.

Now that being said... a skeptic investigator will always give you there honest evidence... I say honest evidence because far too often investigators with bogus equipment and bogus psychics will try their hardest to find something even if nothing is there... you understand? I've seen photos of a blank white wall with a stain on it, a skeptic will tell you it's a stain, a psychic will tell you it's Johnny trying to come forward and say Hi !

In this field we need more debunker's with skepticism to HELP families in crisis, not for personal gain... so if they are willing to investigate for true evidence than I am all for it...

Edited July 11, 2009 by MDeacon

[OldTimeRadio]

It all depends what is meant by "debunker."

The proper Fortean approach is to be a "Believer" in or at the very least extremely open-minded towards the existence of the Paranormal but to also remain a Skeptic in regards to every individual episode.

In short, there's no reason to be taken for a wild pony-ride by every ghost-hoaxer who knocks at the door.

Edited July 11, 2009 by OldTimeRadio

[JamieSymptom]

Debunking individual cases is fun. The fact is, people debunk them because the cases CAN be debunked. This is not a waste of time, it is valuable in that it educates people so they are less likely to attempt and report mundane occurances as fantastical supernatural events.

But I don't think it's possible to debunk an entire 'idea' - like ghosts or demons or extraterrestrials or whatever, it just has to be debunked on a case by case basis to weed out the mediocre and focus on the more interesting cases that may or may not end up answering some of our questions.

And it's always good to be skeptical - be too gullible and you'll end up doing yourself an disservice sooner or later.

[KennyB]

I think a lot of the de-bunkers and skeptics aren't really that at all. They are just bored, well educated people who like to argue. It's a game to them. It makes them feel superior if they can 'WIN' by changing someone else's mind. KennyB

[Agent. Mulder]

I think a lot of the de-bunkers and skeptics aren't really that at all. They are just bored, well educated people who like to argue. It's a game to them. It makes them feel superior if they can 'WIN' by changing someone else's mind. KennyB

i dont think thats the case.

besides, believers do the same, if they can change someone elses mind which now results in them believing what they do.

same thing.

[Duke_of_Wales]

You realize that making a board specifically to "bash" other members is against forum rules, right? It is also immature. If you want to discuss something, then discuss it, don't try to make people believe what you believe. If that's the way they want to live their lives, then that's their problem.

Doesn't look like your original post has anything to do with asking believers what they think. "Why not just ignore the subject and go on with your life?" From the look of your first post, that's really what it sounds like this topic was made to do--bash skeptics. Where do believers come in, and what do they really have to say in reply to something that addresses skeptics singularly. "My basic thought here is how debunkers are skeptics, they do not believe in paranormal phenomena. But why do they waste their time trying to disprove these things? In my understanding, if a person doesn't believe in something, why waste his time studying it and trying to disprove it?"

People have already answered your questions, and of course, they were skeptics, because that is who your topic was made to address. You may want to expand your first post, if you have any intention of attracting believers for an actual discussion.

That little part of my soul that died on the previous topic has yet to be revived with the posting of this one. In fact, I think another little part just died from the sheer inability to understand the point of this topic.

All you're trying to do is say that skepticism is stupid, that you think it's a waste of time, and are unwilling to discuss. You just want to push your thoughts on others without so much as trying to understand what others are saying.

A pointless topic, imo.

I suppose that is why there are moderators: to determine which posts are inappropriate and or pointless, and since you are NOT one; I advise just not reading this post you have now replied THREE separate times to "pointless thread", saying the virtually the SAME THING. If it's mere existence upsets you so, I would try and make a concerted effort to avoid it in the future.

Edited July 14, 2009 by Duke_of_Wales

[vukxfiles]

He's a debunker. He likes bashing things that don't interest him.

[Pauly Dangerously]

I debunk for two reasons.

First, most times people who experience the paranormal aren't interested, they're scared. If I can show them there is nothing to be afraid of, and maybe show them the logical approach to how I reached that conclusion, they won't be scared of anything like that in the future, or possibly even help someone else through what they learned.

Second, and IMO more importantly, I won't see people taken advantage of when I can help it. Yes, debunking has facets of bullying, but so does convincing a fourteen year old that vampires and werewolves are real, and that ghosts and demons are out to get them.

I want to keep people honest. If someone has an experience, well good. If they don't want it explained, a simple "Neat story." should suffice as a response. If someone comes here looking for an answer to why they can't sleep and feel terrified in thier own home then, yes, I am going to analyze any info they give and try to come up with some explanation that is actually going to help.

Helping someone is not a waste. Fearmongering and inflation of ego through claiming to know all about how to rid a home of haunting, fighting demons, psychic powers is a waste of time. I won't ignore that type of behavior, because when you have a chance to stop lies/misconceptions, you should. Letting believers believe is not the issue. Whether or not someone conclusively (dis)proves a point, people will believe anyway. What I can do is show that there are other ways of thought, and that sometimes it really is just a house settling in it's foundation, or too much caffiene and scary movies, or just and overactive imagination. These things are real, and they can be helped. Not all the time, but most times. Then again, there are times when the only answer I have, is "It sounds like your house is haunted." But just because I can't explain it, does not mean it can't be explained.

Edited to correct spelling error.

Edited July 14, 2009 by Paul Noise

[Agent. Mulder]

He's a debunker. He likes bashing things that don't interest him.

well, if i meet someone like that, i call them an *******, not a debunker.

because theyre not debunking anything, when theyre just rippin on things they dont like.

Edited July 14, 2009 by Agent. Mulder

[JamieSymptom]

Methinks the OP doesn't have a good understanding of the differences between being skeptic, debunking and being a troll.

Trashes things they think are stupid = troll

Explains the mundane non-supernatural causes of alleged phenomena = debunker

Doesn't automatically believe other's claims = skeptic

Of course, one can be all three of those, even in just one post, but it doesn't make them all the same.

[Lady Amethyst]

Debunking individual cases is fun. The fact is, people debunk them because the cases CAN be debunked. This is not a waste of time, it is valuable in that it educates people so they are less likely to attempt and report mundane occurances as fantastical supernatural events.

But I don't think it's possible to debunk an entire 'idea' - like ghosts or demons or extraterrestrials or whatever, it just has to be debunked on a case by case basis to weed out the mediocre and focus on the more interesting cases that may or may not end up answering some of our questions.

And it's always good to be skeptical - be too gullible and you'll end up doing yourself an disservice sooner or later.

This is a good post and I agree.

[Delovely5150]

I posted a similar topic on the Spirituality vs Skepticism board, and made a mistake for thinking that all skeptics are debunkers. My basic thought here is how debunkers are skeptics, they do not believe in paranormal phenomena. But why do they waste their time trying to disprove these things? In my understanding, if a person doesn't believe in something, why waste his time studying it and trying to disprove it? Why not just ignore the subject and go on with your life?

No, not at all a waste of time. Take it this way, if you don't believe on something, you'd want reasons why you don't, you would want to be able to show and tell people why you think that way so therefore they continue to debunk things. It goes the same way with people who believes on something and finding evidence to support their beliefs. The thing is, honey, learning never stops. There's no right or wrong. These things are mere speculations and that is why people keep on studying to acquire more knowledge about the things they believe or don't believe. Now, tell me, dear, is that a waste of time?