Skeptics have already made their minds up about UAPs

Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by Yazata, Sep 1, 2023.

  1. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,960
    All right. Then I am free to "assume" that Yazata and MR like to eat kittens.

    We are free to make whatever claims we want about other members think and what motivates them. There is no accountability or need to back up outlandish claims that serve only to poison the well against our opponents. So I claim - without knowing them, and without telepathic abilities to know how they think - that my opponents like to eat kittens. See how that works?

    That is the sole reason this entire thread exists. And more signiifcantly, why all discussion about the thought processes and motives of members do not belong in the UAPs thread, but belong here in the Conspiracies forum instead.


    Frankly, we're all a bit sick of this dishonesty. Which is why constructive discussion has broken down. Yazata and his ilk have given up having any good faith discussion and simply repeat this lie over and over again, in a manner disgustingly similar to disgraced former president Trump's cries about the stolen election.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2023
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,254
    In other words, do you feel that we shouldn’t mention biases at all? Everyone is slightly or a lot biased, about something. I suppose where Yazata could be coming from is if it’s fair game for skeptics (in general) to claim that UAP enthusiasts are irresponsible grifters, then why isn’t it fair to suggest that Mick West is probably biased, when it comes to his debunkery?

    That’s why we’re deadlocked in this thread; the core argument is disingenuous.
     
    Yazata likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,960
    Because skeptics don't speak to the minds and inner motives of their opponents - they speak to what their opponents say, out loud, here, on this forum.

    Magical Realist has made no bones about telling us what he believes and why he believes it, so skeptics don't have to speculate about his motives or mindset. He has admitted what goes on in his mind.

    Yazata's only artillery is to make up what he thinks must be going on in every skeptic's mind. No skeptic has said the things he accuses them of thinking (namely that "they have already made up their minds about the origin of UAPs" and that "UAPs must have a mundane origin".)

    These are lies. Yazata is a liar. A chronic liar. So chronically in fact, that it has polluted the thread about explanations of UAPs so badly that the whole conspiracy had to be pulled out into its own thread. That's some pretty industrial-grade lying.


    Who cares if some third party is biased?

    No skeptic ever says "trust me". Even West. He says "the truth wants to be free! Go look for yourself! It's there for the having!"

    Let's argue the facts. Believers never want to argue the facts. That's why they try to attack the arguer rather than the argument.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2023
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,783
    Everybody infers motives based on how people behave and what they say. It's just human nature. Many times here for instance I have been accused of using ufos for a religion and have discussed how that is not true. But I'm not going to whine and cry and insist a separate thread be opened for it just because people continue to infer that about me. If people are wrong about what they infer about you, then explain how it is not true and then move on. Just calling it a lie over and over again is retaliatory and does nothing to resolve it.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2023
  8. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    wegs:
    DaveC has explained. It's in the title of this thread.

    Yazata's Big Lie covers all of the following themes, to a greater or lesser extent. The first one is the most pertinent one, but the others tend to come up in Yazata's posts, as well.
    • Before looking at the available evidence in any given UAP case, the skeptic has already decided that the UAP cannot possibly be an alien spaceship (or any other "non-mundane" thing). The skeptic is firm in his opinion that all UAPs are necessarily weather phenomena, misidentifications of familiar things (planes, birds, planets, etc.) or similar.
    • All skeptics are dishonest when they claim to have open minds about what any given UAP might be, because, in reality, they have all already made up their minds about all UAPs (see previous point).
    • All skeptics are narrow minded, because they simply can't imagine that there could be anything in the world that hasn't been discovered or seen before.
    • Skeptics automatically dismiss, without fair consideration, even the possibility that a UAP might be something novel to human understanding.
    • Skeptics don't care about the truth. Their aim is to debunk every UAP report, so they automatically dismiss - without fair consideration - accounts given by honest, trustworthy people.
    • Skeptics are dishonest because they pretend that human perception is unreliable, when in actual fact it is "totally reliable" (to use MR's phrase) in 99+% of cases.
    • Skeptics are party poopers, who are just out to spoil everybody else's fun by saying that aliens can't be real and UAPs can't be extraordinary, other-worldly things.
    • Skeptics are afraid when their comfortable scientific worldviews are challenged by paranormal phenomena such as UAPs. They are willing to just make stuff up to defend their narrow-minded views and to protect what they see as the sanctity of science.
    • Skeptics are stupid, because their philosophies are so limited. It takes a real philosopher, like a Magical Realist or a Yazata to see the Big Picture.
    • Science is unable to absorb radically new ideas. It is a staid dogma, and its followers are a sort of cabal that is desperate to protect its own standing in the face of obvious challenges from extraordinary phenomena like UAPs.
    • Skeptics cherry pick only the parts of the evidence that suits their preferred narrative - that the UAP is mundane, that the eyewitness is mistaken or lying, etc. The skeptic ignores or simply dismisses all evidence that goes against his pre-existing beliefs.
    • Skeptics are biased, and their biases mean that they never honestly and fairly examine UAP evidence, especially the "hard cases".
    • Given all of the above, skeptics are liars. They will say anything they think is necessary to try to preserve their sacred science and their comfortable, mundane worldviews.
    Again, the emphasis is on the first point here, but the other ones come up regularly enough whenever Yazata posts on the topic of UFOs or other woo.
    Tell me why you think Yazata is correct in his claims about skeptics.

    Do you agree with some or all of the above dot points?
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2023
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    wegs:
    You're referring to the government investigations of UAPs here.

    I would say that it is, in part, because there is a cult of tin foil hat wearing enthusiasts clamouring for the government to pay attention to their concerns, that these government investigations have been happening. At least some of those tin foil hat people vote. The government ignores them at its peril.

    Apart from that, what makes you think there are no tin foil hat wearing enthusiasts in government, or the military? Being a Representative in Congress, or a decorated military officer, does not make you immune to irrationity or shoddy thinking. Some of your current Representatives are clearly off with the fairies when it comes to various topics. Their beliefs don't connect with real facts in the world.

    I must say, I find it interesting that some in the UFO believer community have suddenly decided to trust the government and the military, after spending years shopping cover-up conspiracy theories around. So now they think the government is going to get to the truth behind UFOs, for them?
    Everybody has their own interests, quite apart from the desire to get to the truth. Sometimes, those two things are compatible; sometimes they are not.

    One thing about being a skeptic is that you learn not to put all your trust in a single person or organisation to tell you the truth - or even in a collection of people or organisations. Finding the truth of things is not about finding a guru to follow blindly. It's about following evidence where it leads.
    Not unless the government ends up finding that the little green men are real after all. We'll have to wait and see, but preliminary signs are that the government (NASA, the military etc.) have taken an appropriate skeptical stance when it comes to the whole matter of UAPs, which is encouraging.
    Anybody can be wrong in their interpretations. Generally, if you pay attention, when it comes to UAPs, you will see that the only people usually expressing any doubt about things are the skeptics. The believers are quite certain that it's the superadvanced aquatic aliens, or the extradimensional Martians, or the time-travelling ghosts.

    Remember, it's the skeptics who gently suggest that it is possible that an eyewitness could be mistaken. It's the Magical Realists who insist that - no - that's impossible, because eyewitnesses are always "totally reliable".

    You should start paying more attention to these differences. It often seems to me that you're just not paying attention to what you're hearing from both sides.
    That nonsense. MR is the man who says that eyewitness statements are "totally reliable". MR is the man who claims to know that most UFOs are "piloted craft". When he says such things, he is adamant. He doesn't express any doubt. He states such things as if they are facts.

    This is very different to the careful way that skeptics such as myself describe what might be true, what is a possibility, what a list of potential explanations might include. Skeptical statements - like scientific ones - often come with statements about the confidence of the person making them, too. "I think it could be this, but I'm not sure." "If the eyewitness is correct, then it is reasonable to deduce that ..." "On the other hand, if the eyewitness is wrong, then ..."
    It doesn't matter. Only occasionally does MR let slip what he actually believes his UAPs are. One major mistake he makes is assuming that most of them must be instances of the same phenomenon, whereas the reality is that if we look at the solved UAP cases there are different explanations for different cases. This speaks against the notion that most UAPs are the same thing.

    What MR believes is that UAPs are, mostly, "craft" who have "pilots". In addition, he believes that these "craft" are technologically advanced, beyond the ability of regular human beings to construct.

    It doesn't matter where MR actually believes these "craft" of his come from. Maybe they come from Mars. Maybe they are time-travelling ghosts. Maybe they are from a superadvanced (and unevidenced) civilisationa of aquatic lizard-people at the bottom of the Atlantic. It just doesn't matter, because he has zero evidence for any place of origin, just as he has zero evidence for "craft" or "pilots".
    He rules out the mundane immediately. That's his working assumption, going in, for every UAP sighting. He has to be dragged kicking and screaming towards recognising that any UAP is actually a weather balloon, or a mistaken sighting of Venus. And every time one of his "craft" does turn out to be Venus, instead of learning a lesson about making gullible silly assumptions, he just blocks it from his mind and goes looking for the next unsolved case.

    In one sense, the extraordinary can never be ruled out. I gave an example in a recent post in this thread, not too far up from here. Once you've identified that an eyewitness was looking in the exact direction of a bright planet Venus, but reported seeing only an alien spaceship and no planet, it becomes reasonable to conclude that the witness probably make a mistake in interpreting what he was looking at. It's still possible that there was a real alien spaceship parked in front of Venus, but far more evidence would be needed before that would become a reasonable conclusion to draw.
    No. Everybody has biases. Given my experience in examining UAP cases over many years - not to mention the 70+ year history of no conclusive evidence of alien visitations - I am sensibly biased towards the view that the next UAP report in all likelihood won't turn out to be little green men. But that does not mean I've made up my mind about the next UAP report in advance, as Yazata's Big Lie asserts.

    As for motivations, everybody has them, too. My motivations in talking about and examining UAP cases include trying to model to other people how to apply critical thinking to the examination of evidence. That is a phenomenally useful life skill, applicable far beyond the tin foil hat nonsense of UFOs.

    I am not out to defend the dogma of science against a credible threat from UFO believers. Science isn't a dogma; to think that is to fail to understand how - and why - science works. Nor is science under any threat from UFO believers.

    I am aware that a significant portion (I think it's in the 40-50% range) of Americans say they believe that, probably, aliens have visited or are visiting Earth. Since there's no good evidence to support that belief, there's a ton of work that needs to be done to try to educate those people. Not about what to think, but about how to think.
    I asked you a bunch of specific questions about your views on Mick West. I said that if you believe he got something wrong, you should post about what we got wrong and explain why he was wrong. I've heard nothing more from you, on that.

    Your complaints about West's bias are the same ones I assume you have about me and the other skeptics here. Maybe West is just a proxy so that you seem less confrontational in accusing us of all the things in my dot point list in my post above. I have responded, for myself, on behalf of West, and for skeptics more generally.

    I don't think your assessment of skeptics is fair or accurate. I think you have bought into Yazata's Big Lie, for whatever reason. But there's not a lot I can do to correct your perceptions if all you're coming with is vague accusations of bias and closed-mindedness and such.
    Evidence is the only thing that will change my mind on West. It should be the only thing that changes your mind, too.
    This shouldn't be about choosing a guru to follow blindly. Stop simply adopting somebody else's opinions without question. Think for yourself. Examine the evidence. That's what skepticism is.
     
  10. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,254
    @ James

    In a tiny nutshell, I’d say those bullet points above, are exaggerations of Yazata’s views on skeptics. He doesn’t state things in such absolute ways. He engages on more of a philosophical level, in my opinion. That said, no one knows the entirety of someone’s thoughts, but from his posts in these threads, it seems to me that he merely believes that some skeptics change the goalposts when the situation calls for it. Or when it’s convenient for them. I’d say there’s some truth in that “theory.” I don’t want to misspeak on behalf of Yazata, but that’s been my observation of his postings, as these threads continue.

    I agree with a great many of your posts and other skeptics here but, I’m not using West as a proxy. That’s kind of funny that you’d imply that, though.

    Anyway, I will post more, tomorrow after I think on some of your other assertions. I want to be thorough, as you are when you reply to me.
     
  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,960
    I recall you saying at least once that no amount of evidence presented here was going to change your mind about UFOs. That's one working definition of religion.

    My point being that we did not infer what you think, you told us.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2023
  12. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,960
    I think I'd like you to get yourself a little more informed about what Yazata has and has not said before you basically conclude that we're making it up.

    After all, you only found out what it was (because you asked us to tell you) less than 20 posts ago.


    Again this thread's very existence (all 500+ posts) is owed to the things Yazata has said so many times that it polluted another thread that, itself, is so huge it's creeping up on five digits in posts.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2023
  13. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,783
    Where did I say that? I don't even know what they are. Refer me to the post where I said that.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2023
  14. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,960
    What I said was "I recall". Which I do.

    (And, by your own assertion, memory is perfectly reliable, so you have no reason to doubt my recollection is accurate.)
     
  15. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,783
    IOW you just made it up. Figures...
     
  16. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,254
    This is getting silly. I haven’t concluded nor remotely stated as such, that you’re all “making it up.” Those bullet points are bit exaggerated, imo. And you’re exaggerating my comment about James’ exaggerated bullet points. -_-

    Do you honestly agree with James that Yazata believes all skeptics think exactly alike and are liars? Come on. This is an excellent example though of how often posts can be misconstrued ‘round here, partially due to our bias. That was too easy.

    To be continued…
     
  17. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,960
    You literally did not know what Yazata's lies were just twenty posts ago. Now you have total recall?
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,960
    And you like to eat kittens. See how easy it is to just make up lies?


    I recall you saying no amount of evidence would get you to change your mind about UFOs. That's a fact.
     
  19. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,783
    Making a claim you can't support. Seems there's a Sci Forums rule against that troll.
     
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,960
    I made no claim I cannot support. Read carefully. I wrote it twice - and explained how it is fact - just for your express benefit.


    Before you throw the 'troll' word around willy nilly, let's compare warnings and time outs. You make a fool of yourself when you do that.
     
  21. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,783
    You claimed I said something I never said. That was lie #1. Then you claimed you recall me saying it when I never did. That was lie #2. Wanna try for a third violation of the rules troll? Or are you just gonna hide underneath James' skirts like you usually do?
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2023
  22. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,254
    @ Dave

    Um, I’ve read Yazata’s comments about skeptics but didn’t know that the general viewpoint here is that he’s a liar. He’s allowed to state his opinions, but if he disagrees with skeptics, then he’s lying?

    That is what I’ve learned today; “Yazata’s Big Lie” is a label that has been assigned to his posts by skeptics who simply disagree with him. And I guess if I respect some of his opinions, I’m being swept away by “Yazata’s Big Lie.”

    Got it.

    We create disconnect and confusion on this forum, when we generalize members’ intentions and attack their character, simply because we disagree with their view on different topics when in reality, maybe we are on the same side. UFO skeptics and non-skeptics share a common bond in that we all wonder what some of these UAP’s actually are, but it’s in what we consider credible evidence, that divides us.
     
    Yazata and Magical Realist like this.
  23. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,783
    It's a strategy of automatically invalidating what Yazata says by dismissing it outright as a lie. It's been used by sectarian ingroups protecting themselves from disagreeing outsiders thruout history. Label them as malicious liars and dispense with listening to anything they have to say. And furthermore condemn and ostracize anyone who wants to hear them as also liars propagating the "Big Lie". Hence all remains safe and unquestioned inside the ingroup.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2023

Share This Page