Jump to content
MNskeptic

What's The Deal With Skeptics?

Recommended Posts

Guest DWA

From the fairy reports I've read, I'm able to discern they're all truthful, and that science and disbelievers are hindering the identification of the species.

 

Any logical thinking person would arrive at the same conclusion I have, especially if they've read reports like the wind, as I've done.

 

Well, Inc, I'm glad you believe in fairies anyway.  Good to believe in something.  Now get up to speed on this.

 

http://www.realfairies.net/forum/faery-encounters

 

These people are reporting them. People that report things on the Internet never lie--why would they?  Ergo faeries are real.   

 

They even have a research organization:  www.fro.net

 

I get it.  So you guys' problem is...attention OP!  This is what the deal is with skeptics.  They can't assess information properly.  Tack this on to 1 through 3.

Edited by DWA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TD-40

What you're saying is "you have to expect science to heap ridicule on people who are way ahead of it."

 

No you don't.  

 

What you are talking about here is scientific progress being delayed, for decades, by closed minds.  That is NOT science.  It's close-minded people who unfortunately call themselves 'scientists.'

 

This is what the OP is talking about:  people who flat refuse to consider any evidence that conflicts with their comfortable worldview.    Even when that is their job.

 

In all fields of science, any new ideas are challenged if they go against the mainstream. It takes time for other scientists to duplicate and confirm anyone's research. This is how pseudo-science gets avoided. The pioneering scientist might be way ahead but he still has to be right, and that is where peer reviews are useful.

 

You'll notice that my posts celebrates those scientists who did challenge the mainstream and won. You can't just expect very smart colleagues to blindly accept new ideas without sufficient evidence and persuasion. It's human behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DWA

In all the cases you mention, though, it wasn't waiting for the evidence.  People were presented it and said in reply, forget that!  Not happening.

 

Not relevant either.  What we very clearly have in this case is a solid body of evidence the mainstream won't even review.  I mean, I might have heard one intelligent comment about it from the mainstream otherwise, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TD-40

Those scientists had to do more research before their colleagues could do anything with it. They had to get others on board to help them put together enough evidence to overturn the mainstream beliefs, and they did.

 

What body of evidence do we have? Footprints, testimonials, eyewitness accounts, and folklore. But no bones, no DNA, no blood sample, no solid photo, nothing of any significance that I would expect modern science to get excited about. The PGF has been beat to death but that's all we've got.

 

Imagine being the anthropologist who studies and confirms the existence of an 8' Neanderthal monster man! You would go down in the history books next to Charles Darwin. So clearly the prize is there for the taking. But let's be real. No serious researcher is going to consider our scant evidence until something comes along that is more worth their time.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DWA

It's not really "scant" evidence, but this is where the refusal to even look at it comes in.

 

Science has never discovered anything without building on inconclusive evidence; the exceptions only prove the rule.  But apparently scientists make exceptions to the rule.

 

To anyone who can read patterns the evidence is better than we have for anything else that isn't proven.  By a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ChrisBFRPKY

MNSkeptic,  This is a good thread and very civil discussion. I think you may be confusing actual skeptics like Ben Radford with pretend skeptics like those at online skeptic forums. The forum folks aren't really skeptics, they're denialists for the most part. Instead of openly considering evidence for discussion, they'll tend to insult, belittle, dismiss and generally exhibit disgusting behavior to seek out a response from you. Pushing your buttons is what turns them on.

 

Why? Who knows? It's the internet. Some guys chat in chat rooms pretending to be girls, some pretend to be rich or someone they're not. Some seek out responses by insult and ridicule. It's weird but that's planet Earth for you.

 

The real skeptics, like Ben Radford. Keep an open  mind and consider the possibilities. Sure Ben doesn't think Bigfoot exists, because there's not enough scientific evidence. But, he doesn't say Bigfoot will never be found because it's not real. If you ask any true skeptic, they should respond something like: "I don't think Bigfoot exists, but it would be exciting times if a body was found." That's an appropriate reply. If they ask when was your last mental health checkup, or try to turn the conversation to mermaid sightings or fairies, well I think you get the picture.

 

I think if someone is a true skeptic, that's great. Especially when it comes to Bigfoot. I always say, you need to see one for yourself to be sure, that's what it took for me. Don't take anyone's word for it, be skeptical. If you have an interest, seek out the truth. Be warned though, if you're an avid outdoorsman, a sighting will change alot about how you look at hunting, fishing and especially camping. Chris B,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

Instead of openly considering evidence for discussion, they'll tend to insult, belittle, dismiss and generally exhibit disgusting behavior to seek out a response from you. Pushing your buttons is what turns them on."

 

When you went to JREF with your pine bark eating bigfoot claims, what evidence did you bring?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DWA

^^^And that's the deal with skeptics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman

http://www.realfairies.net/forum/faery-encounters

These people are reporting them. People that report things on the Internet never lie--why would they? Ergo faeries are real.

They even have a research organization:

Rick Rolled!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DWA

 

 

The real skeptics, like Ben Radford. Keep an open  mind and consider the possibilities. Sure Ben doesn't think Bigfoot exists, because there's not enough scientific evidence. But, he doesn't say Bigfoot will never be found because it's not real. If you ask any true skeptic, they should respond something like: "I don't think Bigfoot exists, but it would be exciting times if a body was found." That's an appropriate reply. If they ask when was your last mental health checkup, or try to turn the conversation to mermaid sightings or fairies, well I think you get the picture.

 

Couldn't disagree more.  Ben Radford is an arch-denialist.  And pretty blatantly uninformed.

 

No, he doesn't say, in so many words, that Bigfoot will never be found, etc.  Radford is like one of those pictures that is made up of thousands and thousands of smaller pictures.  The teenytiny pictures say, I'm not saying that bigfoot will never be found etc.  But you back up, and look at the big picture composed of all those teenytiny pictures, and it says:  No way; when was your last mental health checkup; and this is like mermaids and fairies.

 

Don't know how many arguments you have had with him.  I have had plenty.  There's no one here - and this is saying something - worse than Radford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

Rick Rolled!

Finally!  I thought that little gem was going completely under the radar :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman

It does show how many people read your links bud!!!! Lol!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cotter

I'm missing something.

Rick Rolled?  I did click the links......

 

Oh wait....dangit dmaker!  It's ON now!

 

Rickrolling is an Internet meme[1] involving the music video for the 1987 Rick Astley song "Never Gonna Give You Up". The meme is a bait and switch; a person provides a hyperlink which is seemingly relevant to the topic at hand, but actually leads to Astley's video. The link can be masked or obfuscated in some manner so that the user cannot determine the true destination of the link without clicking. People led to the music video are said to have been rickrolled. Rickrolling has extended beyond web links to playing the video or song disruptively in other situations, including public places, such as a live appearance of Astley himself in the 2008 Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade in New York.[1] The meme helped to revive Astley's career.[2]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
coffee2go

From my own experience I believe that a lot of skeptics are people who are visual learners and no amount of reading or listening to people talk about a subject, such as bigfoot, will convince them it could be real. Unlike someone who has an open-minded view of the possibility of things, they must personally see or experience things in life. 

 

I am not criticizing skeptics.  A certain amount of skepticism is healthy in this world if we want to stay safe and teach our children not to trust everything they hear or see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WSA

Thanks for the explanation Cotter. Before reading that, I was convinced Astley was on the cutting edge of, well....never mind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...