"Michael Davis" <mdavis19@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

altheim wrote:

"Michael Davis" <mdavis19@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

altheim wrote:

"Michael Davis" <mdavis19@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

altheim wrote:

"Michael Davis" <mdavis19@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

researcher wrote:

A Definition of "UFO Skeptic"

Someone that is fundamentally in denial and has a mind closed
like a steel trap.

[snip]

his definition of a Skeptic is sound.

If you think so, then you are delusional too.

The true definition of a UFO skeptic is merly someone who listens to

all

the baseless ravings flowing out of the UFO cult and then asks "what
evidence do you have to back up any of that?" Then when no real

evidence

is presented, the skeptic quite correctly writes off the ravings as

the

utter BS they are. HTH.

No. That is the definition of a disbeliever.

No, it is the definition of a rational person. You see, for things that
are real, no belief is required. You can prove they are real. However,
when someone appeals to belief in a debate, it is a clear sign that they
have nothing real to offer to back up their claims, and are just
shoveling BS. A rational person can see that a mile away. Why can't you?

How do you know I can't?

Because you are defending his idiocy.

Jeez - I so hate all this inexactitude!

Then what are you doing hanging out in the UFO and paranormal groups?
There's nothing but inexacitude here. No facts whatsoever, other than
the utter lack of any hard evidence for any of the paranormal notions
hawked here.

Why would I want to defend idiocy in anyone?

Good question. Why are you doing it anyway?

I didn't think I was defending idiocy; I was trying to defend his
right to a point of view.

In fact I see a small element of truth in his theory

Really? Then you are even more logically challenged than I thought.

See?  This is what I hate in you Skeptiks; you are so dogmatically
convinced you are right that you won't even ask me what I mean.
Now, all debates in these groups seem to consist of "you're stupid",
"no, you're stupid", no, you're stupid", and quite frankly I'd rather talk
to Researcher who at least has something intelligent to say.

[...]

and without so much as asking a question.

I asked, but only you showed up to try to speak for him. He's off hiding
somewhere watching you take the beating for his trolling idiocy. At
this point I'm not sure which of you is the dumber. I'm thinking you
have the edge on him in the dumbness department since you are getting
pummelled over something that isn't even your own argument.

Well whup-de-doo!
I nominate you for next year's Nobel prize for psychic detection.

No thanks. The whole psychic business is just more bullshit.

Well that is something I would quite definitely disagree with.
Apart from a couple of hard to explain events of my own, the
science of parapsychology is gaining in strength (in the sense
that more and more universities are getting parapsychology
units) and in respectability (in the sense that more and more
sceptics are being won over).
[...]

--
altheim