Truthers: A question concerning your perception of “debunkers”.

[Par]

Hello truthers. I have a question concerning the ways in which you perceive your typical opponents on this forum and their taxonomic relationships with the concept of “debunking”. So, which of these options most closely matches your beliefs?

[Edx]

I'd have voted for this:

+ Debunking is a noble thing with which to engage. However, broadly speaking, the anti-conspiracists on this forum are merely pseudo-debunkers.

However, I havent determined if this is can be so generally stated here.

[Par]

I'd have voted for this:

+ Debunking is a noble thing with which to engage. However, broadly speaking, the anti-conspiracists on this forum are merely pseudo-debunkers.

However, I havent determined if this is can be so generally stated here.


Of course, it’s not going to be possible to phrase the options in such a way that at least one will match respondents’ beliefs precisely. However, I merely ask them to select the option that “most closely matches” their beliefs.

[Edx]

Ok well I'll vote for that and see if it changes :)

[Alt+F4]

However, I havent determined if this is can be so generally stated here.

Are you this whiney and complaining in real life or just on the Internet? If you think it sucks here, then leave...otherwise why not contribute to whichever conversation?

[Edx]

Are you this whiney and complaining in real life or just on the Internet? If you think it sucks here, then leave...otherwise why not contribute to whichever conversation?

How you gleaned this impression form that post is beyond me.

[Alric]

Specially those "debunking" 9/11, climate change or evolution. If you try to "debunk" the published scientific consensus you are automatically a pseudodebunker.

[Par]

Specially those "debunking" 9/11, climate change or evolution. If you try to "debunk" the published scientific consensus you are automatically a pseudodebunker.


Are you sure about that?

[1337m4n]

Specially those "debunking" 9/11, climate change or evolution. If you try to "debunk" the published scientific consensus you are automatically a pseudodebunker.

I would like to know about this "scientific consensus" of a 9/11 inside job.

[Tippit]

Hello truthers. I have a question concerning the ways in which you perceive your typical opponents on this forum and their taxonomic relationships with the concept of “debunking”. So, which of these options most closely matches your beliefs?

Your poll was addressed to truthers. As of now almost 53% of respondents have selected option 1 which states:

"Debunking is a noble thing with which to engage. Moreover, broadly speaking, the anti-conspiracists on this forum are genuine debunkers."

Since those respondents believe that the debunkers on this forum are genuine, they can't possibly be truthers or they would have been disabused of any 9/11 conspiracies by genuine debunkers.

Therefore we can conclude that anyone who took the poll and selected option 1 is not a truther, and thus either cannot read or cannot properly follow directions, neither does the option belong in a poll designed for truthers alone.

[beachnut]

Your poll was addressed to truthers. As of now almost 53% of respondents have selected option 1 which states:

"Debunking is a noble thing with which to engage. Moreover, broadly speaking, the anti-conspiracists on this forum are genuine debunkers."

Since those respondents believe that the debunkers on this forum are genuine, they can't possibly be truthers or they would have been disabused of any 9/11 conspiracies by genuine debunkers.

Therefore we can conclude that anyone who took the poll and selected option 1 is not a truther, and thus either cannot read or cannot properly follow directions, neither does the option belong in a poll designed for truthers alone.Darn, you almost caught the CT. It is trick to out the truthers. It worked. Your post sounds very truthy

[Dave Rogers]

Therefore we can conclude that anyone who took the poll and selected option 1 is not a truther, and thus either cannot read or cannot properly follow directions, neither does the option belong in a poll designed for truthers alone.


Be advised that this is a public poll: other users can see the choice(s) you selected.


You might want to follow up your suspicions with some actual research - like, for example, looking at who voted for which option. Or is that too much like hard work?

Dave

[beachnut]

How you gleaned this impression form that post is beyond me.
He was not wrong; you were debunked the second you posted, "dropout" for Dylan was a hit piece (quoting Alex Jones).

[Par]

Since those respondents believe that the debunkers on this forum are genuine, they can't possibly be truthers or they would have been disabused of any 9/11 conspiracies by genuine debunkers. Therefore… the option [does not] belong in a poll designed for truthers alone.


This is something of a non sequitur. It is certainly possible for a truther to consider his opponents on this forum to be both noble and genuine debunkers. Similarly, a scientist might strongly disagree with proponents of competing theories yet still hold them in an extremely high professional regard.

In short, considering someone to be a noble and genuine debunker doesn’t necessitate considering them to be either factually correct or successful at convincing you.

[Tippit]

This is something of a non sequitur. It is certainly possible for a truther to consider his opponents on this forum to be both noble and genuine debunkers. Similarly, a scientist might strongly disagree with proponents of competing theories yet still hold them in an extremely high professional regard.

In short, considering someone to be a noble and genuine debunker doesn’t necessitate considering them to be either factually correct or successful at convincing you.

Ok, so your use of the word "geniune" in this case means honest. I had assumed that it meant actual, in the sense that debunkers have had to have actually debunked something convincingly in order to be genuine. In that case, my selection remains the same.

[skeptigirl]

Looks like there are conspiracy theorists who believe they are being skeptical. Nothing new there.

(Perhaps I'm misinterpreting people's answers so forgive me if I am.)

I think most of us believe we are being skeptical. I think the majority of us are. But there are a substantial number of members on this board who are convinced they are correctly interpreting the evidence when the evidence is overwhelming they are not. That is the essence of a lot of woo belief.

It would be interesting to ask a similar question about theism vs skepticism. I wonder given there are a lot of atheist/agnostics on the board what the ratio would be for 'skeptics except personal theist belief' vs 'skeptics'. You could ask the same question about a number of medical woo issues as well. There you get into more and more specific exceptions such as skeptical except for vaccines or skeptical except for chiropractic care or acupuncture.

And as for politics and economics, the lines of interpreting the evidence there are so totally blurred as to be enormously frustrating trying to discuss evidence with anyone not holding your position.

I think we need to consider there is a difference in underlying premises when evaluating evidence. Those premises determine which information we tend to accept as credible, which we dismiss out of hand and how deeply we need to investigate the original source of the information before determining it is credible or not.

Edited to add: I neglected to mention the problem of interpreting science poorly from insufficient knowledge base. That is also a key problem especially in the 911 conspiracy theory. Ignorance about science is one key to drawing a false conclusion the science supports the conspiracy. For example, it is easy to believe the evidence supports something like explosions when really the air pressure from the collapsing floors above is the cause of the visual evidence.

[rcronk]

Whoops - I'm not a truther, but I voted. Is that ok?

[tsig]

Planet X
if you live there all dreams come true
and it's all there for you.

And something big loves you.

[Philip]

As I post, this poll is listed as the current poll on the left-hand side of the main forum page, so I took the poll without first seeing the thread. I assume some other voters may also have done so.