Quantcast

Are Debunkers Just as Nutty as the Nuts They Debunk?

Transquesta 2012/08/07 22:58:14
Debunkers are every bit as nutty as those who/that which they debunk.
Debunking is not to be confused with rational analysis/scrutiny of a given topic or phenomenon.
You're a nutjob.  Debunkers are always right!
Other (specify)
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Debunk
tr. v.
To expose or ridicule the falseness, sham, or exaggerated claims of.

Is it rational to automatically *assume* something to be false without evidence? Is it rational to 'expose or ridicule the falseness' of anything which has not been proven false? Does ridicule have ANY place in the rational analysis of ideas, phenomena or topics of interest/controversy?

Visit Answers.com
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Beccy 2012/08/07 23:02:25
    Other (specify)
    Beccy
    +5
    It is one thing to debate or tell someone they are wrong but it is not right to make fun of them or call them names. There is alot we can learn from each other.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Boblawbla 2012/08/08 18:32:52
    Debunking is not to be confused with rational analysis/scrutiny of a given to...
    Boblawbla
    +2
    My favorite conspiracy theory is that 19 neanderthal hijackers with box cutters overcame all security measures, fooled NORAD, our military and intelligence agencies as well as the FAA on a day when there were drills and scenario exercises that would render us impotent to defend against an attack. The kicker is that if the US government wanted to defuse the growing questions of the people about these theories they could reopen the investigation and make fools of us all.

    They can't do that because 9/11 was an inside job.

    dees 911
  • ERide54 2012/08/08 13:56:20
    Other (specify)
    ERide54
    +1
    Worse in my oponion!
  • Kevin1111 2012/08/08 06:04:28
    Debunkers are every bit as nutty as those who/that which they debunk.
    Kevin1111
    +1
    I've seen this go both ways. There is tons of crap presented as truth that needs debunking. And sometimes these fallacies are exposed properly. Other times the debunkers have closed minds, are very inflexible and they refuse to accept that things might be more complex than they think.

    In general, the famous debunkers and some of the major debunking websites infuriate me because they are such humanists and rationalists. They refuse to accept that there are more layers of complexity to our universe than science understands.

    So there is a balance between exposing inconsistencies, false assumptions, and bad science, and realizing that we understand very little about the true nature of the universe and we must therefore keep an open mind.
  • Transqu... Kevin1111 2012/08/08 06:34:27
    Transquesta
    +1
    Exactly! I'm 'on this kick' for precisely some of the reasons you've mentioned. Neither 'side' can get at the truth--much less demonstrate it to anyone else--as long as both are put on the defensive by way of a battle of insults.

    As ever, the best way to validate--or refute--an assertion is with the rational presentation of facts, points, counterpoints, evidence, etc.

    I think it's too late for debunkers, though. They've been pretty much universally outed as zealots in their own right--and again, for precisely some of the reasons you've mentioned.
  • DeeB 2012/08/08 01:56:45 (edited)
    Other (specify)
    DeeB
    +3
    If there wasn't any conspiracies, there wouldn't be any theories, therefore there would be no debunkers. I go with fact and common sense and have been called a conspiracy theorist more than I care to remember. By people that have zero common sense.
  • Zuggi 2012/08/07 23:23:19
    Other (specify)
    Zuggi
    +1
    Most debunkers are based in fact and rational analysis, unlike the conspiracy theories they fight.
  • Transqu... Zuggi 2012/08/08 00:44:25
    Transquesta
    +1
    See, IMO that last word says it all. Why the need for a 'fight'? Wouldn't rationality or critical thinking be enough to beat back bad ideas? Consider that, when a debunker makes it personal (as through combativeness or ridicule), she or he loses any chance of converting the fence sitters. (The fanatics' minds are already set, permanently, so you can take them out of the equation.) Whenever I'm faced with deciding between the more 'sane' explanations of any particular controversy and the more 'rabid,' I usually side with the sane ones. If that happens to be the conspiracy theorists, that means debunkers are wasting their time on me. I *suspect* this is true for others, but I'm not gonna be found guilty of ad populum here.

    Never mind that the very definition of the word 'debunk' tends to argue against the a priori position that 'debunkers' base their derision on 'fact.' :-)
  • Zuggi Transqu... 2012/08/08 02:26:05
    Zuggi
    No. Because conspiracy theories are crazy, and so are their proponents usually.
  • holly go lightly 2012/08/07 23:12:28
    Other (specify)
    holly go lightly
    +3
    There are some people that never believe anything and label people that do as wing nuts or tin foil hats.
    I see them to be every bit as dangerous as any hardcore conspiracy theorist.
  • Transqu... holly g... 2012/08/08 00:48:05 (edited)
    Transquesta
    +3
    EXACTLY!

    It's getting to the point where I take debunkers LESS seriously than the theorists. In essence, a theorist is just positing a more reasonable (to him or her) explanation for X. A debunker is a zealot.
  • Beccy 2012/08/07 23:02:25
    Other (specify)
    Beccy
    +5
    It is one thing to debate or tell someone they are wrong but it is not right to make fun of them or call them names. There is alot we can learn from each other.
  • Transqu... Beccy 2012/08/07 23:04:57 (edited)
    Transquesta
    +3
    Absolutely!

    Every time I think about the 'Truther' movement, I consider how simple everything would be if both sets of experts got together to ferret out the REAL truth about 9-11 once and for all.

    . . .And 9-11 is just ONE example where this issue comes into play.
  • holly g... Beccy 2012/08/07 23:15:20
    holly go lightly
    +4
    IMO if someone was trying to tell me something they see as ultra important it must be worth taking a look at.
  • Beccy holly g... 2012/08/07 23:28:01
    Beccy
    +2
    Yes but calling people names and insulting them isn't the way to do it. I try to remember there is truth in both sides.
  • holly g... Beccy 2012/08/07 23:40:48
    holly go lightly
    +3
    Yes but?
  • Beccy holly g... 2012/08/08 00:29:21
  • holly g... Beccy 2012/08/08 01:40:30
    holly go lightly
    +4
    I am questioning the "yes but" part of your response to my post.
  • Beccy holly g... 2012/08/08 23:54:57
    Beccy
    +1
    More people are interested in being right then gaining the truth.
  • Transqu... Beccy 2012/08/08 23:57:15
    Transquesta
    +2
    Not me man. I live to be wrong. That's the only way I learn anything new.

    But as one might suspect, when you take that approach to new information and ideas, you find yourself being wrong less and less often. :-)
  • Beccy Transqu... 2012/08/10 00:35:57
    Beccy
    +1
    You also learn alot when you listen to other people's world views.
  • holly g... Beccy 2012/08/08 23:57:19
    holly go lightly
    +2
    A lot of them are.What does that have to do with calling people names?
  • Beccy holly g... 2012/08/10 00:36:49
    Beccy
    +1
    I don't think they are debating but if you say something they don't like they call you names.
  • holly g... Beccy 2012/08/10 01:24:58
    holly go lightly
    +1
    No that is not debating.It's just name calling.
  • Chukroast 2012/08/07 23:01:27
    Other (specify)
    Chukroast
    +3
    One must not confuse a skeptic for a debunker.
  • Transqu... Chukroast 2012/08/07 23:05:14
    Transquesta
    Exactly!
  • holly g... Chukroast 2012/08/07 23:42:49
    holly go lightly
    +3
    I agree.A bit of initial skepticism is always healthy.Trust but verify.
    That is very different than just brushing them off as a nut job.
  • Transqu... holly g... 2012/08/08 00:56:25
    Transquesta
    +2
    Right again!


    Consider the following argument:

    Theorist: "9-11 was an inside job because [reasons a, b and c]."

    Debunker: "You're nuts! Everybody KNOWS the terrorist did it because [reasons d, e, f]!"

    Rational observer: "9-11 happened just like the government said because [reasons g, h, i]."

    Whose argument are you naturally more inclined to DISCOUNT right from the start?
  • holly g... Transqu... 2012/08/08 01:49:02
    holly go lightly
    +2
    A lot of times truth is way too scary to consider.At least it is where 9/11 is concerned.
    Odd how once you believe that truth,you are more willing to have a look at other things,Gladio in particular.
  • Boblawbla holly g... 2012/08/12 04:55:06
    Boblawbla
    +2
    Gladio. as in our state-sponsored terrorism of the NATO variety that overthrew democratically elected European leaders, murdered anyone to make sure left-leaning governments changed or were brought down, and still to this day is secretly molding nations and institutions across the continent?
  • holly g... Boblawbla 2012/08/12 21:00:49
    holly go lightly
    +2
    Good explanation. And still,no one knows about it.
  • Boblawbla holly g... 2012/08/13 01:40:17
    Boblawbla
    +2
    I had never heard of it either Holly. I always try to be informed about such things but you were the one who exposed me to the term Gladio. Thanks for the information. It's all part of the NWO agenda no doubt.
  • reaper 2012/08/07 23:00:28
    Debunkers are every bit as nutty as those who/that which they debunk.
    reaper
    +2
    everyone is nutty.
  • Transqu... reaper 2012/08/07 23:05:42
    Transquesta
    +1
    Not me man. I'm the friggin' archetype of sanity. :-D
  • holly g... reaper 2012/08/08 01:50:18
    holly go lightly
    +2
    Got that right.I'm a flippin wreck.
  • reaper holly g... 2012/08/08 01:54:37
    reaper
    +2
    I'm sure I'm worse.
  • holly g... reaper 2012/08/08 02:16:27
    holly go lightly
    +1
    Gawd I hope not.Wonder why I never noticed ........hmmmm

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/04/19 19:35:04

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals