View Single Post
  #56  
Old 11-06-2009, 09:20 AM
EireEngineer's Avatar
EireEngineer EireEngineer is offline
Woo Nemesis
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Grapevine, Texas
Posts: 583
Default Re: The Great "HIV" Hoax

Quote:
Originally Posted by Out of the Box View Post
You said :



I'm not sure how you define "the Woo crowd", but thusfar your context seems to imply it is a reference to "conspiracy theorists". If this is not a reference to "conspiracy theorists" please explain who you consider to be part of the "Woo crowd" or use a more common term. It is a term I've never heard or read before.
OK, how about the Alternative Medicine/Flat Earth/Conspiracy Theory crowd. Woo-Woo is a term skeptics use to describe any of the myriad pseudo-science that is out there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Out of the Box View Post
Anyway, you did explicitly say that the "Woo crowd" does not observe the principles supposebly held dear to you, while you (implicitly) suggest that so-called "sceptics" do observe those principles considering you didn't care to mention them and you singled out the "Woo crowd".
In general, yes that has been my observation, though I will admit so seeing some pretty poor logic out of skeptics too. Albie is a prime example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Out of the Box View Post
First of all, there's no reason to mention "conspiracy", "alternative medicine" and "flat earth" theory in one breath as these are completely different areas. Also, the first two areas both vary from plausible to outer fringe making it quite absurd as well to put all these people and theories in one category. I already explained this in a previous comment and find it quite offensive to be put in the same category as "flat earthers", "David Icke fanatics" or "Creationists" just because I reject the mainstream account in certain areas (eg. certain specific historical events).
It has been my observation over the years that there are many commonalities between these groups. Namely, rabid denial of even basic evidence to the contrary, tendentiousness, and the common use of logical fallacy in their arguments. I will concede the point that many in the skeptical movement are just as bad, but it is a lower percentage then you will find in the woo crowd.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Out of the Box View Post
Further, I've seen so-called "sceptics" behave in exactly the same way. Many of them also start with a pre-concieved conclusion and work backwards towards their arguments. Similarly, I've encountered so-called "conspiracy theorists" who do base their conclusions on the evidence rather than vice versa. You like to pretend that having pre-conceived conclusions is typical for "conspiracy theorists" but I've seen it on both sides at varying degree and in some fields of expertise I've seen it even far more among the so-called "sceptics".



Many are. Many others are not.



You'll find the same behavior among so-called "sceptics" as I explained earlier. Such pathetic behavior is NOT exclusive to so-called "conspiracy theorists" and at least as common among those dedicated to "debunking conspiracy theorists". In fact, I've encountered dozens of self-proclaimed sceptics who are no less narrowminded and gullible as your average "David Icke fanatic".



I couldn't agree more. However, by only criticising so-called "conspiracy theorists" and pretending this behavioral flaw does not exist among so-called "sceptics" you're portraying a black-and-white view of reality and you're offending those "conspiracy theorists" who do not fit those criteria.
As I said, i agree with you on this, to a point. Certainly people like albie dont help our side in the least.
__________________
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the precipitate.
Reply With Quote